Comment posted Inaugural Clydelink Kilcreggan to Gourock ferry service by colin.
How many of the previous vessels had AIS fitted then? Under current legislation she is not required to have one, being under 200gt. I would agree however that to have one would be a major safety asset. Competition on the Clyde is a good thing. It really makes me laugh when I read comments about the age of Island Princess. Compare that to the vessels previously on the route (excluding the ugly Seabus). Remember the Kenilworth incident when a water inlet fitting detached from the hull due to corrosion?
powered by SEO Super Comments
This was interesting reading indeed and the photos to back it up. I just wonder if passenger and crew safety will be paramount transferring from boat to shore or visa versa , that very narrow gangway was a disgrace , it should be made of a strong frame and safety netting and also broad enough for cycles , prams and buggies with out these items being lifted overhead. The sea-state is worth a mention with heavy swells and waves crashing against the piers , the ‘grab-and-hope’ tie ups are not for the faint hearted and can be easily missed and dropping the boathook to handle the ropes may cause accidents. The line hanging over the Kilcreggan Pier must be made secure and not just hanging over the wooden stantion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Unfortunately, no mention in the article, but has the opportunity been taken by the current Argyll and Bute Council administration to ensure that this new ferry, unlike the last one, is accessible to wheelchair users and other people with mobility difficulties? No it hasn’t!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Apologies. We will pursue this.
We were planning to deal with it as a separate issue because we did not realise that there had been disabled access to Seabus.
How did this work?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The disability access issue has always been a problem. If my recollection is correct (and Andrew knows a lot more about this than I do so please correct me if I am mistaken) the Seabus was brought on to the route because, as a ferry, it met with the necessary disability access requirements, whereas the Kenilworth didn’t.
However the problem is that the pier doesn’t provide wheelchair access which sort of defeats the purpose.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We asked Clydelibk about this issue this morning and have had this prompt response from Mark Aikman:
‘The issue that exists is that the shoreside facilities at both Gourock and Kilcreggan do not permit easy access by less able persons, the same issue has existed at both locations for over 30 years.
‘I believe that a working group has tasked consultants to assess the viability of new pontoons at both Gourock and Kilcreggan (and also at other Clyde locations).
‘I will forward you an update as soon as we are aware of progress.
‘The Seabus and the Island Princess both have suitable access for the less able on the main deck, however the shoreside infrastructure needs to be in place to permit its use (ie pontoons).
‘We are bedding in the service over the next few weeks, then will engage with our commuter base and other parties with a view to implementing enhanced services for new and existing commuters.
‘We will keep you posted!’
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wheelchair access to ferry/cruise boats has always been a bit of a no-hoper to be honest. The relatively new MV Seabus had a top deck for access but passengers were not allowed to stay there ‘in transit’ and had to go down below…and that was able-bodied people. The cost of designing a purpose-built disabled access boat and pier access ramps for wheelchairs is much prohibited in today’s financial cutbacks. If someone was sitting on a wheelchair or someone was pushing a wheelchair and the sea-states were very poor with a heavy swell was moving the boat up and down then passenger safety would be put in danger embarking and disembarking….it would be awfully difficult to resolve the two.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It does seem to be resolved elsewhere – eg Brian Souter’s ferries in the Auckland area, New Zealand, where all the ferries and most of the landings are apparently wheelchair accessible
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We have noticed in looking for Island Princess this morning that she either does not have an AIS transponder or does not have it switched on.
It is important for commercial services operating in busy waters like the Clyde that other boats can ‘see’ that they are out there; where and what they are; and have the details of their speed and direction.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Searching marinetraffic this morning to see if the ‘new’ 16 year old ‘ferry’ was using her ais transponders and…NO…was the answer. If she doesn’t have a transponder , I’m really surprised MCA Greenock allows a passenger vessel out with out one. Did she have one onboard whilst she was plying the waters of the very busy Solent? She could easily be run over by the much bigger ships that use the channel down at the Tail o’ the Bank.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great article. Thanks!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
How many of the previous vessels had AIS fitted then? Under current legislation she is not required to have one, being under 200gt. I would agree however that to have one would be a major safety asset. Competition on the Clyde is a good thing. It really makes me laugh when I read comments about the age of Island Princess. Compare that to the vessels previously on the route (excluding the ugly Seabus). Remember the Kenilworth incident when a water inlet fitting detached from the hull due to corrosion?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just a point of information – Seabus did have and use AIS.
Is it quite correct that AIS is not obligatory for a boat of this size but it is a safety feature that will probably be part of its coming fine tuning for this route in these waters.
