A Fast Frequent Ferry Service for Orkney. 8th. October 2013 An independent assessment using information from the books “Who Pays the Ferryman” and “Pentland Hero” by Roy Pedersen. It also takes into account information provided at a seminar at the 2013 Science Festival by Stuart Ballantyne, Prof. Alf Baird and other sources including the Scottish Ferry Services: Ferries Plan (Scottish Government). By Kenneth Hambly, East Breckan, Holm, Orkney.KW17 2SB Introduction. The nature of ferry services in Orkney has long been a contentious issue, and it remains so. With the Orkney Ferries fleet nearing a time when its ships must be replaced, and the issues relating to the service on the Pentland Firth, it’s time there was a public discussion of the future of Orkney ferry transport. The problems relate to two separate issues, one being the crossing of the Pentland Firth, and the other being the development of the outer isles services. The problems surrounding both of these services are inter-related. One is dependent upon the other. One thing is obvious, the services must be developed and must be fit for purpose over the next forty years, the probable lifetime of a ferry. Investment in infrastructure and ships is relevant to the discussion at a time when money is in short supply. (Scottish Ferries Plan). When ships are commissioned and built, they cannot be discarded and the plans changed. A rigorous investigation of the issues is required before money is spent, and this is not happening. It is important not to conflate the two issues. The crossing of the Pentland Firth is one issue, and the outer isles service another related issue. The service to Aberdeen is also a matter for discussion. Why these issues are important. Immense sums of public money are involved in the provision of these services. Much of this is capital expenditure, investment in boats and infrastructure. Providing optimal services for Orcadians and reducing running costs are part of the equation. Another issue is the provision of subsidies by the Scottish Government with Serco Northlink (the Hamnavoe) receiving £243 million over 6 years, and the ownership of the internal ferry fleet by the Orkney Islands Council (OIC) using public money. The question is whether these sums of money have been wisely spent in the past and that is open to discussion. Planning ahead is important as the future financing of services will probably change. The subsidies provided to ferry operation by the Scottish Government throughout Scotland are extremely high and ultimately unsustainable. Public scrutiny of this funding is inevitable and changes will follow. The other important problem is the fact that the lack of rigorous scrutiny of the ferry services has meant that residents in Orkney do not get the service they deserve. Ferries do not operate as efficiently as they should and a sub-optimal service is provided. If the funding situation changes during the next forty years Orkney residents will be left with a fleet of expensive inefficient boats and infrastructure and a service they cannot afford to run. To avoid such an outcome, important decisions have to be made before the end of 2013, the date set by the Scottish Government. The present situation. At present ferry services to the North Isles are provided by three Roll on - Roll off (Ro-Ro) ferries which operate from Kirkwall pier. These ferries are supplemented by a smaller ferry running to Rousay, Egilsay and Wyre from Tingwall Pier, and another from Kirkwall to Shapinsay. These ships are of traditional design and provide a scheduled service to the outer isles, most of them from Kirkwall where there is a slipway and two linkspans. For the South Isles there are ferries from Houton Pier to Lyness, Flotta and Longhope, and another from Stromness to Graemsay and Moaness on Hoy. There is a service from Westray to Papa Westray, and other private services in Scapa Flow. Boats to Shapinsay and Hoy have both been lengthened recently to increase their capacity at a cost of approximately £1million each. The Graemsay is to be re-engined at considerable cost when it could have been replaced with a cheaper catamaran. There are two permanent Pentland Firth crossings and one summer passenger-only ferry. The traditional route is from Stromness to Scrabster, where a very large sum of money has been spent improving the harbour. This route passes down the western side of Hoy and crosses the Pentland Firth on the west (Atlantic) side. The ship is the “Hamnavoe” and it is a traditional (mono hull) ship operated by Serco Northlink. The other route is from St. Margaret’s Hope to Gills Bay on the Caithness coast. This ship, the “Pentalina”, is a medium speed catamaran of Australian design operated by Pentland Ferries, a local company. The “Pentland Venture” operates a service for foot passengers only from John O’Groats to Burwick Head on South Ronaldsay. This service is operated by John O’Groats Ferries during the summer months. A long haul service operates from Aberdeen to Kirkwall and Lerwick in Shetland. This will be discussed under “Aberdeen Services” later. What are the options? Before the current fleet of ferries was commissioned Pierce Webb, a marine architect living and working in Orkney, after much research, produced a plan advocating a change to the ferry services in Orkney. His idea was to introduce a fast, frequent ferry service in Orkney thus providing a cheaper, more frequent connection for residents of the outer isles. His idea was to use medium speed catamarans which were then