Jump to content
Andy

HONFLEUR - New Build for Ouistreham Route

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, jonno said:

Once the parent company has it's final ship I have it on good authority that there's more than an even chance that FSG will no longer form part of it.

In the latest accounts Siem have stopped showing FSG as a subsidiary, it only shows as a shareholding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it had made sense if FSG sub contracted out the fitting out of the Honfleur to another shipyard instead?   If they can't do it themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cabin-boy said:

Pont Aven was the last ro-pax ferry built by the shipyard before they decided to give up on this type of vessel and concentrate on cruise ships. 

Mont Saint Michel was the second to last to leave her yard before they went bankrupt and was around 5 months late.

Armorique was delivered (I believe) 6 months late and the yard had serious financial problems a couple of years later. 

Honfleur is just the latest ship perpetuating what seems to be a rather sad tradition of delays, poor project management and financial woes. 

Ed. 

I can't see BF using FSG in the future. Where are the E-Flexors being built?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MichaelBF said:

I forgot that, thanks Ed. 

Don't worry, 'Made in China' will most likely be stamped, embossed, painted or engraved onto every visible surface just so that you don't forget again. 😉 Ed. 

Edited by Cabin-boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ian Walker said:

Would it had made sense if FSG sub contracted out the fitting out of the Honfleur to another shipyard instead?   If they can't do it themselves.

75% of the fit out is done, the modules including the bridge were towed from Poland that way. it's all the plumbing, hydraulics & wiring which is taking the bulk of the time. A  modern ship the size of Honfleur will have over 10 km's of wiring alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I am aware that the modules were constructed in Poland.  But I thought most of the fitting out were already done. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ian Walker said:

Yes I am aware that the modules were constructed in Poland.  But I thought most of the fitting out were already done. 

 

75% is most of it, all of the first fix was done in Poland. They now need to join all the dots in Germany which takes time. From module delivery & fitting WBY took a further 4 months prior to the problems being found. The Honfleur job is being done with only a third of the staff and to a higher specification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/06/2019 at 10:08, Fine Whine said:

It should'nt be complicated hf_uk, just take the original exterior plans to satisfy all her thousands of fans, increase the appropriate width and length dimensions so she has the same hull size as Honfleur, increase cabin capacity to a maximum 1600 beds and bingo, you'll have a modern Bretagne 2 (I think they could/should bring back the Prince de Bretagne name) with sufficient cabin space in high season, vehicle decks that are fit for purpose in this age of wider cars, and space for a few more HGV's to keep the bean counters turning.

Flensburg should let BF have the hull plans for nothing rather than claim compensation for current delays as happened with MSM and the Van der Giessen yard, then everyone"s happy ....:D

Chris

Here is a thought then... would Bretagne 2 need to be double-level loading?
If not - far easier to make a Pont Aven / Bretagne style, and less ro-paxy stern like Armorique, Honfleur etc. 
If she is only designed to serve Pompey - St Malo then is it really required? I am not aware of St Malo becoming double level any time soon. 
(Nor Roscoff-Plymouth of course, if she were ever to cover). 
I suppose if BF want a true replacement vessel for that route, or if they want another more versatile one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hf_uk said:

Here is a thought then... would Bretagne 2 need to be double-level loading?
If not - far easier to make a Pont Aven / Bretagne style, and less ro-paxy stern like Armorique, Honfleur etc. 
If she is only designed to serve Pompey - St Malo then is it really required? I am not aware of St Malo becoming double level any time soon. 
(Nor Roscoff-Plymouth of course, if she were ever to cover). 
I suppose if BF want a true replacement vessel for that route, or if they want another more versatile one.

No I don't think it would be double-deck. Bretagne 2 in my eyes would have:

Decks 2, 3 & 4 as vehicle decks and very similarly designed to Pont-Aven's vehicle decks

Decks 5, 8 & 9 as cabin decks ensuring there is plenty of cabins 

Decks 6 & 7 as passenger decks similarly designed to Armorique's (i.e. plenty of lounges) except it would be longer and include an a la carte restaurant and large show lounge/bar 

Edited by georgem7
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think both St Malo & Roscoff should have vessels more passenger orientated. Neither route attracts anywhere the near the freight a double linkspan would carry

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair comment, but if you have specialist vessels for Portsmouth/Caen and Portsmouth/Sta Malo or Plymouth/Roscoff then you are placing restrictions on the flexibiilty of switching ships between routes to meet specific problems or changing requirements in the future.

Whatever people might think about Armorique, this vessel has demonstrated impressive versatility in covering all sorts of situations over and above the Plymouth/Roscoff route she was initially designed for. Such vessels might not be the optimum on all routes but they can stand in seamlessly in case of need and the only real drawback is the waiter restaurant facility which only a minority of passengers will consider to be a deal breaker.

The priority of the majority of passengers is to be able to get from A to B as originally expected and on time and if this means they have to slum it in the self service then it is a very small price to pay. (especially if they still have comfy cabins to sleep in).

Edited by cvabishop
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cvabishop said:

The priority of the majority of passengers is to be able to get from A to B as originally expected and on time and if this means they have to slum it in the self service then it is a very small price to pay. (especially if they still have comfy cabins to sleep in).

