Thames Crossing Proposals
Moderator: Site Management Team
- Chris Bertram
- Member
- Posts: 15771
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
- Location: Birmingham, England
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
How do they compare capacity-wise and speed-wise with the retired vessels?
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
Yes, looking forward to ticking them off the list in the new year!roadtester wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 09:08Interesting - handsome looking vessels, to my inexpert eye at least!c2R wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 09:06 From MarineTraffic, it looks like Ben Woollacott is currently performing sea trials in Gdansk: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... WOOLLACOTT while Vera Lynn is moored: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... ERA%20LYNN
Apparently they've 14% more space (I'm not sure if this is strictly in terms of lane metres) https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/i ... ry-upgrade. I don't know that the ferries really can go much quicker - the crossing is so short that I suspect that the journey would be very unpleasant if the acceleration and deceleration was any faster....
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
- roadtester
- Member
- Posts: 31503
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
- Location: Cambridgeshire
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
The main change in capacity seems to be going from three to two ferries. I don't know how they will manage that.Chris Bertram wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 09:14 How do they compare capacity-wise and speed-wise with the retired vessels?
Just a guess, but maybe they will have to look at adding a third ferry in several years time whenever the first of the new ones needs its first big overhaul. Or maybe they can bring in a ferry from somewhere else for cover, although that would seem unlikely given the apparently specialised/bespoke berthing facilities.
Electrophorus Electricus
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
Only two were ever in use at one time, though, and sometimes a reduced single ferry service was put in place anyway. If one did break down I suspect there would just be delays and people would have to queue or use alternative routes. Planned maintenance could occur overnight or at weekends during periods of single vessel operation.roadtester wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 09:23The main change in capacity seems to be going from three to two ferries. I don't know how they will manage that.Chris Bertram wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 09:14 How do they compare capacity-wise and speed-wise with the retired vessels?
Just a guess, but maybe they will have to look at adding a third ferry in several years time whenever the first of the new ones needs its first big overhaul. Or maybe they can bring in a ferry from somewhere else for cover, although that would seem unlikely given the apparently specialised/bespoke berthing facilities.
I think it would be tricky just to get a temporary replacement in given the pier design and delays owing to broken down vessels aren't uncommon (see Windemere Chain ferry currently and Irish Ferries Ulysses earlier this year)
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
I believe the new ferries will be far more efficient in terms of docking as well as being hybrid. I read some where that the docking will be electromagnetically assisted making it easier and less time shunting it around.
The old ferries were a bit of a novelty when i did use them, absolutely terrifying when i took my road bike across on it. Wet deck and skinny road tyres made an interesting mix.
I did go up on Friday late evening to see if they were moored up but alas i just managed to get some pics of the piers and ramps.
With regards to any crossing at Gallions reach that's now a lot harder as it's all built on and the link to the A2 would be nigh on impossible as the A2041 Knee Hill is fiendishly narrow, in fact too narrow for buses to use.
The most sensible option it seems to me in terms of traffic volume and position is another bridge between Erith and Cliffe that links to the A13. Majority of traffic wants to avoid going into London, and if the Mayor has his way, most will be unable to without major expense!
The old ferries were a bit of a novelty when i did use them, absolutely terrifying when i took my road bike across on it. Wet deck and skinny road tyres made an interesting mix.
I did go up on Friday late evening to see if they were moored up but alas i just managed to get some pics of the piers and ramps.
With regards to any crossing at Gallions reach that's now a lot harder as it's all built on and the link to the A2 would be nigh on impossible as the A2041 Knee Hill is fiendishly narrow, in fact too narrow for buses to use.
The most sensible option it seems to me in terms of traffic volume and position is another bridge between Erith and Cliffe that links to the A13. Majority of traffic wants to avoid going into London, and if the Mayor has his way, most will be unable to without major expense!
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
That's true, but because it's tidal, the pier ramps still need to move up and down into position, which takes quite a lot of time. Similarly actually loading and unloading the vehicles takes time - so I'm not sure how much additional time will be saved with electromagnetic assistance on the docking, assuming all goes well. I've been on it a couple of times where the conditions have made it difficult to align the boat properly, and that I assume is what the magnets are about fixing, as well as reducing emissions (I don't recall whether they currently tie the boat onto the piers, or whether they just use the engines to keep the boat in place to reduce the turnaround time.
I have to say, some of the smaller ferries in Ireland and Scotland are good for not bothering to tie the boat, just lowering the ramp on the slipway and then you just drive off...!
