You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I know this has popped up before, but I cannot find a suitable thread as it's usually discussion on someone's holiday thread...
What. The. Actual. Is going on with ferries in Scotland, particularly but not solely CMAL and Calmac?
Aside from the silly delays and costs of the two new Clyde built boats, I read this today about issues with new port facilities meaning an existing ferry cannot dock in the dark or in any waves:
In the summer I was struck by how straightforward and simple the Orkney council ferries were. I also had one of the Pentland captains telling my father in law that if he had the same subsidy per passenger or freight mile as Calmac+CMAL, he would not charge a penny...
We've been trying to get to a couple of smaller islands this autumn and it's just not happened - partly weather, but mainly ferry issues. I'm now looking for the 2024 bookings and timetables to head out the outer Hebrides and it is a worry...
I know underlying things is some really daft decisions from CMAL it seems, and a lack of political oversight?
[s] Arguments[/s] discussion please.
CMAL and Calmac suffer from the same woes as other parts of the public sector i.e. they are now suffering the outcome of years of under investment. The problem lies with your ministers.
Which goes back to the financial limitations of the scottish government. If they put more money into ferries then they have to take that money from other budgets as they effectively have a fixed budget. NHS spend is around half of the scots government budget with education being another big chunk. So for more money into ferries means less for NHS or education<br /><br />That is not to say that stupid government decisions have made the situation worse nd wasted money
@tjagain sums it up nicely. The other known weakness in Scotland is the lack of capacity (knowledge and skills) in large scale public procurement. Again this is an investment issue I’d argue.
That is not to say that stupid government decisions have made the situation worse nd wasted money
This seems to be making a bad situation almost untenable.
It seems for years that government, CMAL and Calmac have trodden a path to fewer bigger ferries, each a unique design not only onboard but in docking requirements. It seems each harbour has also developed uniquely to support a particular vessel. And no interchange between northern route ferries either.
So any single breakdown = fewer ferries to shuffle and serious and growing limitations on what boat can operate where.
there should be a NOT in between have and made in that sentence for it to make sense or the first NOT needs to be removed - apologires
Its should read "that is NOT to say that stupid government decisions have NOT made the situation worse and wasted money" ie its both a structural issue AND daft government decisions compounding it
Ex Calmac engineer here....
There has been a lack of investment in maintenance of Calmac's ferries for a number of years. Older ferries require more investment in maintenance but, every refit period was a fight to get things repaired/renewed. In addition there is a dual management process,IE a " service delivery" department and an " asset management" department. Neither department was particularly willing to pay for things and most jobs involved prolonged discussion about who's budget it would come from.
In addition the top heavy management is very expensive and employs many people who have no maritime experience.
Making the ferries and their ports more cross compatible is very expensive and a very long term plan.. Difficult in practical terms and really, what's needed is a fleet with spare vessels of a range of sizes. That doesn't come cheap, hence the arrangements with the likes of Pentland right now.
Think about the range of requirements, often long crossings over open water to get to quite small communities. Then take into account TJ's expressions on the budgetary situation and the problems that an ageing fleet brings and it's no surprise that difficulties arise. Although to be fair, I've been on several ferries this year out to various western islands and everything has gone to plan.
At least the ships being built in Turkey are continuing apace. Sadly, my cynical side wouldn't be surprised to find that there's been a requirements screw-up somewhere down the line
The problem with the two Clyde boats is on a superficial level, very simple. They're a new design layout, combined with a dual fuel requirement that was very 'aspirational' at the start of the process but has proven to be a nightmare in terms of designing in sufficient safety and utility. These vessels are designed to run on both marine diesel and on LPG; the latter being much cleaner but introducing all sorts of additional problems along the way. Rather than cleaning up the fuel, the decision was made to go dual fuel and reduce emissions that way. It's proven much harder than originally predicted and if they'd been conventional ships off the drawing board, they'd have been finished years ago and out working by now.
It was a good idea at the time but rubbish when it collided with reality.
Mismanagement, unclear briefing and a political wish to build on the Clyde (rightly but turns out wrongly)
It's been fascinating/ depressing/ shocking reading about the chronic issues around Calmac, seemingly all boiling down to Nicola Sturgeon and her inability to actually, well, manage finances... Oh, and Alex Salmond's, erm... "surprising"... decisions on procurement, if I remember rightly?
