HI Superferry: China's military fast catamaran from Australia

I call this one "Chinese Dirty Laundry." Credit to www.sinodefence.com (click on image for detail)

"HellCat" 022 underway. Credit to www.sinodefence.com (click on image for detail)

***

HI Superferry: China's military fast catamaran from Australia, the fast cat from Hell.

***

There has been a lot of information come out in the past month on the JHSV. I will publish a survey of that. For now, I just wanted to get this out.

***

China's equivalent technology military fast catamaran developed by the Australian firm AMD Marine Consulting whose principals have longstanding contacts in Hong Kong. It doesn't appear to have a western name yet, so I am calling it the "HellCat," the Houbei "HellCat" Type 022 wave-piercing catamaran. There is no good intention with this particular vessel. Although, the designs AMD350PB and AMD438YS look more economical, quickly built, and cheaper than any other LCS, JHSV, or fast ferry design I have seen. This is what the Neocon's are worried about:
***
Australia's role in China's naval expansion
by Sam Roggeveen 2 weeks ago - Sam Roggeveen, formerly a senior analyst with Australia’s intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments. Roggeveen is now with the Lowy Institute security think tank. --

"On 4 December an obscure American naval technology trade journal called Signal published an article on a new generation of missile-armed catamarans (the Type 022; pictured) being built for China’s navy, the People’s Liberation Army-Navy (PLAN). The article was all about the tactical employment of these new ships in a Taiwan war scenario, and thrown in almost as an aside was the following:

'The Australian company AMD exports various sizes of catamarans for commercial customers from all parts of the world. From 1993 until 2000, China procured seven AMD catamarans from 16 meters long to 30 meters (100 feet) long for river, seaport or local ferry duties. AMD has a joint venture company, Sea Bus International, located in Guangzhou that refined this catamaran design. After a review of competing designs, the PLAN selected a military patrol boat design based on the AMD 350, which is markedly like the 022 in specifications. AMD is cooperating in the design with China, and French diesels may be the power plant.'"...Read rest of article here.

***

From the original article and navy analyst who reported this in Dec. 2007:
"Catamarans Glide Through Chinese Waters," Signal Magazine, December 2007 - By James C. Bussert - James C. Bussert is employed at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Virginia. --

"China is launching catamaran missile boats in large numbers in what might be a program to replace long-standing conventional missile boats. However, the new missile catamarans are painted in blue and white camouflage colors that are characteristic of the Chinese marines. This raises questions about the boats’ real missions—questions that might be intentionally generated by the paint scheme.
...However, the startup of production for additional 022 hulls in Dalian, Quixin and Jiangnan shipyards in Shanghai, as well as in the Huangpu shipyard in Guangzhou, changed this precept.

...No other nation has missile catamaran boats with marine missions. Western observers may have difficulty understanding a Chinese design if it does not fit their blue water or littoral mission concepts. But the number one objective of the Chinese government is reunification by bringing the renegade island of Taiwan back into the Chinese nation. If this must be done by an invasion, then gunfire support of the amphibious landing is a gap in PLAN capabilities. The ideal U.S. Navy invasion gunfire support platforms were the U.S. Navy 16-inch battleship guns and 8-inch cruiser guns that provided crushing firepower in World War II. Use of the many PLA intermediate-range ballistic missiles located in Fujian province would destroy much of the Taiwan infrastructure, which would be counterproductive. On the other hand, the small missile catamarans need only travel from Fujian province ports to the Taiwan landing sites. Their design may make no sense to Western observers, but it meets China’s most important unique government and PLAN objective. The catamaran-based missiles could be used to support Taiwan amphibious landings."...Read full article here.

***

On further searching, this Type 022 vessel began to be reported in 2004 and again in 2005. That is probably when the invested parties here found out about it. See the following great blog entry from an Australian National University professor:

http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/labels/Transport.html
Friday, February 01, 2008

"Australian designed missile ships for China"

"The Lowy Institute for International Policy has reported that a new generation of missile-armed catamarans for China’s navy are based on an Australian design by AMD. http://www.amd.com.au/designs/amd350pb.php The US military have previously used several designs adapted from Australian fast ferry designs.

The Lowy report, released on 31 January 2008, is not exactly news, as the use of a wave-piercing catamaran hull design for "boat 2208", was reported in the DefenceTalk.com blog http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2935 in 2004. and the Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, July 2005 ("Combat Fleets", by Eric Wertheim). At the time I noted the similar appearance to Australian high-speed catamarans. http://www.tomw.net.au/2002/tsv1x/tsv1x.shtml#china The wikipedia describes them as the "Houbei class missile boat" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houbei_class_missile_boat and that entry was updated with mention of AMD in April 2007:

'The Houbei class missile boat is the newest class of missile boat in the People's Liberation Army Navy that first appeared in April 2004. The boats incorporate obvious stealthy features and were first built by the Qiuxin Shipbuilding Factory at Shanghai. These wave-piercing catamaran boats numbered from 2208 through 2211 and more are planned and built. The design of the Houbei class was reportedly developed with AMD Marine Consulting, a leading Australian company on catamaran designs for fast ferries.'

'Specifications

Displacement: 220 ton

Length: 43 m

Beam: 12 m

Draft: 1.5 mSpeed: 36 kt

Armament:

Anti-ship missiles: 8 C-801/802/803

Surface-to-air missiles: 12 MANPAD missiles

Guns: 1 x licensed copy of KBP AO-18 6-barrel 30 mm gun (AK-630) by ZEERI

Propulsion: 2 diesel engines @ 6,865 hp with 4 waterjet propulsors by MARI

Radars:

Surface search radar: 1 Type 362

Navigational radar: 1Electro-optics: HEOS 300'

From: Houbei class missile boat, Wikipedia, 00:19, 23 December 2007.

The ships are produced by Chinese company, GUMECO, which has built an AMD designed ferry(YS438,170-seat aluminum catamaran passenger vessel).

The USAV Spearhead (TSV-1X): High Speed US Army Transport Ship was built by the Incat, in Tasmania and is a modified high speed ferry. The HSV-2 Swift is a similar ship from Incat, used by the US Navy, modified with a helicopter flight deck and armament. The Western Australian company Austal. is building a Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) trimaran for the US Navy in conjunction with General Dynamics.

Apart from their high speed, the Australian designed passenger ferries have a low draft and large deck area. The low draft allows them to unload cargo and vehicles rapidly in unimproved ports or to landing craft. The large deck area provided potential for use with helicopters."...

posted by Tom Worthington at 7:54 AM on February 01, 2008 at:

http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/labels/Transport.html

***

Also see article and pictures at: http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/littoral/type022.asp

***

Additional articles of good coverage on this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/02/wchina202.xml

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/01/2151690.htm

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/AMD-in-China-navy-catamarans-deal-BE3MU?OpenDocument

http://news.smh.com.au/amd-building-catamarans-for-chinas-navy/20080201-1pgi.html
***

***
Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Great Letter to the Editor, Maui News today

Here was a brief, great letter to the editor of the Maui News today, 2/15/08:

"Washington’s fleet of ferries could use Hawaii’s ship"
POSTED: February 15, 2008

Here on Puget Sound we have a sinking fleet of ferries, old and needing replacing.

What an excellent opportunity for solving your Superferry “problem” — sell it to Washington State. And, we promise not to injure any whales.

John W. Cooper
Bellevue, Wash.

