Newsbot Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Repairs to a Manx ferry are due to be completed early, in time for the Tynwald Day weekend. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7484696.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsmurf Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I cannot understand why the afternoon sailing to Liverpool has to go to Heysham instead, surely the Snaefell is capable of sailing to Liverpool. I can also well imagine that several foot and car passengers will not be happy either, for some it is another two hours driving, plus the additional cost of petrol. Changes to sailings like this i would think is a very good way of driving customers away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcCann Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 The Snaefell now has a phobia of Liverpool after nearly sinking there so refuses point blank to enter the Mersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 It may not fit the temporary docking facility MDHC have affixed to the landing stage? otherwise why send a slow craft and a fast craft to Heysham and back, unless both were full? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 just looked at the schedule and Snaefell will be doing a Dublin trip at 10:00 returning 14:00, presumably arriving about 17:00 (+/- weather), so maybe it's just that it's a quicker trip to Heysham getting back at a more reasonable time rather than the early hours of the morning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaefell050 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 The SNAEFELL cannot fit the current linkspan at Liverpool, as the loading ramp is in the middle of the craft, whereas the VIKING can fit using the starboard vehicle ramp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 The SNAEFELL cannot fit the current linkspan at Liverpool, as the loading ramp is in the middle of the craft, whereas the VIKING can fit using the starboard vehicle ramp. perfect bit of design there - knocks out 50% the fleet that use the berth! Hope the gearbox is fixed this week - a tedious journey arriving an hour late today back from Liverpool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaefell050 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 The SNAEFELL cannot fit the current linkspan at Liverpool, as the loading ramp is in the middle of the craft, whereas the VIKING can fit using the starboard vehicle ramp. perfect bit of design there - knocks out 50% the fleet that use the berth! Hope the gearbox is fixed this week - a tedious journey arriving an hour late today back from Liverpool The VIKING should be operating at full speed again this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-in-man Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Not being funny BUT - The new incat .... has anybody measured to see if it fits on the Liverpool stage? not to mention Douglas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Not being funny BUT - The new incat .... has anybody measured to see if it fits on the Liverpool stage? not to mention Douglas. He he he Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 More warnings this morning in the news, of likely increases in the fuel surcharges gulp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallybug Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 More warnings this morning in the news, of likely increases in the fuel surcharges gulp! Aye - they said that it currently costs £15,000 in fuel alone for one Liverpool fast craft round-trip! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 More warnings this morning in the news, of likely increases in the fuel surcharges gulp! Aye - they said that it currently costs £15,000 in fuel alone for one Liverpool fast craft round-trip! Found this quate in an article on fuel consumption in the US Navy: First principles of naval architecture (Manning 1956) characterize propulsion energy requirements as a cubic function of speed; therefore, speed is the key determinant of fuel consumption. An American destroyer was using approx 1700 gallons per hour at 20 knots, 2500 at 25 knots and 5900 at 30 knots. An exponential increase. Presumably something similar applies to civilian vessels. I heard (but cannot source it) that Stena Line reckon a reduction of 4 knots from 24 to 20 on one of their ferries will save 40% in fuel costs compared with a 16% reduction in speed. Do any Forum members know something more about this? It just strikes me that rather than simply upping fuel surcharges and maintaining current crossing times the alternative could be for the IOMSPC to slow down and save fuel. The focus would then need to be on ensuring minimum turnround times in harbour (like a Ryanair operation). The saving on fuel looks pretty massive. There is obviously an exercise that would need to be done in savings on fuel versus possible revenue implications. Don't know how this would apply to the different vessels. Hopefully the new vessel will be super efficient.... The bummer would of course be if they slowed down, saved fuel and upped fuel surcharges!!! What would you prefer a slower crossing time or current crossing times and increased surcharge? PS rumour has it that Ryanair have ordered pilots to fly a bit slower to save fuel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 PS rumour has it that Ryanair have ordered pilots to fly a bit slower to save fuel Don't give people ideas. They'll be justifying the £44M runway extension as saving fuel costs next - being just that bit closer to the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 The bummer would of course be if they slowed down, saved fuel and upped fuel surcharges!!! Good Heavens! You don't really think that our beloved Steam Packet would do anything like that, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.