VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

Ideas and concepts of what Adelaide can be.
Message
Author
User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: Glenelg ferry terminal

#31 Post by Ho Really » Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:12 pm

Nort wrote:
AtD wrote: I've always thought it'd be cool to return the Glenelg Jetty to its former glory to enable cruise ships to stop there. It sure beats Outer Harbor.
Would the water be deep enough there for cruise ships? Would definitely be a great stopping point for tourists.
No. The 10 metre depth mark is about 2 nautical miles (3600 metres) off the coast (the marina) at low tide. Most cruise ships have draughts of 7 to 8.5 metres. The QUEEN MARY 2 even more at about 10 metres. All ships need at least 10 percent of their draught as clearance. That's approximately 1 metre clearance from the sea bed. For any cruise ship to dock at a Glenelg wharf or jetty, they would need to dredge a shipping channel similar to the one at Outer Harbour. Not as deep or as long, as Outer Harbour's channel is for Post-Panamax vessels with draughts just under 14.2 metres LAT. Then you would need a swinging basin of approximately 400metres in diameter for Panamax vessels of 294 metres in length. If you want the latest Post-Panamax cruise ships then you would need an even larger basin!! Those on the Green side of the fence will not like any suggestion of dredging anywhere outside of Outer Harbour. The idea is fabulous, but not practical. The graphic in the article is crappy. No way would anyone moor their proud and joy on the weather side of any jetty that has no breakwater for protection. Glenelg has open sea and all the bad weather comes from the south west. Wonder if Makris would moor his megayacht (if he has one) out there? The rest of the graphic doesn't stack up. There would have to be more work put into it if this is ever going to be a serious proposal.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2046
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#32 Post by Aidan » Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:33 pm

So Glenelg isn't much use for cruise ships because it's not deep enough, and nor is it that good for KI ferries because it's so far.

But what about ferries to the Lower Yorke Peninsula?
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#33 Post by Ho Really » Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:42 pm

Aidan wrote:So Glenelg isn't much use for cruise ships because it's not deep enough, and nor is it that good for KI ferries because it's so far.
Correct. They could anchor out in the bay but I don't think there's a cruise line that would be willing to tender their pax to shore from 2 nautical miles out when they have a terminal and a sheltered port at Outer Harbour two hours up the coast. Besides the environmental damage caused by anchors and chains on the sea bed - raising the ire of Greenies - the cruise ships would have to contend with the impracticalities of re-provisioning and refuelling out at sea, a very difficult thing to do from a barge (especially if the weather turns sour).

As for the ferry, it is plausible if certain conditions are met. As you know there are several hurdles that all developments and proposals have to pass. One of them may hinder the process more than financial one, the EIS. It could possibly fail. If we are talking about a small extension of the marina with a breakwater and a wharf for a ferry it may work out. I hope we get a better graphic and more details, so we can get a proper idea how things could pan out, especially in the environmental regard.
But what about ferries to the Lower Yorke Peninsula?
Would be great for day trips! Glenelg to Port Vincent marina. Maybe also to the (unhospitable) Port Giles jetty. If Stansbury marina had gone ahead it would have been a direct east-west route to Glenelg. Of course there has to be buses or mini buses on the other side or else you'd be better off driving around the gulf! The bottomline with Yorke Peninsula is that there isn't a whole lot to do unless you like beaches, fishing and visiting one or two small museums. I could be wrong. This is something the stakeholders (state government, locals and the business people) have to work on.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Paulns
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:55 am
Has thanked: 130 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#34 Post by Paulns » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:12 pm

I'm not sure if too many people here would be old enough to remember the State Government run, "MV Island Seaway", that used to run between Port Adelaide and Kingscote. It's a damn shame the Government at the time sold this service off and KI out. That one decision created the Monoploy we have today. With the sea route between the mainland and KI having no State or Federal government subsides (that exist on the Melbourne to Tas route), this has become one of the most expensive ferry rides in the world. As a result KI freight costs are a nightmare and everyone be it tourists and locals pay the costs. It's just funny how we talk about a ferry service between Adelaide and Kingscote when one used to already exist but was sold off.