Recent news story related to this:
http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20080206/NEWS/802060302

Still, would be a whole lot easier plowing the Puget Sound and proving ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) sea trials for the JHSV design while not having to deal with the "unpredictably crazy" 20+ft. waves of the Pailolo Channel.

Also, Joan Conrow pointed out the related very interesting article:
"Tough sledding for fast vehicle ferries"
By Bruce Buls, Technical Editor, Workboat.com
http://divcom-fish.informz.net/admin31/content/template.asp?sid=6927&ptid=169&brandid=3174&uid=752956450&mi=260951


Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Oversight Taskforce Committee Meeting of 2/13/08

This was the third monthly meeting of the Act 2 Temporary Oversight Taskforce Committee. The first one on Maui, next one due on Oahu in March, and April due back again on Maui. I was wondering why not Kauai or the Big Island? Personally, I think the next meeting should be on the Big Island. See my captions to each of the photos for additional information. There was a lot of good reporting and public comments in this meeting. I think the circle helped for a lot of good interaction. There was some informal ho'oponopono going on here of which Dennis Chun has spoken.

See: http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603918577939/

The 13 members of the committee are:

Randy Awo, DOCARE/DLNR, Maui
Domingo Cravalho, DOA designee, Oahu
Collette Y. Machado, Molokai
Dennis Chun, Kauai
William J. Aila, Jr., Oahu
Laura Thielen, DLNR, Oahu
Mike Formby, DOT designee and facilitator
Lynn McCrory, Kauai (new member replacing Jeff Mira)
Michael Q. Lau, AG designee, Oahu
John Garibaldi, HSF, Oahu
Michael Matsukawa, Big Island (absent for this meeting)
Sarah Peck, Big Island (absent for this meeting)
Kauila Clark, Oahu (others pointed out has missed 2 of 3 meetings so far)

Also present were Terry O'Hallaron presenting for HSF, I believe Napua Brown observing for Big Island Mayor Harry Kim, and Debbie Kuwaye doing the recordkeeping and assisting Mike Formby. A lot of materials were handed over to Debbie for recordkeeping. Debbie can be reached at (808) 587-3651.

Some notes not mentioned in my picture captions:

Akaku filmed the whole meeting. Dave is in charge of that video.

Christie Wilson was present but did not report on this meeting in particular. She was writing copy on her laptop by halfway through the meeting.

Dick Mayer called the Maui News when they did not show, and they sent Chris Hamilton who was present for the later 2/3rds of the meeting. His report is at: http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/500359.html?nav=10

DOA Presentation - Are monitoring, not inspecting. One DOA inspector at each harbor who normally serves as the Maritime Office Inspector. HSF had 24 days of ops. in January, 7 days of no ops. Infractions included 125 lbs of lava rocks and 10 lbs. of coral among others.

HSF Presentation - Jan. 1 - 31, 2008 -
Average Loads:
Oahu to Maui - 141 passengers, 43 vehicles
Maui to Oahu - 146 passengers, 43 vehicles
On questioning range of passengers is "over 100 to under 300."

Of 48 one-way sailings, 13 of 24 to Maui went south of Molokai through Whale Sanctuary resulting in 22 whale sightings/avoidance, but 3 whale approaches of less than 100 yards.

Capt. and Chief Mate watch for whales in addition to 2 dedicated whale lookouts, one on starboard and one on port. The lookouts were trained by the Humpback Whale Sanctuary.

Uncle Les proposed GPS be fixed and reported on all close whale approaches. Uncle Les also asked if rental cars are allowed on HSF. Terry got cut off before he could answer that question. Uncle Les also questioned the safety and stability of this vessel and mentioned that this ride is too rough for elderly kapuna, a comment I had reaffirmed to me again by others in e-mail today.
Uncle Les and Collette translated that Pailolo Channel means "unpredictably crazy" Channel.

DOCARE/DLNR Presentation - Dec. 13 - Feb. 8 -
3 DLNR inspectors at the Kahului, Maui Harbor whenever HSF is in. Mostly observing and assisting HSF screeners.

Dennis Chun asked about origination of cars with infractions. Terry did not know. Mike Formby asked that a question be asked on infractions of where cars originate from.

Collette voiced concern that more inspectors be ready in case ridership goes up in May, June, July, and August. Called Randy the "Maka'ala" one on this.

Lance Holter voiced concern that as much inspection by DLNR/DOA needs to be done on Oahu as is being done on Maui.

Jeff Parker voiced detailed concern about Hawaii's pure pollinators and the varroa mite. He passed a lot of good, detailed documentation to Mike Formby and Debbie Kuwaye.

Irene Bowie voiced concern about the lack of usefullness of night vision at the speeds involved for if/when a second daily voyage happens.

Dick Mayer proposed the idea of "amnesty buckets" and stiff penalties for attempted infractions of prohibited items. Dick also recommended that per the Act. 2 language that the OTC include in its final report an itemized list of all costs to the state associated with HSF. Dick also showed a couple minutes of George Peabody's Wild Ride video...the full 8 minutes of which will be on the internet soon.

‎Sally Raisbeck's‎ comments included, "the more lucrative aspect of building and selling these type of vessels, as opposed to operating this one."

Mike Formby disclosed that the Belt Collins Rapid Risk Assessment team including Dr. Joe Mobley of UH is costing $250,000 in addition to the $1 million for the Act. 2 EIS.

Laura Thielen mentioned that lessons learned here/with this could be applied to other interisland traffic.

Uncle Les commented further on the long history of Kahului Harbor and the more recent Hale Kiawe Senior Citizens Fishing Club. He gave an interesting translation for Kahului:
"The Kahu who watches the changes."

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Good stuff from Dr.Tepley on Rudder

The Superferry's rudder problems - more than you ever wanted to know.‏
From: Lee Tepley
Sent: Thu 2/14/08 9:05 PM

The Superferry's rudder problems- more than you ever wanted to know. Feel free to circulate
Open the attached PDF file and
1. You will see real live pictures of the Superferry' s mysterious "Auxiliary rudders".
2. You will read about how the rudders caused "hair-line cracks" , "surface cracks" or whatever to the pontoons of the poor struggllng Superferry.
3. You will even learn how it may all have happened.
4. You will read conflicting and confusing interpretations of the Auxiliary rudder problems from HSF representatives, the Coast Guard and news reporters.
If you can't open the PDF file you can get the same information on my web-site. Just go to the
http://web.mac.com/leetepley/Site/Superferry_Rudder_Problems_-_New_Data.html
Then go the page called "Superferry Rudder Problems - New data"
Aloha,
Lee

Seastate Barf-O-Meter Index (version 2.3)

This is the second enhanced edition of the "Barf-O-Meter Index." This Index is now overlayed on the Beaufort scale. I have added a color coding that would be useful for the Beaufort scale. The Barf-O-Meter is a half parody/half serious attempt to measure likelihood of seasickness on a specific sea transit in any kind of vessel giving equal weighting to wind speed and wave height.

