Jump to content

FSG Hull No. 774 - A new chapter


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Everyone, I have gathered as much as I could find and speculate about Honfleur (FSG 774) over the past few days. I tried to make sure that most of the stuff that I mention in this post isn't rep

130 is really a sample number based on a range of different accompanied and unaccompanied traffic.  Giving a trailer capacity for any ship is always hypothetical.   As food for thought, see this link

Ok, let’s try again... Now that the vessel formerly known as Honfleur has finally arrived at Fosen shipyard I think a new heading/thread is called for because the next chapter in her troubled lif

Posted Images

59 minutes ago, ZinedineBiscan said:

Looks like parcel tape holding her together, which shows really how much work is needed

Like most of the kit in a lot of factories. It holds guards in place also useful for attaching a a guide. Used on old safety shoes to hold the sole in place it has a multitude of uses. Was amazed once when visiting a Nissan Door Seal supplier in Japan not a piece of brown tape in sight

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a very bespoke ship so without major reconfiguration isn't ideal for that many routes.

 

Her lane metres aren't massive for a busier freight route.  Equally, she has too much passenger accommodation for a true ropax route.

Her berth numbers mean she isn't that suitable for a longer overnight route.

 

Corsica springs to mind...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about Fishguard?! I bet they never fill the cabins on Stena Europe.

Or, if they could add a few more cabins, she could work in tandem with a freighter on Hull Zeebrugge. They'd just need to add a river berth or shave a few metres of each side for the lock. I'd be willing to accept a downgrade in standards if it kept the route open in the summer

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Khaines said:

Notice in the photo her name is covered up apart from the first two letters so she has the charming name of ‚ÄúHo‚ÄĚ ūüėā

Must be going to Plymouth then

ps and yes Ed I know it is a different spelling !

Edited by David Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RickOShea said:

It's a very bespoke ship so without major reconfiguration isn't ideal for that many routes.

 

Her lane metres aren't massive for a busier freight route.  Equally, she has too much passenger accommodation for a true ropax route.

Her berth numbers mean she isn't that suitable for a longer overnight route.

 

Corsica springs to mind...

 

She has 2600 full height lane metres which will be more or less the same as the next two E - Flexers for BF and she was to have over 800 berths in 260 cabins. what's bespoke about that?

If this would mean that she'd be unsuitable for a longer overnight crossing, Cap Finistere must be a terrible experience - which of course she isn't.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony someone else asked on here but got no answer so did you get permission from the person who took the photo to put it on here?

it may be wise to Quote on the post with photo who gave you permission(if they did) their name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jonno said:

She has 2600 full height lane metres which will be more or less the same as the next two E - Flexers for BF and she was to have over 800 berths in 260 cabins. what's bespoke about that?

If this would mean that she'd be unsuitable for a longer overnight crossing, Cap Finistere must be a terrible experience - which of course she isn't.

She is very purpose built for Portsmouth - Caen.  This is actually why previous ships like the NORMANDIE and MONT ST MICHEL have been so successful as they are really tailored to the market.

The number of berths Vs passenger capacity is totally insufficient for a longer overnight crossing but fine for a short overnight crossing where many are fine with a reclining seat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, RickOShea said:

The number of berths Vs passenger capacity is totally insufficient for a longer overnight crossing but fine for a short overnight crossing where many are fine with a reclining seat.

I understand the point you're making in terms of finding a balance between day & night sailings but to state that ships like this are totally insufficient for a longer crossing isn't  accurate. The operator simply sells the berth /cabin capacity like they do on the Visentini's & BF's Superfast.

Cap Finistere was built to carry 1600 passengers although with BF she's only operated with an 856 capacity. It's the same with the Visentini's which were built to carry in excess of 1000 pax but carry less than 400.

.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Tumnus2010 said:

How hard would it be for extra cabins to be added in place of a reclining lounge or something at this stage?

 

They won't do anything but the basics to the current layout until they have a client, then modifications can be made.

I recall FSG saying that the hull had been specially designed with Ouistreham in mind !

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jonno said:

 

I understand the point you're making in terms of finding a balance between day & night sailings but to state that ships like this are totally insufficient for a longer crossing isn't  accurate. The operator simply sells the berth /cabin capacity like they do on the Visentini's & BF's Superfast.

Cap Finistere was built to carry 1600 passengers although with BF she's only operated with an 856 capacity. It's the same with the Visentini's which were built to carry in excess of 1000 pax but carry less than 400.

.

 

Yes but both Visentinis and CF are uneasy compromises.

Visentinis could probably do with about 100 more cabins when on passenger focussed routes.   It's widely known CF would benefit from more cabins.

All I was saying is that the Honfleur as currently configured isn't ideal for that many routes.  If you had a range of ships in front of you for an 18 hour crossing, she'd be far from top of your agenda.

This is the beauty of the e-flexer class, not awe-inspiring ships but can be configured to be a decent fit for almost any route.

Edited by RickOShea
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gareth said:

Does she have an internal ramp?

My interpretation of this question is - can you get from the lower vehicle deck to the upper vehicle via a ramp? I do not know the answer but, the subsequent answers demonstrate there are two decks that hoist, in other words, mezzanine decks. These do not transfer vehicles from one deck to another so two-tier loading would still be required.

Mezzanine decks allow for two layers of cars in area that would normally have trucks, or not used on quiet sailings.

I would be very surprised if they went to the expense of fitting ramps on a vessel that loads in ports with two-tier links spans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...