I NOTE your series on Scotland's ferries ("Experts demand action to solve Scotland's ferry crisis", The Herald, June 12). For years Calmac has provided a less than satisfactory service. Timetables appear to be works of fiction. While other companies' ships can cruise the world without incident, Calmac ships break down on their short routes. Since most of their large ferries are individual designs it is difficult to allow interchange of route. Back in 1964 it had three identical ferries (one still runs as the Hebridean Princess) which allowed them to replace each other.
Another problem is inefficiency. The Shetland service requires two ferries, both of which spend nearly 50 per cent of the day berthed at each end. They also spend more than half their steaming time alongside the Scottish mainland instead of running from a more efficient port like Scrabster (which services Orkney) instead of Aberdeen. Back in the 1950s ferries to the Northern Isles ran from Leith, something we would no longer consider, so why are we still using Aberdeen? It would mean a single ferry could maintain the service.
The reality is that private companies like Pentland Ferries, owners of the Pentalina, show what is required. A clear-out of management of Calmac is required. Both its management and designers are specifying the wrong sort of ships and seem incompetent when it comes to managing build contracts. A single set of specifications for the harbour linkspans for the larger ferries are needed. A build specification which takes into account the most recent technology but keeps the same berthing parameters is needed. A set of build contracts which ensure a new ferry every couple of years and having a spare ferry to cover breakdowns and extra traffic is required.
The Norwegian Hurtigrutten service has ferries of varying ages and technology yet it manages to provide a service using the same harbours and all the ships can stand in for each other.
The residents of the islands and the tourists deserve much better service.
Bruce D Skivington, Edinburgh EH7.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel