Nick
Voyager 
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080 
|
Post by Nick on Jan 30, 2008 21:24:12 GMT -8
But we're talking about the Voyager here, not the Explorer. Remember, the Explorer was the one that prompted all the speed restrictions due to the wake. Supposedly, according to that article posted a few days ago, the wake and fuel consumption issues were resolved on the Voyager, after they became apparent on the Explorer.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on Jan 30, 2008 22:35:55 GMT -8
Discussing the possible suitability of any of the three 'cats for service on the north coast is perhaps the definitive example of the term 'moot point'.
The Liberals would never, ever, allow the 'cats any government supported role on our coast, anywhere. George Bush would allow his daughter to marry Hugo Chavez before Gordon Campbell would admit that the 'cats were anything other than the work of the devil.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 30, 2008 22:46:32 GMT -8
Wake would not be an issue in Hecate St. Yes, but it would be an issue on the Inside Passage... I believe the suggestion was to use the fast cat for PR<>QCI service as a temporary measure until a new ship was put in place. If used on route 10, I highly doubt that they could have 'opened her up' to full speed except in the open areas like Queen Charlotte Sound. Again, in those areas, wake would not be an issue. I can just imagine Princess Royal Channel at 34 knots! |
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,672
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Jan 31, 2008 4:05:59 GMT -8
George Bush would allow his daughter to marry Hugo Chavez before Gordon Campbell would admit that the 'cats were anything other than the work of the devil. I just about spit my coffee out when I read that! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by oceaneer77 on Feb 5, 2008 20:25:52 GMT -8
I had heard a so-called 'marine expert' on CBC Radio back in the spring of 2006 (in the days following the demise of the QotN) say that a Pacificat could, with relatively minor modifications, operate on the North Coast routes, at least in summer. I have no idea whether he was, in fact, a marine expert, or whether his opinion had any substance. I do know that he was the 'guest' expert on a phone-in segment on Mark Forsythe's program 'Almanac'. The subject under discussion was how to cope with just one boat on the north coast routes during the summer of 2006. He said BC Ferries could have solved the problem with relative ease by putting a fast cat to work.
This marine expert must have been a bit slow.. or an expert on calms and oysters.
the fast cast were built for protected waters and the tunnel (the area between the hulls) is to low for any open water. If you ran the fast cats in a large sea and a wave hit the tunnel the compressive force would buckle all of the frames on the cats soft underbelly.
This is one of the reasons that we cannot sell the cats to a offshore buyer.
If you look at the pictures of the Hawaii super ferry you will notice that the tunnel is just huge, the reason for the high tunnel is for rough conditions.
On the speed through the inside passage.. at present no wake restrictions are posted and lots of ships go bombing through making huge wake..
I would love to see these ships operate again.. but i think that that route is just wrong for them in every way... and i think that Alaska state ferries has already tried this experiment.
Now if we built a efficient cat for this route rather than a fast cat.. that is a different story.
ocenaeer77
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 5, 2008 20:56:14 GMT -8
With respect to the previous post I think the 'marine expert' was talking about summer service on the Prince Rupert - Haida Gwaii route. Hecate Strait in the summer is usually fairly calm and if it is 'bad' it would be more comparable to bad Georgia Strait conditions during the fall/winter months.
I think the guys comments were in the vain of what could have been done to provide for a more or less full service to both routes 10 and 11 during the summer of 2006. Under such a scheme the QPR would have been used exclusively on route 10.
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Feb 5, 2008 23:20:35 GMT -8
Fast Ferries just don't work on the West Coast. If the Fast Ferry fiasco doesn't prove that, look at the Alaska Fast Ferries. They aren't going to make any more of them due to their limitations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 12, 2008 9:58:31 GMT -8
Today (12 Apr 08) - Vancouver Shipyards:  |
|
|
|
Post by Rod Smelser on Apr 28, 2008 11:19:05 GMT -8
Glenn Clark what a nut running BC's Economy and Fast Ferries into the ground Partisan political drivel as anyone can see. Why is Clark making millions working for Pattison in the executive suite? He's now got a better record in business than Gordon Campbell. Or Carol Taylor. Or even Ken Dobell. |
|
|
|
Post by Rod Smelser on Apr 28, 2008 11:21:29 GMT -8
Glen Clark was an idiot and the NDP is still full of Idiots. More partisan political drivel. Any reasonable person can see who the real idiot is. |
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Apr 28, 2008 13:49:57 GMT -8
Glen Clark was an idiot and the NDP is still full of Idiots. More partisan political drivel. Any reasonable person can see who the real idiot is. Exactly why are you quoting stuff from 3 years ago? I'm sure Glen Clark is doing great in his new position under Jimmy Pattison, and I'm sure he has learned a lot more about business. During the time he was Premier, I don't think he knew what he was doing or getting into by starting up CFI. The Principle of creating jobs and revitalizing the ship-building industry was good, but I don't think his plan was well thought out. Lastly, Mr. Smelser, My above comment was made when I was 18, and I'm nearly 21 now. Nowadays I wouldn't call Glen Clark or the NDP Idiots, but I still will openly admit that I am not a fan of NDP. |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Apr 28, 2008 14:29:55 GMT -8
I think this is an example of something that will become more common. What used to be a place where a smaller group could get together and "chew the fat" on a range of things with impunity because no one knew about it or paid attention, will now gain attention. The downside of some media attention, more employees of BCFC knowing the forum, and growth, if you like. You could call it growing pains. In other words nothing stays the same in the world.
