NSW Ferry Discussion until December 2017.

[Tonymercury]

See photo towards bottom of page -

http://www.ssmaritime.com/Baragoola.htm

[Swift]

A great read and heart breaking at the same time regarding the way Sydney treats it's history, in regards to those imbeciles responsible for damaging the Baragoola's hull after it's retirement, during demolition works.

[tonyp]

Baragoola is no longer heritage listed due to the failure to undertake the necessary hull works to prevent it ultimately sinking. It needs replating and none of the owners have had the financial means to do this. In the meantime it is waterproofed with some sort of expoxy treatment which is a temporary solution only. They've done good work stabilising the upperworks but the hull needs work in a dock.

Neither the Heritage Council nor Maritime were prepared to wear the risk and bad publicity that would result from it sinking. That's the underlying reason why it has been kept at arm's length by officialdom. Nevertheless Maritime (RMS) has tolerated it being moored in the harbour, which is a lot better than ordering it be scrapped or scuttled. Don't forget they have had a bad experience with Kooleen and other old boats. This sort of thing can be a very costly headache for them especially if the owner of the vessel has no money or insurance, so while it may seem heartless, there are reasons.

If Baragoola could receive a multi-million donation from a benefactor to get the hull fixed that would solve almost everything but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately. There's a little bit more to preserving a steel ship sitting in salt water than there is to preserving a bus, tram or train sitting on terra firma! When a boat gets a hole in the bottom it sinks and that's a HUGE problem in a harbour.

South Steyne is still heritage listed and in sound structural condition.

[boronia]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... 81926211fc

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/manly-ferry-l ... uuv1l.html

[Roderick Smith]

Manly Ferry left drifting after mechanical issues 9 Mar 2017, 20:26.
Passengers on the Manly Ferry have been stranded for almost two hours after the ferry broke down at Manly on Thursday evening.
The ferry was around 30 metres from Manly Wharf, witnesses said, when it suddenly stopped and started drifting.
Transport authorities organised another ferry to pull alongside the broken-down Queenscliff, and planned for passengers to walk across a plank to the working boat.
However, this did not work, and passengers were told a spare part was being sent to the ferry in a water taxi.
Other ferries have been delayed by the "mechanical issues".
The 6:45pm Manly to Circular Quay ferry and the 7:15pm Manly to Circular Quay ferry are delayed due to a ferry with mechanical issues.??? Ferries Info (@FerriesInfo) March 9, 2017
Harbour City Ferries, which operates the service, said the issues unfolded on the 6pm Circular Quay to Manly service, "on approach to Manly".
"The vessel, the Queenscliff, dropp[ed] anchor near Manly Wharf. We are monitoring the situation and will provide updates as soon as possible," the ferry operator said in a statement.
"Harbour City Ferries apologises for the inconvenience. The safety of our passengers is our highest priority and we will continue working hard to get everyone back to shore as soon as possible."
The story Manly Ferry left drifting after mechanical issues first appeared on The Sydney Morning Herald.
http://www.areanews.com.au/story/452081 ... cal-issues

[Swift]

Nothing to do with privatisation and possible cuts to maintenance. No. Impossible.

[mandonov]

So is every mechanical issue from now on going to be privatisations fault? What about when there were issues before privatisation, who's fault was that?

[Swift]

I never heard of any in the news prior to the madness..sorry privatisation (keep getting that wrong).

[In Transit]

Its a pity that your droll tabloid wit wasn't accompanied by facts to match your assertions.

It seems you don't remember media reports pre privatisation of any incidents that occurred. A quick Google search might uncover some interesting articles that you may have missed over the years.

Apparently you don't remember the Walker special inquiry into Sydney Ferries about ten years ago, which was at least partially motivated by a string of serious safety incidents (pre privatisation).

I'm guessing you don't have any particular knowledge of Sydney Ferries operations or maintenance, either pre or post privatisation, its costs or its standards, with which to make an informed comparison.

Given the above, I'd be very interested on what basis you make such sweeping accusatory statements.

[Swift]

Please enlighten me with examples yourself instead of having a fit because our personal ideologies and politics conflict.
Unlike some people, I can hack it if my perceptions are turned on it's head.

[In Transit]

I'm quite glad that you mention personal ideologies and politics, because it seems that yours does colour your views - which is fine, so long as you are willing to back up allegations with a bit of evidence. On the other hand, you make an assumption as to my own ideas and politics, without having a clue about them whatsoever. I didn't mention in my post any comments in favour or against privatisation from a philosophical point of view, nonetheless you have decided to draw assumptions in their absence.

However - it was not me who started throwing around suggestions about the root cause of last week's incident, or about the pre and post privatisation performance of Sydney Ferries. It was you - and the reason for my post was to suggest that maybe you'd like to put up some concrete examples as evidence. Your response unfortunately proves my point - seemingly unable or unwilling to provide evidence for your point of view (inspired, as you say, by personal ideology and politics), you instead challenge me for evidence to disprove your allegations, not even bothering to back up your own statements at all. I mentioned the Walker inquiry - there's a starting point.

Why is this important? Because if you are going to make statements which in the real world are quite serious, be prepared to back them up. Don't simply attack those who question your opinion. You have alleged that privatisation and possible cuts to maintenance are the cause of the incident the other day - then when questioned by someone else on the privatisation connection, you responded that you never heard any incidents in the news prior to privatisation, implying that there has been a change to this since privatisation. That may be true that you didn't see them - however there were many incidents, and they were most definitely reported in the news. That is not to say that the current operator is any better or worse than Sydney Ferries was - however you are clearly suggesting that they are, and the only evidence you've offered so far is a reference to your recollection of the news over the years.

I'm also curious as to why you think contracting out Sydney Ferries is "madness"? I think the case both for and against contracting out services like Sydney Ferries can be argued, but madness? I'm genuinely curious why?

Different points of view are interesting and essential for good discussion - but it does help to be able to argue your case with more evidence than "personal ideologies and conflict".

[Swift]

There are certain sectors where the profit motive serves to undermine the public interest. Those areas are mass transportation, defence, energy and telecommunications.
These are areas where our taxes are worth spending to prop up, instead of being reliant on private contractors to take over that role. That word contract is a dirty word in my eyes, where their only focus is receiving their payout with no reason to care about quality service delivery to the end user.
Essential services like the above have always been proven to be in the public interest when under complete public sector control.
Look at Melbourne's trains where their once proud MET network has been run into the ground under private enterprise. Ask any Melbournian and they will resoundingly give Sydney's still fully government run rail network the thumbs up over the private lines down there.
And can you really compare Sydney's STA bus services with the Melbourne set up?
Perth may be an exception but that is under very strict state control. I don't know why the companies there bother except for such high turnover that there is enough of the pie for them to walk away satisfied.
No I cannot recall any story of a ferry being stranded for two hours in living memory.
Perception is everything and this post private contracting incident is not a good impression.

[Rick R]

I never heard of any in the news prior to the madness..sorry privatisation (keep getting that wrong).

Um, they have had a history of problems when trying to dock from new. There were at least two incidents of one running aground at Manly when they were newish and I recall the buffers at Circular Quay copping a beating at least twice.

STA changed the procedure at least 10 years ago to make sure they could apply reverse thrust well before arriving at the wharfs to mitigate these problems.

[tonyp]

Um, they have had a history of problems when trying to dock from new. There were at least two incidents of one running aground at Manly when they were newish and I recall the buffers at Circular Quay copping a beating at least twice.

STA changed the procedure at least 10 years ago to make sure they could apply reverse thrust well before arriving at the wharfs to mitigate these problems.

The trouble is you can't apply it too early or you lose your way, especially in a double ended boat. You have to charge into the wharf and hope it reverses when you want it to. Maybe there was some fundamental design flaw in the reversing mechanism/computer program?

It's funny arguing here about the merits of privatisation - the ferries were "privatised" for nearly a century and half, which is probably when they worked their best!

[In Transit]

Unlike some people, I can hack it if my perceptions are turned on it's head.

Notwithstanding this rather low level dig, I don't see anything in your posts which reflects this to be true, nor have you acknowledged any of the posts (not only mine) which actually respond with anything resembling facts rather than emotion and partisan points of view.

My original point was that if you are going to throw around loose accusations, at least be prepared to back it up. So far... radio silence on that front.

