Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Jul 1, 2015 20:45:21 GMT -8
Stoned's announcement is probably the closest we'll ever get to an admission that 'gawd, we really botched things here'.
I've never believed that it's necessary to have the central coast vessel operate from Port Hardy. Perhaps a fifty car boat, meeting every sailing of the NorEx at Bella Bella, with the necessary reserved space on route ten, might suffice.
Since he said the Nimpkish needs to be replaced 2018 or earlier, I wonder if they might sink some money into fixing up Tenaka and placing her on the run next year, until a new vessel is bought or built. She would, at the very least, provide 40% more vehicle space and three times the lounge space, with the ability to provide a basic coffee bar, which she had in her days as the Comox Queen. Better than nothing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2015 7:17:03 GMT -8
I agree with most that has been said here. The Nimpkish is booked solid? What a surprise!!!
I'm a little puzzled as to why they're pushing the NIP back again, but I suppose this is good. Clearly the Minister's little family trip last year didn't solve any problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jul 2, 2015 20:19:28 GMT -8
Here is what BC Ferries most recently said about Nimpkish replacement, in its Capital Budget document, from September 26, 2014:
Presumably the Govt has ruled out the Alternative Provider alternative, and so this "new" BCF ship process is now underway, within the expected 2015-2017 period.
----------
The budget for the Nimpkish replacement project was shown as $31,176,327 in the September 2014 budget document (see our budget thread for this funny story of the amounts being redacted from the report, but that they still showed up when you highlighted the rows of the document...)
|
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Jul 28, 2015 19:35:28 GMT -8
Would something like the Bowen Queen with a major refit and rebuild of her passenger cabin not work for Discovery Coast COnnector...def lots more vehicles put the snack bar back in..add hot food and a mini cafeteria, put in reclining seats to sleep in.wifi,vending machines, add extra deck space.. She'd be ideal!
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jul 28, 2015 19:46:09 GMT -8
Would something like the Bowen Queen with a major refit and rebuild of her passenger cabin not work for Discovery Coast COnnector...def lots more vehicles put the snack bar back in..add hot food and a mini cafeteria, put in reclining seats to sleep in.wifi,vending machines, add extra deck space.. She'd be ideal! No, she would not be as she is designed to run only in well protected waters. Further, why would you spend a whole whack of money on improvements to a vessel that is just a year short of 50. |
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886 
|
Post by Mill Bay on Jul 29, 2015 11:51:00 GMT -8
Would something like the Bowen Queen with a major refit and rebuild of her passenger cabin not work for Discovery Coast COnnector...def lots more vehicles put the snack bar back in..add hot food and a mini cafeteria, put in reclining seats to sleep in.wifi,vending machines, add extra deck space.. She'd be ideal! No, she would not be as she is designed to run only in well protected waters. Further, why would you spend a whole whack of money on improvements to a vessel that is just a year short of 50. A reasonable question: Didn't they just do nearly that exact maneuver on the Queen of Chilliwack only to cancel its route and pull it of service. Refitting the Bowen Queen for a northern service would be par for this course. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jul 29, 2015 12:29:21 GMT -8
No, she would not be as she is designed to run only in well protected waters. Further, why would you spend a whole whack of money on improvements to a vessel that is just a year short of 50. A reasonable question: Didn't they just do nearly that exact maneuver on the Queen of Chilliwack only to cancel its route and pull it of service. Refitting the Bowen Queen for a northern service would be par for this course. No, I think the situation was a fair bit different. For starters the Queen of Chilliwack was not nearly so old & not nearly as ill-suited for the intended route (though she was ill-suited, just not as much as the Bowen Queen would be). More importantly, the money spent on the Wack, both back in the 90's, and more recently, to improve its suitability for central coast service had the blessing & financial backing of the provincial government. It was the government's 2013 decision to no longer support the cost of operation of route 40 that turned all that expenditure of money & effort into what now can be regarded as a huge waste. The BC government is responsible for this mess, not BC Ferries. |
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Jul 29, 2015 15:01:26 GMT -8
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Jul 29, 2015 16:03:16 GMT -8
A reasonable question: Didn't they just do nearly that exact maneuver on the Queen of Chilliwack only to cancel its route and pull it of service. Refitting the Bowen Queen for a northern service would be par for this course. No, I think the situation was a fair bit different. For starters the Queen of Chilliwack was not nearly so old & not nearly as ill-suited for the intended route (though she was ill-suited, just not as much as the Bowen Queen would be). More importantly, the money spent on the Wack, both back in the 90's, and more recently, to improve its suitability for central coast service had the blessing & financial backing of the provincial government. It was the government's 2013 decision to no longer support the cost of operation of route 40 that turned all that expenditure of money & effort into what now can be regarded as a huge waste. The BC government is responsible for this mess, not BC Ferries. It would be the same in the sense that a political appointment, is the only thing that would ever see the Bowen Queen refitted to any northern service. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 6, 2016 11:55:33 GMT -8
Nimpkish is set for 2019 retirement.
