Steam Packet considers shake-up of fleet

[Blade Runner]

21 hours ago, quilp said:

Three engines? 

Four Candles?

[Cambon]

2 hours ago, Omobono said:

but you needed the entire resources  of the US navy to achieve  that performance  I understand she uses  approx 54 litres of fuel  per  Nautical mile  but the big problem will come when the city fathers in Liverpool declare the centre a  ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) and vehicles entering the city will have to pay  a fee , 

more grief for the travelling public making Liverpool a very costly mistake for  the isle of Man government  and one we will be paying dearly for ,for many years to come ,thats if we ever find out what the final true  cost  of the    passenger terminal  is ,

Yes, but being over 25 years old, the Manannan would be exempt, as are historic cars. ULEZ literally only affects cars between (roughly) 18-25 years old,  and theoretically will disappear in seven years time. 

[Omobono]

Iam not talking about the Manannan  but the poor motorists who travel to  liverpool and  board or disembark  from the ferry  , they will be facing additional charges , the Manannan will have her own cross to bear   when  air pollution and emission regulations in the maritime world kick in  or fuel costs have an adverse effect on her viability 

question,  where were the bright sparks  we have been paying very good money to   for  planning our vital sea routes ?

[Max Power]

Hasn't Manxman been future proofed with clean engines and hybrid drive?

Why not just use Liverpool for passengers and light freight with Manxman, and Heysham for all heavy freight with Arrow?

[P.K.]

1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Hasn't Manxman been future proofed with clean engines and hybrid drive?

Why not just use Liverpool for passengers and light freight with Manxman, and Heysham for all heavy freight with Arrow?

When they purchased Arrow it was clearly just to transport freight from Heysham. Basically with a capacity of 88 trailers and just 12 passengers it can't do anything else.

When they announced they wanted to get rid of the Ben I naturally assumed that they had done their sums and had concluded that Arrow had the capacity to replace the Ben on the Heysham freight run.

But then this is the IOM, where you can fuck up...

[Dirty Buggane]

53 minutes ago, P.K. said:

But then this is the IOM, where you can fuck up...

No need to whisper "FUCK UP"

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

Hasn't Manxman been future proofed with clean engines and hybrid drive?

Why not just use Liverpool for passengers and light freight with Manxman, and Heysham for all heavy freight with Arrow?

What's light freight?

[John Wright]

Just now, Happier diner said:

What's light freight?

Transit sized stuff. How we managed before 1978.

[Happier diner]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Transit sized stuff. How we managed before 1978.

I see. This type of 'freight' regularly goes to Liverpool on the mannanan so why would it be an issue on the manxman.

Personally I would refer to transit sized vehicles as freight, but not sure of the definition 

[Passing Time]

3 hours ago, Blade Runner said:

All of the above is/ are correct.

Could the new dock be sold to another shipping company? Cruise ship type operation?

The island needs to offload this white elephant ASAP.

What are the running costs likely to be? What are the "maintenance" lease payments? No planning consent for freight or night sailings - Seriously who signed this sh1t off? Were they not fully in control of their faculties? 

It really looks like the £100 million shed is even more of a waste of money than everyone first thought.

It the island was a South American country someone, or more likely several people would be taken near to that new dock and shot in the forehead.....

If a cruise co or similar offered £20 million, their arm should be ripped off. This white elephant will drag the island down, it must, and will always bleed money hand over fist, it cant ever be profitable, even if you ignored the monstrous capital cost as IOM Gov tends to do when making up financial statements..

E.T.A  All of my daughters now have their houses up for sale as they don't want negative equity (they are highly leveraged house wise to be fair but so are a lot of others).

The also don't see any future in being either care nurses or physio therapists on the island long term.

Their partners can all work from home so where they are based does not matter as long as the interwebs thing is okay.

Tax wise, their partners, who earn the main income, can still use the island for tax planning measures so a win win for all.

That is a lot easier if you have lived here for a while and have friends here.🙂

What’s it got to do with you? Isn’t there a local forum you could bore the pants off?

[John Wright]

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

I see. This type of 'freight' regularly goes to Liverpool on the mannanan so why would it be an issue on the manxman.

Personally I would refer to transit sized vehicles as freight, but not sure of the definition 

It wouldn’t be economic. 

[Non-Believer]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

It wouldn’t be economic. 

Can any of us imagine the prices in the shops for example, if goods were shipped to the Island in Transit-sized vans? 😱

It's all about efficiency and economies of scale.

[John Wright]

5 hours ago, Blade Runner said:

Could the new dock be sold to another shipping company? Cruise ship type operation?

The island needs to offload this white elephant ASAP.

The actual docking facility is a linkspan, no big berth. One of the three traditional passenger freight companies operating RoPax from Liverpool has just announced its withdrawal of service.

It’s not able to accommodate the e-flexer class of new RoPax ferries which are between 60 and 80 metres longer than Manxman. And cruise liners are even bigger.

[Happier diner]

4 hours ago, John Wright said:

It wouldn’t be economic. 

What wouldn't be economic. It would be no different to now. You can take any vehicle up to 7.5t on the mannanan 

[John Wright]

3 hours ago, Happier diner said:

What wouldn't be economic. It would be no different to now. You can take any vehicle up to 7.5t on the mannanan 

Think it through. It’s much more expensive to ship six transits with six drivers than one trailer with container with no driver. That increases cost to consumer. Steam Packet would have a potential fare bonanza.

Liverpool is a longer crossing than Heysham, so fuel costs are 20% higher.

It’s just not a sensible use of Mx.

Having the Arrow do two daily returns with containers to Heysham takes us back to the expense of two boats, two crew rosters. SPCo went RoRo to avoid those types of overheads.

SPCo need to set out their strategy. I agree that, once, if, Mx proves it can cope with harbour entry and manoeuvres during winter, then Ben must go. Keeping it on standby is not realistic financially.

Then we are into planning for Mannanan replacement. I don’t favour a fast craft. But two, smaller, conventional ferries like the recent CalMac purchases from Turkey. Sailings to Liverpool all year round. Ability to offer Scots sailings, Irish and Northern Ireland sailings at increased frequency.

Perhaps a once a day service between Liverpool or Heysham to Dublin. With P&O withdrawing their Dublin service there’s a potential gap in the market, and no passenger service between England and Republic of Ireland.

P&O say they’ve been booted out of Gladstone Dock by Peel. P&O have history of not paying fees. Peel seized one of the ferries at one stage. No love lost there. Plus the boats are old. Not economic to replace.

The route is a Brexit victim. Freight that used to come from the EU via Newcastle and Hull headed to Liverpool, mainly. Now there are direct sailings from Netherlands and France and Spain to Rosslare or Dublin.

They benefit from standard tried design, dual fuel, lower fuel consumption, less pollution. 450 pax. 100 cars or a car and van mix. Or up to 20 containers. Fast craft are heavy fuel consumption/high level polluters. Plus have operational weather constraints.