as now being used in the southern hemisphere countries and in Scandinavia. He saw no point in simply replacing the old style ferry service with the same service but using more modern ships. He recognised that the replacement of the fleet represented an opportunity to update the ferry service and make it fit for the 20th. century. The OIC wasn’t interested in his ideas at that time. The situation on the Pentland Firth was changed by the introduction of the “Pentalina” by a new privately owned company, Pentland Ferries. Amidst much scepticism, this medium speed catamaran of Australian design began a three times daily service from Caithness to Orkney. It has proved to be very reliable with the ability to operate in almost all weather conditions. It is sea-kindly and reliable and has confounded its critics. The option seems to be that the conventional ships deployed on the internal ferry service in Orkney could be replaced by more suitable craft providing a different type of service – a fast frequent service on short sea crossings between the islands of the County. This option is based on the knowledge gained elsewhere that short sea crossings offering a frequent service increase the traffic flow by up to 50% and provide a better, more reliable service than ships operating a scheduled service on longer routes. An alternative type of ferry service. The fast ferry service which was proposed in the past and is now being suggested again is not only cheaper to commission, but the ships are much less expensive than the current mono hulls to build and the running costs are less than conventional ships. The recently commissioned Calmac mono hull Finlaggan cost £24.5million and the new hybrid ferries cost £20.0 million each. An equivalent catamaran cost under £5.0million and is cheaper to run, produces less in the way of toxic emissions and carries fewer crew members. The crews live ashore thus allowing more capacity for passengers and freight. A service using these ships would not only be cheaper to install and run, it would provide faster, more frequent services to the outer isles running for longer in the day. There is nothing new about the concept of a fast frequent ferry service. Such services are normal in the southern hemisphere and in Scandinavia, particularly in Norway. Orkney would be an ideal place to introduce such a service in Britain. Research evidence. This short paper is not the place to introduce the detailed evidence supporting the fast frequent ferry concept. It is sufficient to say that where this type of service has been introduced ferry traffic has increased dramatically and income has increased as a result. The amenity value of such a service has been immense with passengers being able to choose when they want to travel and how late they want to return. There is no booking required and increased capacity is provided by increasing the frequency of the service. The key to success is to have the right ships on the right routes. The routes must be short crossings to reduce ferry costs and emissions. The Scottish Ferries Service has done research all the Scottish routes, but their research uses a model concept based on the ships currently in service. There is no mention of the new ideas now dominating world ferry services. Scottish Transport and the Stromness/Scrabster route. Quite amazingly, the Scottish government’s chosen example for a model of competitive tendering as explained in the document Scottish Ferries Service: Ferries Plan (2.30), is the Scrabster to Stromness route recently negotiated with the service company Serco Northlink. The route was given to Serco after a competitive tendering exercise, but this Pentland Firth service was offered as a package requiring the use of the two ports of Stromness and Scrabster, and the route was bundled with the Aberdeen/Northern Isles route. The ship to be used was the inefficient polluting Hamnavoe. A subsidy of £243 million over 6 years was offered. This was despite the fact that a rival service operated by Pentland Ferries was in place in the Pentland Firth providing a service with no government subsidy and no infrastructure costs. In a recent engine failure of the Hamnavoe, no replacement could be found and the service lapsed while the problem was fixed. During that time the Orkney “Lifeline” service was operated by the “Pentalina” of Pentland Ferries. The oft repeated government commitment to providing “Lifeline” services is thus rendered invalid. What is to be made of the above a situation? The Scottish Government has two examples of independent operators, one on the Pentland Firth and one on the Clyde, providing a service without government subsidies which the public actually prefer to use. It seems as if Scottish Ferry services prefer to hand out public money indiscriminately, thus contradicting their own statements in their Ferry Plan. It is unlikely, to say the least, that this arrangement will last for 40 years, the lifetime of a ship. Provision of ships. The ship of choice on short crossings is the medium speed catamaran. The concept of the medium speed catamaran was invented by Stuart Ballantyne, a Scot living in Australia. He has designed many types and is now the leading authority on such ships. These catamarans have two hulls and a large load carrying platform. They are made from steel and aluminium, and often have four engines. They are sea-kindly and can sail in all weathers. There is no evidence that they perform less well than conventional mono hull boats. A catamaran costs about one