If they put more money into ferries then they have to take that money from other budgets as they effectively have a fixed budget. NHS spend is around half of the scots government budget with education being another big chunk.
Perfect somethingion. The SNP in Holyrood decided free (for all) prescriptions and greater investment in education were vote winners, and they probably weren't wrong; but it boiled down to robbing Peter (the islands) to pay Paul (the mainland electorate)
It's well worth this (very very long) read:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n18/ian-jack/chasing-steel
The new port/habour at Brodick doesn't work very well either. It's almost like no actual sea-experienced engineers were involved in its design.
It's going to go completely batshit on the Arran-Ardrossan crossing when they start work on the Ardrossan harbour.
What is the point being made? I lost interest after the umpteenth segue into childhood memories of the port in the 50s before another trip through history.
As for why you think Arran to Troon will be chaotic, got any sound reason? The slip at Troon is built for P&O RoRo's for the Larne crossing and there's another slip with a(n admittedly long out of service) Seacat ramp. The only folk moaning are the ones in Ardrossan who are getting the new terminal anyway!
Perfect somethingion. The SNP in Holyrood decided free (for all) prescriptions and greater investment in education were vote winners, and they probably weren’t wrong; but it boiled down to robbing Peter (the islands) to pay Paul (the mainland electorate)
Free presciptions are low cost and indeed may be cost neutral overall a there is now less bureaucracy and only a small % of folk ever paid for prescriptions anyway - and it reduces cost in further illhealth down the line. Same for education - small upfront costs for large long term savings
However your point is valid in principle for other stuff like the borders railway or edinburgh trams
free personal care however is a really poor and expensive policy. It save the inheritence of some middle class kids. It makes little differnce to the people inrecipt of care
@squirrelking the article tracks the procurement story but in the wider context of skills availability. It's not just that the procurement process was weak (and public sector procurement has form there), but that the basic skills on the ground to deliver aren't there any more.
Troon doesn't have the same passenger access, so the turnaround times will be longer while they get everyone on and off the boat. Plus crossing times are longer. So there's already a (planned) reduced service. Add a few cancellations due to the wind being the wrong direction or whatever in Brodick, plus the usual ferry breakdowns, and there's not going to be a lot of slack or capacity in the system to recover from lost sailings.
You've also got the islanders who usually head over to Ardrossan on foot for things like dentists, or solicitors - now their trips to these services become much longer. Plus, it's then a half hour walk from the harbour in Troon to the train - will people actually use the shuttlebus to get to the train up to Ardrossan (or wherever they usually head), or will they just decide to take their car, putting more demand on the car service? It's pretty chaotic now, I can't see Troon making life any easier.
Making the ferries and their ports more cross compatible is very expensive and a very long term plan.. Difficult in practical terms and really, what’s needed is a fleet with spare vessels of a range of sizes.
Its a nice idea, and at first glance seems logical. But eventually you will want a bigger/different ferry for some route and so then break the mould. If you know that is likely do you force everything to a lowest common denominator even if a custom design could handle more traffic, different tides etc.
Which goes back to the financial limitations of the scottish government.
Which is not an independence problem - even if they had fiscal autonomy there would be a hard decision to make about where to spend the money they had.
If they put more money into ferries then they have to take that money from other budgets as they effectively have a fixed budget. NHS spend is around half of the scots government budget with education being another big chunk. So for more money into ferries means less for NHS or education.
And actually its more likely a decision about roads / rail / ferries. Given that people die on the A9 and thankfully not on the ferries, and the number of people moved by trains/trams/busses its not 100% clear to me that the ferries are where you would but another £xxxM if it magically appeared in the Transport budget.
But Scot Gov > Transport Scotland > CMAL > CalMac does seem like a complex management chain to do things. However Highland Council are not exactly heroes with their ferries, and many people in Cowal will tell you ABC are incompetent at fixing transport crisis too. OIC have their own capital and operational cost issues for the ferries in Orkney. I actually think Calmac, Highland Council, OIC and ABC actually have all coped pretty well with the problems they encounter; probably they could have avoided many but that means higher tax or fares and the most vocal complainers would be just as vocal about that.
The hauliers seem to face the biggest frustrations. I wonder if they've actually tried to solve the problem themselves - RoRo ferries replaced the puffers, they are a recent invention. Are arctics driving the length of scotland the best solution? Why have we accepted that island ecconomies dependent on shipping physical product is actually the most logical approach.