I will just comment that Beaufort assumes that wind determines waves. Here in Hawaii we know that sometimes Low Pressure determines waves thousands of miles away independent of wind, and so I created the index that gives almost equal weighting to both with slightly more weighting to wave. There are many aspects to measuring seastates and seasickness that could be further developed by a graduate student somewhere. There are a few more nuances about Beaufort that I noticed, for example the the exact range of wind and wave measurements, but for now I will get into the:

Seastate Barf-O-Meter Index v.2.3

Copyright - Brad Parsons

Barf------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -Int'l
Threat-Color-Beaufort- Puke--------Wind-Speed---------Wave-Height---- ---Barf-----WMO*
Level - Code- Force----Prospect---knots-----km/h-----feet--------meters-- -Index*- Class -- Conditions

1----- -White----0-------Possible---0 - 10---0 - 19---- 0-[2]-3--- 0-[.6]-.9 --0 - 20--Calm-----Flat
------------------1-------Puking - --------------------------------------------------------Light Air---Ripples
------------------2-------Unlikely ----------------------------------------------------Light Breeze- -Sm. wavelets
------------------3-------Seasickness ---------------------------------------------Gentle Breeze ---Lg. wavelets

2-------Yellow---4-------Scattered--11-16---20-29-----3.3-6.3---1M-1.9M---21-35--Moderate-Small wave
---------------------------Puking - ---------------------------------------------------------Breeze--
---------------------------Less than Likely Seasickness

3-------Orange--5-------Rising-----17-21---30-39-----6.6-9.6---2M-2.9M---36-51--Fresh----Moderate wave
---------------------------Puking - --------------------------------------------------------Breeze
---------------------------Somewhat Likely Seasickness

4--------Red-----6-------Probable--22-27---40-50-----9.9-13---3M-3.9M---52-67--Strong----Large wave
---------------------------Puking - --------------------------------------------------------Breeze
---------------------------Likely Seasickness---------------------------------------------U.S. Small Craft Adv.

5-------Purple---7------Widespread-28-33--51-61-----13.3 -----4M-5.4M-- 68-88--Near Gale--Seas heap
---------------------------Puking - --------------------------17.9-------------------------U.S. Small Craft Adv.
---------------------------More than Likely Seasickness

6-------Brown---8-------Definite-----34-40---62-75----18.3 -----5.5M - -- -89-110--Gale-----Mod high wave
-------Borderline--------Puking - ---------------------------22.9-------6.9M-------------U.S. Gale Warning
--Unsafe Conditions----Very Likely Seasickness

7-------Black---9--------Deathly-----41-47---76-87----23.3 -----7M - -- -111-137--Strong Gale--High wave
--Unsafe Conditions-------Puking - ---------------------------29.6-------8.9M-------------U.S. Gale Warning
---------------------------Certain Seasickness

Copyright - Brad Parsons

* The Barf Index is calculated in the U.S.: Index = kn + (ft x 3),
and in metric International: Index = (km/hr)/1.85 + (M x 9.9).
This results in the same Barf Index for the whole wide world!
WMO above stands for World Meteorological Organization.

**I will add some info. later for Beaufort Force 10-12 that are not a part of the Barf Index. Force 10 and 11 are Tropical Storms and Force 12 is a Hurricane.

***I will also include a short list of additional links that I found useful and accurate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea-sickness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort_scale
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9013985/Beaufort-scale
http://www.howtoons.com/toon/the-beaufort-scale/
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/scales/beaufort.html
http://www.cruise-charter.net/sailing-guide/beaufort-scale.aspx
http://hisuperferry.blogspot.com/2008/01/hi-superferry-survey-of-seasickness-on.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy17uGiocMY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g20Qho-JeRA

****Here in Hawaii the source of data with RSS feeds for seastate conditions in wind knots and the higher of two wave heights should be: http://www.prh.noaa.gov/hnl/pages/CWF.php. For those of you in New Zealand, the following site is useful for the Cook Strait weather data: http://www.metservice.com/default/index.php?alias=wellingtoninshore and the following site for the slower but necessary ferry service there: http://www.interislander.co.nz/.

Shared primary credit for the ongoing development of this original concept goes to Dick on Maui. Additional thanks to Larry Geller for pushing for its development and for publicizing its existence, to Greg on Maui for pointing out the usefullness of the related Beaufort scale, to Keone on Kauai for developing the thrust of the Puke Prospect nomenclature, to Jonathan on Kauai for his alliteration inspiration, and thanks to Richard in New Zealand for requesting that international metric be included and for pursuing the story.

This has been a Smartypants Guerrilla Research PR Presentation of the Pan-Polynesian Project.

HI Superferry: One more about the "Rudder"

From Greg, a knowledgeable mariner:

"What is at stake here is the "deck slamming" capabilities of the vessel at various speeds and wave heights. Marine architects model this. USCG reviews their models and either agrees, modifies or rejects. No real world testing is done on ship design, only hypothetical, especially in the special cruise market. Most passenger vessels are ‘one-offs,’ unique and never tested before. Sure they are built on some form of a platform or hull that has (perhaps) limited history, but it is not until operation can the flaws be detected. What is likely to happen to HSF, is USCG will review engineering calculations, speeds, etc., and place new operational limitations on it. We know O’Halloran disclosed a 19’ wave height “no sail” condition by USCG. Given the current failings of the vessel, they are likely to review and revise this."

Juan Wilson has another good article on this with an indirect Coast Guard source:

SUBJECT: SUPERFERRY DAMAGE
SOURCE: JUAN WILSON
POSTED: 5 FEBRUARY 2008 - 9:45am HST
USCG says Auxiliary Rudders Damaged

http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath/2008Year/09-access_transport/0809-11HSFrudddermess.html

by Juan Wilson on 5 February 2008

I just got a phone call from Tim Rysdale, of Wailua. He was one of those arrested back in August in the aftermath of the Superferry's attempt to land on Kauai.

Tim's family has always been a supporter of the United States Coast Guard. He maintains friends in the service, despite his disfavor with the USCG coming under the wing of Homeland Security Department.

A friend of Tim's active in the USCG, and in a position to know, has told him that the Superferry uses an new prototype of auxiliary rudder, in addition to other steering mechanisms.
This is in addition to the control surfaces and Humphree devices mentioned as possible "rudders" in previous speculation.

As I understood Tim's description, these rudders are hydraulically rotated through sleeved posts that enter the ship through the aluminum hull. Stress on the posts created cracks that allowed some water to enter the ferry's hull.

With my limited knowledge of ship design, and structural metals, I would maintain that this represents an engineering flaw that has resulted in at least a minor structural failing of the hull.
Yes the Superferry is running again. I'll bet that the next ferry Austal builds will have some re-engineering on the structure of the auxiliary rudders before the boat is ready for sea trials.

George Peabody HSF Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy17uGiocMY
by Juan Wilson on 4 February 2008

George Peabody, of the Molokai-Advertiser News, sent us this portion of a video he shot of the Superferry Alakai passing by Molokai a week ago, before the "rudder" damage was detected.

George has a dial-up internet connection and therefore sent only a small resolution portion of the video. A longer higher resolution version may soon be available. Note, this is the source of the video shown on KGMB-9 TV.

The pitching bow of the Alakai deck in the swell appears to pass through more than 30 vertical feet of movement. Certainly enough to throw passengers of their feet if not holding themselves securely to the ship. I'm not quite clear how or if vehicles are secured on board. I have traveled on large Nantucket vehicle ferries and they do not secure cars and trucks. Could get dicey in a pacific Ocean winter swell.

There must have been tremendous stress on any of the control surfaces deployed and active.
End article.

And another edited evaluation from Lee Tepley, Ph.D.:

Was the Superferry rudder damage caused by a collision...??‏
From: Lee Tepley

Was the Superferry rudder damage caused by a collision...?? Feel free to circulate.

In an e-mail dated Feb. 2, I made the point that, for earlier Austal fast ferries, an important Austal official had stated that steering at low speeds was controlled by the 4 water jets. At high speeds (above about 25 knots), steering was controlled by Interceptors. In that e-mail (and also on my website), I questioned whether the Superferry even had rudders.

However, yesterday I found the following sentence on the Austal web site: “Austal first developed and implemented the interceptor, and the system now also incorporates sophisticated primary and auxiliary steering systems.”

The last part of the above sentence implies that significant changes were made in the steering systems of the Superferry compared to earlier Austal fast ferries. It implies that Austal was not satisfied with the performance of it’s interceptors which had previously controlled steering at high speed – so it added “sophisticated primary and auxiliary steering systems” which probably included rudders.

This seems to be related to the recent rudder damage to the Superferry. In fact, Superferry officials stated that the damage was related to “the auxiliary rudder which is involved with steering”.

In addition, the Coast Guard supposedly said that “the trouble is with the rudder post which houses the rudder and is controlled by jet drives that help stabilize the Alakai."

The above Coast Guard statement does not seem to make sense but is at least consistent with the idea that the damage was related to the new steering systems.

This suggests that the Superferry may have serious structural problems which did not arise with earlier Austal fast ferries. This seems ironic. I have felt for some time, that HSF could care less about earning money as a commercial operation and that the proposed 2nd daily trip to Maui was only to establish operational reliability with the idea of impressing the military. Joan Conrow has done a great job.... Go to http://www.honoluluweekly.com/. Then read Joan’s story on U.S.S. Superferry.

Anyhow, it now seems that the Superferry is anything but reliable – which may not impress the military - and it may be hard to blame it’s problems all on bad weather.

The structural problems could have been caused by poor design, metal fatigue, etc. They could have also been caused by a protruding rudder or it’s support elements striking an underwater object....

First, lets compare the operation of rudders and interceptors:

1. Interceptors would probably be mounted behind the transom and would only be lowered into the water a short distance (maybe only a few inches) when turning was involved. Vessel drag would be increased for only a short time. It is hard to see how any part of an interceptor could be damaged by striking an underwater object.

2. Rudders would always stick down into the water and would add to the vessel’s drag – reducing the ferries already poor fuel mileage. To minimize this effect, it would be reasonable to make the rudder and supporting posts as thin as thought practical. Thus, if the rudder should strike [an object], it might easily crack. In fact, an auxiliary rudder could be one of the weakest underwater parts of the Superferry....

Aloha,
Lee


I was talking with a couple of knowledgeable people and when the HSF goes over large waves and then slams back down into the water, esp. with high seas and slamming into water between the two catamaran hulls, that that has the potential to do this type of damage. So an object none other than water being slammed into repeatedly after falling off of 20+ foot waves may in fact be the culprit. On a given transit wind waves may be reported to be something like 15 ft., but invariably there will be some rogue waves and sets out there in the channels that are much more than the reported wind wave heights.

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Coffee with John? and Counts and Pics for 2/4-5/08

No, that's Dave from WA:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603859558777/

Pics and count for 2/4/08:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603856360146/

Pics and count for 2/5/08:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603856467442/

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Comments on Recent Article

Christie Wilson of the Honolulu Advertiser had an interesting article yesterday with a few good tidbits in it: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080203/NEWS01/802030364

Some quotes from that with my comments in red:

"...beyond the winter months to a time of year 'when sea conditions and weather are more predictable.'" - I think they will find that summer months in the channels going into normal trade winds will be almost as rough.

There are a number of quotes in the article comparing the interisland airline industry to the Superferry. The big difference not mentioned in the article is that an interisland air flight is 30 minutes and convenient. The Superferry's ride is 3 hours and inconvenient. The Superferry cannot compete with that kind of convenience. Fast ferries around the world are successful where there is not superior alternative competition and where the distances of one-way transits are substantially less than 100 miles.

"Maui Land & Pineapple Co. invested $1 million in the new business but has not been using the ferry to ship fruit to Honolulu because "currently the rates are not cost-effective," said Teri Freitas Gorman, vice president of corporate communications. ML&P invested in the ferry because "early on, we saw an opportunity to pull the state together and provide an alternative method of transportation for farmers and small businesses," she said. The company would like to transport refrigerated trucks on the ferry, but under current rules that require vehicles be accompanied by a driver, that would mean putting up the driver overnight in Honolulu until the next ferry leaves for Maui." - Interesting, but Christie left out that ML&P has already sold half of that $1 million investment to Grove Farm on Kauai controlled by some of the same investors as ML&P.

"Gruidl also complained of "extremely rough" seas and said the ferry trip didn't save as much travel time as he expected. - Oh yeah, in the channels I bet. See this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy17uGiocMY

"University of Hawai'i communications professor Tom Kelleher...'When was the last time you've had a case like this? This really is a new concept,' he said." - No, it's not a new concept. Ferries have tried and failed many times in Hawaii. This one's troubles are not merely as simple as timing or PR. This ferry's problems are fundamental to the annual natural elements, distances involved, vessel design, excessive amount of propulsion chosen, and expenses involved. The PR difficulties are merely a reflection of those underlying problems in this business plan. The world does not revolved around PR alone.

From my comment on that article at http://www.topix.com/:

"Done properly would be a ferry with about half the engine power as this one. This kind of fast ferry with 4 diesel jet engines operates financially optimally commercially around the world where there is not superior competition on transits of 30 to 70 miles, not 105 miles each way. This ferry has too much engine power and burns too much fuel to be cost effective for the distances involved here. Plus, this Austal design is not aerodynamic enough to go efficiently against the wind in the channels here. Travelling at engine power for 25 knots+ into a 25 knot wind speed is like 50 knots+ or more than 57.5 miles per hour of effective wind resistence not including gusts. The profile of this vessel is much less aerodynamic than what Incat offers. This vessel has too much engine power and too much wind resistence to be effective for commercial purposes alone here in Hawaii."

Aloha, Brad

JHSV Solicitation RFP N00024-07-R-2219 to be reviewed

The JHSV Solicitation RFP N00024-07-R-2219 is at the following:
http://savekauai.org/sites/default/files/SolicitationN00024-07-R-2219JointHighSpeedVessel.doc

I will be doing an evaluation of that document. You are welcome to take a look at it for yourself. The contract on this design solicitation was recently awarded to 3 parties including Austal-USA, and an Incat partner, and a GD partner.

The following is from some of the correspondence used to receive a copy of the RFP solicitation on the JHSV a few weeks ago. I did not request it, that was done by another researcher on Oahu. I will only be reviewing some of the pertinent details in that Navy solicitation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Blagg, Suzanne CIV NAVSEA, SEA
Subject: RE: N0002407R2219
In response to your questions:
1. The original solicitation is attached.
[...]
Suzanne Blagg
Naval Sea Systems Command
Washington Navy Yard, DC

-----Original Message-----
From: Blagg, Suzanne CIV NAVSEA, SEA
Subject: RE: N0002407R2219
[...]
Solicitation N00024-07-R-2219 was released on 31 Aug 2007 and closed on 31 Oct 2007.
Suzanne Blagg
Naval Sea Systems Command
Washington Navy Yard, DC


Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Actual? Superferry Passenger and Vehicle counts

HI Superferry: Actual? Superferry Passenger and Vehicle counts

Here is a link to the pdf document that Larry Geller has provided:
http://disappearednews.com/docs/20080131132623.pdf

Larry has a good report on this at:
http://disappearednews.com/2008/02/ferry-monday-maybe-we-wonder-about.html
be sure to read the comments to that.

