|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Mar 27, 2016 18:38:46 GMT -8
Have you ever thought about what you would do if YOU were in charge of BCFerries? I do... probably too much. This is A Brief summary of the items that would be on the table if I took over... >New Class of 48-AEQ Vessels >New class of 73-AEQ vessels >New class of ~400-AEQ major vessels >Route 21/22 Reconfiguration >Route 10/11 Reconfiguration >Route 7 Scheduling Alterations >Reinstatement of Route 40 >New and much more economical Northern Vessels >Queens of Cowichain&Coquitlam Life Extension >Mayne&Bowen Queens Life Extension >Kahloke Life Extension New VesselsThe new class of 48-AEQ ships would serve a variety of roles, including, but not limited to routes 18, 24&25, And would allow retirement of NIP and Quinitsa The new class of 73-AEQ vessels would allow retirement of HSQ and PRQ and would fulfill a variety of roles. The new Northern Ships would be MUCH more economical than the NorAd and NorEx. They'd be more fuel efficient, have less passenger space, and would require a far smaller crew. The new 400-AEQ ships would give a capacity boost to the Major routes, allow the retirement of the QoNW and QoA, and allow Coquitlam to assume a full-time stand-in position. Route Alterations
Routes 10/11 would be merged into one Triangle route. Two ships would run the route in the Summer, and one for the rest of the year. There would be at least one direct sailing per week between Port Hardy and Haida Gwaii. Service to Denman and Hornby would be completely reconfigured. A new terminal would be constructed in Deep Bay. Route 21 would go from this new terminal to another new terminal near the Southeastern tip of Denman. 22 would run from Deep bay to the existing terminal at Shingle Spit. (See Below) Route 7 would lose the Island Sky, which would be replaced by 2 73-AEQ ferries. One would be based out of SB, the other out of EC. Route 40 would be reinstated and would operate year-round. After it's done
After all this is done, this is what Vessel positioning would look like. My plan for BCF.docx (17.62 KB)
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Mar 27, 2016 20:41:33 GMT -8
My vote is to live in the real world. There is an existing ferry system, and it's based on financial and operational realities. We've been through lots of rounds of fan-based fantasy ferries on this forum, and I've never found it very illuminating. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 27, 2016 20:58:06 GMT -8
My vote is to live in the real world. There is an existing ferry system, and it's based on financial and operational realities. We've been through lots of rounds of fan-based fantasy ferries on this forum, and I've never found it very illuminating. Sorry. How about we sweeten the pot and offer a North Delta to Grassy Point route. Onboard amenities include a news-stand stocked with the New Yorker and Guardian. Snack bar with cheesecake and endless raspberry sauce. And extra wide lanes on the car deck for those with more classic varieties of vehicles. Oh, and we make it the world's first hybrid propeller / cable ferry.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 27, 2016 21:01:18 GMT -8
The Snowy options of changes to routes has me thinking: "When was the last time that a ferry route was changed?"
Not a new route or a discontinuation, but an alteration of an existing route.
- For BC Ferries
- For BC Ministry of Highways
- For Warshington State
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Mar 27, 2016 21:08:55 GMT -8
My vote is to live in the real world. There is an existing ferry system, and it's based on financial and operational realities. We've been through lots of rounds of fan-based fantasy ferries on this forum, and I've never found it very illuminating. Sorry. How about we sweeten the pot and offer a North Delta to Grassy Point route. Onboard amenities include a news-stand stocked with the New Yorker and Guardian. Snack bar with cheesecake and endless raspberry sauce. And extra wide lanes on the car deck for those with more classic varieties of vehicles. Oh, and we make it the world's first hybrid propeller / cable ferry. Mr Horn, you're pandering. Of course I want a route to Grassy Point. I'm tired of having to drive all the way to Shingle Spit. I would suggest though, that given the steep beach, a Kwuna type vessel, with ramps, might be able to nuzzle up on a concrete ramp. And the Poznanskis, who live next door, would be less likely to complain if the terminal was kept simple. Good idea!
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 28, 2016 6:50:11 GMT -8
The Snowy options of changes to routes has me thinking: "When was the last time that a ferry route was changed?" Not a new route or a discontinuation, but an alteration of an existing route. - For BC Ferries - For BC Ministry of Highways - For Warshington State Can't think of any major alterations of routes for WSF during its history. The only modifications I can think of are ferry dock relocations, like Anacortes in the early 60's when the ferry landing moved from I Avenue out to Ship Harbor. Of course, I Avenue is now the current Guemes Ferry dock. And the other relocation I can think of was at Port Townsend, from Quincy Street to the current location. But, those situations were not significant route alterations, just relocating the ferry landings in their respective towns. BC Ferries has done a little more in the way of route alterations. Moving the Kelsey Bay terminal to Port Hardy springs to mind. More recently, opening Wedge Rock terminal at Klemtu, and shifting ferry operations there, is sort of like the Anacortes terminal relocation - moving it out of town. There may be other examples I am not thinking of.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 28, 2016 10:09:01 GMT -8
One route that deserves consideration for 'shortening' is the Kootenay Lake crossing, the domain of the Osprey 2000. The 'crossing' that is made today (and for the last multiple number of decades) is about twice the length that it needs to be. Ultimately the cost of a new terminal(s) would be paid for in savings on fuel costs, manpower, retirement of the second vessel, etc. But, it seems that saving money on ferry operations is only a priority for salt water operations?
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 1, 2016 17:06:05 GMT -8
Last summer, I heard about significant overload problems on Routes 2 and 30. I was wondering if there is a way to reshuffle the existing major fleet to provide improved service on these routes during the summer season. And I think I've come up with something... -EXCURSION INTO FANTASY FERRYLAND AHEAD- The plan I am thinking of would include having certain ships doing sailings on multiple different routes every day, and would have every vessel in service all day, every day. Here are the route assignments I am thinking of, in a nutshell:
ROUTE 1
Spirit of Vancouver Island Spirit of British Columbia Coastal Celebration Queen Of Surrey ROUTE 2 Coastal Renaissance Queen Of Oak Bay Queen of Cowichan (Part-time) Queen of New Westminster (Part-time) ROUTE 3 Queen Of Coquitlam Queen Of Cowichan (Part-time) Queen Of New Westminster (Part-time) ROUTE 30 Coastal Inspiration Queen Of Alberni Queen Of New Westminster (Part-time) ============ As you can see, Routes 2, 3, and 30 would be sharing ferries to an extensive degree. -Route 2 would get 3 round-trip sailings per day by the Cowichan, 1 per day by the New West, in addition to all existing sailings facilitated by the Renaissance and Oak Bay. -Route 3 would get 2 round-trip sailings per day by the Cowichan, 1 per day by the New West, and all sailings that were previously facilitated by the Surrey would be facilitated by the Coquitlam on a slightly modified schedule (To avoid docking conflicts) -Route 30 would get 2 round-trip sailings per day by the New West, in addition to all existing sailings facilitated by the Inspiration and Alberni -Route 1 would have no changes to it's schedule; the only change would be the Surrey's replacement of the New West. -Route 8 may need to have it's schedule modified slightly to avoid docking conflicts. No sailings would be added or cancelled; some times may need to be adjusted. ============ Because I have far too much spare time on my hands, I have taken the liberty of drafting hypothetical schedules for the two shared boats, to give a better idea of how this could work. These are the only sailing times that would see major alterations. ( Link to Schedules)
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Oct 1, 2016 23:39:28 GMT -8
These 'vessel placement' posts come up every now and again. Sorry to come off as nay-saying, debbie-downer "Old Man Mike C", but without any actual solid data to back any of these movements up, these discussions are purely academic.
One thing that we do know, is that the New West does poorly in Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries will be reluctant to place any single-ended vessel on Routes 2 and 3 in this post-V Class world. In addition to that, the New West represents a significant decrease in capacity on Route 2.
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Oct 2, 2016 19:19:23 GMT -8
I think a a Swartz Bay to Horseshoe Bay route ...Would take a lot of pressure off Route 1. Use one ship, operating 4 trips per day. Based out of Horseshoe Bay. kind of like mid island when it first started. With a mid day break. I would think sailing times would be close to same as mid Island?? Or a Summer time Tsawwassen to Port Hardy service would be good for tourists and its a beautiful trip.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Oct 2, 2016 19:43:31 GMT -8
I think a a Swartz Bay to Horseshoe Bay route ...Would take a lot of pressure off Route 1. Use one ship, operating 4 trips per day. Based out of Horseshoe Bay. kind of like mid island when it first started. With a mid day break. I would think sailing times would be close to same as mid Island?? Or a Summer time Tsawwassen to Port Hardy service would be good for tourists and its a beautiful trip. I think you should get a map and a few coloured pens, draw all the ferry routes you've ever wondered about, and send it in to BC Ferries. I'm sure Mike Corrigan would find it very helpful.
