|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 17, 2006 15:50:03 GMT -8
Minor point: the Duke Point / Tsawwassen sailing reduction is only for Saturday nights, not for all 7 nights of the week.
I think that the Saturday night elimination should maybe be for October-May period......and to keep Saturday night for September and June.
It's a weird issue, because normally we would think that weekends are busier than weekdays....but I guess that this isn't the case on Route-30??
From BCFS website, re upcoming schedules: ==================================
Schedule in Effect: September 5, 2006 to June 26, 2007
Leave Tsawwassen Leave Duke Point * 5:15 am Daily except Sundays * 7:45 am Daily except Sundays 10:15 am 12:45 pm 3:15 pm 5:45 pm * 8:15 pm Daily except Saturdays from Oct 14 to Mar 31
*10:45 pm Daily except Saturdays from Oct 14 to Mar 31
===================================
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 18, 2006 11:24:13 GMT -8
In my experience Saturday nights are dead.
On the topic of privatization... it was a nice gesture today by the government to help out BC Ferries with a little spare change wasn't it? $14 million for a new ferry. I don't disagree with it, but it shows how "private" it is.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Dec 16, 2006 0:19:09 GMT -8
After some recent comments, I thought I needed to add to this.
Security after 9/11
Washington State Ferries has been concerned and the feds here have been concerned about WSF. They are concerned of it becoming a terror target due to them transporting the masses of people to and from Seattle and Kitsap County. Recently, it has come to my attention that fellow member Graham Johnson was recently taking a trip and the thread he started can be seen here got me thinking of what WSF does with people taking pictures. They have not questioned me when I take photos with my point and shoot. People with SLR cameras are not being questioned or considered suspicious.
How it is seen as, "size matters". He was just taking pictures at the top of the hill. When he reached the bottom, a ramp attendant asked him what he was taking pictures for. The attendant informed him he would need to fill out paperwork in order to do that in the future. This was a first with being notified of having to fill out documents, however, not with the camera. He has been asked many times due to the size of his camera since he does unusual things. Singling out an individual for his interests in photography of a marine transportation unit is wrong. There was a document that I have been searching for yet can't find that said that photography of transportation is "a.o.k.” This is beginning to change and enthusiasts are now being considered suspects. This is similar to getting rid of thought like in 1984; this is getting rid of our right to take photos of transportation. This is a display of fear and as I believe FDR said, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". This is a reaction from the fear of taking action in making things worse than they were.
In conclusion, size does not matter. In my opinion, this should be a judgment call on crewmembers’ parts. If they feel someone is doing something suspicious, they can intervene and question the person. They can take action from there. If they do not look suspicious, they don't question. It is a matter of common sense.
Feel free to post your comments on this. Part four is to come.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Dec 22, 2006 13:51:11 GMT -8
Good. We all "got wealthy off" it then, as the money recirculated in BC instead of going to some other country. industry/banks/government are closely intertwined in Germany as they are in Japan and other countries that actually want to make something of themselves industrially, or realize the importance of retaining their technoligical capabilities. I assume you're a German citizen, so your attitudes are understandable. Being Canadian, I prefer to see my countrymen and women benefit, even though I have very little time for unions or the NDP. Unions only exist due to sh---y management anyway.
The fact that our so-called leaders will cut off our country's industrial nose to spite the NDPs political face, just shows the level of the mentalities. No wonder this country is a standing joke worldwide for foreign control. The money that has been drained out of our economy since 1945 must be larger than the national debt, probably several times larger.
For those who think they belong to the 1st World because they have a white skin; time to wake up and smell the coffee. You either produce or you perish.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 27, 2006 19:00:31 GMT -8
Below is a link to the actual 2003 service agreement document: www.bcferries.com/files/AboutBCF/Coastal_Ferry_Services_Contract.pdfThe first part is the legal agreement mumbo jumbo stuff (no offense intended to those who understand and enjoy that stuff)....and the middle section is a route-by-route description of the routes, with all sorts of interesting statistics and descriptive items. Good reading. I used it to learn that there are no on-site parking spots at Heriot Bay terminal.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Dec 27, 2006 23:02:31 GMT -8
Flugel Horn: I was looking through the Contract earlier, and then I came on here and saw you had posted the link. Spooky, eh? Nerdy minds think alike, eh?