I finally got a chance to look at this. Exhibits B and C are very interesting here. Others have noticed what appears to be anomalous data in Exhibit B. These are only bookings or reservations it looks like. Still, you can see from these numbers that ridership has declined throughout January and dropped off dramatically since Jan. 27th. The data are almost all below levels necessary to cover fuel expenses alone. All the data in Exhibit B would look good in a graph for the whole month of January. Dick Mayer is going to create a line graph out of this data. We will look for that soon.

From: Dick Mayer
Subject: ?Actual? Superferry Passenger and Vehicle counts
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 13:41:33 -1000

Attached in PDF format is HDOT's Report to Judge August.

Check out Exhibit "B" containing HSF's numbers for the month of January.

There are 3 columns but there is confusion.

#1 Number of Bookings This probably means that I booked my family of 3. This would be one booking. It is unclear if round-trips are one or two bookings.
#2 Daily log of the Number of Passengers
#3 Daily log of the Number of Vehicles
Both #1 + #2 are probably misleading because they show figures for days that the SF did not operate.
Some of the high passenger counts may be due to passengers who were already counted on days that the SF did not operate and are now taking the SF.
Thus folks may have been counted twice.

Exhibit "C" at the end are some monthly figures for December.
End of Dick's comments.

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: More on the "Mechanical" - Lee Tepley's take on it

Regarding the "rudder" problems, the following is worth reading:

http://web.mac.com/leetepley/Site/Superferry_Rudder_()_Problems.html

and

http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath/2008Year/09-access_transport/0809-11HSFrudddermess.html

Also, Christie Wilson of the Honolulu Advertiser had an interesting article today with a few good tidbits in it:

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080203/NEWS01/802030364

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Looking for the Video

Was looking for the video that shows HSF being "tossed around like a toy" in the Pailolo Channel between Molokai and Maui. Did not find it online, but I did find the person who filmed it and am in the process of helping him with that. Here is the video, maybe the best version we will see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy17uGiocMY

Instead, found the following video. The helicopter in the video I remember over Kahului Harbor from the first few days of operations in Dec. 2007. I bet they've got some good videos, whoever they are. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rDyggrBEP4

HI Superferry: More on the "Mechanical"

Juan Wilson and Jonathan Jay have updated their coverage on this at http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath/body.html:
http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath/2008Year/09-access_transport/0809-11HSFrudddermess.html

Also, the following comes from the Honolulu Advertiser blog at www.topix.com. The entry is by "kaimana" and is a nugget among the conversation there:

kaimana Joined: Nov 25, 2007 Comments: 63 Wailuku ISP Location: Wailuku, HI

Here's the old sea hag with my two cents.... If anyone is interested in looking at diagrams or pictures of the propulsion, steering, and motion control technology of the SF, here are some links: SeaState - Motion Control and Evaluation http://www.austal.com/go/design-and-technology/design-and-technology#motion This is a good description of the jet propulsion system: http://marine.rolls-royce.com/water-jet-propulsion-systems/ Click on: "Propulsion brochure" (pdf.file) then go to pg. 20 of brochure. The SF has 4 of the 125 S11 drives. As you can see, there really is no rudder in the traditional sense. Because of the misnomer, I am not entirely certain as to which part actually was damaged. I'll try to find out and get back to you.

kaimana Joined: Nov 25, 2007 Comments: 63 Wailuku ISP Location: Wailuku, HI

18 hrs ago Should have been more specific. It uses the Kamewa® Sll-series of waterjets. So if you check it out make certain you look at those.

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: JHSV Design Contract Award

I am a little slow in getting this up. A bunch of others posted news of this yesterday when it was announced. I learned about it first from Sally Raisbeck. I do think it is interesting on the week that HSF is having damage problems, the extent and design of which the public has not yet been told, the Navy awards a joint design contract to the builder of this vessel, for this type of vessel:

FW: Press Release: Navy awards preliminary design contracts for JHSV
From: Sally Raisbeck
Sent: Thu 1/31/08 3:57 PM

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Press Release: Navy awards preliminary design contracts for JHSV
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:29:36 -0500
From: Roberts, Kathleen D CIV SEA

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Jan. 31, 2008

NAVY AWARDS PRELIMINARY DESIGN CONTRACTS FOR JHSV WASHINGTON -- The Navy awarded contracts to Austal USA, Bath Iron Works, and Bollinger Shipyards Inc., for a firm fixed price of $3 million each for the preliminary design of Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) concepts on Jan. 31. “Once delivered, the Joint High Speed Vessel will be a key component of the U.S. military’s expeditionary warfare capability,” said Rear Adm. Charles Goddard, program executive officer for ships.

“This high speed transport will carry soldier or Marines, with their gear, to harbors that would normally be unusable by conventional maritime assets.” Once preliminary design is complete, the Navy will receive detail designs and construction proposals from the three teams. The Navy intends to award a single Phase Two detail design contract with construction options in late 2008.

The first ship, an Army vessel, is expected to be delivered in 2011. The JHSV program is a joint effort between the Army and the Navy to acquire high-speed vessels for the two branches of the U.S. military. JHSV will be used for fast intra-theater transportation of troops, military vehicles and equipment.

Currently the U.S. military leases two HSVs each capable of achieving speeds of more than 30 knots. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) allows the U.S. Navy to use its surface ship acquisition expertise in acquiring these vessels for the Army, which will assume full responsibility post acquisition.

The JHSV program merges the Army Theater Support Vessel (TSV) and the Navy High Speed Connector (HSC), taking advantage of the inherent commonality between the two programs. The current program calls for a total of eight ships, three to be operated by the Navy and five to be operated by the Army. The Army will own and operate the Army-funded vessels after procurement. Army responsibilities for their vessels will include crew training and vessel maintenance. The Navy will have the same responsibilities for the Navy-funded vessels.

--NAVSEA-- Public Affairs Contact: Kathleen Roberts

-----Original Message-----
From: Sally Raisbeck
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 18:00
To: Blagg, Suzanne CIV NAVSEA, SEA
Subject: Solicitation N00024-07-R-2219

January 10, 2008

Suzanne Blagg
Naval Sea Systems Command
Washington Navy Yard, DC

Dear Ms. Blagg:

Re: Solicitation N00024-07-R-2219

I understand that Solicitation N00024-07-R-2219, for the Joint High Speed Vessel design (JHSV) was released on 31 Aug 2007 and closed on 31 Oct 2007. I also understand that offers were received, but no contract has yet been awarded.

The solicitation is quite lengthy, as it is 254 pages. The criteria for awarding the contract specifically include many non-price factors, so that low bid is not the controlling factor. The maximum price for the offer is $3 million.

As a very interested member of the American public, and a Maui resident, I would like to know how many offers were received, and from whom, though I do not expect to be told the price they are bidding. Or can you direct me to the appropriate documents that would contain this information?

I am particularly interested in whether an offer has been received from the Hawaii Superferry group. It was built at the Austal Shipyard in Mobile Alabama. Is the Navy in the process of negotiating and evaluating these offers? When may we expect a decision from the Navy? Is there a deadline for the decision?