I'm going to go back to the original post and suggest that it is partly the problem!
We’ve been trying to get to a couple of smaller islands this autumn and it’s just not happened – partly weather, but mainly ferry issues. I’m now looking for the 2024 bookings and timetables to head out the outer Hebrides and it is a worry…
Not being able to get there for your holiday is a 1st world problem (the islands are still bursting with holiday makers in the season so its not causing major economic damage), in fact I might even suggest its part of the "adventure", if you want certainty go to centre parks. Taking a vehicle adds jeapordy to your trip, foot or bike passengers are less likely to suffer the same disruption. Its more of an issue for islanders. RET was a great concept but the consequence is more traffic, more wear and tear on the boats etc. Was an infrequent but more reliable services better than more frequent service that might break down. I've spoken to islanders who remember before RoRo ferries and they are actually pretty complimentary about Calmac. I've spoken to those who have lived in big cities and experienced the way rail and other operators treat customers - and they too are positive about calmac for finding solutions and understanding how ferries impact lives. I'm not trying to say its perfect, its far from it, certainly there will be incompetence at every level from ticket collector to government minister.
Personally I'd rather see RET abolished and the money used to make genuinely good public transport links both on and off the islands. I may have missed it, but have the other parties proposed how they would approach the ferries issues if they were elected? Political point scoring probaby entrenches some of the issues rather than making it easy to say "turns out that was a bad idea".
No wish to hijack thread but I couldn't let this pass unchallenged @tjagain
free personal care however is a really poor and expensive policy. It save the inheritence of some middle class kids. It makes little differnce to the people inrecipt of care
Really? I thought it was an effective way of keeping people out of hospital. Perhaps some people can afford to pay for it, but that is largely because the wages for social care workers are far too low. I know I àm one. Also a universal policy is much less costly to administer than a means tested one.
Oh yes I prefer universiality to means tested but even for home care the same applies. HOme care is paid for by the state for those with little money. for those with a chunk they self pay. so its still a subsidy that is paid only to the better off and acts to protect middle class kids inheritances. It makes no real difference to most.
Perhaps a better argument for home care than for care home care but I still see it as incredibly poor value for money and I am one who would benefit for it as my parents are elderly and have some money.
I resent state money being used to protect inheritance
perhaps a policy with good intent but poor secondary effects
As for why you think Arran to Troon will be chaotic<br /><br />
perhaps the fact that the move to Troon that had been delayed until this summer still hasn’t happened 🙂
Well yeah. I'm aware of the logistical issues and Hannah hasn't said anything that's not true but "chaotic" just sounds like the usual agenda driven nonsense. As far as specialist clinics go it's still a journey to Crosshouse which is easier from Troon as well.
Obviously disruption to people getting to work is going to happen but what's the alternative? There are no other suitable harbours until you get to Cairnryan and I doubt Wemyss Bay is big enough for the Caledonian or Arthur.
It also ignores the logistical benefits in that Troon has far better rail connections than Ardrossan so if you miss the train you're still only 20mins from the next one.
Which goes back to the financial limitations of the scottish government. If they put more money into ferries then they have to take that money from other budgets as they effectively have a fixed budget.
No government has unlimited money (except maybe Saudi Arabia). This is a 100% Scottish Government problem and yet still there is an attempt to blame the lack of independence.
NO - but an independent Scotland could raise money by borrowing to increase its budget and even "print money"
An independent Scotland would have full control over its finances including taxation and revenue raising
Borrow money? The SNP already have far more spending per head than the UK average. The reason there is a shortage of cash for new ferries is that procurement rules were broken too award a contract for political reasons. We are £400m into that hole with no idea when the ferries will be delivered.
A newly Indy Scotland would be dealing with a substantial deficit which would require higher taxes, big spending cuts, and/or borrowing to pay for day to day services. Any borrowing would be at a premium.
You do realise that data is not the whole picture? and if Scotland is such a basket case then its hardly an endorsement of the union? Whats that saying about continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result?
Edit - on the ferries tho as I said in my first post crap government decisions have wasted money and caused delays
newly Indy Scotland would be dealing with a substantial deficit which would require higher taxes, big spending cuts, and/or borrowing to pay for day to day services
To be fair, the same cadre of administrators and politicians that couldn't buy some boats will also be negotiating exit with rUK, initial entry to the EU, launching a new currency and central bank, and adminstering a customs border on Scotland's sole land border. They'll have plenty of time and money on their hands.