Part of me is glad the forum is expanding. Part of me is kind of sad. And I am a relative late comer compared to the orginals who founded it.
People with an agenda will check out the forum and search topics and respond in order to further that agenda. I think we will see increased "guest" individuals who will parachute in and make comments they feel will further their case. I hope the forum stays where people can state their opinions and discuss them as ferry enthusiasts, rather than become a venue for a limited point of view.
The problem of and the brilliance of the net, is that people who thought they never had a voice now have a place they can now express their opinions and concerns. I hope this forum doesn't become just a voice of BCFC staff who hate their jobs, or hate BCFC. Or a voice of people of one particular political viewpoint.
I have said it a number of times but I think our moderators do a great job and have helped build a great forum. However, with increased exposure and increased interest in the forum I hope their jobs don't become onerous keeping to the mission of discussing all things ferry for those who have a passion in this area and not becoming hijacked by a narrow point of view or mindset.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on Apr 28, 2008 16:04:43 GMT -8
More partisan political drivel. Any reasonable person can see who the real idiot is. Exactly why are you quoting stuff from 3 years ago? I'm sure Glen Clark is doing great in his new position under Jimmy Pattison, and I'm sure he has learned a lot more about business. During the time he was Premier, I don't think he knew what he was doing or getting into by starting up CFI. The Principle of creating jobs and revitalizing the ship-building industry was good, but I don't think his plan was well thought out. Lastly, Mr. Smelser, My above comment was made when I was 18, and I'm nearly 21 now. Nowadays I wouldn't call Glen Clark or the NDP Idiots, but I still will openly admit that I am not a fan of NDP. Coastal Skier: Congrats on a classy reply to a pointless cheap shot. |
|
|
|
Post by Rod Smelser on May 6, 2008 13:36:18 GMT -8
My above comment was made when I was 18, and I'm nearly 21 now. Nowadays I wouldn't call Glen Clark or the NDP Idiots, but I still will openly admit that I am not a fan of NDP. Does this mean you've grown up or something? LOL. Drivel is drivel and I detest whether it's yesterday or several years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by Rod Smelesr on May 6, 2008 13:38:48 GMT -8
Coastal Skier: Congrats on a classy reply to a pointless cheap shot. It wasn't cheap, and it wasn't pointless. As a ferry consumer and a citizen I object to seeing discussions about the ferry service used as proxies for gut level political hatreds that have no rational foundation whatsoever. |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on May 6, 2008 15:08:19 GMT -8
It wasn't cheap, and it wasn't pointless. As a ferry consumer and a citizen I object to seeing discussions about the ferry service used as proxies for gut level political hatreds that have no rational foundation whatsoever. Yes it was, and it reflected more on you than the person you were aiming at. This forum, along with a number of it's members, has matured a fair bit in the last few years, and while we often disagree on issues, people aren't in the habit of refering to each other as idiots. If you want to get into a civil dialogue with forum members, it's probably best that you temper your remarks. |
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on May 6, 2008 21:44:47 GMT -8
My above comment was made when I was 18, and I'm nearly 21 now. Nowadays I wouldn't call Glen Clark or the NDP Idiots, but I still will openly admit that I am not a fan of NDP. Does this mean you've grown up or something? LOL. Drivel is drivel and I detest whether it's yesterday or several years ago. I'm sorry, you have pissed off the wrong person on this board. Enjoy your ban... and Neil, thanks for standing up for me. |
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on May 8, 2008 9:40:11 GMT -8
Does this mean you've grown up or something? LOL. Drivel is drivel and I detest whether it's yesterday or several years ago. I'm sorry, you have pissed off the wrong person on this board. Enjoy your ban... and Neil, thanks for standing up for me. I say amen to this! No one should put down anyone on this Forum. Especially "Coastal Skier". He, as well as others, have done their best in making this Forum what it is today. Keep up the great work, "Coastal Skier"!!  |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on May 13, 2008 11:46:34 GMT -8
From The Province, August 27, 1995.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on May 19, 2008 20:51:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest 101 on May 20, 2008 8:46:47 GMT -8
I finally got a copy of the KMM report on the Cats - and was very disappointed in the lack of content. There was a lot more information in the press/media speculation than in this report.
