I was shocked to read about the proposed “day boat” design that incorporates an open deck design.
As a 33 year resident of SE Alaska, retired Coast Guard Commander, and user of the ferry system, I can’t believe that they are even considering an open deck option.
Dennis Egan was correct in asking what impact the freezing spray would have should the vessel have to turn around. However, the issue is not freezing spray when the ship turns around in heavy seas. Rather, the issue is the ship LOSING POWER, and NOT BEING ABLE TO MANEUVER. Those of us in the marine safety business know that casualties at sea tend to be caused not only by bad weather, but also other factors that suddenly appear. Just consider the recent Carnival Triumph casualty in warm water, where the ship (full of the latest modern technology) lost power and had to be towed, taking it several days to reach safety.
Those of us who ride the ferries for both business and pleasure have experienced being in the Solarium of the LeConte on the aft portion of the ship and having freezing spray hitting the solarium as the ship shuddered and shock through heavy seas.
Having an open deck in North Lynn Canal with a ship “in extremis” and rolling in heavy wind and seas due to loss of power is frightening. Alaska is called the ‘Land of Extremes” for a reason.
Jim Sepel
CDR USCG Ret.
Accredited Marine Surveyor
Chair, Alaska Boating Safety and Advisory Council
Comments (4)
Add commentWow!
THIS is the kind of perspective that should give major pause to the designers of this brilliant plan. Sepel has more credibility on this subject than the entire Administration combined.
How big of a deal is it to enclose the aft deck? What do you lose? What's the cost?
For that matter, why not make the boat longer? Keep it as a day boat, but add another 75 feet, making it Taku sized, long & lean. It'll run faster, cheaper, handle Lynn Canal better. It can still be a day boat. Even make it a multi-hull, just not the high speed, jet powered rocket ship model like the Fairweather.
And run it out of Berners Bay - That would cut nearly 30 miles off of the trip each way. Run a shuttle bus between Berners & Auke Bay for walk-ons, that would be a lot cheaper than running a ferry 60 miles round trip.
Finally
a voice of common sense and knowledge...that Parnell and Kemp will still ignore. Lat, they arent going to make any changes, to make changes now would force them to admit they were wrong and spend additional money on the ferry system that they despise. They want AMHS to fail, plain and simple so they can privatize it and give the contracts to their buddies. By the time they got through correcting the flawed design they have now, it would have cost them about the same to stay with the original ferry design. My guess is Parnell would have preferred even a smaller ship, he could care less if SE residents ride in a punt to Haines in the dead of winter.
The question I have is who approves the safety of these vessels, do they have to pass some sort of Coast Guard requirements?
A basic question:
does the existing yard in Ketchikan have the capability to build the original design -- an Alaska Class Ferry?
For it is my understanding the new design is being based on the maximum size capability of the yard as a major design criteria.
@islander
Good question. It also brings up another issue and that is what happened to bidding and competition. If the contract was awarded to a yard outside of Alaska, it could be written into the contract that Alaskans would have first dibs at the jobs. But to turn back Fed money in hand to give a no-competition contract to a pre-selected company?