Talk:Fast ferry scandal/Archives/2012

(untitled)

The following two comments were in the problems:

• The air on vehicle decks became uncomfortably warm, either from the heat of the vessel engines or lack of air circulation. This came to prevent people from being able to take pets on the crossing.
• The vessels also reportedly discharged raw sewage overboard from time to time when their small holding tanks became full.

Is there any source for this. I had never heard of these problems. I know passengers were not allowed on the car deck and therefore pets outside of a car (which usually must stay on the car deck) were not permitted. I never heard of the problems with pets in a car.

I had never heard of the sewage issue. However that I understand that is a common problem on a lot of the BC Ferries ships. -- Webgeer 06:50, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The first comment is true, I had the oppertunity to ride the fastcats a few times, and as I have a pet, I was told that he should be put in one of the kennels at the front and back of the ship that had greater air circulation. The air on the vehicle decks was uncomfortably warm.

And yes there have been rumours about the sewage issue, however I don't know of those rumours ever being substatiated.

I am going to rewrite and reinsert point #1.

[[User:Consequencefree|Ardent^†_∈]] 07:38, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

POV title?

Just out of curiosity, doesn't "FastCat Fiasco" sound a bit POV to anyone? Perhaps it should be moved and redirected to a page with a more NPOV title (arg.. too tired to think of one right now). I'd like to hear what you have to say! [[User:Consequencefree|Ardent^†_∈]] 08:30, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I think a better title would be "Fast Ferry Scandal". I think that is what is generally used by the press in more serious news stories. (The Fastcat Fiasco and a number of similar names were/are commonly used in editorial/POV articles) -- Webgeer 17:06, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You made a change to an even more POV title than it had before; "more serious news stories" in B C, i.e. those from major papers and broadcast monopolies, are all partisan-run (pro-Liberal, anti-NDP); the "editorial/POV articles" that use "Fiasco" are most likely those either of independent journalists who don't subscribe to the CanWest presentation of reality, or are from non-anti-NDP sources such as your "serious news stories". This was not a scandal, it was a screw-up, there's a difference.....scandal is corruption, graft, influenc-peddling, patronage, pork barrel, insider information etc and associated cover-ups; this was simply stupid decision-making; other much bigger scandals in recent BC history are not even referred to or talked about by your "more serious news" outlets, e.g. the Coquihalla cost-overruns - graft - and the insider info which saw the Premier's brother buy up land in the Nicola Valley and elsewhere on the highway's route before it was announced; the securities investigation of the Premier frmo the same period, aka the Doman Scandal (see Herb Doman, if there's any article on him; maybe Doman Industries)......similarly the current Premier's arrest for drunk-driving in Maui is never refered to as a scandal, and more.....but the media and the anti-NDP hacks/pundits keep on talking about Fast Ferries as a scandal BECAUSE of their anti-NDP POV agenda.....Skookum1 (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Alright I'm going to move and redirect then [[User:Consequencefree|Ardent^†_∈]] 08:36, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Actually "Fast Ferry Scandal" is also POV, as no actual "scandal" was involved here, only ineptitude (ergo, "fiasco" is much more accurate"). If the major media in BC persist in using "Fast Ferry Scandal" it should be commented that the major media in BC are inherently very POV and known to be anti-NDP in the extreme. The choice of title here is itself an issue; a POV source (the Vancouver papers/stations) is still POV, same as you can't quote something from Mein Kampf as authoritative about German history (a bit of an extreme comparison, but hte culture of lies is the same). There was no actual scandal here, same as with Casinogate there was no actual wrongdoing but the trial-by-media was relentless as was the terming of the fracas as a "scandal". teh real scandal there was the collusion between the BCTV (now Global), the RCMP and the BC Liberals. The much more serioues Ledgegate affair curretly being kept quietly out of the meida IS a scandal, and a very big one, but you won't hear the ssame media people who branded this as a scandal referring to that as a scandal. In fact, the more I think about the title of this article, the more noxious I think it is; a fiasco is not a scandal, and this was a fiasco, not a scandal. Ineptitude is not corruption.Skookum1 (talk) 13:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

The relevant guideline in this case is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events). If this event is mostly known as the "Fast Ferry scandal", that is what the title must be. The point of view that it is not a scandal should be represented in the article. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 05:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Naming conventions are a problem when the most common usage was engineered by a highly POV-charged media monopoly that is largely in control of public language/debate in British Columbia; "most widespread usage" may b e teh case here, but it's an engineered usage created by the Neo-Con/anti-NDP media machine (then BCTV, now CanWestGlobal). Papering the public mind, and the internet, is definitely a way to introduce POV views/names into the public record, and it's used wilfully by the monpolies in their re-engineering of history and likewise engineering of current events. This was not a scandal; the upshot and trial connected with the Legislature Raids were/are definitely a scandal, but I have yet to see them talked about that way in the same sources that perpetrate teh "Scandal" tag here.....similarly Casinogate is still spoken of as a scandal, even though it was a sham and the real scandal was the media/RCMP/Liberal Party collusion.....isn't there something in the guidelines about avoiding "most common usages" htat are deliberately politicized? "Fast Ferry fiasco" is quite common, especially in non-monopoly media/journalism.....Skookum1 (talk) 18:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

First of their kind?