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
Looks like the Ben Woollacott is on its way here - it's currently heading across Germany on the North Sea - East Sea link canal
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... WOOLLACOTT
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... WOOLLACOTT
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
It looks like the Dame Vera Lynn is still moored in Gdansk, but both vessels should still have plenty of time to carry out berthing trials once the upgraded ferry terminals are complete whenever they arrive in London. Obviously with just two new vessels replacing the three older ones, there will be a lack of a spare or back-up vessel handy which would lead to a 50% reduced service if one vessel were to experience a technical fault. However given the increased capacity of the new vessels it would still provide more vehicle capacity per hour than just one of the older vessels would have done, but still fewer than what two of them would have provided. Has the route seen any decline in usage to the point where constant availability of a spare vessel for maintaining a 100% service is deemed unnecessary, or are there other factors involved?c2R wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 10:30 Looks like the Ben Woollacott is on its way here - it's currently heading across Germany on the North Sea - East Sea link canal
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... WOOLLACOTT
E-roads, M-roads, A-roads, N-roads, B-roads, R-roads, C-roads, L-roads, U-roads, footpaths
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
The three ferries had their own crews. If one broke down or was away for maintenance it was often the case the third one remained moored there because it was that crew's day off. Hopefully all resolved with the new boats.
There was a maintenance berth at Woolwich alongside the pier, but it could only be accessed at high tide. When the tide went out the boat was completely high and dry. The spare vessel was normally moored at a buoy a bit upstream on the Woolwich side.
Ben Wollacott was a deckhand on the ferries who was killed in an on-board accident a few years ago. Vera Lynn, locally from East Ham, was a WW2 prominent singer; now aged 101 she is still with us. I hope she will be able to come to the arrival of her namesake. Better names than the three former vessels which were all named after Labour Party politicians.
Ferry aficionados may note that the old Mersey ferry "Royal Iris" is still laying against a river wall just a bit further upstream on the Woolwich side, visible from the ferries. It's been there derelict for the last 20 years.
There was a maintenance berth at Woolwich alongside the pier, but it could only be accessed at high tide. When the tide went out the boat was completely high and dry. The spare vessel was normally moored at a buoy a bit upstream on the Woolwich side.
Ben Wollacott was a deckhand on the ferries who was killed in an on-board accident a few years ago. Vera Lynn, locally from East Ham, was a WW2 prominent singer; now aged 101 she is still with us. I hope she will be able to come to the arrival of her namesake. Better names than the three former vessels which were all named after Labour Party politicians.
Ferry aficionados may note that the old Mersey ferry "Royal Iris" is still laying against a river wall just a bit further upstream on the Woolwich side, visible from the ferries. It's been there derelict for the last 20 years.
- roadtester
- Member
- Posts: 31503
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
- Location: Cambridgeshire
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
Well this is what I wonder about and also what I was trying to get at up-thread. No doubt someone has prepared some sort of business case saying “we can get away with two new ferries because they’ll be much more reliable than the three old ones” - but of course, the new ferries will get eventually get old too, which Is why I suspect a third may one day be added, perhaps around the time the first of the new pair has to have its first major refit/repair.
Electrophorus Electricus
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
- Johnathan404
- Member
- Posts: 11478
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
If their management setup is like most other faceless businesses and government departments then it will go like this:roadtester wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 13:02 Well this is what I wonder about and also what I was trying to get at up-thread. No doubt someone has prepared some sort of business case saying “we can get away with two new ferries because they’ll be much more reliable than the three old ones” - but of course, the new ferries will get eventually get old too, which Is why I suspect a third may one day be added, perhaps around the time the first of the new pair has to have its first major refit/repair.
Person in an office: Look how much money we can save every week by just operating two vehicles.
Person who does all the work: Yes but for most of the year we are going to have to hire a third vehicle at an extortionate rate.
Person in an office: No you won’t, these vehicles are perfect.
Person who does all the work: But they’ve broken already.
Person in an office: I’ve temporarily hired a spare vehicle and it will be with you in a week and we’re to send it back if anything goes wrong.
Person who does all the work: But our operating costs are now higher and our performance worse.
