New Wightlink ferry for Lymington

C

ChrisE

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 Nov 2003
Messages
7,343
Location
Kington
www.simpleisgood.com
Report here

This has stirred up a lot of controversy locally, apparently WL and river users happy bunnies until about a year ago when they had a spectacular falling out with 'Sir, sir, he hit me first' headlines in the local press from both sides.

Personally, I welcome the new craft and look forward to dodging them on a regular basis whilst coming in and out of the river. For those that are a bit grumpy about the existing ferries, these will be a bit bigger and pose more of an opportunity to demonstrate your close quarter boat handling skills....
 
Interesting that they will be sailed back - I suppose that there is no other option - but I expect they'll need a very good forecast before heading across Biscay! I'm not sure I'd fancy dealing with 10m waves in a flat bottomed shallow draft steel box!

rob
 
Has anybody told Ian Grant yet? I know that his first priority is towards Wightlink's Eastern Solent operations, but surely he can spare the time to check out the new opportunities for Ferry Avoidance drills down West? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Don't get me started on this !!

Oh beggar, you already have !! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

The whole way the introductions of new ferries has been managed has been a complete shambles. The Harbour Commissioneres already know I think this because I told their Chair and CEO/HM when they came to the club to talk about the matter. They have done nothing, in their narrow minded belief that they can't, to oppose the ferries. The LHC have had their own issues with a change of chair etc, but are clearly too spineless to pull together a proper opposition. They seem to think it is their duty to keep Wightlink happy.

That is the same Wightlink who pay a mere £200k pa in fees to the LHC. Wightlinks attitude is they are bringing in the ferries regardless of what anybody says - not the best PR approach.

The displacement and windage of the ferries being 80% bigger is a major concern to sailing fleets on the river, and the impact on the marshes which we already know are being eroded very quickly.

Then there is the way the local community have (not) dealt with it ....... I'll stop there .... I told you not to get me started !! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
Less than a metre wider.... hmm... sounds alright. What a pity they have to go to Croatia to build them though. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
 
Frankly no it isn't. It's the propulsion system and how it is operated. I have always found the ferries operated with great consideration for the sailing fleet out of Lymington and can't see that the draught can increase so we still have a big, but very slow lump of steel moving in shallow water as we did before. Frankly the lack of consideration I have seen has been from mobos and sailing yachts overtaking and not staying within the speed limits. It is quite possible that the new vessels may actually create less wash. Why not wait and see if there is truly anything to complain about before having a rant about them? Lymington is indeed an important sailing venue but we don't own the river and the ferry is a very important issue to western island folk too.
 
Everyone who lives on the Island that I speak to are less than complimentary about Wightlink. This goes back to the days when the loaders were taking bungs to get unbooked cars on before the booked people and the dodgy car washing and bacon butty selling that went on in the 70's. I'm not convinced the former has stopped either, after booking an early ferry to get to the Beaulieu Boat Jumble last year and watching the loader pulling cars out of all three lines to fill the ferry, and then giving me a mouthful when I had the cheek to ask him what was going on. Add to that the fact that they can't stick to the published timetable because they can't load the cars and turn round fast enough - hence every ferry on Friday night and Sunday night is late by at least 1/2 an hour. Then of course there are the fares themselves - how they've managed to avoid an official investigation that rules in favour of the customer for once can only be guessed at.
Ok, I've stopped now.
 
I see the first one's called "Wight Light". Obviously not Velvet Underground fans or the second would be "Wight Heat" rather than "Wight Sky".
 
hang on a minute - if a vessel displaces 1400tons it has to move an additional 600 tons of water out of the way compared to a vessel of 800 tons. Archimedes said so.

I'm not disputing anything to do with consideration, one way or the other, that doesnt affect the science. The main issue that needs to be resolved is the passing in the river - Wightlink should change the schedule to avoid this happening with the new ships.


I know we dont own the river, but we have a responsibility to ensure its future sustainability and longevity. If we just allow any size of vessel to use the river many times a day, then found out how much damage has been done, it could be too late.

Not too fussed about the Islanders, but seeing as many of the crossings are partially occupied, there is sufficient capacity to replace the current ferries with new ones of a similar size and nobody would be affected.
 
As an exiled Islander who has spent donkeys years travelling back and forth to/from the IoW I say a bridge is long overdue - but there is too much vested interest for that. West Wight seems the logical location, let the ferries justify their prices on the Eastern route(s).

Thinks! How about a timber bridge, there seems to be a lot of suitable material "floating" around.

A.
 