We are aware that the latest Kintyre Express fast passenger ferry from Campbeltown to Ballycastle – which carries 12 – has AIS and that the company are looking at retro-fitting it on KEII, last year’s new boat out of the RedBay yard.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
All of these boats carry AIS because they are categorized as workboats as well as being passenger boats. It’s not a safety issue, but a requirement, which for some strange reason is known only to the MCGA. Clyde Marine, very wisely, choose to place their fleet into that category as it then allows them the freedom to sail just about anywhere around the coast just as the Seabus has done, to Oban and points north. If it was classed just as a passenger boat then such a voayge would have been accompanied by a mountain of paperwork. As it was, it just left quietly and got on with it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The reason that the Island Princess does not show up on the Shipais or the Marine Traffic websites is that she is not required to have an AIS set on board, as she is below the 300 ton limit.
There are several other passenger vessels operating in the Clyde that are not so equipped, and many naval (and support) vessels choose not to use it either.
AIS’ like radar, is only an aid to navigation and is no substitute for keeping a good look-out.
Reference the comment about the gangway “barely connecting” with the shore, presumably it was pushed ashore far enough to be safe. As your photos show, there was still plenty of it aboard the boat so it could well have been placed further onto the pier had the need been there.
Nice to see Mr Reid made the effort to be aboard . Will he be as critical of the Island Princess as he was of the Ali Cat when it started on the Dunoon run?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A few points from me after my trip on Sunday that either elaborate on above points, or not been covered yet:
The gangway presents a huge challenge when trying to manoevre a cycle. Those present on Sunday will have seen me struggling a bit!!
The stairway down to the lower deck is the steepest but also shallowest steps I’ve ever seen on a commuter boat. Jupiter was pretty bad, but Island Princess is awful. They are an accident waiting to happen.
Thermostatically controlled heating – I could only see two tiny air vents, and only one was working. No controls were obvious in the ‘bar’ area, maybe controlled from the wheelhouse?
Comfort – did anyone notice how the entrance to the saloon was held by a fabric ‘click lock’ like a kids seat? Never mind the wooden benches to sit on.
Final point – timings. Okay it was the first few runs, but Island Princess really struggled to keep good times, running late on both trips I was on in calm weather. To keep speed, the engines were taking a pounding – long term I can’t see them being reliable. It’s like taking a 1.0litre small car across the contintent – good chance it could make it, but the engine will be getting constantly stressed making it much more liable to go bang.
As said in the article, fair play to Clydelink, I’m sure they are committed to the route, but cannot say the same for SPT. They should be ashamed at the way this whole process has been handled, not least for blatantly ignoring the public they serve.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The stairway down to the lower deck is the steepest but also shallowest steps I’ve ever seen on a commuter boat. Jupiter was pretty bad, but Island Princess is awful. They are an accident waiting to happen.
No kidding! One of my kids couldn’t even climb up or down on his own because the ‘steps’ are more like a ladder. I’m 7 months pregnant now and certain I couldn’t get up or down safely and I know I’d be stuck standing on the top deck, braving the elements with my new baby, because how the heck can I get to the lower deck with a baby, even in a carrier? :p
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Find yourself a good community lawyer and get stuck into SPTE for gross neglect of their responsibilities as the authority in charge of this public transport service.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In response to the comments seeking further information: the Seabus, in service until the end of last week, was completely wheelchair inaccessible. Its layout also made access to its lower deck down a very steep and narrow flight of steps seriously difficult for anyone with poor mobility.
The Strathclyde Partnership Transport’s (SPT) original Q&A, produced in response to a range of issues raised recently, made a welcome reference at several points to a “socially-necessary service” between Gourock and Kilcreggan, and the responsibilities of the SPT in this regard. Attention was also paid in the Q&A to access issues, including the tender requirement for an accessible vessel and that the new vessel would provide:
• Easier access for the visually impaired and infirm;
• A non-slip gangway, approximately 50% wider than existing gangway;
• The gangway at a shallower angle, permitting easier access for all.
The revised Q&A paper stated that the new vessel will offer “a wider, non-slip gangway permitting pushchairs and bicycles to be pushed on and off” and that “with a reduced upper deck height, boarding and disembarkation will be carried out with the gangway at a shallower angle, permitting easier access for all.”
However, in relation to the Island Princess, now in service, the term “all” does not appear to include wheelchair users such as myself. There may also be continuing issues about people with poor mobility accessing the lower deck down a steep flight of steps.
There is no statutory duty in the matter of disability equality and discrimination in ferry services. However, the SPT contract specification for the new ferry included a requirement to provide “an accessible vessel” SPT has allowed the operator to avoid the specification set down in its tender pack, and reduced the requirement to arrangements that were “reasonably practical.” It would be helpful to see the SPT policies and procurement procedures which allowed the tender requirement not to be met.