I did ask if there was "two" reports - and the answer was no this was the only one.
Well, if I was a politician and had to make a choice on selling them or keeping them - based on this single - very thin report - then I would sell them.
It seems a lot of talk in the media/press and idol speculation, but very little, to no reports done on there usability. We have had Risk Management reports done on BC Ferries, & Safety Reports on the service, and a few others.....but given the large sums of money thrown at the Cat's - then I would expect more reports done on finding a suitable solution or usage for them - and like I have mention if this is the only report done......then I guess it was right / correct to unload them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 20, 2008 17:39:14 GMT -8
I finally got a copy of the KMM report on the Cats - and was very disappointed in the lack of content. There was a lot more information in the press/media speculation than in this report. I did ask if there was "two" reports - and the answer was no this was the only one. Well, if I was a politician and had to make a choice on selling them or keeping them - based on this single - very thin report - then I would sell them. It seems a lot of talk in the media/press and idol speculation, but very little, to no reports done on there usability. We have had Risk Management reports done on BC Ferries, & Safety Reports on the service, and a few others.....but given the large sums of money thrown at the Cat's - then I would expect more reports done on finding a suitable solution or usage for them - and like I have mention if this is the only report done......then I guess it was right / correct to unload them. At the Save-Our-Ferries political rally in Nanaimo (Feb.08), Greg mentioned a report that cited possible uses for the fastcats. I suspect this is the report that he was referring to. I suppose that even with this one report (which I read last night, thanks to Chris' post), you can still choose which option to focus on and follow, regardless of the report's final recommendation. The SaveOurFerries folk seemed to like the idea of refitting the fastcats and using them in a conventional ferry style on Routes 2 & 3. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest 101 on May 21, 2008 10:13:32 GMT -8
Not sure if we are talking about the same report.
The KMM report was about shutting down two of the 4 main engines and running her as a pure commercial truck ferry. Not a cross the Strait car only service - which is something that Seaspan looked at.
There is a large amount of BC Ferries traffic figures which they use to support there view - vision for the Cat's.
What I read in some of the press/media reports - was the "complete" re-engineering of the Cat's - so to me that means taking out the very heavy & expensive engines and replacing them with something smaller and more efficient to run the Cat's.
Not shutting down and leaving on-board two main engines - which yes they can use for parts. If you look back at pictures of the Cat's you can see that they can replace the engines pretty quickly - so if that is correct then why leave them on-board.
One of the reason that Seaspan did not go for them to run across the strait was the weight they are currently carrying - they sit to low in the water - direct quote from Seaspan.
Each engine block weights in at 25tons - before you add anything else to them.
According to a JMP report on the Cat's they came in 500Tons over weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest 101 on May 21, 2008 10:19:48 GMT -8
The "Wright Report" - has some very interesting projection on what they think will happen to BC Ferries.
One line I like - and pls remember this was written in 2001 - that they need to replace 18 vessels in the fleet at a cost of $1Billion dollars. Fast forward to 2008 - and we have close to that in Bonds out standing- but will only have 6 new or used vessels to show for that money......
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on May 21, 2008 11:17:44 GMT -8
One line I like - and pls remember this was written in 2001 - that they need to replace 18 vessels in the fleet at a cost of $1Billion dollars. Fast forward to 2008 - and we have close to that in Bonds out standing- but will only have 6 new or used vessels to show for that money...... The figure of $1.1 billion had no basis in reality, given what the Spirits had cost, and what we know to be the prevailing cost of newbuilds at the time of that report. It's simplistic and invalid to say we've overspent because we didn't keep to that unrealistic target. The Wright report also concluded that BC Ferries must operate on a private model, on a break even basis, so it's good to keep in mind that it's recommendations and findings spring from a well defined agenda. |
|