I am sure that the Amorique will look good with the Economie logo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m always surprised when I go on Bretagne the array of little shops there are that must cost more staff than they bring in its a prime example of how a new ship is more economical to run ,if you have all the customer service areas in a central area it must bring savings, I’m sure the cabins will be designed to be easier and quicker to clean as well , it all adds up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cvabishop said:

Fair comment, but if you have specialist vessels for Portsmouth/Caen and Portsmouth/Sta Malo or Plymouth/Roscoff then you are placing restrictions on the flexibiilty of switching ships between routes to meet specific problems or changing requirements in the future.

Whatever people might think about Armorique, this vessel has demonstrated impressive versatility in covering all sorts of situations over and above the Plymouth/Roscoff route she was initially designed for. Such vessels might not be the optimum on all routes but they can stand in seamlessly in case of need and the only real drawback is the waiter restaurant facility which only a minority of passengers will consider to be a deal breaker.

The priority of the majority of passengers is to be able to get from A to B as originally expected and on time and if this means they have to slum it in the self service then it is a very small price to pay. (especially if they still have comfy cabins to sleep in).

I can see where you're coming from Colin, but ......

I'm pretty sure you've posted on here about your experiences on QM2; we were fortunate to spend an unforgettable 10 days in the Caribbean on her back in 2007 and have booked a 2 week reverse trans-atlantic cruise next year via Iceland. If we turned up in New York to find she had conked out only to find the replacement vessel was MV Black Watch or MV Thompson/Marella Celebraton, we would be just a wee bit miffed even though either vessel would get us from A to B in comfy cabins!

My view is people who book Portsmouth - St-Malo do so because it's there own "mini cruise ", made all the more memorable because of the waiter service restaurant which is an integral part of the holiday experience.

Chris

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cvabishop said:

Fair comment, but if you have specialist vessels for Portsmouth/Caen and Portsmouth/Sta Malo or Plymouth/Roscoff then you are placing restrictions on the flexibiilty of switching ships between routes to meet specific problems or changing requirements in the future.

Whatever people might think about Armorique, this vessel has demonstrated impressive versatility in covering all sorts of situations over and above the Plymouth/Roscoff route she was initially designed for. Such vessels might not be the optimum on all routes but they can stand in seamlessly in case of need and the only real drawback is the waiter restaurant facility which only a minority of passengers will consider to be a deal breaker.

The priority of the majority of passengers is to be able to get from A to B as originally expected and on time and if this means they have to slum it in the self service then it is a very small price to pay. (especially if they still have comfy cabins to sleep in).

Armorique is a nice comfortable ship... for Roscoff. Any extended run on any route out of Portsmouth would quickly bring her limitations to the fore. In terms of freight she'd also struggle to keep up with what Barfleur carries too.

She has a low freight capacity (only Bretagne has lower) and less than 800 beds.

With two ships and two sailings in some instances over the summer, Roscoff has the poorest freight numbers, at 4994 compared to 9596 you can see it's nearly 50% less than St Malo which has an outdated ship, no twin loading and no extra summer sailings..

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fine Whine said:

 

My view is people who book Portsmouth - St-Malo do so because it's there own "mini cruise ", made all the more memorable because of the waiter service restaurant which is an integral part of the holiday experience.

Chris

A lot of the people I know including myself book StMalo for the timing it’s the only route that has a decent overnight sailing that and convenient onward travel,  maybe out of season what you say is more relevant.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fine Whine said:

My view is people who book Portsmouth - St-Malo do so because it's there own "mini cruise ", made all the more memorable because of the waiter service restaurant which is an integral part of the holiday experience.

Chris

I'd endorse that and I also think there's a perception of value, as a holiday traveller you always feel you're getting more for your money on a relaxing overnight sailing rather than the similar priced cut and thrust crossing to Ouistreham.

One of my most relaxing ferry experiences is a Sunday morning summer sailing out of St Malo with the stern of Bretagne's deck 7 bathed in sunshine most of the way home, cold drinks and crosswords.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've come close to booking St Malo as we like a relaxed overnight crossing (and I've been curious to experience the Olde World Charme of the Bretagne). 

The presence or otherwise of a waiter restaurant makes not a jot of difference to us.  Each time we've come close to booking it, the crossing has been rejected on price grounds (Plymouth Roscoff on Pont Aven booked instead, twice) and convenience (Hull Zeebrugge booked four times).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep @VikingVoyager I put off doing StMalo for a long time due to cost and to be honest I wouldn’t rush back to use it again, it’s an expensive sailing for a cramped noisy cabin which after all is where you spend the most amount of time we are doing the Thursday sailing from Plymouth it’s a better experience in my opinion.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/06/2019 at 22:05, Cabin-boy said:

China. 

Ed. 

 

They will be on time and on budget then :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, David Williams said:

I note that the other ship on the pier has had the AIS turned on, they seem to be putting more effort into delivering it on time.

I was looking for pictures of AVIC 267 (yard no) - which is Galacia I beleive... there are quite a few showing early stages of the build but none verifiable as BF. Does anyone have any?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...