So, whilst there are issues about access from their piers at Kilcreggan and Gourock, there are also access questions concerning boarding and disembarking from the new ferry, which still require an answer. We can spend 1.2 billion on each of the new Astute class submarines. We are planning to spend £1.86bn every year for the next 50 years on the Trident nuclear missile programme. But we still seem unable to provide a ferry service between Kilcreggan and Gourock, which is accessible to people with mobility difficulties, including wheelchair users.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m sorry , but the two subjects are simly not connected. To relate the costings of a domestic ferry service to the defence of the realm beggers belief. The anti-nuclear weapons stance you have is not worth the price of the ferry ticket.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The SPT have not enhanced their reputation with this one.
There is something quite absurd in cutting and then pruning some more, a service that they painfully failed to promote or nurture. It’s perverse to see an increase in pleasure boating on the Clyde but see commercial ferry destinations’ decrease on the upper estuary. One of the joys in life (on a good day) is ferry travel. Commuters will not use ferries if it become the ride to hell. Is it the case that SPT are at odds with Scotland’s National Transport Strategy which sets out for the first time a long term vision for transport, together with objectives, priorities and plans?
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/12/04104414/0
The Strategy set five high level objectives for transport in Scotland’s Transport Future. They are to:
Promote economic growth by building, enhancing managing and maintaining transport services, infrastructure and networks to maximise their efficiency;
Promote social inclusion by connecting remote and disadvantaged communities and increasing the accessibility of the transport network;
Protect our environment and improve health by building and investing in public transport and other types of efficient and sustainable transport which minimise emissions and consumption of resources and energy;
Improve safety of journeys by reducing accidents and enhancing the personal safety of pedestrians, drivers, passengers and staff; and
Improve integration by making journey planning and ticketing easier and working to ensure smooth connection between different forms of transport.
There are 3 key strategic outcomes that the National Strategy says it must focus on to achieve this vision. They are to:
Improve journey times and connections, to tackle congestion and the lack of integration and connections in transport which impact on our high level objectives for economic growth, social inclusion, integration and safety;
Reduce emissions, to tackle the issues of climate change, air quality and health improvement which impact on our high level objective for protecting the environment and improving health; and
Improve quality, accessibility and affordability, to give people a choice of public transport, where availability means better quality transport services and value for money or an alternative to the car.
These strategic outcomes will have wider benefits and will contribute to the delivery of a number of other key priorities including health improvement, social inclusion and regeneration. Tackling congestion, integrating services and infrastructure, improving connections and accessibility will all encourage individuals to make different choices about their preferred method of travel and enable individuals to become more economically active. As well as reducing emissions, policies to increase active travel and better integrate transport with services will contribute to increased physical activity and improved health.
So what part of the document did the SPT skip. By any stretch what they have planned and delivered is wide of this mark – again. The Clyde and it’s coasts are fabulous assets, if you tell people they will come and enjoy. SPT website for the ferry http://www.spt.co.uk/ferry/about.php
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And when you say: ‘The Clyde and it’s coasts are fabulous assets…’ the Svitzer Marine tug Milford’s favourite job is escorting tankers up to Finnart on Loch Long – because it’s such a beautiful and secret run. They describe it as flord-like, green, tranquil – and although they do that job regularly, it remains a pleasure.
These are wonderful resources specific to this place and simply not brought to bear – which is why we were and remain angry that the Helensburgh leg of this route was cut by SPT (and with Argyll and Bute Council’s consent) without any consultation with Helensburgh and with no marketing of any description.
Yes, this part of the former service was underused – but it was never sold.
It is indefensibly wasteful to pay for and run public services and to cripple their
potential success by not bothering to consider the range of roles they might fulfil and to market them in these roles.
It is in no one’s interests that the Clydelink service fails. It must succeed. Marlk Aikman of Clydelink has said today that when they have bedded in the service, they will be consulting their customer base.
This is a relationship mutually worth developing. A marriage of user interest in developing services and an entrepreneurial interest in providing them could together get the right perspectives in the driving seat; and open up routes on the Clyde that could change the way we move around and map the water-bound world we live in here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Always interested when someone clicks on the “dislike” button – Then doesn’t leave a comment. I try always to back my comments up with research and where appropriate will include sites or references. Not interested in flaming, but curious all the same.