|
|
|
Post by bigcountry on Oct 2, 2016 21:26:03 GMT -8
These 'vessel placement' posts come up every now and again. Sorry to come off as nay-saying, debbie-downer "Old Man Mike C", but without any actual solid data to back any of these movements up, these discussions are purely academic. One thing that we do know, is that the New West does poorly in Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries will be reluctant to place any single-ended vessel on Routes 2 and 3 in this post-V Class world. In addition to that, the New West represents a significant decrease in capacity on Route 2. 1) how far would the New West have to back up to have enough room to turn around to leave Horseshoe Bay? and 2) I believe (and this is 100% speculation) that if BC Ferries were to make a change to address Route 30 capacity the changes would be... Route 30 CR+CI Route 2 Cow + Coq + OB Route 3 Surrey + Alberni and yes I know this isn't ideal especially for Sunshine Coasters
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Oct 2, 2016 22:41:30 GMT -8
1) how far would the New West have to back up to have enough room to turn around to leave Horseshoe Bay? Any B/V class needs to fully reverse out of the bay entirely. With the Vs (and their inability to make up time), this added about ten extra minutes to a crossing.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Oct 3, 2016 5:27:13 GMT -8
1) how far would the New West have to back up to have enough room to turn around to leave Horseshoe Bay? Any B/V class needs to fully reverse out of the bay entirely. With the Vs (and their inability to make up time), this added about ten extra minutes to a crossing. Before the 7 sisters underwent their 'stretching', there were captains who would begin the turn as their vessels had reversed about 3/4 of the way out of the bay. There were several times I recall actually heading out bow-first around the corner, the master of that vessel shall remain anonymous. Those were the days.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Oct 3, 2016 7:55:31 GMT -8
Any B/V class needs to fully reverse out of the bay entirely. With the Vs (and their inability to make up time), this added about ten extra minutes to a crossing. Before the 7 sisters underwent their 'stretching', there were captains who would begin the turn as their vessels had reversed about 3/4 of the way out of the bay. There were several times I recall actually heading out bow-first around the corner, the master of that vessel shall remain anonymous. Those were the days. And in the early days the schedule pretty much mirrored the route 1 schedule, sailings on the hour from 7 AM till 10 PM, 16 (or more) daily during peak periods. The crossing time was listed as 1 hour & 50 minutes, with a 10 minute 'dwell' time for unloading & loading. And this was all accomplished with single-ended vessels... As Neil has pointed out, however, the schedule was a bit of a fiction.
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Oct 3, 2016 10:19:45 GMT -8
1) how far would the New West have to back up to have enough room to turn around to leave Horseshoe Bay? Any B/V class needs to fully reverse out of the bay entirely. With the Vs (and their inability to make up time), this added about ten extra minutes to a crossing. Is their any reason when the B/V class back out of the terminals they do? Are their certain terminals that are more difficult to back out of...?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 3, 2016 10:51:07 GMT -8
Any B/V class needs to fully reverse out of the bay entirely. With the Vs (and their inability to make up time), this added about ten extra minutes to a crossing. Is their any reason when the B/V class back out of the terminals they do? Are their certain terminals that are more difficult to back out of...? For Horseshoe Bay for example, it is easier for a single-ender to dock bow-in and then back out, compared with needing to turn outside the bay and then back into the berth precisely. It is interesting to look at the terminals on Google Maps and see how it is easier to go bow-in in some, and stern-to in others, and how easy the approaches are for either.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 3, 2016 15:54:18 GMT -8
One thing that we do know, is that the New West does poorly in Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries will be reluctant to place any single-ended vessel on Routes 2 and 3 in this post-V Class world. In addition to that, the New West represents a significant decrease in capacity on Route 2. If the V-class sailed out of HSB in the days before the German Wonderboats, than in theory, the New West should be able to do it now. If the New West needs a little extra time to back out of the bay, than the sailing times I drafted could be tweaked a little to accommodate that. She'd only have to do it twice per day, towards the end of the service day. Also, is the New West not faster than the V-class vessels? If so, than she should be able to do the crossing in nearly the same time as the C-class vessels. In response to your concern about the QoNW representing a capacity decrease: the New West would only do one round-trip per day on Route 2, while the Cowichan would still do all 3 of it's daily sailings, albeit on a different schedule. The New West would provide an extra round-trip on Route 2, not replace an existing one. So, in that respect, the New West actually represents a capacity increase for Route 2. ====================== I think a a Swartz Bay to Horseshoe Bay route ...Would take a lot of pressure off Route 1. Use one ship, operating 4 trips per day. Based out of Horseshoe Bay. kind of like mid island when it first started. With a mid day break. I would think sailing times would be close to same as mid Island?? Admittedly, I used to think that that could work nicely as a shortcut for people traveling from Victoria&Sidney to places along Highway 99, however, if you look at it on a map, you'll see that it's just not feasible. Such a route would not be comparable in length to the Mid-Island Express; It would be far longer. The crossing would be about 3.5 hours, half an hour longer than just taking Route 1 and driving through Vancouver. It would be a nice ride, but not a feasible one.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Oct 3, 2016 21:18:33 GMT -8