"the same cadre of administrators and politicians that couldn’t buy some boats will also be negotiating exit with rUK, initial entry to the EU, launching a new currency and central bank, and adminstering a customs border on Scotland’s sole land border"
What could possibly go wrong?
IMO the route to Indy is for the Scottish govt to demonstrate a track record of competence and financial prudence so the 20% of voters in the middle ground that are persuadable can see it might be a better future. Not seeing it myself.
IRC - we also raise more taxes per head than is spent. Money flows south 🙂
BIg thread digression.
IRC - whereas I think they have done not a bad job overall. NO teachers or NHS strikes in Scotland because of fair pay settlements. No sickness tax in prescription charges, extra money for poor folk with kids and plenty of other success stories but you never hear them in the unionist press.
I am no huge SNP fan but I am a fan of the truth and over the last 13 years which has been the more competent government- Holyrood or Westminster? /are you really saying the tories have been more competent?
“the same cadre of administrators and politicians that couldn’t buy some boats will also be negotiating exit with rUK, initial entry to the EU, launching a new currency and central bank, and adminstering a customs border on Scotland’s sole land border”
Still sounds better than sticking with the UK government's current shower of thiefs, charlatans and bigots though
From someone who lives on an island, a local perspective is a bit different from what you see in the media or those that make a couple of journeys a year in summer. I know a number of people who work for CalMac and a lot of issues lie with CMAL and Transport Scotland who make all the strategic and budgetary decisions - CalMac as the operator has to deal with the consequences. They’re also not unique to CalMac - witness the Corran Ferry fiasco under Highland Council - many businesses on Ardnamurchan have seen their revenues drop by 50% and are really suffering. A key issue is that the operating philosophy of CMAL is often divergent with the needs of remote and island communities - they want mainland home-ported monohull boats with live-aboard accommodation that are sized for peak holiday traffic. The problem is these types of ferries are expensive to build, run and operate, require expensive proprietary port facilities plus they don’t run well in high winds and heavy seas. Many of the existing ferries are 40 years old, at the end of their designed service life so are less reliable, require more upkeep and break down more often. The decision to delay replacements is a direct consequence of decision taken in Westminster (austerity) and the Labour administration in Holyrood - SNP aren’t perfect but are having to deal with the consequence. Last winter we were mostly served by a single ferry service on Oban Craignure by the Loch Frisa and yet had fewer weather cancellations - we’d be better served by a small fleet of ferries like the Frisa than one large 500+ pax ferry like Glen Sannox. Last week it took me 3 hours to get to a dental appointment in Oban, 36 miles away because the direct ferry was fully booked - I had to drive 80-odd miles and take 2 ferries instead. That said, the notion that we’d prefer a bridge from the mainland is ridiculous - the last thing we’d want is to end up like Skye.
NO teachers or NHS strikes in Scotland because of fair pay settlements.
Only because they went on strike before to get it and took a long time to get there. There's already been school closures this year because the jannies and dinner ladies went on strike.
Some more 'bumps' in the delivery of CMAL/Calmac services...?
https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/24123412.going-need-bigger-port-not-ready-new-ferry/
Fao TJ, apologies to op. I’ve made some corrections, see below.
HOme care is paid for by the state for those with little money, and those with lots of money or complex tax arrangements (or access to) who can shift, trust, give and hide assets. for those with a chunk (that they have been unable to transfer or hide) they actually pay over the odds as they have subsidise the state paid residents. ( https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23181410.care-home-self-funders-paying-40-state-paid/)
Re ferries, I would suggest that the more layers of management and companies/bodies involved the higher the cost and the lower the quality.
What a load of shite.
Ardrossan has had the upgrade work planed for years, the P&O freight berth in Troon has been reconfigured to work with the ferries and AFAIK is ready to go. It's the Ardrossan locals that are holding it up and moaning about losing the ferry despite the obvious advantage Ardrossan has in terms of sailing times.
Oh and Troon station isn't the other end of town, it's an easy 15 minute walk along 2 roads. They even used to run a bus when the Seacat was running out the other end of the harbour.