The ferries were the first of their kind in the world, and second largest in the world. But unfortunately, the public and media were not patient with "first-of-breed" glitches. In fact, the three ships were never put into service as originally intended, and the third vessel was never even commissioned.

This statement is patently false and should be removed. I also question any such statements added by this user as they could be NPOV or at the least, incorrect and apologist when they do not provide factual information. Incat Tasmania Party Ltd. of Hobart, Australia has been designing high speed catamaran ferries since 1977[1] and Austal Ships of Perth, Australia has been doing the same since 1988. There is no possible way that BC Ferries' fast ferry plan was even conceived prior to the 1990s and it was only because of the success of these companies. Plasma east 19:56, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Plasma, as you seem to be WIkipedia Canada's resident expert on marine and rail transportation issues, I encourage you to Be bold! and make the edits that you think are necessary. If the anon editor has evidence s/he will have to come back and provide it. Regards, Ground Zero 20:02, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it is fair to say it is patently false. There were some significant differences to what was being done in Australia and the Fast Ferries (I do not believe that there were any Ro-Ro fast ferries anywhere near this size at the time). NPOV information on the fast ferries is very difficult to come by. Most of the factual information what was added by the anon user is accurate. However, there is some conjecture (why people didn't like it for example) that is debatable. -- Webgeer 23:34, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Ground Zero, I wouldn't say I'm an expert by any means but it is one of my interests. I just didn't want to be overly bold with this article, given the politics behind it - that, and I'm still not fully aware of all the intricate details behind this issue (the Pacificats). I agree with Webgeer though - "patently false" is a tad strong so I'll temper my criticism of the edits by stating that ro-ro high speed catamaran pax/vehicle vessels were available from other shipbuilders prior to the BC Ferries situation. I'll have to delve into Lloyd's to find out for sure if HSC's of this size were built by Incat or Austal prior to the Pacificats. Now, how to edit the new(er) edits is another matter entirely as I don't like to get into the politics of it, whether pro-labour or neo-con. I just took issue with statements re. the vessels and their design.

Another tidbit of info about Washington Marine Group's fleet of Pacificats that I came across recently via globalsecurity.org's Canadian counterpart at SFU (CASR) is the raising of the possibility of these ships becoming sealift/joint support vessels for the navy - see "A Modest Proposal — CF Joint Support Ship – a Sealift Alternative?". Cheers,Plasma east 23:53, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I will say that I first heard of the plans for the fast ferrys before Glen Clark was premiere. I had been to quite a few presentations on the Fast Cat project and toured them a few times while they were under construction. There were quite a few things about them that made them significantly different from any ship that was built before. Unfortunately I don't remember the specifics (in general there were unique aspects relating to construction methods, size, loading and powerplant) as I mentioned there is very little real informative information that is still available on the net due to the highly polarized political aspects of the ferries. I would suggest that going through some back issues (from before they became political) of the appropriate industry magazines and local publications could be useful. It should probably be noted that the design for these ships was prepared by Incat. Regarding the "modest proposal" I had already added that to the external links. I'm quite certain that this will never happen, but I think it is a neat idea. -- Webgeer 06:35, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

$200M pre-auction offer?

Is there any source for the claim that $200M was offered before the auction? I haven't seen that claim anywhere else. $200M a lot of money, and if it's true I'd like to be able to find out more (like who refused the offer and why). -- 24.82.176.59 05:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I've found a CBC news article that quotes George McPherson saying $60M was offered, and updated the article accordingly. -- 24.82.176.59 06:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Projected use

Dubai will be hosting the 33rd America's Cup in February 2010. Is there any source for the name of the new owner, and whether the ships will be used to host his 450 best friends for the big event? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.7.81.49 (talk) 23:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I really don't have time to figure out all the ins and outs of adding to Wiki - but I did upload two photos to the Commons of a Fast Cat being shipped from Vancouver yesterday (26 August 2009). If you can't find them I can be reached at mcroger@shaw.ca —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger the Sailor (talk • contribs) 22:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)