Is their any reason when the B/V class back out of the terminals they do? Are their certain terminals that are more difficult to back out of...? For Horseshoe Bay for example, it is easier for a single-ender to dock bow-in and then back out, compared with needing to turn outside the bay and then back into the berth precisely. It is interesting to look at the terminals on Google Maps and see how it is easier to go bow-in in some, and stern-to in others, and how easy the approaches are for either. I am fairly sure that Blackball recognized 65 years ago that the geography of Horseshoe Bay pretty much dictated that it would have to be a 'bow-in' terminal. Today's double-ended vessels work very well in the tight confines of Horseshoe Bay, though it remains possible for a single-ender such as the New West to work route 2 or route 3 from this terminal.
David Haun, the foamer top dog at BCFS, stated at an annual meeting a few years back that C class vessels could not be used on route 1. We know that what he said is not exactly true. However, for reasons of efficiency (& perhaps safety) with navigation through Active Pass, the C class are not used on route 1, and I don't expect that to change. The lack of passenger cabin space on the C's would also be an issue on route 1 due to the high passenger counts typical on that route.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Oct 4, 2016 10:57:53 GMT -8
One thing that we do know, is that the New West does poorly in Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries will be reluctant to place any single-ended vessel on Routes 2 and 3 in this post-V Class world. In addition to that, the New West represents a significant decrease in capacity on Route 2. If the V-class sailed out of HSB in the days before the German Wonderboats, than in theory, the New West should be able to do it now. If the New West needs a little extra time to back out of the bay, than the sailing times I drafted could be tweaked a little to accommodate that. She'd only have to do it twice per day, towards the end of the service day. Also, is the New West not faster than the V-class vessels? If so, than she should be able to do the crossing in nearly the same time as the C-class vessels. In response to your concern about the QoNW representing a capacity decrease: the New West would only do one round-trip per day on Route 2, while the Cowichan would still do all 3 of it's daily sailings, albeit on a different schedule. The New West would provide an extra round-trip on Route 2, not replace an existing one. So, in that respect, the New West actually represents a capacity increase for Route 2. I think you must have misunderstood... I'm not suggesting it's impossible, but I am suggesting that your plan looks nice on paper and will be largely dysfunctional in its execution. BC Ferries has very much avoided any further single-ended vessels sailing in and out of Horseshoe Bay (and Departure Bay, where there are also crossing-time issues with single-ended vessels), and for good reason. If you recall how V-Class vessels were assigned, there was an emphasis on Route 1, with the New West being full-time on Route 30, and the seasonal Queen of Esquimalt appearance on Route 3. There's a reason for this. Additionally, with consideration to crews being based out of specific ports, you have suggested the New West operate on three different routes, and it sounds like potentially two in one day. Your plan simply cannot move beyond paper, for a lot of reasons. A quick quip regarding Route 30: It is largely understood on this forum that Coastals don't do well on Route 30 from a passenger perspective, given the closure of Deck 5. I believe the New West would be a better fit (and is a poor fit on Route 1).
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Apr 3, 2017 22:19:20 GMT -8
I didn't want this segregated in the Norwegian ferries thread because, as this thread asks... "what would you do?", in relation to BC Ferries. I would consider this method of powering, for the shorter routes. It's now becoming tried and tested elsewhere. www.bbc.com/news/business-39478856
|
|
|
Post by mirrlmak on Apr 4, 2017 8:18:44 GMT -8
This is a great article. Norway has also led the charge with electric car infrastructure. I drive an electric car, and can just make it to Hornby Island in one charge from Vancouver. I thought that the Baynes Sound Connector would be electric due to the efficiency created by pulling a cable versus spinning a prop in water but alas, progress is progress....
I believe there are quite a few routes that BC Ferries could eventually deploy this technology on, however as I'm sure everyone knows.... we will be seeing LNG as our government mandated evolution
|
|