Sincerely yours,
Sarah V. Raisbeck


Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: I'M SORRY, WE NEED TO APOLOGIZE

From Dick Mayer:

WE NEED TO APOLOGIZE.
WE WHO ASKED FOR AN EIS HAD IT ALL WRONG.

The Superferry will NOT impact the Environment.
NO, the Environment is impacting the Superferry.

Please, do not laugh.

The State should be doing an EIS to describe
all the impacts from Hawaii’s devastaing
natural environment on the poor Superferry.

At least the Navy would learn a lesson
as it builds more of these vessels.
Design the ship to look like a surf-board.

Only Judge Cardoza had it right.
If the Superferry were allowed to operate, he said
there is a likelihood of “irreparable harm!”


Nice, Dick,
Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Rudder Problems for Superferry

See full report at: http://kgmb9.com/main/content/view/3704/40/

Rudder Problems for Superferry

Written by KGMB9 News
Wednesday, January 30, 2008 07:13 PM

"The Superferry tells us it's a problem with something called the auxiliary rudder, which is involved with steering the vessel.

The Coast Guard said the trouble is with the rudder post, which houses the rudder and is controlled by jet drives that help stabilize the Alakai. The Superferry is stuck at Honolulu Harbor. The problem was discovered Monday during a routine inspection..."

"...The editor of the Molokai Advertiser, the newspaper on that island took these images of the vessel underway last Saturday showing just how rough it can be between Maui and Molokai.

You can see the Alakai pitched up and then down in the two images. It's not known if the rough weather contributed to the damage.

The Coast Guard did take a look at the damage and instructed the Superferry to remain in port until the problem was fixed."

Last Updated ( Wednesday, January 30, 2008 07:25 PM )
End Report

One question...how does a rudder get damaged???

See also related report The Superferry suffered damage at sea
at: http://www.islandbreath.org/
And comments on that Superferry taking a beating in rough seas?
at: http://poinography.com/?p=5502

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Austal Corp. News 1/28/08

http://www.egoli.com.au/egoli/egoliStoryPage.asp?PageID={50947EED-4812-4AEC-B4B6-A9CAFADDD848}&Section=NewsViews

Austal signs $82m catamaran contract
29/01/2008
By: Daniel Bragg

"Austal Limited (ASB) said it has signed a contract for four additional 47.5 metre passenger catamarans with Macau-based Cotai WaterJets. Valued at approximately $82 million, the order will add to 10 identical vessels currently under construction at Austal's Henderson shipyard in Perth.

Executive chairman John Rothwell said the total number of Austal vessels delivered to the China/Hong Kong area would now grow to 52, reinforcing Austal�s successful growth in the region. �It is a pleasing start to the year to see the Cotai WaterJet order expand to 14 ferries based on the success of the initial deliveries already operating between Hong Kong and Macau,� said Mr Rothwell. The company said that it expected the vessels to be delivered in the first half of 2009.

The announcement follows news that the US Navy will be providing a US$33 million ($37.1 million) grant assistance package for Austal USA�s planned modular manufacturing facility expansion. The company said the facility would allow Austal to construct up to six large vessels per year.

In addition, Austal said it is expecting to hear in the first quarter of 2008 the outcome of a preliminary design contract for the US joint high-speed vessel program. The US Navy intends to purchase eight vessels for joint use by both Navy and Army."

HI Superferry: Live Cam of Kahului Harbor

This is a repost of the live cam address of Kahului Harbor that I learned about from Karen Chun:

http://www.selldirt.com/Kahului_Harbor_Camera.php

For the hardcore, you can put it up in the corner of your computer screen, and look at it anytime,
Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Regarding the Kahului Harbor Draft EIS

Today is the deadline to get in written comments. Here are mine:

First, generally speaking, the scope of alternatives in this Draft EIS seems dated, undeveloped, and too narrow.

In the Kahului Harbor Draft EIS, DOT/Belt Collins have proposed breakwaters for Kahului Harbor that would be inadequate. I have used figures from that Draft EIS and the applicable US Army Corp of Engineers document to propose better breakwaters. DOT/Belt Collins did not make adequate use of resources at the CHL of USACoE to test multiple new breakwater senerios. One senerio that I can think of I have drawn in green over figures taken from the two docs. http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603512682937/

In addition to the proposed new East Breakwater extending due north outside of the harbor, I believe the East Breakwater should be extended due south into the harbor equal to about 3/4 of the extension due north. This addition I am proposing would be to effectively cut off wave/swell surge into Piers 1, 2, 3, and 4. Also, regarding the extension of the West Breakwater into the harbor to cut off surge into Pier 5, if it is determined that the efficacy of that outweighs the cultural impacts, then I believe that the West Breakwater Extension into the harbor should follow more of a due south path (and not angle so closely toward Pier 5) to more effectively cut off the wave/swell surge into the Pier 5 area. These breakwater extension proposals will still funnel a surfable wave/swell surge toward the shoreline at the southeast end of Kahului Beach Road and the west end of Hoaloha Beach.

Regarding Alternative A:
The proposed fill-in area to the southwest of Pier 2 takes too much space away from the canoe clubs. Also, DOT has been advised by the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers that extending Pier 2 in any manner, without an adequate breakwater solution, would likely be impractical at the end of the pier. Even though the state appears to favor Alt. A, too much of the funding for this alternative would be to establish solely the TRANSIENT cruise ships and Superferry on the West side of the harbor.

Regarding Alternative B:
Again, Pier 2 extension requires an East Breakwater solution to make this workable for the cruise ships and Superferry at Pier 2. This alternative is better in that all of the significant investment to improve the West side of the harbor under this alternative would be for the NEED of long-term cargo tenants.

The more than a third of a billion dollars in expense for these harbor improvements are mostly to the breakwater extensions and to develop the West side of the harbor. The cruise ships have already taken one of the three ships out of Hawaii recently and will take another one out soon. The Superferry cannot even cover its fuel costs. Neither of them can be expected to be long-term tenants.

Whatever harbor improvements are made on the West side of the harbor, esp. at the dollar figures contemplated should be easily adaptable for tenants expected to be long-term...namely cargo. Bond financing should only be used for long-term, necessary improvements as for cargo tenants and facilities.

See also:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603397379253/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603373093375/

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: New research project...avg. swell days

You know, I have noticed an excuse that is being used is that this winter season has had more severe wind and swell weather than usual. In the decade I have been here, this seems like an average winter weather year to me. I have started a new search to find the data on this. I am consulting with a meteorologist or two and with some people involved in shipping here in Hawaii. I'll let you know when I find what the answer is. I know this, the USACoE doc indicated 37 higher swell days on average in Kahului Harbor and not just 4 days. Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Derrick DePledge/Advertiser Investigative Reports Begin

Sunday, January 27, 2008
"State path set in '04 Awana, ferry talks"

	The Advertiser has obtained thousands of documents related to the Lingle administration's decision to exempt the Hawaii Superferry from an environmental review.
	New selection of the state Department of Transportation's Superferry documents (13MB)
	Previous selection of the state Department of Transportation's Superferry documents (material highlighted by The Advertiser in a previous story - 57MB)
•	Hawaii, ferry at odds in '04 over environment

StoryChat: Comment on this story

By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Government Writer

The state Department of Transportation's aggressive pursuit to exempt Hawaii Superferry from an environmental review came after a late December 2004 meeting with Superferry executives and Bob Awana, Gov. Linda Lingle's then-chief of staff, state records show....