Troon has been reconfigured to work with the ferries and AFAIK is ready to go.
apart from there not being any refuelling facilities for the new hybrid ferries
@squirrelking - tell me more, it's hard to tell online what you're suggesting.
Is Ardrossan getting the upgrade needed, it's just delayed? A temporary move to Troon then?
Or...?
I think the point is that despite the new ferries having been originally planned to be delivered in 2018 work has not yet started to make Ardrossan usable for them. Hardly joined up thinking. Not just the LNG they are bigger than the old ferry and won't fit the current berth.
Obviously somehow Westminster s fault
"However, these small victories continue to be offset by the incompetence and intransigence of those who, against all advice, built our new Brodick terminal vulnerable to crosswinds, specified oversized and overcomplicated vessels that can’t use existing ports, and who cannot coordinate bus, rail and ferry schedules. Paradoxically, none of these issues have been due to the universal shortage of available funding. On the contrary, outrageous quantities of public money have been splashed on failures, necessitating ever more investment to try and overcome the shortcomings. The eye-watering amounts of public money spent on the Ferguson Marine fiasco, the ballooning cost of fleet maintenance and the huge operating subsidy to support the service now mount up to hundreds of millions of pounds every year. The Scottish Government has been long on promises, but painfully short on action. "
Is Ardrossan getting the upgrade needed, it’s just delayed?
It's not 'delayed' as such, there has been the expectation that it will happen - part of the brief for the ferries was contingent on it happening, but nothing has actually been actioned. Renewing the ferries and upgrading the port are two sides of the same coin - the brief for the ferry being contingent on the upgrading of the dock. But while one has been failing to finish the other has been failing to start. And while it has been failing to start the costs of labour and materials have been increasing meaning that any deal between Peel Ports, the council and the gov was based on an out of date budget. So until an agreement is reached on that the position is really less than not having started. They couldn't start tomorrow.
Troon is the right size / shape for the ferry to operate from there but can't supply the gas the new ferries run on. The move to Troon was supposed to have started and ended before the new ferries arrived. Its expected to park a big barge full of gas next to it for refuelling but that is then too slow a refuelling process to keep a full timetable and the barge would have to travel back and forth to Kent to restock.
Is Ardrossan getting the upgrade needed, it’s just delayed? A temporary move to Troon then?
Or…?
There's "plenty*" if you search the Ardrossan and Saltcoats Herald, basically Troon was reactivated to handle the ferries whilst Ardrossan is closed for the upgrades. This has had a load of councillors on soap boxes desperate to be noticed telling anyone who will listen it's all a conspiracy to move the ferries permenantly and demanding all the usual nonsense that will end up making it such a bawache it'll be a self fulfilling prophecy. Clydeport (Peel) also seem to be doing sweet fa to move things along.
*usual local paper shite
apart from there not being any refuelling facilities for the new hybrid ferries
Presumably they'll take bunkers the same way as any other ship in the harbour which I'd imagine will be off the back of another ship when off duty. I am surprised that there's no fuel provision in a purpose built fuel terminal though.
Presumably they’ll take bunkers the same way as any other ship in the harbour
All the other ships run on LNG?
Last week it took me 3 hours to get to a dental appointment in Oban, 36 miles away because the direct ferry was fully booked – I had to drive 80-odd miles and take 2 ferries instead.
Appreciate it was a while ago you posted this - but is Mull not big enough to sustain its own dental practice? But then I’m equally as surprised that you needed to drive once in Oban - unless you are saying the ferry was fully booked for foot passengers too.
Ferry services could undoubtedly be better - but it’s only because we are used to luxuries of modern life that we notice it. Even 60 years ago the level of service, speed, operating conditions available today would have been unthinkable. That’s not to say we should leave the islands and remote communities behind as the rest of the country marches towards comfort and success - but like bridges perfect ferries might be a double edged sword.
All the other ships run on LNG?
Nope.
Isn't that the point of the Sannox and Rosa being dual fuel? AFAIK there's no gas infrastructure to refuel them at Ardrossan either so until there's is they would have to run on diesel only. The damnable thing is there's a rail head at Troon where you could conceivably shuttle ISO tanks to the harbour but that's not really realistic.
Isn’t that the point of the Sannox and Rosa being dual fuel? AFAIK there’s no gas infrastructure to refuel them at Ardrossan either so until there’s is they would have to run on diesel only. The damnable thing is there’s a rail head at Troon where you could conceivably shuttle ISO tanks to the harbour but that’s not really realistic.
