Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The numbers account for an 82.8 load factor. They are using 106 passengers on a plane that accommodates 128. Hawaiian runs at an 87% load factor which is even better than the example I cited.
3 months? Might want to check your facts there. SF operated between Maui and Oahu for 18 months - PLENTY of time to test the market.
I used actual ridership figures so the fuel being consumed per person, per mode of transportation is accurate. Am I supposed to just assume the ferry should have a similar load factor as a plane? That's not how it works. The SF needed a 50% load factor to "break even" with costs. A plane needs well over 70% to break even. The ferry, even if wildly successful, will NEVER meet the same high load factors as those realized in the aviation industry.
But still, the argument of gross fuel inefficiency still holds even if you put the ferry in the same high load factor of the aviation industry. At IDENTICAL capacity, the SF still consumes nearly TEN TIMES THE FUEL as a jet plane.
These days, even 15-20% energy efficiency savings is a big deal. We are talking 1,000% MORE fuel to do the exact same thing a heck lot slower. And that's best case.
Let me ask you, is that really worth the convenience?
Considering that a Boeing 717 can't transport a couple of hundred cars in a single trip, it's kinda of a waste of time to compare its fuel efficiency and load factors with those of the Superferry.
Yeah be quiet uncle, know your role. Don't you know we have to bring christ to every unenlightened native heathen, everyone has got to learn english and we have to bring everyone to the enlighten age of capitalism even if they kick and scream against it because its progress, they just don't know it yet.
Considering that a Boeing 717 can't transport a couple of hundred cars in a single trip, it's kinda of a waste of time to compare its fuel efficiency and load factors with those of the Superferry.
Yes, the SF can transport vehicles for 10 -15 times more fuel than it does on existing freight barges because of it's design and cruising speed.
A fully loaded SF vs one that is half loaded has a small impact on it's pathetic fuel efficiency. It burns pool-full sized amounts of fuel with 10 cars or 100 cars on it. It's grossly inefficient regardless of payload.
Planes transport cargo as well. And they do so MUCH quicker for much less fuel.
The primary purpose of the SF is for the transport of humans between islands - not cars. The fact that it takes 10-20 times more fuel to do THE EXACT SAME THING (whether it's moving cars, people, cargo, etc) than existing transportation methods should disturb you.
But it doesn't.
And that's sad.
Even more sad is that the fuel argument is just one of the many. Spread of invasive species, threat to mammalian sea life, destruction of long-time rural lifestyles, etc.
I find it strange touting poor fuel efficiency against the Superferry as a way to knock it down - that is like saying busses have poor fuel efficiency so we should ban them also.
It seems lost in the discussion that the Superferry could hold 800 passengers + cars (about the capacity of 8 Boeing 717's)and used environmentally friendly engines.
And try taking a fully loaded 717 to Maui from HNL on 300 gallons of gas and let us know how far you get.
I find it strange touting poor fuel efficiency against the Superferry as a way to knock it down - that is like saying busses have poor fuel efficiency so we should ban them also.
It seems lost in the discussion that the Superferry could hold 800 passengers + cars (about the capacity of 8 Boeing 717's)and used environmentally friendly engines.
And try taking a fully loaded 717 to Maui from HNL on 300 gallons of gas and let us know how far you get.
Yes, because comparing the bus (which serves as a NECESSARY means of public transportation for elderly people, disabled people or those that cannot afford a car) to an UNNECESSARY high-speed inter-island people mover makes perfect sense.
At similar capacity to planes, the SF still burns 10X the amount of fuel to accomplish the same exact thing, 10X slower.
Can you please explain to me how the engines used in the SF are "environmentally friendly" given the facts. Maybe they are comparing the engines to those found in Navy warships?
And a fully-loaded 717 will fly from Oahu to Maui with 128 passengers on board with just 300 gallons of fuel.
That's the kind of energy efficiency we've had for decades. Until the SF came along.
And all this talk about fully loaded ferries and fully loaded planes... Ever wonder how long it would take to fully load and off load an at-capacity ferry? Cars and people? Think 6 hours on and off
6 hours.
I can do the same thing on a fully-loaded plane in 1.5 hours - tops. That's 1/4 the time, again, to accomplish the exact. Same. Thing. Using 1/10 the fuel.
Now that's efficiency.
Your argument is akin to those rail-advocates that touted insane energy efficiency numbers when the train was FULLY LOADED at rush hour. Unfortunately they lacked an adequate number of brain cells to understand light rail systems run at a dismal 15%-20% capacity 50% of the day/night. Still, after bringing the facts to their attention, they wouldn't budge.
to an UNNECESSARY high-speed inter-island people mover makes perfect sense.
True, because nobody in Hawaii has family or friend on other islands and could use a cheaper alternative to go to another island and not have to rent a car.
It seems lost in the discussion that the Superferry could hold 800 passengers + cars (about the capacity of 8 Boeing 717's)and used environmentally friendly engines.
Could but never has. There is a track record of very low levels of ridership even at heavily discounted fares.
There is a history of failed private company attempts to run a ferry system. There is proven low ridership levels. And there is no compelling State interest that would justify the State running a ferry system.
And running a ferry system simply to transport Tourists and their cars around the islands would be short sighted and not worth the long term impact to the surrounding islands and residents ... in my opinion.
True, because nobody in Hawaii has family or friend on other islands and could use a cheaper alternative to go to another island and not have to rent a car.
Cheaper? How?
Please explain and cite your sources (like you always ask of me )
Could but never has. There is a track record of very low levels of ridership even at heavily discounted fares.
There is a history of failed private company attempts to run a ferry system. There is proven low ridership levels. And there is no compelling State interest that would justify the State running a ferry system.
And running a ferry system simply to transport Tourists and their cars around the islands would be short sighted and not worth the long term impact to the surrounding islands and residents ... in my opinion.
Ahh, we really do have intelligent, rational people here! There is hope.
SF achieved a whopping 29% load factor with $29 fares.
I think what viper is saying is that fares should be reduced to 29 cents and that will get SF to the 50% required ridership it requires. The only problem is the SF is now >$100/passenger in the hole.
But that's OK, viper wants the taxpayers to cover the difference. I mean, we already do it for the bus, we might as well do it for the gas guzzling ferry as well.
Could but never has. There is a track record of very low levels of ridership even at heavily discounted fares.
There is a history of failed private company attempts to run a ferry system. There is proven low ridership levels. And there is no compelling State interest that would justify the State running a ferry system.
And running a ferry system simply to transport Tourists and their cars around the islands would be short sighted and not worth the long term impact to the surrounding islands and residents ... in my opinion.
Oh but that the past brah, you can't live in the past. Progress remember.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