Rest of article:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jan/27/ln/hawaii801270360.html


Posted on: Sunday, January 6, 2008

"Hawaii, ferry at odds in ’04 over environment"

•	PDF: Selection of the state Department of Transportation's Superferry documents (material highlighted by The Advertiser)

StoryChat: Comment on this story

By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Government Writer

Staff at the state Department of Transportation told Hawaii Superferry in October 2004 that a statewide environmental assessment would be required for the new interisland ferry service. But Superferry executives resisted and, within two days, scaled back the project in a calculated attempt to get an exemption from the state's environmental review law, state records show....

Rest of article:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jan/06/ln/hawaii801060361.html


It's a start. I met Mr. DePledge in passing in the airport at Lihue, Kauai, on Oct. 21, 2007. We were both catching the same late plane out of Kauai. It was only a brief conversation, but he seemed a little bit disinterested at the time. Seems his energy level on this has come up a bit since then.

Aloha, Brad

"Endless Bummer" T-Shirts from Kauai Surfers

Have known about these being in development. Received the following today from a businessman on Kauai:

---------------

Aloha Brad,

Thanks again for all of your good work. I have received my first order of Endless Bummer Superferry Tshirts. (Picture attached) I will be selling them for $15.00 + shipping. I plan to put some money aside from each sale to fund a small PR budget. I have 100 shirts in sizes ranging from small to xxl. The colors are black, green and blue. Let me know how many you want and I will send them to you.

Please pass the word along if you like them. Maybe you could post it to your blog.

Scott,
can be reached at
(808) 652-7113

HI Superferry: Gotta laugh with this one...

This was a letter to the editor in today's Maui News, 1/23/08:

"So just where is that “silent majority” of Superferry supporters? Come out, come out, wherever you aren’t and put your money where your Opinion page letters were. Jump into your vehicular motion and drive it to the ocean or pass a basket around the casket – sail that Pukerferry.

Hawaii Superferry needs $650,000 weekly to operate. Gov. Linda Lingle can hold the Alakai to her breast for only so long and then somebody has to pay for the formula. Who is buying the bailbuckets and bilge pumps to keep Sinkerferry afloat?

Is it really, after all the B.S. and no EIS, going to prove to be the Stupidferry, Fiascoferry, Stinkerferry, the Blooperferry or maybe become the Trooperferry? I’m currently calling it Suckerferry. Hawaii taxpayers got suckered big time. How soon before Lingle starts throwing good money after bad?

Pacific Business News reported Jan. 18 that HSF officials sent a letter on Dec. 21 to the Public Utilities Commission, stating that they are operating in an “emergency situation” with so few passengers and vehicles that they are apparently experiencing financial difficulties. Imagine that.

They are only carrying about 160 passengers and 50 vehicles each way, and that is with the cheapo $39 fare. Remember, it seats 866 plebeians and stables 250 chariots, and they said they needed 410 heads and 150 motors to break even.

It may not be a Lemonferry but sure tastes sour to me. Can you say bye-bye to the Alakai?"

Kenny Hultquist

Lahaina

Nice work Kenny,

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Re: Night Vision Equipment

I am still posting to try and tie up some loose ends. In my break even and scheduling analysis a few months ago I noticed that a key constraint was going to be the return leg of HSF's second roundtrip each day. Invariably some or all of it would be in the dark depending on what speed HSF had been traveling at throughout the day. The only way I thought that might be able to be dealt with is by using night vision optics.

Irene Bowie, Karen Chun and Lee Tepley have looked into this more than I have, and all of them believe night vision optics at the speed and distances involved would not be effective in avoiding whales. Until I see advanced night vision optics demo'd (and yes, I would be responsibly curious to see it demo'd), I will defer to Irene's, Karen's, and Dr. Lee's opinions that night vision optics would not work for this. The following is a piece that Lee Tepley, Ph.D. wrote on the matter. The graphics he mentions are not included here, but the curious can Google or go to the sites he mentions and look at the graphics.


How well do night vision systems really work??‏
From: Lee Tepley
Sent: Tue 1/15/08 10:35 PM

Would night vision devices really detect whales for the Superferry??--Please circulate

Why did the Hawaii Superferry (HSF) decide to suspend it’s proposed night operations to Maui until springtime?? Coincidentally springtime, is near the end of the whale season. Was it really all that concerned about the displeasure of Maui’s Mayor Tavares relating to traffic jams and undecided legal issues?? Or is it really more concerned about the increased probability of the Superferry hitting a whale at night – and, even worse, getting caught in the act?? Go to the last paragraph for my personal guess.

But maybe I am just being an alarmist. After all, Terry O’Halloran has stated that the Superferry has night vision devices that operate with “remarkable clarity”. This implies that the Superferry is no more likely to hit a whale at night than during the daytime (which, of course, is inevitable - sooner or later).

So just how good are these “remarkably clear” night vision devices – say, for detecting a dorsal fin of a whale at the surface at night.

It seems that there are two types of night vision devices - goggles and scopes - and the Superferry has both.

First, lets consider night vision goggles. There may hundreds of different types on the market. You can buy one for your very own for from a few hundred to about 12,000 dollars. The term “generation 4” (or “gen 4”) refers to the most advanced type. Night vision goggles work by capturing and intensifying available light.

An on-line ad for a really fancy one (the ATN Cougar 4) states that it can pick up light about 150 yards away in pitch darkness and can identify objects about 100 yards away. (It is not made clear how it can pick up any light in “pitch darkness” – but never mind!) However, in moonlight, it will reach out pretty far –maybe even out to 1000 yards.

Let’s consider a dark night when the Superferry is creeping along at a mere 25 knots. Assume that an observer is actually looking through his goggles (instead of just drinking coffee) and detects a dorsal fin 100 yards ahead of the ferry. Now assume that it takes 10 seconds for the Pilot to respond to the observer. But in that 10 seconds the Superferry will have moved 140 yards. Whoops!! It will have hit the whale before the Pilot had time to take action.

So the gen-4 night vision goggles will not work for detecting whales on a dark night – but they might work with a full moon.

Now, lets consider the other alternative – the night vision scope. The best one I found on Google is the Electrophysics AL-20 Infrared Illuminator. It claims to work out to 1000 yards on a dark night. This sounds promising. It puts out a beam of infrared light which bounces off a distant object, returns, and is then picked up by an infrared sensitive camera.

So how good a picture does it get?? Would it detect a dorsal fin of a whale breaking the surface at a great distance? You can judge for yourself because Electrophysics put out a short video showing it’s performance at distances from 300 to 700 yards. The video is attached to this e-mail as a Quicktime movie – but in case you can’t open it, I am also attaching a still picture taken at a distance of 700 yards. It shows a car, a man jumping and a sign. Also, I think the bright band in the center represents an airstrip. I suspect that the car, the man and the sign all have light colors which would reflect light better than the trees in the picture. Anyhow, it does seem rather “remarkable” that the AL-20 works at 700 yards in the dark – but how well would it detect a dark colored dorsal fin of a whale breaking the surface of a dark colored ocean?? And how much easier would it be to detect the same whale in daylight??