third as much to build as a similar mono hull and have many advantages such as minimal draft for easy docking. The “Pentalina” is an example of such a ship and many Orcadians will have had the experience of sailing on her. Such a ship could easily be used on the internal Orkney routes. Stuart Ballantyne has affirmed that it would be possible and desirable to build these catamarans locally from Australian kits, most likely at Nigg where there are suitable facilities, thus promoting the Scottish shipbuilding industry. The routes. The selection of routes for a new fleet of ferries is as important as the selection of boats. It is important to institute the principles currently applied in the Southern Hemisphere and Scandinavia if maximum economic and amenity benefits are to be achieved. That means fast, frequent services on the shortest routes possible. They could properly be called “shuttle services” which would require no booking because of their frequency. Looking at a map of Orkney and applying this principle produces some obvious choices (see end of paper). Other factors have to be considered, one of which is the acceptability of the routes to the travelling public. The circulation of information and the promotion of a debate would be required if the services were to acquire maximum acceptability. Currently the “hub” of the North Isles ferry service is Kirkwall, but Kirkwall isn’t the geographical centre of the islands. It is an inefficient system. It would be more efficient, faster and cheaper to use short sea crossing from a hub further north. Thus a fast, frequent ferry shuttle could connect Balfour village in Shapinsay to Carness on the Mainland. Another shuttle could connect the north of Shapinsay (new terminal) to Backaland on Eday which would be the genuine hub of the new service, with smaller boats connecting Eday to the other outer isles. In this way a resident of Westray could drive at any time from the island to the Orkney mainland using three short sea crossings. Operating costs. We can make no assumptions about the continued funding of ferry services. Government subsidies are immense throughout Scotland and it is hard to understand how this situation has been allowed to develop. Many ferry services operate entirely on subsidies and these can be up to £350 per person per round trip. Some ships sail routinely with fewer passengers than crew. A new Orkney North Isles service would change that, providing a sustainable ferry service with manageable operating costs. Medium speed catamarans use less fuel than conventional mono hulls. They produce fewer emissions which is important with new EC regulations in the offing. They carry less crew and with interchangeable engines can be easier to service. It is worth noting that it is possible to build three catamarans for the purchase price of one conventional mono hull, so the actual number of ferries in Orkney could be greatly increased. Experience in Scandinavia and the Southern Hemisphere. Throughout this paper, mono hulls have been described as “conventional ships”. This terminology might be inappropriate in the Southern Hemisphere where most of the short ferry services are provided by medium speed catamarans. They have proved their worth in Australia and New Zealand and are now accepted as being the normal type of ferry. Norway has also adopted the catamaran as its design of choice in its most inaccessible places. For further information please consult the extensive bibliography in Roy Pedersen’s book, “Who Pays the Ferryman?” An integrated plan for Orkney. Much of the financial benefit to Orkney from an improved ferry service would depend on an increase in ferry traffic. Much of this traffic would come from within the County, but an increase in the overall traffic to Orkney would benefit the tourist trade amongst others. People coming to Orkney could drive freely round all of the islands and enjoy an improved visitor experience. To achieve this increased traffic it is essential to apply the same principles to the Pentland Firth service as would be applied to the outer isles service. That would require a fast, frequent short sea crossing and such an option does exist. Pentland Ferries operate the medium speed catamaran “Pentalina” between Gills Bay, a terminal the company built, to St. Margaret’s Hope. The OIC has previously constructed a very satisfactory terminal at Burwick Head, a terminal closer to Gills Bay thus facilitating an even shorter sea crossing, but so far has refused to allow Pentland Ferries to use this terminal for its service. The link span remains unused, and the steelwork has started to decay through this lack of use. This neglect is creating an indefensible waste of public money. No councillor has been able to explain this situation for reasons which remain open to speculation. The Scottish Ferry Service applies what it calls “a model service” using evidence based methodology. By this they mean they compare future proposals for ferry services against the existing models. They do not seek to compare existing models with innovative concepts such as those in place on the Pentland Firth (Pentland Ferries) and the Clyde (Western Ferries). These services are up and running and they are fast, efficient and economic. It would be interesting to know why they are ignored. The North Isles infrastructure. Clearly there would need to be some investment in infrastructure in the north isles if this new type of service was to be introduced. Such an investment would not be excessive compared to the