Image

Image

As a former islander myself I remember all the fast ferry failures that have come and gone to Kingscote! Half the problem was the weather. The seas out in the gulf can get very rough during winter. A 2 hour trip can easily become 3 hours plus, very quickly. I also remember services being cancelled due to bad weather. I don't know why Makris thinks its going to work now when barely 10 years ago a couple of other companies tried and failed???? I just don't think KI gets the tourism numbers to be able to sustain a fast ferry service like this from Glenelg, particularly during the offseason, let alone the summer months.

Lets face it, if you really need to get to KI in a hurry you can fly from ADL to KGC in 20 minutes anyway!!
"SA GOING ALL THE WAY".

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#35 Post by AtD » Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:38 am

Sometimes it's as if they read this forum...

http://guardian-messenger.whereilive.co ... t-the-bay/
Dock at the Bay
A BID to have cruise ships dock at Glenelg, so passengers can spend up big along Jetty Rd, is being investigated.

Hindmarsh MP Steve Georganas has called for a parliamentary report into major international liners berthing off the Glenelg coast and bringing passengers in via smaller boats.

Mr Georganas said the idea came about after meeting last year with Carnival Cruise Lines - which has 22 ships, some carrying up to 2500 passengers - and discussing the benefits of stopping for day trips at the Bay instead of Outer Harbor.

“In the Pacific Islands, many boats will berth out in the water and people are brought into the jetties, processed by immigration and then they’re straight into shopping and entertainment precincts,” he said.

“Carnival said they love the ships to berth at ports where people can walk off and see things, do shopping and get something to eat.

“It would be far more beneficial for cruise ship operators and passengers if they could immediately get off and start their shopping.

“If you get a cruise ship with more than 1000 passengers, the whole of Jetty Rd is going to benefit.”

Mr Georganas said the concept would attract more cruise ships than the eight which stopped at Adelaide last year.

“It’s the inconvenience of busing them from Outer Harbour to the centre of the city, as they often have very short periods.”

Mr Georganas has asked for a report into the numbers of cruise passengers to SA, the typical spending in each visit and the feasibility of docking offshore at Glenelg.

“Once we see what information we get, I’ll put some proposal to the relevant bodies and speak to the relevant ministers.”

Andersen’s of Denmark Ice Cream Glenelg owner Trevor Averay said Jetty Rd businesses could work together to put on packages for passengers.

“With a concentrated effort and plenty of warning, the businesses could set up rosters accordingly and put some pretty good packages together,” he said.

“It (packages) is done in other ports around the country where it’s well recognised that these passengers are coming off to spend money and enjoy their limited time.”

Deborah Matson, from Jetty Rd tourist shop I Love Glenelg, said the idea would be “absolutely fantastic for Glenelg”.

Holdfast Bay CEO Justin Lynch said the council would “definitely support” Mr Georganas’ bid.

Mr Georganas said his proposal could be tied in with that of developer Con Makris’s to build a Monaco-style marina at Glenelg, as reported by the Sunday Mail.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#36 Post by Ho Really » Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:27 pm

Paulns wrote:I'm not sure if too many people here would be old enough to remember the State Government run, "MV Island Seaway", that used to run between Port Adelaide and Kingscote. It's a damn shame the Government at the time sold this service off and KI out. That one decision created the Monoploy we have today. With the sea route between the mainland and KI having no State or Federal government subsides (that exist on the Melbourne to Tas route), this has become one of the most expensive ferry rides in the world. As a result KI freight costs are a nightmare and everyone be it tourists and locals pay the costs. It's just funny how we talk about a ferry service between Adelaide and Kingscote when one used to already exist but was sold off.

As a former islander myself I remember all the fast ferry failures that have come and gone to Kingscote! Half the problem was the weather. The seas out in the gulf can get very rough during winter. A 2 hour trip can easily become 3 hours plus, very quickly. I also remember services being cancelled due to bad weather. I don't know why Makris thinks its going to work now when barely 10 years ago a couple of other companies tried and failed???? I just don't think KI gets the tourism numbers to be able to sustain a fast ferry service like this from Glenelg, particularly during the offseason, let alone the summer months.

