Friends ask islanders for harbour rethink
THE FRIENDS of Penzance Harbour are urging the residents of the Isles of Scilly to reconsider what is being proposed by the Route Partnership.
In an open letter to the Scilonians the Friends have outlined their concerns and described the alternatives they think should be considered.
The most controversial aspect of the scheme, according to the Friends, is the creation of a passenger terminal, freight depot and lorry parking and turning space on Battery Rocks beach and waterfront location between the Lighthouse Pier and the Jubilee Pool.
As an alternative to this the Friends would like to see the creation of an out-of-town freight handling depot with containerised freight brought to the harbour each day for immediate loading onto the ship and the passenger terminal built on the existing harbour side site.
The Friends also have got doubts about the replacement of the existing two ship operation with a single larger combined freight and passenger vessel.
Member John Maggs said: "A two-ship operation much more effectively separates freight and passengers on the quays, it allows sailing times to suit the different needs of freight and passengers and it avoids the cost of pushing an expensive passenger ship back and forward to the Scillies all winter long with no passengers on it.
"And with one ship the danger of mechanical failure or other incidents leading to the absence of a sea link to the mainland is also greater. It has also been suggested that if the new vessel was a passenger-only one it might be faster with a reduction in journey times boosting day-visitors to the Islands.
"While we review the possibilities for Penzance, perhaps Scilonians might also take the opportunity to spend a little extra time to make sure that what is being planned for Scilly is really in the best interests of the Islands."
The Friends welcome any thoughts on their concerns and alternatives to the Route Partnership scheme and they can be contacted through
www.friendsof pzharbour.org
● Isles of Scilly: Page 19
6 Comments
View all
by CHARLIE, WEST CORNWALL
Tuesday, February 24 2009, 11:20PM
“Hi "Ginnick".
The reason we changed to a two ship system way back in 1988 was to save on runnung costs and provide a better freight service. Passenger ships cost a lot of money to run, and the bigger they are the more they cost. In the last season that we ran Scillonian 3 in the winter she averaged 8 Passnegers per trip November to March. How many do you think would travel to-day?
Regarding sea keeping the SWATH is designed for this route and has no problem coping with heavy weather and has reinforced scantlings in way of the berthing stresses and is proved in service on another similar route. She can maintian her speed of 25 knots in a 4 meter seaway with no sea sikness
Why not charter her for a season's trial.
By the way the current Scillonian has a service speed of 15 knots and takes about 2 hours 35 minutes quay to quay. The SWATH will do the journey in 95 minutes.
If the GRY is "worn out" why did thecompany recently re plate her bottom and fit replacement engines. Suitably geared replacement cargo ships are readily avaliable on the open market in any case.
Why have your day trips by sea dropped from over 40 thousand in 1986 to under 20 thousand to-day?? Because the journey time is too long and the voyage is too uncomfortable.”
by Simon Elliott, Penzance
Tuesday, February 24 2009, 11:09AM
“Why not move the Scillonian to Newlyn - a proper commercial harbour with deeper water access.
Make Penzance harbour totally focused on recreational use.
While we are at it, put a multi-story car park on the Penzance gasworks site and dig the harbour back out again, reducing the size of the car park.”
by roger lowry, penzance
Friday, February 20 2009, 8:57PM
“The very idea of the destruction of the historic centre of Penzance goes to illustrate how insensitive the Route Partnership is.
They have no interest in Penzance or the ferry link which has existed for many decades, run by Scillonians at a profit.”
by Ginnick, Scilly
Friday, February 20 2009, 6:26PM
“Bring on the new ship!!
One set of crew costs, one maintenace bill, one fuel bill, one insurance bill, etc. Yes there is the risk of the ship being out of action, but this would be a lot less likely with a new ship than the current two, and we managed (just) when both of them were out of action last year.
The talk of a "faster" passsenger ferry makes me smile, anyone tried to put an aluminium craft with light scantlings onto a hard bottom recently! Or steam it at 25 knots into big swell! The current Scillonian does 14+ knots and I believe the replacement will be similar, this is actually a reasonable speed for a ship. Anything designed to go faster will be unable to run becuase of the weather a lot of the time, and would be damaged taking the bottom when alongside at low water springs.
As for the idea of keeping the Gry going for much longer, lets just say she has been a god ship and has performed beyond the call of duty, but she is coming to the end of her life. The maintenance costs involved in keeping her going much longer would be crippling. The same goes for the current Scillonian, passenger ships over 30 year old need a lot of maintenance and have more stringent survey routines.
Running a combined ship in the winter would not require the same number of crew as in the summer as she would not be carrying passengers. Crew costs normally make up a good percentage of the running costs, so I hope they are taking this into account when critisising the single ship option.
I will not go on any longer, but would just like to say that as a Scillonian the sooner Both quays are done and a new vessel is available the better.”
by Dangerous Brian, Cornwall
Friday, February 20 2009, 9:21AM
“That Battery Rocks 'beach' is an eyesore, the sooner this development goes ahead, and brings Penzance somewhere near the 21st century, the better.”