A few more points:

1. A night vision scope will not work in rain or heavy mist because the infrared light it puts out would be mostly absorbed before reaching the hypothetical dorsal fin that surfaced 700 yards away. Little or no light would be reflected back to the source,

2. An observer would have to be staring continuously at a grainy Black & White display on a computer screen (or monitor) looking for a small dorsal fin. The fin would be smaller than the “jumping little man” in the attached Quicktime video or the standing little man in the attached still picture. Also a “coffee-break” at the wrong time would spell disaster. The observer must never look away from the screen.

3. The Quicktime video appears to show the playback from a video camera. It would be really tough for an observer to keep staring at a small LED screen displaying a grainy black & white picture of mostly nothing for many hours– and then be looking away when a dorsal fin finally appears. To avoid self-hypnosis (and maybe loss of sanity), the observer must at least be able to look at the video on a large screen in real time. Let’s hope that Electrophysics provides this option.

4. Finally, perhaps Terry O’Halloran and cohorts actually gave themselves a private demonstration and tried looking at a picture of the ocean at night on the large screen (if there is one) of a night vision scope with “remarkable clarity”. After a few minutes of staring straight ahead at a grainy and almost featureless picture of the ocean, Terry may have decided that maintenance of sanity required cancellation of all night operations of the Superferry – at least for the remainder of the whale season.

Aloha, Lee

HI Superferry: The Saga Continues...$350,000 More

This is like a Greek tragedy...or a bad dream that you can't wake up from. Every week it looks more and more like the Fast Ferry Fiasco of British Columbia only a few years ago. Aloha, Brad

Wednesday, January 23, 2008
$350,000 tugboat service needed to support Superferry
By Christie Wilson
Advertiser Neighbor Island Editor

"The state Department of Transportation said 10 weeks of daily tugboat service — at a cost of $350,000 — is needed at Kahului Harbor to support Hawaii Superferry operations.
The tug service is necessary to keep a state-owned barge snug against the end of Pier 2C during ocean surges and to provide safe loading and unloading of passengers and vehicles, according to a request filed Friday to exempt the contract from state procurement rules.
Without the assistance, the state could be liable for damage claims by the Superferry of $18,000 a day if it cannot meet its obligation to provide barges with mooring systems to enable ferry operations, the request said..."

For rest of this excellent article see...
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080123/NEWS01/801230409/1001/NEWS01

Also, comments on the article at Topix:

Comments
Showing posts 1 - 10 of 10

Lose Money
Honolulu, HI
#1
What For We Need SuperFerry!
All these problems should have been addressed before the SuperFerry was rushed into operations. Let's face it, this is a Military prototype vessel and we are paying to do the beta testing. We have lived all this time without a ferry. Why do we need this expensive luxury when money could be better spent elsewhere.

Pule
Paia, Maui
#2
More public kala thrown into the dark anomaly of harbor "improvements" at Kahului Harbor?
http://www.prh.noaa.gov/hnl/pages/sat_State.p...

Karen Chun
Makawao, HI
#3
In about 2005, the paddlers and harbor users (cruise ships, Matson, YB, Harbor Pilots, paddlers etc.) got together in what turned out to be a first-time meeting with DOT.(DOT likes to work in a vacuum without pesky users or physical reality)

In addition to finding out that DOT had been telling each user a different thing, the harbor pilots told DOT:

You can't tie up ANYTHING at the end of Pier 2 for any length of time because the surge is so bad.

We TOLD DOT again and again that the barge idea wouldn't work but I think DOT just works on "wishing it were so" by ignoring physical facts.

The pilots also said:

You can't put ANYTHING at the end of Pier 2 or make Pier 2 longer because Kahului Harbor already has too tight of a turning radius and you'll make the harbor unsafe.

Well, guess what? DOT is back again. This time they're going to spend 1/3 of a BILLION dollars to extend Pier 2.

Now that is bad enough since the pilots already said it is unworkable, but get this - not only are they going to restrict the turning basin by lengthening Pier 2, but the are also building a breakwater on the west edge of the turning basin to further restrict the turning radius in Kahului Harbor.

I guess the pencil pushers at DOT who rarely bother to come out and LOOK at what they are designing figured that putting the breakwater for the new cruise ship pier on the edge wouldn't impact the turning basin.

Go LOOK at how the basin is used guys! Yeah, the deep draft vessels stay within the basin (they hope - it's hard with the surge) but the tugs are using the area where they propose to put the breakwater to maneuver and get on the west side of the vessels to push them towards the docks.

How the heck are the tugs going to maneuver if you put a breakwater there?


spraymaster
Wailuku, HI
#4
the state should have begun harbor improvements 20 years ago in all its ports...the harbors and commercial port infrastructures are "third world standards" not pretty....lets blame the democrat controlled legislature...for the last 50 years they have been in control....

Hawaii Born
Kapaa, HI
#5
We are throwing good money after bad!

Luis
Ewa Beach, HI
#6
Lose Money wrote:
What For We Need SuperFerry!
All these problems should have been addressed before the SuperFerry was rushed into operations. Let's face it, this is a Military prototype vessel and we are paying to do the beta testing. We have lived all this time without a ferry. Why do we need this expensive luxury when money could be better spent elsewhere.
Money, whether they buy this tug boat or not, the state is going to take your money anyways. That money is pocket change compare with the waste of millions of dollars in other stuff that we don't get to use. So, even if they don't buy this tug, you will be paying the same taxes or more. "You know you live in Hawaii, when your money is use for everything, except, to what is intended for."

Loke
West Chicago, IL
#7
Big business partnered with government at the cost of the taxpayer & the enviroment!!!
the kau truth


United States
#8
Sustainability, where have you gone? Gone to harbor improvements, superferry(s) to bring everything from everywhere else. Don't grow it or build it here, we bring it to you and let you drink our beer.

neutral
Long Beach, CA
#9
This is typical Hawaii, more band aid approach. I was just in town and could not believe the mess the streets are in with construction at every which way. The infrastructure is broken and every little band aid approach seems to be just the initial payment toward another huge bill down the line. And now this Superferry debacle. It just seems like Hawaii could do a lot better directing their funds at much needed repairs to their infrastructure such as the UH campus to begin with. Wow, what a mess!!!

Mauibrad
Maui, HI
#10
Christie,

That is an excellent article.

Aloha, Brad

HI Superferry: Regarding Draft EIS of Kahului Harbor

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21400600@N03/sets/72157603512682937/

DOT/Belt Collins have come up with some proposed breakwaters for Kahului Harbor that would be inadequate. I have used figures from the applicable USACoE doc to propose better breakwaters. DOT/Belt Collins did not make adequate use of the CGWAVE Model that CHL has a USACoE to test multiple new breakwater senerios. One senerio that I can think of I have drawn in green over figures taken from the two docs.

The third of a billion dollars in expense for these harbor improvements are mostly to the breakwater extensions and to develop the west side of the harbor for the cruise ships and the Superferry. The cruise ships have already taken one of the three ships out of Hawaii recently and will take another one out soon. The cruise ships prefer facilities in West Maui anyway. The Superferry cannot even cover its fuel costs. Neither of them can be expected to be long-term tenants. Whatever harbor improvements are made on the west side of the harbor, esp. at the dollar figures contemplated should be easily adaptable for tenants expected to be long-term...namely cargo. Bond financing should only be used for long-term, necessary improvements as for cargo tenants and facilities.

Again, the EIS of the Superferry would have to be much more esoteric, and yet it is clear that this draft EIS for Kahului Harbor is already dated and not thorough.

Aloha, Brad