"Melbourne's once proud MET network"? I take it that you have never actually worked within Melbourne's rail network then? I'm struggling to think of when the glory days were - perhaps between the world wars? The era of the Met was characterised by cost cutting, continuous job losses on the railway, lack of investment (which Melbourne is still paying for today in the form of infrastructure which is decades behind on investment), repeated industrial action, service cancellations and poor reliability. Without the rose tinted glasses on, the past is not so glorious.

Interesting that you dismiss Perth as an anomaly, then go on to extol the STA. As a daily sufferer of the STA's services, who has also spent many years involved with Perth's network, I'm not seeing the comparison...

Finally, and back to ferries, don't take my word for it. How about reading the Auditor General's report, "Franchising of Sydney Ferries", from 2016 which is easily available online. The first two sentences in the conclusion read "the decision to franchise ferry services on the Sydney Ferries network was justified, and TfNSW's management of the franchise has been largely effective. Franchising has resulted in cost savings, good service performance, and effective risk transfer from government to the private sector."

Thank goodness not everyone works on the basis that "perception is everything", after all, its that kind of thinking that helped create Trump, Hanson, electricity blackouts in South Australia and the general decay of good policy in politics and elsewhere.

[Frosty]

Some would people would say its the age of the ferries the Queenscliff has been operating since the mid 80s. But surely there will be a thorough investigation into the cause could be a design flaw with the part, ferry, maintenance or some other reason.

All this talk about the Manly Ferry is questioning the point of the public current Sydney Ferries. Manly Fast Ferries does a far better job it would pretty much have 99% of the patronage if people could use Opal. The only upside of the public Manly Ferry is operates for longer and Opal.

[simonl]

They're also unsubsidised. Pretty poor form of Gladys to not include the fast ferries in Opal IMO.

[Fleet Lists]

Dont blame Gladys as in her day the Fast Ferry operation was split over two operators and a bit of shambles.
At least Constance has sorted that out and quite some time ago promised that they wouls be included in Opal but it is certainly taking time.

[simonl]

Dont blame Gladys as in her day the Fast Ferry operation was split over two operators and a bit of shambles.
At least Constance has sorted that out and quite some time ago promised that they wouls be included in Opal but it is certainly taking time.

The contract was tendered in her time so it is indeed fair to blame Gladys.

[Fleet Lists]

Wrong - from Wiki

In April 2010 the government awarded the contract to the Pearl Consortium, whose members are the Commonwealth Bank, Cubic Transportation Systems and Downer EDI.

The Liberal Party where she was Transport Minister did not come into power until April 2011.

[simonl]

Wrong - from Wiki

In April 2010 the government awarded the contract to the Pearl Consortium, whose members are the Commonwealth Bank, Cubic Transportation Systems and Downer EDI.

The Liberal Party where she was Transport Minister did not come into power until April 2011.

I mean the contract for the Manly Fast Ferries.

[simonl]

BTW, I can't recall Constance ever saying that the fast ferry would have Opal. Are you sure about that one?

Another operator has blamed the government for going slow: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/lack-of-opal- ... ksnl6.html

[Fleet Lists]

Wrong - from Wiki
The Liberal Party where she was Transport Minister did not come into power until April 2011.

I mean the contract for the Manly Fast Ferries.

This was the only contract Gladys was involved in which actually sorted out the problem so again nothing for which Gladys could be blamed and was implemented just as Constance became minister.

On 13 December 2014, it was announced that Manly Fast Ferries had won back the rights to operate the service, with a new contract which commencing on 1 April 2015.[8]

And the doubling of operators started during Labor in 2010 so again nothing for which Gladys could be blamed so I dont know what you are on about.

In March 2010, the government announced that that Manly Fast Ferries contract had not been renewed. Instead another private operator, Sydney Fast Ferries, was awarded a five year contract from 1 April 2010.[2] However both operators have continued to operate services between Circular Quay and Manly[3]

[Fleet Lists]

BTW, I can't recall Constance ever saying that the fast ferry would have Opal. Are you sure about that one?

Another operator has blamed the government for going slow: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/lack-of-opal- ... ksnl6.html

Back in October last year when I posted the link you have used here, I did mention that I could not find the reference to Constance and have not been successful in finding it since then but I feel confident that it has been said.

[simonl]

I dont know what you are on about.

What I'm on about is that the tender for the single fast ferry operator should have stipulated that the operator had to use Opal.