Its not really a worry when the LNG pipes inside the ship don't exist either. I suspect in time the LNG will be forgotten and will have just wasted years and millions of $$$ and not a single person will get punished!
"Clydeport (Peel) also seem to be doing sweet fa to move things along."
Just pure speculation here but is there a game of bluff being played here between Peel Ports and the taxpayer in the shape of the council, Transport Scotland/CMAL and the SCottish govt.
Ardrossan is the obvious port for Arran services as it is the shortest crossing amd has a railway station. So Peel obviously want to retain in the long term the berthing fees from Calmac while spending as little as possible on maintaining and/or upgrading the berths. So any further delay will strengthen their hand by increasing public pressure for a solution.
The history of the Scottish govt negotiating with private companies doesn't fill me with confidence though.
https://thinkscotland.org/2022/11/theres-not-just-a-ferry-fiasco-the-gupta-scandal-is-even-bigger/
@xora Well considering they're due to be fitted next month I'll take your prediction with a shovel of salt.
@irc I'd say you're on the money, I'd be happy to see the back of Peel tbh, they're doing bugger all with what they have and don't seem in much of a hurry to change that.
Ffs.
I get that the P&O berth was more accessible and Glennon use the other one for their barge BUT THERE IS A ****ING CATAMARAN BERTH IN TROON HARBOUR ALREADY!
Get the Arthur back and sort this shit out.
(I honestly know that's not going to happen for a number of reasons, not least the fact it's not been used in about 20 years)
Looks like we're renting the old Manx ferry as well the catamaran, and even then we might be one or two big ferries short through winter maintenance until Glen Sannox and Glen Rosa arrive.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czj7deky2xpo.amp
^^^ apparently it's too big for berthing at Ardrossan ... so crossings remain 50% longer duration than they would be had Ardrossan had the promised investment in the harbour infrastructure years ago, Fiasco continues !
There is no way a larger ferry can berth at Ardrossan. The Caledonian Isles was on the limit.
^^^ there was a multimillion pound committed spend to reconfigure Ardrossan, which would have been largely completed now had it gone ahead as planned. Sadly seems to be off the radar now and I wonder if it will ever happen..
The feeling here is that Troon is going to be the future and Ardrossan will never be developed.
It's maybe not ideal, rail connections are poorer for instance, but we need stability. Businesses are suffering and I know of at least two families leaving the island because of the unreliable access to the mainland, the very demographic we need to come here and stay.
Nice to know we're not the only people that can make a complete **** of buying a couple of ships: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk40rk54p7o
Too big for the islands, but could be just right* for sailing to Zeebrugge/Rotterdam for a couple of years
*actually no idea if they have cabins or other suitable amenities
Edit: 301 cabins. What are the modern laws on taking a "prize"?
The feeling here is that Troon is going to be the future and Ardrossan will never be developed.
I thought Troon was more susceptible to weather interruptions?
And am I right in thinking Peel Port or someone owns Ardrossan, a further complication in moving things forwards...
Yes Peel Ports is responsible for Ardrossan Harbour.
Unfortunately lack of investment has led to the Irish Berth being condemned and permanently closed, which has lost us the high wind docking option there.
Troon isn't perfect either, Gourock is still used sometimes as the alternative harbour.
Untangling the connections between Calmac, CMAL, Peel Ports, and the Scottish government is a fun game.
Why has this become so f'd up with the ferries?
Can't you just go to any shipyard in the world who's already made a few ships close enough to what you want, and ask them to make a couple more for you over the course of the next decade?
^ You could, but then you would be losing the political point you were making when you awarded the contract just before the Indy Ref.
Competitive tenders.
New technologies.
Competing interests.
Politics.
Global supply chain issues.
There are four ferries being built in Turkey and the first of those is already delayed too, so it's not just to do with local yards.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm23m3zx111o
So the Turks have one of those issues causing a two month delay, and the natives have all of them resulting in massively over budget and time.
Politics I expect is the root cause of the green "new technologies" issue. Delusions of grandeur and virtue signalling.
Typical public sector procurement balls up, aided by typical private sector suppliers eyeing up an easy fat payday from the public purse.