I was looking for specific information on how many routes have to come up for review under the ASP process, and how often, but I haven't been able to find anything definite in the Coastal Ferry Services Contract, or in the Coastal Ferries Act.
It was interesting to see, that in the Contract, signed 2003, BC Ferries planned to:
(all changes by 2013)
Replace both ferries on route 30 Replace the Mill Bay and Dogwood Princess II New 60 car ferries for Hornby, Cortes, Alert Bay/Sointula, and maybe Texada New 110-118 car ferries for Bowen and Crofton-Vesuvius Queen of Capilano to Jervis Inlet, with new platform decks New 185 car ferry for Powell River- Comox
.....along with other changes we're familiar with. I wonder how many of those plans are still go, three years later?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 28, 2006 8:25:41 GMT -8
All those planned new vessels do seem very "pie in the sky" now.
And very strange indeed that we were both thinking of the same issue.....
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 24, 2007 11:35:50 GMT -8
After looking back through history and getting the word to "try again" I might as well. BC Ferries has been running since 1960, started by WAC due to strikes with Black Ball, CP, and other ferry companies of the time. I have looked back and then looking to what the system is now and have come to the conclusion that something is wrong. When the company became semi-privatized back in 03', the good of it began to show, customer selection and service improved. Ships on the major routes were going to be refitted for extra service life, and would not have to worry partialy about the government position. However, over a few years, things have changed. New things (such as the Sonia) are kept under wraps, tradition was forced to make its final bow. With the Sonia being kept under wraps and many other things, I do not see the point. The only reason I see to keep things under wraps is in the case of competition. At this point in time, there is none. WMG looked like it wanted to try and steal some of the profit from BCF by running the fastcats again and we still are waiting to see what happens with that. What would explain the under wraps part is in the fear that competition might rise out of the water. Tradition, such as unqueness between ships has vanished, it went from many differences to only some minor blemeshes. Uniqueness is important to please the general public's eye to something different each time you take a trip instead of the same stuff. With WSF, the interior colour is different if compared to each vessel, however, BCF does not care much about minor differences. It is about saving money and how do they do that? Trying to keep a certain class of one type so that you do not need specific parts for each and every vessel. Like in the airline industry, in order to keep maintenance down, you keep aircraft of one type. If you look at Southwest Airlines, all they have are 737's this is in order to keep maintenance price down because you have one part for all of one class. With ferries, you cannot necesarilly do that. Each route induvidually has its demands. It maybe possible to get one class for the minor routes that area vital to islands, however, that takes away the tradition of uniqueness between vessels. I will give more information later my mind has lost some focus, however, if you would like to post your comments and opinions and add more information to this discussion, feel free to do so. Your point is confusing... when the Cs entered service they were the same. Time causes changes. When the Vs enetered service, they were mostly the same with differences revolving around food service (asthetically at least, mechanically they were like 4 classes). BC Ferries has never bought (new) ships that were different upon delivery, it's what happens to them after 10 years of being in service that gives them "character."
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Feb 24, 2007 17:52:36 GMT -8
My point in that was if you looked at forsay a C class in today's BCFS form, it would not look different from its counterpart. I find tradition a problem but it is more personal opinion than it is political. Wasn't there variation between the Coquitlam and Cowichan when originally built? or was that because the Cowichan had a 1990s refit?
|
|
Ferryman
Voyager
Posts: 7,474
Member is Online
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 24, 2007 19:24:50 GMT -8
The Cowichan and Coquitlam were nearly identical inside and out (in the public areas anyway) until 1996. They both had the seats in the port and starboard ends that had the lifejackets stored under them. These seats were great for when you were coming home from a long trip, and was on one of the last sailings of the day, and was wanting a place to lay down, as they didn't have armrests. Ahh, the good ol' days of the mustard yellow framed windows, and yellowy green walls.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 24, 2007 20:21:52 GMT -8
Wasn't there variation between the Coquitlam and Cowichan when originally built? No or was that because the Cowichan had a 1990s refit? Yes ... even now they're not identical. For example, one has 12 more seats than the other! ;D --- Vic/Van/Saan/Esqu were pretty close to the same on delivery (minus mechanically) NW/Bur/Nan together Sid/Tsa together PRQ, Mayne, Bown together Cow, Coqu together, featuring a guest appearance from the Alberni Oak/Surrey together SoBC, SoVI together Not sure about Cap and Cumb?