Person in an office: No, if you look at just that column, you’ll see we’ve made significant savings.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
- lefthandedspanner
- Member
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 21:25
- Location: West Yorkshire
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
And the person doing the work is paid about twopence-ha'penny, while the person in the office draws a six-figure salary, even though they can't fart their way out of a wet paper bag. Such is the way things are in this country.Johnathan404 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 13:28If their management setup is like most other faceless businesses and government departments then it will go like this:roadtester wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 13:02 Well this is what I wonder about and also what I was trying to get at up-thread. No doubt someone has prepared some sort of business case saying “we can get away with two new ferries because they’ll be much more reliable than the three old ones” - but of course, the new ferries will get eventually get old too, which Is why I suspect a third may one day be added, perhaps around the time the first of the new pair has to have its first major refit/repair.
Person in an office: Look how much money we can save every week by just operating two vehicles.
Person who does all the work: Yes but for most of the year we are going to have to hire a third vehicle at an extortionate rate.
Person in an office: No you won’t, these vehicles are perfect.
Person who does all the work: But they’ve broken already.
Person in an office: I’ve temporarily hired a spare vehicle and it will be with you in a week and we’re to send it back if anything goes wrong.
Person who does all the work: But our operating costs are now higher and our performance worse.
Person in an office: No, if you look at just that column, you’ll see we’ve made significant savings.
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
No, I think usage is more or less flat over time, simply because of the restricted capacity of the crossing. There's far more demand than the ferry service can satisfy.
As others have said the presence of a third vessel didn't mean there was 100% service availability. I think I'm right in saying there used to be three boats because they required high levels of maintenance, so two would be in service while the third was in dock. One of the two working vessels breaking down did not always mean the third boat would go into service to replace it.
A one-boat service, even when there were three boats theoretically available, was a frequent enough event that travel reporters on BBC London developed a football chant that would be rolled out in their bulletins... "there's only one Woolwich Ferry, there's only one Woolwich Ferry..."
Bottom line: someone somewhere has looked at the reliability of the new boats, and the level of maintenance they will require going forward, and decided this is a saving that won't have unacceptably grave consequences. If the expectation is that maintenance will happen overnight and that the new boats are mechanically more reliable than the old ones, there may be little change.
But we'll see!
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
The sort of thing that happened :
Boat 1 days off Sun Mon Tue
Boat 2 days off Wed Thu Sat
Boat 3 days off Fri Sat Sun
(they worked 12+ hour shifts the days they worked; fair enough). 1 boat service at weekend.
Boat 2 & 3 on service Monday. 12 noon boat 2 gets a rope round a propeller.
It's low tide, cannot get on the maintenance grid until high tide at 6pm.
Boat 1 crew day off so one boat service for Monday pm rush hour with boat 3.
6pm boat 2 onto maintenance grid, however cannot work on propeller until tide goes out.
Tide out at midnight but nobody on shift.
Tuesday am rush hour one boat service as Boat 1 crew still day off.
Tuesday 12 noon low tide, engineer can get at boat 2 propeller. 1 hour job to remove rope.
Now have to wait for tide to come in so Tuesday pm rush hour one boat service.
Tuesday 7 pm high tide (goes back an hour a day), get boat 2 off maintenance grid. Anchor, head for days off.
Wednesday boat 2 crew now on days off; 1 and 3 on the service.
Boat 1 days off Sun Mon Tue
Boat 2 days off Wed Thu Sat
Boat 3 days off Fri Sat Sun
(they worked 12+ hour shifts the days they worked; fair enough). 1 boat service at weekend.
Boat 2 & 3 on service Monday. 12 noon boat 2 gets a rope round a propeller.
It's low tide, cannot get on the maintenance grid until high tide at 6pm.
Boat 1 crew day off so one boat service for Monday pm rush hour with boat 3.
6pm boat 2 onto maintenance grid, however cannot work on propeller until tide goes out.
Tide out at midnight but nobody on shift.
Tuesday am rush hour one boat service as Boat 1 crew still day off.
Tuesday 12 noon low tide, engineer can get at boat 2 propeller. 1 hour job to remove rope.
Now have to wait for tide to come in so Tuesday pm rush hour one boat service.
Tuesday 7 pm high tide (goes back an hour a day), get boat 2 off maintenance grid. Anchor, head for days off.
Wednesday boat 2 crew now on days off; 1 and 3 on the service.
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
Slow response as I've only just seen this.
What numpty decided that a ferry needing a quick turnaround should use a system more suited to ocean-going ferries that have extended turnaround times!