It seems to go beyond the boats though. It's the landing areas / ramps / docks. All different in design.
And I go back to the chap who runs Pentland Ferries. He claimed that if he got the same per passenger/vehicle per mile subsidy as Northlink and Calmac, he would basically offer free travel to all.
Why has this become so f’d up with the ferries?
Partly because its a political football - you can't win:
- Order smelly oil burning boats and the opposition complain you missed the opportunity to lead the way in green tech
- Order "innovative" greener boats and you face the inevitable technical risk and get slated for virtue signalling
- Order large boats tailored to the "big routes" and someone will complain they lack the flexibility to move around the network
- Order smaller boats that might fit "anywhere" and others will complain you've specced them far too small
- Design for poor weather and you may be criticised for over-engineering (cost / time) for a few days a year
- Ignore the weather and you will be accused of being townies who don't care if the islands are cut off for a week at a time
- Order from a Scottish yard, and the opposition will complain you let jobs and politics get ahead or financial sense
- Order from a foreign yard and they will complain that you let Scottish jobs and ecconomy suffer to save a few bucks
- Order with penalty clauses in your favour and the opposition will say you paid too much (because no private yard is going to actually carry the risk)
- Order with a contract that leaves you carrying the can for delays - and the opposition will claim you should have negotiated better terms
- Order with a "draft spec" and the opposition will say it was crazy to start a project without a final design and cost
- Wait for a final spec before starting and the opposition will say you have not actually started and are window dressing
- Design around a crew who live aboard and people will tell you thats bad for Island/Rural jobs
- Design around a crew who live ashore and you lose the flexibility to quickly redeploy the vessel (which may actually be what the previous people want).
Can’t you just go to any shipyard in the world who’s already made a few ships close enough to what you want, and ask them to make a couple more for you over the course of the next decade?
Because buying a ship is not typically a catalogue purchase. Its not like mass production where the customer saves money by having everything exactly the same as everyone else. Almost all big boats are actually prototypes - the builder and designer learns from each one how to make the next one better. The power plant that was designed in a boat 10 years ago might no longer be available; the fuel load you want to carry (to give you range between refuelling) may be different; the regulatory approvals in the UK may be different; the height of the vessel for getting under bridges or working around dock infrastructure may matter more to some than others; draft (depth) certainly matters - and matters more in tidal waters than the med or baltic; range of angles the loading ramps work at to fit the docks etc.
The biggest issue though is the decision inertia. Once a political decision is made to do it one way - reversing that decision is nigh on impossible even when it becomes logical to change based on new information. Politicians (and their fan bases) often forget that the more noise they make about the other side being wrong the more entrenched their position often becomes. Of course sometime they don't care because the advantage of opposition is you don't actually need a viable solution - just soundbites.
And I go back to the chap who runs Pentland Ferries. He claimed that if he got the same per passenger/vehicle per mile subsidy as Northlink and Calmac, he would basically offer free travel to all.
Western ferries in the clyde also throw around big claims. I'm not saying they are 100% wrong - but I do treat bold claims with a pinch of salt.
A fair point, but there does seem to be something in the fact that Calmac and Northlink get significant subsidies (and state control) but other ferries such as Pentland, Western Ferries, even Orkney Council and Shetland Council funding, and wee things like Glenelg Community Trust or Cromarty Ferry all seem to keep running and dare I suggest quite successfully...
The counter argument is also that Calmac/Northlink have a much bigger network to service, a lot of which is less profitable than either Gourock to Dunoon or the short crossing to Orkney (and if there wasn’t competition, there would probably still be a car ferry from Gourock pier, and Northlink might need less subsidy, or it might not).
Channel Islands making a similar hash of re-tendering their ferry services for the next 15 years, and only Condor/BF own ships small enough to fit in the harbours; modern ferries <130m long are apparently not all that common….
Partly because its a political football – you can’t win:
While I accept the truth in some of your statements, you appear to be saying it’s actually impossible to design to tender, design and build a ferry successfully. I’m not sure I agree with that.
scotroutes
Full Memb https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk40rk54p7o.ampFerry fiasco!