The Minutes of the SPT show that the ferry is run for the purposes of transporting its “core users” – what they consider the Faslane workers to be. If it wasn’t for this core group, I would suggest that the SPT may perhaps have rid themselves of another ferry. http://www.spt.co.uk/documents/op200112_minute.pdf
http://www.spt.co.uk/documents/op200112_agenda9.pdf
http://www.spt.co.uk/wmslib/Documents_RTS/catalyst_for_change.pdf
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Reminisces.
It’s somewhat amusing to read all the comments about passenger comfort and wheel chair access, etc., not that I don’t sympathise with these writers. What I actually find amusing is thinking back to the ‘good old days’ when Ritchie Brothers ran a reliable and safe service from Gourock to Kilcreggan every day for many, many years. Back then, there was no such thing as passenger comfort.
The Lady Jane Ritchie, for example, had no protection from the elements except a canvas cover for those for’ard of the wheelhouse. If you were in the mid or stern section, there was nothing and on a busy summer’s day, it was standing room only. The Port Star had some covered accommodation if you were lucky to be near the front of the queue. As for wheelchair access, yes they had it – Rab Ritchie and another well-built deckhand would lift the wheelchair and passenger onto the ferry and lift them off again at the other end. This sometimes happened also with the large prams in those days, if they were not running with a full passenger complement.
AIS? Radar? They didn’t even have VHF radio or fog horns but I believe they may had had a megaphone. Yet, to my knowledge, they never lost a single passenger or had an injury, despite sailing sometimes in appalling weather conditions. However, they were responsible for saving some lives and going to the assistance of other vessels, over the years.
I had the privilege and pleasure of making this trip many, many times, usually in the summer and envied a couple of schoolmates who lived in Kilcreggan and traveled this way on a daily basis. When the journey back to Gourock was occasionally stormier than the outward trip, we youngsters took great delight in trying to spot the first passengers who were feeling queasy and would sometimes pretend to ‘boke o’er the side to get them started’. Happy Days!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The image of kids making boking sounds over the side and keeping an eye to the rear to see what effect it was having on queasy adults is hilariously authentic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One point I would like to make, 3 jobs are being lost, you balance that with 7 have been created but I would like to point out that these jobs have not been created locally or given to anyone on the Rosneath Peninsula. Popularity is not the only reason for public disgust at the redundancies. It is a simple exercise in cutting Clydelink’s costs and nothing more. It can’t be dressed up as anything else
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
‘..3 jobs lost…7 created..’ Are you sure? The previous operator has lost both the surviving service and the Helensburgh link, so – with the loss of the Kilcreggan shore staff how can there be a net gain of 4 jobs?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Robert I was quoting from the article!! I do not see this a gain in the creation of jobs, just a threat to existing jobs. Hopefully Clyde Marine will not need to lay off any of their personnel because of this. If my meaning was unclear then I apologise but as I said these job losses can’t be dressed up as anything but cutting Clyde link’s costs
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
SPT were determined to drive costs down and by rejecting the first submission and re-advertising the route indicated to all their preference. Therefore, the normal way to compete under these circumstances is to take as much cost out in your tender. You look to “cheese pairing”. The quickest way to drop costs is by a head count, followed by taking out every “whistle and bell” you can find. Whether or not the new ferry guys have got their figures right will come out over the next few years – you can’t blame them for the revised SPT tender it is as it is.
SPT on the other hand have worked from the premise that simply not enough people used the route. If it wasn’t for the Faslane core users I suspect they would have done away with it all together. I think this breeches the Scottish Transport Strategy policy which SPT follow and insignificant weighting was (is) given to other inclusive factors other than simply cost. I also think that the checks and balances between the executive and our representatives have failed – the Argyll guy in particular should be named and shamed – Councillor Duncan Macintyre, Argyll and Bute Council’s Transport Spokesperson. There are far greater benefits in having integrated transport systems including ferries and the SPT and Argyll and Bute are failing to promote this. I occasionally did Dunoon to Dumbarton by Ferries and Train, because I liked doing it and it was quirky. Not now of course it has to be all the way by car over the Erskine bridge or Rest and be thankful. Extra tourists coming to Glasgow in 2014, it would have been nice to show them the quirky bits of joined up Argyll. Ever-ones lost – SPT’s gain?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Its so sad that more cuts are affecting so many. I won’t be taking to the Clyde on the “new” boat, it looks inadequate. As a visitor to the area from the city I will have to find other ferries and places to visit, and quick.
The UK is the 5/6th richest nation in the world – oh but- we’ve swallowed the lie about being a poor nation, how convienent for the super rich elites (and cronies) who are carving everything up between them, because we’re allowing them. Armbands (and all the rest) will be the result of next few rounds (programme) of cutbacks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0