sums spent on subsidies and ports elsewhere. Investment in conventional mono hull ships tends to be far greater than expenditure on infrastructure. Shallow draft catamarans can use an inexpensive Norwegian “lock-on” slipway for berthing, but there might be a requirement for road improvement, parking areas and safe berthing facilities to provide a haven for smaller ships in adverse weather conditions. Scottish Transport has indicated that it would take some responsibility for infrastructure expenditure. One possible scenario is for a short sea crossing to be established between the Bay of Carness on the Mainland and Balfour Village on Shapinsay using a medium speed catamaran to provide a shuttle service. This would require investment in infrastructure for a new slipway at Carness. Another crossing would be established between a terminal on the north of Shapinsay, connecting it to Backaland on Eday. This terminal would also require some investment to provide a safe haven for ferries. Smaller ferries would then use existing short routes to Westray, Sanday, and Stronsay and possibly to North Ronaldsay. New slipways on the north of Eday and the South of Westray might be desirable. These ferries would provide a shuttle service allowing cars to drive from the outer isles to the Mainland at any time of the day, any day of the week. There are alternatives to the above. If residents of the outer isles were insistent upon terminating their journey in Kirkwall, perhaps as foot passengers, this could still be used as a terminal, though in all other respects this would be a sub-optimal outcome. The current system, using improved boats, would operate to Rousay, Egilsay and Wire and it is assumed that the Pentland Firth route would have increased capacity using the short sea route to Burwick head. Ultimately it is possible that some of the routes would be superseded by fixed links (tunnels). The Faroe Islands have 19 tunnels, whilst Orkney has none. The South Isles. The south isles have previously had problems with under capacity on its ferry routes. Root and branch changes might be advisable now using the same principles as described in this paper. It has been suggested that a medium speed catamaran might provide a shuttle service to Flotta and South Hoy from St. Margaret’s Hope, whilst another shuttle service could run from the north of Hoy to Houton where there is a linkspan. Increased capacity can be achieved by increasing the frequency of services. The Pentland Firth. A short sea crossing from Gills Bay to Burwick Head would be of considerable value to Orkney as a whole, increasing passenger and vehicle traffic and thus contributing to the success of the Orkney economy. The improvement to the amenity of the Pentland Firth service for the people of Orkney cannot be overstated. The availability of a frequent shuttle service to the Scottish mainland with no pre-booking would be of great value. Just why OIC refuses to allow Pentland Ferries to use Burwick Head is unclear, and certainly very strange. There are several theories as to why this should be, but none are very satisfactory. It is very much a taboo subject in OIC circles. The advantages to the people of Orkney are very clear, and if they are not they could be tested in a pilot project. Why does the council refuse to let Pentland Ferries use this terminal? No one knows, and the OIC isn’t telling. This will be discussed later. Aberdeen Services. The long haul service into Aberdeen is not within the remit of this paper. The advantages of catamarans over mono hulls are less clear in long deep water operations. This being said, the Aberdeen service is the second most subsidised route in Scotland. It is certainly not economic to run, and though it is very popular with Orcadians it is not an essential service. It could be greatly improved in a way that would make it more economic. It has been suggested that a service from Orkney (and Shetland) could run more regularly into Invergorden with a short land connections to Inverness. This would give access to the Inverness rail and bus stations and the A9 motor route to the South. Aberdeen is a difficult harbour to access in bad weather with the ferry being diverted to Rosythe when conditions are poor. A more interesting idea would be for some company to institute a fast shorter service from Invergorden, with its rail station and road links and already used by cruise liners, to St. Margaret’s Hope (or Burwick Head). This route could probably be serviced by a catamaran providing a twice daily, daylight service. A similar boat could run to Shetland. No subsidy would be required. The future service. The future of Orkney with a new integrated ferry service would change Orkney. It would certainly improve the visitor experience, but more than that it would have great amenity value to all Orkney residents and particularly to those of the North and South Isles. It would end the isolation of living in the outer islands and integrate the population of the entire county. It would also facilitate freight transport and other journeys. Many of the boats would be interchangeable and servicing and cover in a breakdown situation would be more manageable. If nothing is done about the Burwick Head link span, it will become unserviceable. The role of Orkney Islands Council. The OIC is central to these discussions. The OIC owns the Burwick Head terminal and is blocking Pentland Ferries from using it. It owns Orkney Ferries which operates the outer isles ferry system, including the infrastructure. OIC