Somebody posted that link yesterday
There’s a circle to be squared - providing lifeline services for remote communities vs the transportation of tourists and visitors that helps bring valuable revenue. In the midst of it, we have a complex organisation involving the Scottish government, Calmac ferry operations, CMAL the owners of the ships and some of the infrastructure, a whole host of local authorities who also own some of the port facilities and finally some private companies. At the moment the service is being delivered beyond stretch using ships that are beyond their planned working life - every week there’s some sort of crisis that results in breakdowns, boats being diverted and services disrupted. The impact of last year’s ferry disruptions last year are still being felt - we’ve had fewer tour buses and day visitors this year and some businesses are closing for good as they’ve not recovered.
Partly because its a political football – you can’t win:
Sounds like a dictator of highland ferries is needed.
I'll volunteer to do it for the next 30 years.
While I accept the truth in some of your statements, you appear to be saying it’s actually impossible to design to tender, design and build a ferry successfully. I’m not sure I agree with that.
Im sure it’s not impossible to successfully design/tender/build a ferry. Depending of course how you define success*. I am sceptical that it’s possible to do that in public view and achieve a result that the majority of people think was the optimal outcome! I think it’s even harder when the people scrutinising your decisions are vested in your failure. The same is true for all large infrastructure projects.
* whilst the Scottish Government and their civil servants have undoubtedly made a fist of this - my understanding of the commentators position is that success would mean:
- delivered fast
- large carrying capacity
- boats small enough to move/fit anywhere in the network
- drive innovative green tech
- support Scottish shipyard jobs
- delivered cheap
- high quality with long working life
- local shore based crews
- easily redeployable to other routes
- certainty in terms of delivery and expectation management
- politically acceptable stories about the progress
- longevity of the yard in scotland
- any delay/overspend is someone else’s problem
i don’t believe you can achieve ALL of those things in the same project. Outcomes that might in the short term have been better for an island may not have been better for all islands in the long term. Outcomes that might have been better for Calmac/CMAL may not have been better for Fergusson, or Inverclyde. Etc.
There may be swings and roundabouts however that doesn't mean it wasn't a shambles.
" CMAL may have broken its own rules by allowing Ferguson to go ahead with its bid despite being unable to provide evidence of a builders refund guarantee, a mandatory financial safeguard
Ferguson obtained a 424-page document from a design consultant setting out CalMac's technical requirements, while other bidders had to rely on a more limited 125-page specification. A key section of its bid was mostly cut-and-pasted from this longer document
The shipyard was allowed to significantly change its design halfway through the tender by developing a variant mentioned but discounted in its original submission. This change also allowed it to reduce its price by nearly £10m, making it more competitive
CMAL assessors held a "confidential" meeting with Ferguson, the only bidder to receive an in-person meeting"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62986757
Issue is always going to be (as with Channel Islands, and Northlink) that suitably sized and suitably seaworthy ships are a bit thin on the ground.
Partly because its a political football – you can’t win:
You can win, but it requires a degree of wisdom and integrity to recognise that despite the fact that no choice is beyond reproach that doesn't mean that every choice is equally valid.
The decision to build the boats in Scotland on economic nationalist grounds was the fatal one: it meant a tiny (or, as been proven, an empty) pool of viable suppliers, and that once awarded the supplier could do what they want because any delay or overrun or dispute would get steamrolled by the PRETERCT UR JERBS argument.
@irc - just because it’s a poisoned chalice doesn’t mean that you can’t still **** up on top of that!
@pca - im not convinced any yard would necessarily have coped better without the proper design spec. Somewhere cheap using sweatshop labour might have seemed a good idea to the accountants but the Herald would have loved the headline “SNP Ferry human rights abuses whilst Port Glasgow left on scrap heap”.
the point is, if you were a normal ferry operator you would get to make all your bad decisions and change your mind without anyone making news headlines. There’s huge waste and stupid mistakes, as there has been on every government procurement in my lifetime, but an opposition and media frenzy on a few ships probably means much more complex but subtle issues are going without challenge. Clearly it is too late to reverse most of the decisions now (which yard, which fuel source, etc) but I don’t think those shouting about those things realise the more they’ve shouted over the years the more entrenched it forces* the incumbents to become. I’ve not heard any meaningful explanation what the alternatives are proposing to do in May 2026 - they must all be actually hoping the SNP leave the ferries in a better state so they don’t have to worry about it!
* I am aware that of course they are not actually forced to make bad decisions worse but Yah Boo politics does naturally lead to defensive rather than logical decisions and for some reason the media thinks u-turns are a sign of weakness.