Fred the shred Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Most of the time it used to be using three engines probably to save fuel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissoltt Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: It's clear that people have been talking to Chris Thomas as well (you'd expect Douglas Central to have a lot of SP workers) and Allinson was left saying that it was impossible to quote sailing times because of other variables. Which makes you wonder just how the Steam Packet manage to produce a timetable. It's clear he completely misled them when he answered questions last month, presumably because he'd been fed a load of old bullshit by the SP management. That doesn't seem to have changed. But you would expect a person with half a brain would sit down and work out how long the trip would take at reduced speed? Why do our politicians just repeat what they are told by the civil service or steam packet? This reeks of Crookalls 'all buses left on time's during TT week gaffe 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 10 minutes ago, cissoltt said: But you would expect a person with half a brain would sit down and work out how long the trip would take at reduced speed? Why do our politicians just repeat what they are told by the civil service or steam packet? This reeks of Crookalls 'all buses left on time's during TT week gaffe It’s not that easy. Relationship between power out put and speed through the water is not linear nor is it constant. It will depend on wind direction, state of sea, tide direction, etc. Allinson said it’s limited to 48% power. But that’s pretty meaningless. Do they means revs, or revs at a certain gearing? He also mentioned max speed at the reduced power and compared it with normal service or operational speed at an unspecified level of power out put. But service speed isn’t max speed or max power. The Ben tootles along in a calm sea with low wind speed at 17-18 knots. That’s not using full power. She can do about 14% faster, in reserve for wind, current, sea, tide, held in reserve. So he wasn’t comparing like with like. The only way they’ll actually know how long she’ll take is by some runs at reduced power, with some left in reserve. Youll be familiar with a car engine high revs in first would burn lots of fuel and create more pollution. Lower revs in 5th, or 9th, will give better fuel consumption and less pollution. Remember this is about the amount of pollution allowed to be emitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissoltt Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 59 minutes ago, John Wright said: It’s not that easy. Relationship between power out put and speed through the water is not linear nor is it constant. It will depend on wind direction, state of sea, tide direction, etc. Allinson said it’s limited to 48% power. But that’s pretty meaningless. Do they means revs, or revs at a certain gearing? He also mentioned max speed at the reduced power and compared it with normal service or operational speed at an unspecified level of power out put. But service speed isn’t max speed or max power. The Ben tootles along in a calm sea with low wind speed at 17-18 knots. That’s not using full power. She can do about 14% faster, in reserve for wind, current, sea, tide, held in reserve. So he wasn’t comparing like with like. The only way they’ll actually know how long she’ll take is by some runs at reduced power, with some left in reserve. Youll be familiar with a car engine high revs in first would burn lots of fuel and create more pollution. Lower revs in 5th, or 9th, will give better fuel consumption and less pollution. Remember this is about the amount of pollution allowed to be emitted. Oh I am a life longer sea dweller, yachts and other craft. You can estimate the time quite easily, and many captains do on a daily basis. This is a pure cop out from Allanson, perhaps the steam packet are playing their hand to try and make a case for selling the Ben? Arent they already in breach of the sea services agreement due to the lack of availability of the Ben There are many sites that could provide a decent estimate https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/2013/07/distance-calculator.html 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 4 minutes ago, cissoltt said: Oh I am a life longer sea dweller, yachts and other craft. You can estimate the time quite easily, and many captains do on a daily basis. This is a pure cop out from Allanson, perhaps the steam packet are playing their hand to try and make a case for selling the Ben? Arent they already in breach of the sea services agreement due to the lack of availability of the Ben There are many sites that could provide a decent estimate https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/2013/07/distance-calculator.html If you know the speed. However the speed estimate is wildly over optimistic, according to those I talk to. The only thing there seems to be agreement on is that there’s a restriction of more than 50% on power output. 7 minutes ago, cissoltt said: Arent they already in breach of the sea services agreement due to the lack of availability of the Ben Which is maybe why the SPCo have been less than transparent since this started to trickle out last year. Crew reckon it’ll have an operational service speed of +/- 7kts. As you say, you can readily calculate crossing time, at 17kts, 14kts or 7kts. However, no point giving a 5 hour estimate at 14kts when it’s only going to sail at 7kts. Is there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) '' ... actually know how long she’ll take...''. Well that's Women for you, bloody useless creatures............. It's a boat, an inanimate object it is an ' IT, IT ,IT !!! Is this a form of misogyny? Blame the Woman? Nothing to do with Men??? Rant over, or is it???????😀 Edited March 6 by Kopek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxman2000 Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 It’s all smoke and mirrors, the steam packet could have sorted this long ago but they want to sell the Ben. Condor have sorted two out of three. The engines within the Ben are common place in ferries around the world, the engine builder will know of all the remedies available to suit fuel in use. The three north link ships have the same engines. are calmac having problems, many of the ferries run by them are using merlees blackstone engines that are years old. The same engines fitted to many locos on the railways. They can’t be compliant. The MHK’s are being fed shit and are taking it, they need to take independent advice and then confront the packet. They own the packet. Farmers, Doctors and shop keepers are not well qualified to run a local council. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 3 minutes ago, Manxman2000 said: It’s all smoke and mirrors, the steam packet could have sorted this long ago but they want to sell the Ben. Condor have sorted two out of three. Surely selling the Ben to any prospective purchaser will be a difficult job if it can only operate at 50% or less in certain regulated areas due to non-compliance with environmental regs? Or the purchaser is going to negotiate the asking price down with a view to having to make it compliant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 20 hours ago, Non-Believer said: Surely selling the Ben to any prospective purchaser will be a difficult job if it can only operate at 50% or less in certain regulated areas due to non-compliance with environmental regs? Or the purchaser is going to negotiate the asking price down with a view to having to make it compliant? This , and I reckon the Steam Packet is scared of the flak they will get if they do the necessary works at a cost and then immediately off load it and basically take a hit. This way sold as seen so to speak is what there angling for i’d say . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 21 hours ago, Non-Believer said: Surely selling the Ben to any prospective purchaser will be a difficult job if it can only operate at 50% or less in certain regulated areas due to non-compliance with environmental regs? Or the purchaser is going to negotiate the asking price down with a view to having to make it compliant? Suppose it could be sold to someone or somewhere that’s not bothered about the emissions 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 52 minutes ago, Banker said: Suppose it could be sold to someone or somewhere that’s not bothered about the emissions No we can’t sell it to someone or somewhere that’s not bothered about emissions! Our politicos have spent ages talking and enacting legislation and grandstanding, now is the time of doing. If the Ben isn’t fitted with scrubbers whatever the cost, then it’s off to the breakers yard. Sad but I am afraid by the island environmental grandstanding, it’s created a rod for its own back. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 FWIW I think the situation with BMC is as much political as it is technical. It was IOMG who insisted on having her as a backup in the Sea Services Agreement so should have been fully aware of what was required to keep her compliant for the future. Sounds to me like a funding issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omobono Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 6 hours ago, Andy Onchan said: FWIW I think the situation with BMC is as much political as it is technical. It was IOMG who insisted on having her as a backup in the Sea Services Agreement so should have been fully aware of what was required to keep her compliant for the future. Sounds to me like a funding issue. sounds like input from the dead hand of government again bit like the fire service we have more fire engines that people qualified to drive them , never give anything up but the cost rumbles on steam packed wage bill must be astronomical at the moment with 4 ships on the go and only one ferry actually sailing on a daily basis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian rush Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 If this comes off (Mersey barrage) there’ll be lock to go through before getting to the landing stage https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/eight-things-you-need-know-28780656 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxman2000 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 19 minutes ago, ian rush said: If this comes off (Mersey barrage) there’ll be lock to go through before getting to the landing stage https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/eight-things-you-need-know-28780656 And the Rhiannon wind farm, and that’s a big one. Looks like they will protect the routes in from the west. That will send the Belfast bound traffic around the south of the island. Douglas to Liverpool will be like a dogs leg to route around the wind farm. After reading the article, it will never happen. Edited March 9 by Manxman2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.