this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
13 points (100.0% liked)

Aotearoa / New Zealand

1812 readers
9 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general

Rules:

FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom

 

Banner image by Bernard Spragg

Got an idea for next month's banner?

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is actually very reasonable, rail enabled, bigger than what we currently have, but not the absolute monsters that were planned.

I wonder if the ability to operate fully under electrical power for part of the crossing has been retained?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Really need more details to understand or make the comparison between the two plans.

Upgrading port side infrastructure in line with earthquake and environmental regulations still needs to occur - this was a major reason for the cost blow-out, and aside from shifting this burden to the port side councils (not a solution imo), what is the revised costing for this?

Iirc a reporter asked Winston this question but the stupid old fart can't/doesnt want to answer questioning along these lines - what is the additional maintenance costs we have to fund to keep the current aging fleet going to the absolute end of their tether - this is millions of dollars in funding that's going to maintain old ships that are going to be scrap.

A question I haven't seen answered too is the whole - we'll build different ships with different shipyards. Are we going with one rail enabled ship, one just cars and trucks? Again - I'd love further information here.

Re- the slight bump in capacity freight and people wise - I'm all for the efficiency gains by having rail enabled ferries - but it's a bit of a shame they will only carry 40 rail carts per trip. I'd prefer a bigger shift towards moving goods by rail and reducing trucks on the road - this is the only way to do it given its such a vital choke point.

Bit of a novel apologies - a guy who takes the ferries mostly as passenger walk on ~10 times a year.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I think the major cost saving is having smaller ships means less port side infrastructure, so even if we do upgrade the port to modern standards, it will still be cheaper.

My understanding is we're buying two ships, which will be identical.

Also, forty rail cars is a lot, each one is equivalent to a fully loaded truck at least.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

The smaller ships are only a little bit smaller and they have no bids on the ships so they have no idea how much they are going to cost. They are going to skimp on the port upgrades which will probably end up not working at all.

So far they have no idea how much any of this is going to cost and you can be sure there will be overruns.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)