is therefore a key player in the modernisation of the Orkney ferry connections. There are issues involved in the operation and planning of the ferry service which have to be investigated and explained. Clearly the OIC and its councillors have reasons for the positions they take, but they have so far refused to make the reasons for their decisions clear. It seems as if the OIC is largely in favour of preserving the status quo, yet it is obvious that the status quo they are so keen to preserve has already changed, leaving public opinion and OIC leadership far behind. When I first came to Orkney I had ticket Number 4 on the new Ro-Ro PandO ferry “St.Ola”. Orkney was able to embrace change in those days, but seems to have become stuck in that era. The most surprising and indefensible OIC attitude relates to the use of the Burwick Head terminal at the southern tip of South Ronaldsay, which the OIC built and which it owns. It is starting to decay. Pentland Ferries have a medium speed catamaran that could instigate a short sea crossing between Gills Bay and Burwick Head. This OIC terminal was built to provide the kind of service that is being discussed, but for a variety of reasons apparently related to the nature of the sea bed and the choice of ships it was never viable. It could be used by a shallow draft catamaran at least in the summer months. Some councillors have been asked repeatedly why they are so intransigent in the face of such a potentially advantageous concept, but they repeatedly refuse to answer. In the absence of an answer, one has to speculate. Possible reasons for OIC decisions. It is doubtful whether there is a practical reason for the refusal of OIC to permit the use of Burwick Head by a ferry operator. It can be assumed that there is a political reason, and it is this. The Stromness to Scrabster route is the traditional link to mainland Scotland, and its presence gives prestige to the town of Stromness, and perhaps jobs and industry to the town as well. It is also favoured by many residents of West Mainland Orkney who see it as their link to the south. The route is very heavily subsidised and though it is inefficient and uses an inappropriate ship, it is usual to hear Orcadians and even councillors say that it someone wants to give Orkney a huge ferry subsidy, why should we turn it down? Unfortunately that subsidy may not be paid forever. It is also believed that if the ship “Pentalina” was allowed to operate a shuttle service, it would make the “Hamnavoe” non-viable even with its subsidies. It’s worth pointing out that the “Pentalina” receives no subsidies at all, and is still competitive on its current route. This would seem to be a very strange argument indeed, as it underlines the case for the shorter service. If it’s that much better, Orkney should have it. The other possible reason is that the OIC was unable to make the Burwick Head terminal workable. One body of opinion says that if the OIC was unable to make it viable, councillors are certainly not going to allow a private operator show them how to do it. The most obvious reason why councillors won’t vote to allow Burwick Head to be used is that they are change-averse. They are simply not prepared to allow any change to ferry services in or around Orkney just because they are not in favour of change at all. Unfortunately the world around them is changing. Whatever next? It is hard to believe that the OIC is unable to change its opinions. It is hard to believe that it would prevent change from happening, yet that is the way it seems to be. It is hard to believe that the OIC could not lead public opinion it if seemed to be in the interests of Orkney to advocate change. Yet that seems to be the situation. Arguments put to me include the belief that traffic would degrade the road from South Ronaldsay if the Burwick Head terminal was used. All traffic degrades all roads. It is also believed, despite all evidence, that a medium speed catamaran is less seaworthy than a mono hull. It is true that there is a current of public opinion in favour of the old boats, but perhaps that could be expected before there has been a discussion. But the truth of the pudding is in the eating. Why not let Pentland Ferries use the South Burwick terminal and Serco continue to have its subsidy? Let the travelling public demonstrate its preference by its choice of Pentland Firth Route. If councillors really care about providing the best for their electorate, why not let independent operators bid for the outer island routes? Why not try to get the least expensive and most efficient service possible by at least considering the options? At the very least councillors could commission a survey into the alternatives or employ a consultancy to assess the situation. The OIC has never been coy about commissioning surveys. Both of the above options would insulate them from any adverse reaction from intransigent electors. Whatever the outcome, the issues have to be investigated and the options aired, and now is the time to do it. Kenneth Hambly is a private Orkney resident with no connection to any other person or company. His opinions are his own. Any information in this paper is believed to be correct at the time of writing and there is no intention to mislead the reader. All facts can be verified and where opinions are expressed they are the opinions of the writer and that is made clear in the text.
Posted on: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 16:31:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015