If you are going to quote archemedes get it right. The increased height of water in the English channel due to the displaced water is insignificant. What presents a problem is wash. Wash is a function of hull shape and propulsion not displacement. A Mobo doing 30 knots will create far more wash than a vessel like this moving at 6 knots. I don't think these vessels create as much wash and/or environmental damage as you seem to intimate they do. If you are going to claim environmental damage is done you should be prepared to substantiate the claim not climb on some imaginary environmental hobby horse. What damage, when , where, how?
There is in fact an argument that regular use of this waterway keeps the channel open and without that it would more easily silt up. Do you have any facts or are you making entirely non scientific assumptions here?
 
Sorry I hadnt realised the new ferries were going to be planing rather than displacement hulls.

[ QUOTE ]
What damage, when , where, how?
There is in fact an argument that regular use of this waterway keeps the channel open and without that it would more easily silt up. Do you have any facts or are you making entirely non scientific assumptions here?

[/ QUOTE ]

No I dont, but nor does anybody else have any actual proof until the environmental risk assessment is completed when the ferries arrive - by when the third one will be on its way.

So regardless of what the consultants have said, and what actually happens in practise once the vessels are here, it is fait accompli that three new ferries will be operating possibly to the detriment of the river and its users, particularly the sailing fleet and we will not be able to do anything to have them taken away. This is the crux of the issue.

I fail to understand how anybody can be supportive of the new ferries being so much larger, unless they have a vested interest in Wightlink itself.
 
I don't have any vested interest Nick, and I didn't say they were planing either.
What I think is that there has to be a balanced view and I don't believe in condemning progress out of hand. A vessel of the same draught but increased beam and length travelling at the same speed as a smaller one does not necessarily create more wash. In fact, depending on the hull form and method of propulsion the hydrodynamic disturbance should not significantly increase and may in fact be less. There also may be another factor here in that sailings may be less frequent with a larger capacity vessel reducing the frequency of vessels passing in the outer reaches of the river, but I don't know. All I am saying is it ain't necessarily a bad thing and we should not complain until we have something to complain about, that's all!
 
My thoughts on this as regular visitors to Lymington are still open to persuasion from either side, but I do have some concerns and Wightlink do appear to be forcing this through as a fait accompli.

My concern is with the risks of collision and yes I saw the comment that these new ferries are just 1m wider. One of the effects of passing close by a large vessel that is under way in shallow water and narrow channels is the 'suction' it creates that can pull a small boat towards it as it passes. This is something we are aware of and take great care to avoid when in the vicinity of the existing Lymington ferries, by being prepared to put some additional power on as they pass, because otherwise there is a definite tendency to be drawn towards them. With the new ferries displacing a much larger amount of water I am worried that the suction effect as they pass by will be considerably higher than with the existing ones, but I don't know the hydrodynamics of this so it may be more imagined than real?

For the benefit of those unfamiliar with Lymington, the navigable channel is very narrow and in our case with deep draught (6'10"/2.08m) dodging ferries by getting outside of the channel marks isn't an option. There are also 3 ferries operating with a changeover occuring inside the river itself, the incoming ferry stops and waits for the outgoing one to leave it's berth and pass at the only 'wide' part. As a smalll boat entering or leaving the river, it isn't possible to accurately predict which ferry will be where in the river at what time so we have to deal with the situation that arises.

We try very hard to stay right on the edge of the navigable channel of course but often there are other factors, some created by other small boats and some by the ferries. Yachts sailing in IMO do not help! That said there are 2 large YCs with dinghy and engineless keelboats, plus another fleet of engineless keelboats kept at the upper (Berthon) marina above the ferry berth. For us (sailboat but under power), slow moving dinghies etc are an added problem if met at the same point as a ferry because it reduces the options we have because we don't want to be sat stopped dead in the water for the reasons given above. Often the dinghies could help by getting out of the channel, but sometimes they chose not to and we have had one hopeful that thought we would/should go outside the channel for him, silly man. I say silly because we had 3 options, run aground on a falling tide, be hit by the ferry or not give way to a twit in a dinghy that could easily bear away outside the markers.

It would certainly help if the new ferries swapped over OUTSIDE of the river, or better still if their size meant that only two were in normal use anyway. I suspect the swapover point is in the river because outside is subject to the very strong cross tides and harder for them to maintain station.
 
"Then of course there are the fares themselves ..."

I had a job done at Lymington on the boat a few years ago and the young engineer explained that he couldn't afford to live in Lymington, found it cheaper on the island and used the ferry to come over. I would guess as a foot passenger with a bike it is affordable but Wightlink's cheapest car+2 return fare last week was £35 compared with a return fare for car+2 of £30 to cross Dover-Calais on P&O. I can't see the costs coming down, either.

The new ferries are only fractionally bigger and take a couple more cars - a lot less foot passengers - but weigh an awful lot more which is claimed to be because of imminent safety legislation ... ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top