It's not like there aren't good examples to follow on other esturies :-
Mersey / Humber system of a floating pontoon with bridge back to shore ( Humber ferry was a vehicle one as well )
Torpoint / Cowes / Scottish system of slipways that the ferry uses more or less of depending on the tide.
Looks like converting the existing Woolwich terminals to something sensible will never happen due to cost / time factors.
I was wondering what you were talking about when you say that the ramps need to move into position so went and had a look on Streetview.c2R wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:05That's true, but because it's tidal, the pier ramps still need to move up and down into position, which takes quite a lot of time. Similarly actually loading and unloading the vehicles takes time - so I'm not sure how much additional time will be saved with electromagnetic assistance on the docking, assuming all goes well. I've been on it a couple of times where the conditions have made it difficult to align the boat properly, and that I assume is what the magnets are about fixing, as well as reducing emissions (I don't recall whether they currently tie the boat onto the piers, or whether they just use the engines to keep the boat in place to reduce the turnaround time.
I have to say, some of the smaller ferries in Ireland and Scotland are good for not bothering to tie the boat, just lowering the ramp on the slipway and then you just drive off...!
What numpty decided that a ferry needing a quick turnaround should use a system more suited to ocean-going ferries that have extended turnaround times!
It's not like there aren't good examples to follow on other esturies :-
Mersey / Humber system of a floating pontoon with bridge back to shore ( Humber ferry was a vehicle one as well )
Torpoint / Cowes / Scottish system of slipways that the ferry uses more or less of depending on the tide.
Looks like converting the existing Woolwich terminals to something sensible will never happen due to cost / time factors.
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
The ferry does not tie up. Like many modern ones, it docks and then keeps the engines going ahead to keep in position against the ramp. Which makes it impractical to use a floating stage, as this would tend to push it out of position. The Mersey Ferries tie up first. And the tidal range is too great to just use a fixed point. Because of the speed of the tide in the river the ferry has to dock pointing along the river, it couldn't hold position if at right angles to the tidal flow. The old pre-1963 fleet did used to tie up to a floating stage, just downstream from the present terminals, which were built then at considerable expense to SPEED UP docking.
Hopefully the new vessels will continue the annual tradition of the handicapped children's summer cruise. All its flags up, it allows the ambulances etc to be driven right on board. They have a disco on the car deck. Goes right upriver where Tower Bridge opens for them. Every passing vessel gives them a long hoot.
http://www.young-greenwich.org.uk/news/ ... iver-trip-
Hopefully the new vessels will continue the annual tradition of the handicapped children's summer cruise. All its flags up, it allows the ambulances etc to be driven right on board. They have a disco on the car deck. Goes right upriver where Tower Bridge opens for them. Every passing vessel gives them a long hoot.
http://www.young-greenwich.org.uk/news/ ... iver-trip-
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
The pontoons are not free floating or moored using cables, they have sets of piles that fix them in place laterally and are designed to take the load when the ferry impacts the pontoon on docking. There is no reason why this would not work with a ferry that kept pressure on the pontoon as the piles could be arranged to distribute that additional load across them.
-
- Member
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 21:44
- Location: London
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
I was in Woolwich on Tuesday, and the 2 remaining ferries were still there, tied up a short distance away. I'm surprised they haven't gone for scrap already like the 3rd one.
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
There might just be plans to scrap all three vessels at the same scrapyard with only enough space/resources to scrap one at a time. Each vessel would have to wait until the previous one is finished being disassembled before being sent away. I could be wrong though.Scratchwood wrote: ↑Sun Oct 28, 2018 13:38 I was in Woolwich on Tuesday, and the 2 remaining ferries were still there, tied up a short distance away. I'm surprised they haven't gone for scrap already like the 3rd one.
E-roads, M-roads, A-roads, N-roads, B-roads, R-roads, C-roads, L-roads, U-roads, footpaths
- roadtester
- Member
- Posts: 31503
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
- Location: Cambridgeshire
Re: Thames Crossing Proposals
It still seems to be negotiating the canal (colloquially referred to as the Kiel Canal I believe) - makes sense to go that way as opposed to “around the top” in something like a Woolwich ferry I suppose!c2R wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 10:30 Looks like the Ben Woollacott is on its way here - it's currently heading across Germany on the North Sea - East Sea link canal
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... WOOLLACOTT
PS - I notice that its status is “moored” - I hope it hasn’t conked out or something - or maybe some kit is being fitted to the ferry in Germany or something?
Electrophorus Electricus
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon