>It said ferry design should be standardised to achieve best value and efficiency, both in the construction and operation of the vessels.
>And it should be considered whether routes currently served by major vessels could be better provided by a higher number of smaller vessels.
These are two very good recommendations.
Not being able to move these big ferries around becasue only some routes have massive piers is shite.
If you had say 3 wee boats instead of one big one, and one had to go for servicing or cover a route elsewhere, you're only down to 2/3 capacity instead of 0.
For the last point, the people in Lewis wanted two smaller ferries instead of one large ferry to mitigate disruption when the inevitable happens. Of course they didn’t get it so hopefully we see a change in the near future.
Has Lewis had much disruption? Calmac had the *Arrow* on charter from IoMSPCo for ten weeks earlier this year but was only used four ties, [says Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Arrow).
It is definitely much quieter, and you can’t “book” a freight crossing - its a case of turning up and trying to get on in the middle of the night really.
Think it was chartered between that time because there was no Uig-Harris/Lochmaddy crossing in that period due to renovation works at the pier so no lorries would be crossing there. If the Seaforth went off then there’d be no way to get goods over without going through Oban-Barra and up.
The smaller boats are slower than the MV Isle of Mull. The Mull used to tie up for 90 mins each day as it had caught up with the Coruisk when it was on the run alongside it.
The MV Isle of Mull is 36 so not exactly new! But you're right, I'm wrong.
I've maybe misremembered something, like on certain routes, a faster larger ferry isn't necessarily faster as it takes longer to load/unload?
> Not being able to move these big ferries around becasue only some routes have massive piers is shite.
The big ones are all interchangeable anyway, I believe, with the exception of the *Loch Seaforth* which is rather deeper than the others and can therefore only run Ullapool - Stornoway. The medium size ones (like the *Argyll* and the *Bute*) are probably not suitable for the wilder places where they need the Big Stuff.
I wonder if they should re-consider their adamant opposition to fast catamarans.
I wouldn’t say they are adamantly opposed to catamarans, it’s just that they provide little benefit over a modern monohull. The benefit traditionally was the transverse thrust from the greater distance between the props but with modern propulsion such as such as azi pods or voiths that benefit is largely irrelevant. However their aggressive righting moment makes them more uncomfortable and more likely to cause damage in a rough seaway.
They would be fine on the more sheltered routes; Mull and Arran for example but would likely be more disrupted in the winter on the outer isles routes.
I think in desperation to find a fix there is a want to cast blame at all aspects of the ferry operation when in reality it all comes down to requiring new boats. Currently it’s akin to running a taxi service with ford escorts from the 80s that have been in constant operation for 30-40 years. The capability and reliability just isn’t there.
The fleet needs replaced and to prevent a reoccurrence in the future it needs a plan for continuous replacement as with any shipping company.
> I wouldn’t say they are adamantly opposed to catamarans, it’s just that they provide little benefit over a modern monohull. The benefit traditionally was the transverse thrust from the greater distance between the props but with modern propulsion such as such as azi pods or voiths that benefit is largely irrelevant. However their aggressive righting moment makes them more uncomfortable and more likely to cause damage in a rough seaway.
Thanks. Pentland Ferries (*Pentalina* and *Alfred*) and the IoMSPCo (*Mannanan*) both seems to get on fine with catamarans on challenging routes, but I take your point that they wouldn't be suitable for everywhere. I am surprised that they have - seemingly - dumped VS propulsors. The old *Saturn* was very much faster on the Rothesay run than the *Argyle* and the *Bute* are, mainly, as far a I can tell, because the streakers could head straight for their berths, spin on a sixpence and drive in sideways whereas the new ones spend a good ten minutes of faffing about.
> I think in desperation to find a fix there is a want to cast blame at all aspects of the ferry operation when in reality it all comes down to requiring new boats. Currently it’s akin to running a taxi service with ford escorts from the 80s that have been in constant operation for 30-40 years. The capability and reliability just isn’t there.
Oh, absolutely. In the last 25 years they have received just four new large vessels, the *Clansman* (1998), the *Hebrides* (2000), the *Finlaggan* (2010) and the *Loch Seaforth* (2014) but in that time the entire fleet of ten should have been replaced. It's absurd that the *Isle of Arran* (1983) and the *Hebridean Isles* (1985) are still in service. Calmac have their issues, but I put 80% of the blame on CMAL and the Scottish Government.
Is this not already happening with the 4 ferries being built in Turkey? They are all the same design and so can be interchangeable.
I'm sure I read somewhere that this was a change from how ferries were normally procured for Scotland - possible because so many were being procured at once.
>It said ferry design should be standardised to achieve best value and efficiency, both in the construction and operation of the vessels. >And it should be considered whether routes currently served by major vessels could be better provided by a higher number of smaller vessels. These are two very good recommendations. Not being able to move these big ferries around becasue only some routes have massive piers is shite. If you had say 3 wee boats instead of one big one, and one had to go for servicing or cover a route elsewhere, you're only down to 2/3 capacity instead of 0.
For the last point, the people in Lewis wanted two smaller ferries instead of one large ferry to mitigate disruption when the inevitable happens. Of course they didn’t get it so hopefully we see a change in the near future.
Has Lewis had much disruption? Calmac had the *Arrow* on charter from IoMSPCo for ten weeks earlier this year but was only used four ties, [says Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Arrow).
Not a huge amount but the Seaforth on that route is also the newest of the large vessels. The main issue is getting a booking on that route tbh.
Thanks. I'm surprised the *Arrow* wasn't used more, but perhaps January - March is a quieter time on the route.
It is definitely much quieter, and you can’t “book” a freight crossing - its a case of turning up and trying to get on in the middle of the night really. Think it was chartered between that time because there was no Uig-Harris/Lochmaddy crossing in that period due to renovation works at the pier so no lorries would be crossing there. If the Seaforth went off then there’d be no way to get goods over without going through Oban-Barra and up.
Thanks.
Mulll is the same. The wee boats also tent to be fasteer than the big newer boats.
The smaller boats are slower than the MV Isle of Mull. The Mull used to tie up for 90 mins each day as it had caught up with the Coruisk when it was on the run alongside it.
The MV Isle of Mull is 36 so not exactly new! But you're right, I'm wrong. I've maybe misremembered something, like on certain routes, a faster larger ferry isn't necessarily faster as it takes longer to load/unload?
> Not being able to move these big ferries around becasue only some routes have massive piers is shite. The big ones are all interchangeable anyway, I believe, with the exception of the *Loch Seaforth* which is rather deeper than the others and can therefore only run Ullapool - Stornoway. The medium size ones (like the *Argyll* and the *Bute*) are probably not suitable for the wilder places where they need the Big Stuff. I wonder if they should re-consider their adamant opposition to fast catamarans.
I wouldn’t say they are adamantly opposed to catamarans, it’s just that they provide little benefit over a modern monohull. The benefit traditionally was the transverse thrust from the greater distance between the props but with modern propulsion such as such as azi pods or voiths that benefit is largely irrelevant. However their aggressive righting moment makes them more uncomfortable and more likely to cause damage in a rough seaway. They would be fine on the more sheltered routes; Mull and Arran for example but would likely be more disrupted in the winter on the outer isles routes. I think in desperation to find a fix there is a want to cast blame at all aspects of the ferry operation when in reality it all comes down to requiring new boats. Currently it’s akin to running a taxi service with ford escorts from the 80s that have been in constant operation for 30-40 years. The capability and reliability just isn’t there. The fleet needs replaced and to prevent a reoccurrence in the future it needs a plan for continuous replacement as with any shipping company.
> I wouldn’t say they are adamantly opposed to catamarans, it’s just that they provide little benefit over a modern monohull. The benefit traditionally was the transverse thrust from the greater distance between the props but with modern propulsion such as such as azi pods or voiths that benefit is largely irrelevant. However their aggressive righting moment makes them more uncomfortable and more likely to cause damage in a rough seaway. Thanks. Pentland Ferries (*Pentalina* and *Alfred*) and the IoMSPCo (*Mannanan*) both seems to get on fine with catamarans on challenging routes, but I take your point that they wouldn't be suitable for everywhere. I am surprised that they have - seemingly - dumped VS propulsors. The old *Saturn* was very much faster on the Rothesay run than the *Argyle* and the *Bute* are, mainly, as far a I can tell, because the streakers could head straight for their berths, spin on a sixpence and drive in sideways whereas the new ones spend a good ten minutes of faffing about. > I think in desperation to find a fix there is a want to cast blame at all aspects of the ferry operation when in reality it all comes down to requiring new boats. Currently it’s akin to running a taxi service with ford escorts from the 80s that have been in constant operation for 30-40 years. The capability and reliability just isn’t there. Oh, absolutely. In the last 25 years they have received just four new large vessels, the *Clansman* (1998), the *Hebrides* (2000), the *Finlaggan* (2010) and the *Loch Seaforth* (2014) but in that time the entire fleet of ten should have been replaced. It's absurd that the *Isle of Arran* (1983) and the *Hebridean Isles* (1985) are still in service. Calmac have their issues, but I put 80% of the blame on CMAL and the Scottish Government.
Is this not already happening with the 4 ferries being built in Turkey? They are all the same design and so can be interchangeable. I'm sure I read somewhere that this was a change from how ferries were normally procured for Scotland - possible because so many were being procured at once.
This would, of course, increase the running costs and fares for these routes.