La_Dolce_Vita Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 And Manannan's problem was a start-up motor. It's not like they make-up stories to dupe the public. Joke, right? They are capable of doing so, but I don't know why when something goes wrong with the ship people think there is a lie behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Wait a sec, this three engines problem happened week's ago because of a start-up motor problem. Just because a boat was late on one day doesn't mean it is still running on three engines. The Irish sailings seem to be running consistently late - then TBF that is the Snaefell which seems to be held together with ticky-tacky. On my last sailing the Captain announced that maximum speed was 28 knots (I thought it used to be 36 knots) which sounded slow for a fastcat. I am sure this is why the IOMSPC accountant accountant/CEO is making the noise about needing to review the Irish services - he needs to get rid of the Snaefell without actually admitting in public that it is a lousy ship that is long past it 'use by' date. I assume that the IOMSPC aim is to run with two ships rather than three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 The Irish sailings seem to be running consistently late - then TBF that is the Snaefell which seems to be held together with ticky-tacky. On my last sailing the Captain announced that maximum speed was 28 knots (I thought it used to be 36 knots) which sounded slow for a fastcat. 32 is normal cruising speed for the Seacat, as far as I am aware and 36 for the Manannan. I am sure this is why the IOMSPC accountant accountant/CEO is making the noise about needing to review the Irish services - he needs to get rid of the Snaefell without actually admitting in public that it is a lousy ship that is long past it 'use by' date. I assume that the IOMSPC aim is to run with two ships rather than three. Well running it on two rather than three would be seem to be plan! It wouldn't be because the ship is past its sell by date. But more likely that the people at the top want to reduce costs as much as possible and squeeze down the service to its bare necessities. It would be much cheaper to get rid of a boat and not have to maintain a Seacat, which are expensive to maintain and run. But it isn't because the ship is falling apart, much more likely that the profitmaking needs of the Bank (that owns the company) are placing serious constraints on what can and will be offered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Wait a sec, this three engines problem happened week's ago because of a start-up motor problem. Just because a boat was late on one day doesn't mean it is still running on three engines. The Irish sailings seem to be running consistently late - then TBF that is the Snaefell which seems to be held together with ticky-tacky. On my last sailing the Captain announced that maximum speed was 28 knots (I thought it used to be 36 knots) which sounded slow for a fastcat. I am sure this is why the IOMSPC accountant accountant/CEO is making the noise about needing to review the Irish services - he needs to get rid of the Snaefell without actually admitting in public that it is a lousy ship that is long past it 'use by' date. I assume that the IOMSPC aim is to run with two ships rather than three. To be honest, and I am no fan of the Racket, always had no problem trravelling on the Snaefell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 To be honest, and I am no fan of the Racket, always had no problem trravelling on the Snaefell. Can't say I am a 'fan'. I can understand people's complaints about customer service or changes to the sailings, and the boats timeliness. But it is not common sense to claim that breakdowns are made-up. That is all I am saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 But it isn't because the ship is falling apart, much more likely that the profitmaking needs of the Bank (that owns the company) are placing serious constraints on what can and will be offered. I have been on the Snaefell number of times this year. It's passenger spaces are in need of smartening up a lot - for example ceilings in poor repair and badly dented in places, 'modernised' toilets still in borderline condition, food serveries very dated, seating uncomfortable by modern ferry standards. It also seems to be running at 12% below what you think is its normal cruising speed. On the last point Mark Woodward said on this Board that the IOMSPC would not run ferries slower to save fuel - so if he is not dissimulating it must be running slower because of ongoing mechanical problems. The slow speed is not a one off on the Snaefell. I would agree with you that there may be pressure from the funds run by Macquarie to operate the Steam Packet Company more profitably for them. I am also of the opinion that the way they are wanting to achieve this is to reduce the fleet size to two - but they do not want to state their real reasons in public - so they are currently looking for a 'rationale' to dispose of the Snaefell - IMO rather than having to spend money on its mechanics and its passenger facilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I would agree with you that there may be pressure from the funds run by Macquarie to operate the Steam Packet Company more profitably for them. I am also of the opinion that the way they are wanting to achieve this is to reduce the fleet size to two - but they do not want to state their real reasons in public - so they are currently looking for a 'rationale' to dispose of the Snaefell - IMO rather than having to spend money on its mechanics and its passenger facilities. I don't understand, what rationale are they using or do you mean they are still looking for one? What is stopping them just saying that they are taking one of Irish sailings off and no longer need the Snaefell? I think your focus on the issue of keeping or disposing of the Snaefell isn't really where the important matters lies for the public. It is when they explain about the changes to the Irish service that would raise questions. If there is no daytime sailing to Ireland - then it those regular passengers who will explain. It doesn't matters how many boats the SP has. Of course, Macquarie want as much profit from the company as they can get. And they are a bank. Their priorities and understanding would be somewhat different. It is all business, unfortunately. As to the speed, the Snaefell will not be running at less than its cruising speed because of technical issues. There must be a reason why the speed is lower. Maybe it is fuel saving, maybe not. I expect the speed is heavily dependent on the weather or calmness of the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 The service is being run for profit by a ruthless Private Equity set up. The company is on record as saying that Irish sailings are unprofitable but they are tied into them by the user agreement. If the services to Ireland are run at a slower speed and at awkward times then less people will use them. This lower take-up would surely give the company more leverage in negotiations to get out of the Irish sailing clauses. Or am I being a bit too cynical?