There is an announcement today for a new route service, directly between Bella Coola and Port Hardy, using a yet-to-be-found used vessel.
- this is obviously way out of Nimpkish's league, re size and licenced area, because of open water.
However, if the Discovery Coast Connector will still operate in off-season, and if Ocean Falls and Shearwater are still to be served in any season, then a "New Nimpkish" small connector vessel will still need to be acquired.
So I'm thinking that a new Route and new Port Hardy - Bella Coola ship won't impact the need for a Nimpkish replacement for year-round connector service.
|
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Sept 6, 2016 20:14:33 GMT -8
Im not sure what other existing vessel in the Fleet could do or be modified for a Discovery Coast connector service cause it would be a huge waste to purpose build one unless they were gonna put actual Route 40 back into service and run a service up on the North Coast the way it should be done. Summer should be Inside Passage every 2nd day direct PH-PR. And Route 40 two direct trips Port Hardy to Bella Coola, and one milk run trip per week via Bella Bella. Extend the season like mid May to mid Sept at minimum. Well acquiring a "new" used vessel is probably the best way to go...and I would think turning to Europe as the best place to find one! Def a Daytime service is critical..Two direct trips per week and one milk run per week would be Ideal. Also a permanent fixed Inside Passage schedule with the Inside Passage vessel taking one day a week off in the summer season. Also to expand the season with maybe one direct and one milk run trip say early May to mid May and mid Sept to early Oct. Something like a Queen of Chilliwack on steroids would work....better speed, Cafeteria, lounge, seating area, big sundeck areas, at least 60-80 cars...and at least 300-500 pass. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 7, 2016 8:17:51 GMT -8
With the Provincial Government's pre-election announcement in September 2016 of the "New" resurrected route between Port Hardy & Bella Coola, and the need for a used ship purchase, here's some thread clarification for this here forum:
The used ship for the Port Hardy - Bella Coola route should not be considered a "Nimpkish Replacement."
- any Nimpkish replacement will be what might happen after 2019 to replace that little ship on the little connector route that serves Ocean Falls and Shearwater year-round.
- this might turn out to be a permanent contract with a private tug-barge service.
So the Nimpkish replacement vessel thread is for this type of service - NOT the new Port Hardy to Bella Coola route.
The used ship to be purchased for the Port Hardy - Bella Coola route should more correctly be referred to as a "Queen of Chilliwack replacement."
Hopefully this is simple and clear for everyone to understand.
Nimpkish's 2014-2017 spotlight was just a blip. She really is just a small mid-coast connector ship that was suited to that role, but not for summer tourist traffic to Bella Coola.
The new 2018 route is really a replacement of part of the old Route 40, following 2013.
The 2013-2017 service is a blip.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 9, 2017 12:45:56 GMT -8
....and it's now announced that the Nimpkish replacement will be the same ship as the new Route-28 summer "Port Hardy - Bella Coola" ship.
So this thread is now irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 15, 2017 11:39:40 GMT -8
I've moved posts from recent days into the main "Route 28 & 10s" new ship thread. That's the best place for ongoing discussion of both routes.
As I said recently, this here thread is now irrelevant. But I hate locking threads, so I'm just letting you all know.
|
|