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Feb 24, 2007 22:41:39 GMT -8
Not sure about Cap and Cumb? I'm pretty sure that they're together if you don't count the Platform Decks on the Cumbie
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 19, 2007 19:09:15 GMT -8
Sorry but I feel I need to bump this up for a part four
Sailing Waits
Every single Friday and Sunday, it seems BCFS does not bring the fleet upto full capacity when it comes to sailings. Last night I found out it being a "cost cutting measure". However, there is risk associated with that. If Duke Point had been at 70% capacity, things could have taken a turn for the worst. However, it was only at 30% for the 10:45 p.m. On Saturday, the Coquitlam only did 2 extra round trips. The Coquitlam can however do up to 4 extra round trips. Today, she only did 3 extra round trips when the 10:40a.m. was full at 10:00a.m. if not earlier since there were at least two lanes full outside the terminal. Right now, they are near capacity for the last sailing and might have to do OT. If they are in it to turn a profit, how is this effective paying crews OT versus running a scheduled sailing?
Tsawwassen to Swartz Bay has had its problems of infrequent platform usage on the Spirits. If they pushed the engines, they could easily do every other sailing with the platforms based on current loading times. Since I have no knowledge of the loading procudure, my guess is that the lag time is from raising and lifting the ramps and all loading must stop. (correct me if I am wrong) Now in the case of the bomb threat, turning away customers I thought was a bad idea. They ended up having some sailings deadhead from Swartz Bay due to them turning away people. Sometimes, even when they add sailings, they turn away people.
From the message I have received is that customer service would be a priority, but I wonder if they are doing it in the best way? It seems as if not getting cars out of the way sooner versus waiting for volumes to build to levels where overtime is needed has been leaning toward later. What I wonder is if the overtime is more effective than earlier sailings? The future is not going to be great with what we know that BCFS will currently do. The Super Cs will not have platforms and will not increase capacity on Route 2 meaning traffic levels will be the same unless another vessel is added. There has been rumors for one of the C's to get there platforms removed before they went on Route 1. That will not increase capacity either. A Super C will increase capacity but it will not be sufficient on Route 1. The only sufficiency it will do is when it is on Route 30 since they have been limited to below 300 vehicles.
Feel free to comment on part 4
|
|
|
Post by Gunny on Aug 20, 2007 19:15:27 GMT -8
There IS a difference between the Cow and Coquitlam I though... one has a Washroom upstairs on the Departure Bay side,
Or so I thought
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Aug 20, 2007 21:50:23 GMT -8
OK here we go.
RE: ships better maintained. This is utter nonsense. On the upper decks, yes they do look nice, and have a nice fresh coat of paint. However, as soon as a person goes into a part of the ship not open to the public, you can see the lack of maintenance. Ceilings falling down (on Burnaby), fire extinguishers expired, CO2 suppression systems jury-rigged (Burnaby), and many other things have been missed in the current MLU structure. After seeing many of these ships come back from the MLUs, it is obvious that almost all of the money is being spent up top in passenger areas of the ships.
The fact that the Alberni had to be pulled from service less than a month after it's MLU for a clutch repair that should be part of its Preventative Maintenance schedule illustrates the severity of the situation.
RE reservations/assured loading:
I think that the reservation system is great. For a small (ish) fee, if you know the sailing you want, you can ensure you have a spot on that ship. Great for businesspeople, travellers who need to check-in by a certain time, and the general public that doesn't want to wait at Tsawwassen in 36 degree weather.
I am totally against the assured loading system. I think that this is, as said above, an introduction of first and second class citizen. Just because you can afford to pay $80 for a car and driver, you get to bypass all other traffic and be boarded as if you owned the place, thus screwing a normal citizen out of his place on the ferry, that he has waited 3 hours for.
In conclusion of this little rant, I think that this EXTENSION OF OUR HIGHWAYS should not be run for profit, period. Especially the smaller "island hopper" runs that BCF wants to make "user pay". I don't mind the larger runs used as an offset to the smaller money-losing runs, but not the way they are now.
|
|