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I know a couple who were off work last week and intended (and booked) to go on a day trip to Liverpool on Manannan, booked a particular reserved seat as well, and what did they get ?, Snaefell not happy ! on the matter of reducing the fleet, I think now they have the Manannan with the larger capacity it makes Snaefell largely redundant, they just need to juggle the schedule a bit to fit in the Irish routes, maybe knock off one of the lesser used Liverpool sailings so that it's not night sailings to Ireland. I think it should also cover a lot of the freight capacity of the Ben when she has to go for annual service, when you get on it and see, the vehicle deck is enormous ! Selling Snaefell and ending the lease on Viking should help ease the overheads, maybe they will be able to drop the prices a bit then (cough, cough !) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 What is stopping them just saying that they are taking one of Irish sailings off and no longer need the Snaefell?I think your focus on the issue of keeping or disposing of the Snaefell isn't really where the important matters lies for the public. It is when they explain about the changes to the Irish service that would raise questions. If there is no daytime sailing to Ireland - then it those regular passengers who will explain. It doesn't matters how many boats the SP has. As to the speed, the Snaefell will not be running at less than its cruising speed because of technical issues. There must be a reason why the speed is lower. Maybe it is fuel saving, maybe not. I expect the speed is heavily dependent on the weather or calmness of the sea. LDV I suspect the Irish service and the future of the Snaefell are linked. The IOMSPC are obliged under the UA to have 63 sailings to Ireland each year until 2020. But if they only have 2 ships the Irish summer sailings will most probably have to be in the overnight period when the Manannan is not serving Liverpool. This will discourage passengers from Ireland even more. BTW the last four journeys I have taken were at 28 knots and fortunately on calm seas (given the S's sea-keeping qualities!). I know a couple who were off work last week and intended (and booked) to go on a day trip to Liverpool on Manannan, booked a particular reserved seat as well, and what did they get ?, Snaefell. on the matter of reducing the fleet, I think now they have the Manannan with the larger capacity it makes Snaefell largely redundant, they just need to juggle the schedule a bit to fit in the Irish routes, maybe knock off one of the lesser used Liverpool sailings so that it's not night sailings to Ireland. Selling Snaefell and ending the lease on Viking should help ease the overheads, maybe they will be able to drop the prices a bit then (cough, cough !) TF I live in hope that when the Snaefell goes the Irish service gets a decent ship and a daytime service. I shall believe this when I see it! The IOMSPC seem to be quite frequently listing the Manannan as the ship to provide the service on the tickets they issue from Ireland and providing the Snaefell. It is pretty obvious that IOMSPC administration and customer service at the HO level is badly flawed (if it exists) - as your friends found out too. One reason they may feel concerned if they get rid of the Snaefell is that the Mannanan huge amounts of fuel - more than the Viking accoding to Mark Woodward - so a half full Irish crossing will not be very profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxman2000 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I think you will find the lack of speed with Snaefell is here with a blown engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I think you will find the lack of speed with Snaefell is here with a blown engine. goodness- I thought that the IOMSPC say that they are 'environmentally friendly'! When was this taken? Looks like that old film footage of the Graf Spee being scuttled! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 LDV I suspect the Irish service and the future of the Snaefell are linked. The IOMSPC are obliged under the UA to have 63 sailings to Ireland each year until 2020. But if they only have 2 ships the Irish summer sailings will most probably have to be in the overnight period when the Manannan is not serving Liverpool. This will discourage passengers from Ireland even more. BTW the last four journeys I have taken were at 28 knots and fortunately on calm seas (given the S's sea-keeping qualities!). No doubt they are linked. I am only just saying that the loss of Snaefell will not be the issue of contention, but rather the sailings. TF I live in hope that when the Snaefell goes the Irish service gets a decent ship and a daytime service. I shall believe this when I see it! The IOMSPC seem to be quite frequently listing the Manannan as the ship to provide the service on the tickets they issue from Ireland and providing the Snaefell. It is pretty obvious that IOMSPC administration and customer service at the HO level is badly flawed (if it exists) - as your friends found out too. One reason they may feel concerned if they get rid of the Snaefell is that the Mannanan huge amounts of fuel - more than the Viking accoding to Mark Woodward - so a half full Irish crossing will not be very profitable. From what I can gather they would probably intend to work the other two vessels even harder. And do the Irish service at night. That's the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 From what I can gather they would probably intend to work the other two vessels even harder. And do the Irish service at night. That's the plan. LDV if that is the plan it would be better to let someone else service Ireland who would promote the service and run it at convenient times that will attract custom not kill it. Bearing in mind that to keep the User Agreement in force to 2020 the IOMSPC has to run Irish sailings, doing it overnight will reduce passenger payloads even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 LDV if that is the plan it would be better to let someone else service Ireland who would promote the service and run it at convenient times that will attract custom not kill it. Bearing in mind that to keep the User Agreement in force to 2020 the IOMSPC has to run Irish sailings, doing it overnight will reduce passenger payloads even more. If it is possible to run the sailings at convenient times and attract custom why does the Steam Packet not do that already? More of a general observation; but in every Steam Packet debate there seems to be the unreconcilable claims that a) The Steam Packet is being used to "squeeze" profits out of a captive population whilst at the same time b) not wanting to do anything that would boost these profits such as promoting use or operating one of these near-mythical all-weather craft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.