Hopefully, the solution is new boats that are a more sensible size, and don’t need the extensive infrastructure upgrades the new fleet would have required. One of the cancelled designs would have been a similar displacement to our current fleet of three.

I really hope the solution isn’t another clapped out beater from Europe.

  • IlovethebombOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    We’ve had far smaller vessels in the past that have been rail enabled though, even smaller than what we currently have.

    An argument against moving is we wouldn’t just have to build the port, we would need road, rail, and all the utilities as well, whereas in Picton they’re already there.

    • DaveMA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yeah, I’d be curious if a private company could build themselves a smallish port and start running a premium service where they could charge more because of the shorter travel time. You wouldn’t have the supporting township but that could grow overtime as you pick up more customers.

      • IlovethebombOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        That’s been done in a way with a catamaran service, the Fast Cat ferries were brought in to compete with them. I think they sailed from Porirua.

        Part of the problem is you would have to base yourself in Port Underwood, which is kinda the middle of nowhere, which would erase some of the time savings.