Lets face it, if you really need to get to KI in a hurry you can fly from ADL to KGC in 20 minutes anyway!!
Paul, thanks for posting those images. I do remember her very well. You know who says it won't be viable? There would be a lot of people that would prefer to board a ship with their car in the city and cruise down the coast than drive all the way down to Cape Jervis. Port Adelaide now has better access from the north and northeastern suburbs and Dock 2 could easily be adapted for a stern loading vessel avoiding opening the new bridge (Tom 'Diver' Derrick Bridge). Give people more of a cruise experience and they may even forget about the two ferries down south. Look at different markets. The same ferry could also go all the way to Port Lincoln with the same sort of product (cruise ferry). A think a feasibility study should be done on this whether it be private or governmental.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Paulns
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:55 am
Has thanked: 130 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#37 Post by Paulns » Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:49 pm

Ho Really wrote:Paul, thanks for posting those images. I do remember her very well. You know who says it won't be viable? There would be a lot of people that would prefer to board a ship with their car in the city and cruise down the coast than drive all the way down to Cape Jervis. Port Adelaide now has better access from the north and northeastern suburbs and Dock 2 could easily be adapted for a stern loading vessel avoiding opening the new bridge (Tom 'Diver' Derrick Bridge). Give people more of a cruise experience and they may even forget about the two ferries down south. Look at different markets. The same ferry could also go all the way to Port Lincoln with the same sort of product (cruise ferry). A think a feasibility study should be done on this whether it be private or governmental.

Cheers
No worries mate, I agree. I'm pretty sure the Island Seaway used to do trips to Port Lincoln aswell!! I was only a kid at the time but I remember all this and used to love jumping on the Seaway as it was known for the big trip back home to Kingscote! I even remember as a young child going on the old Troubridge! Haha, now that's going back! Its almost like we're talking about a series of Back to the Future!!

Image

By the way, last time I was down the Port the old Island Seaway gantry/ramp was still there and so's the one in Kingscote! Now that the Newport Quays development seems to have gone down the drain, all we need is our ship back! Another option might be to intergrate that development into the ferry service like at Glenelg? Just a thought?
"SA GOING ALL THE WAY".

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 666 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#38 Post by Will » Thu Feb 17, 2011 5:06 pm

I know this is an outlandish idea, but let's forget about a ferry and consider the possibility of building a bridge or tunnel from Cape jervis to KI! Any idea of how much that could cost? 8)

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#39 Post by Ho Really » Thu Feb 17, 2011 5:13 pm

AtD wrote:Sometimes it's as if they read this forum...

http://guardian-messenger.whereilive.co ... t-the-bay/
AtD, do you recall we discussed something about a Glenelg cruise terminal more than ten years ago on a defunct forum called Adelaidecity.Net? So the idea is not new. It has been around since the first settlers arrived here. Anyway, the meeting they had was when Carnival and other cruise officials were here at the Cruise Down Under event at the Stamford Grand in Moseley Square. The interest is there from cruise lines we know that, but at what cost? See some of the things I have already mentioned in previous posts to get an idea of some of the pros and cons. If Makris' (definitely with the help of the government) plan for an expanded marina goes ahead it will not mean we'd get cruise ships lining up out at sea. If you said you were going to build a cruise port, then you'd get the ships. Unfortunately that would be a huge project, one unlikely to (ever) happen, regardless of what the traders down Jetty Road think. I know MP Steve Georganas is keen on this, it falls within his current electorate, but he should be looking at better transport facilities at Outer Harbour and getting more trains up there when cruise ships are in port. Make the place more hospitable to tourists and locals alike, plant more trees and beautify the place. Convince (and assist) Flinders Ports to invest money in tourists not imported cars, etc., etc. The traders at Glenelg will get their tourists if that's where they want to go and spend money, but if I were a tourist I'd go first to see Tandanya, the SA Museum and the State Art Gallery, the pandas at the zoo, Cleland, Warrawong, etc., etc.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#40 Post by Ho Really » Thu Feb 17, 2011 5:20 pm

Paulns wrote:No worries mate, I agree. I'm pretty sure the Island Seaway used to do trips to Port Lincoln aswell!! I was only a kid at the time but I remember all this and used to love jumping on the Seaway as it was known for the big trip back home to Kingscote! I even remember as a young child going on the old Troubridge! Haha, now that's going back! Its almost like we're talking about a series of Back to the Future!!

[...]

By the way, last time I was down the Port the old Island Seaway gantry/ramp was still there and so's the one in Kingscote! Now that the Newport Quays development seems to have gone down the drain, all we need is our ship back! Another option might be to intergrate that development into the ferry service like at Glenelg? Just a thought?
Yes, I remember the TROUBRIDGE too. We all thought it was a passenger ship (in actual fact ferries are passenger ships) like the immigrant ships we used get, but my dad said "that's not a pax ship" wait till you see the ships at Outer Harbour, those are big. Well, they were, but now they are midgets compared to ships like QM2 and ALLURE of the SEAS... :shock:

The TROUBRIDGE also berthed at the same place and I think used the same ramp.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#41 Post by Ho Really » Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:44 pm

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but since MP Steve Georganas wants some questions answered regarding the possibility of cruise ships calling at Glenelg I'll post it here. If the mods want to start a new thread not a problem.

Glenelg vs Outer Harbour

I think it is time that we started a healthy debate on whether Glenelg would make a better entry point into Adelaide for cruise passengers than Outer Harbour and its Overseas Passenger Terminal.

Obviously there are going to be many pros and cons on both sides and I would like anyone on the forum to add to those that I have listed here below so that we can make a balanced judgement on this hot topic.

I have decided that to judge Outer Harbour fairly I needed to include Port Adelaide and Semaphore into the equation. It might sound unfair, three against one, but I thought Outer Harbour being a commercial port and being so inhospitable and lacking in the touristy things it needed plenty of support. Glenelg on the other hand, is touristy but lacks the infrastructure for welcoming passengers to shore, but since the debate is for a marina and facilities for a possible ferry terminal (come landing spot for cruise passengers) we need to prove why Glenelg is a better option than what we already have.

My position: I am not against ships calling at Glenelg. I would very much like to see a terminal down at the bay, though, I would be less interested in seeing ships anchoring or staying stationary at a distance and tendering pax to shore.

I am also of the position that if the government and Flinders Ports invested more money at Outer Harbour I would be more than happy. Actually, I lean towards this option since the infrastructure is already there and it would need only some tweaking.

For Glenelg I would envisage facilities that welcomed the largest cruise ships currently around to come alongside at an expanded marina. This would entail dredging a shipping channel and a turning basin of possibly 400 or so metres in diameter, constructing a wharf (pier) between 350 - 400 metres in length to attract one Post-Panamax ship and a terminal building with ancillary facilities.

Before we get to this point a project of this kind would have to pass stringent conditions. An EIS comes to mind first since it would be constructed in a delicate area (sea grasses and fish habitats, etc.). The EIS would be part of a feasibility study that included financial statements showing who would pay for what (Public - Private). This would also be true of a Monaco-styled marina.

The other option, which seems to be favoured by MP Steve Georganas and maybe one or two cruise lines, is to have the cruise ships anchor out in the bay. Some would drop anchor, others, depending on the sea state, could use their dynamic positioning system linked to the bow thrusters and azipods (azimuthing pods) to stay stationary. The margin of error can be less than a metre with this system. This would resolve the environmental issue of damage to the seabed. As most mid-size to large cruise ships have draughts of around 7 to 8.5 metres (not counting QM2 which has a draught of 10 metres) and require a clearance from the sea floor of 10 percent (or more) of their draughts to manoeuvre efficiently, most ships would find themselves at approximately 3600 metres (2 nautical miles) from shore at the 10 metre depth, give or take 100 - 200 metres towards shore. However, this is only true if the sea floor is flat and bare. If you have seagrasses and other obstacles the clearance would have to be much greater, at least several metres to keep propellers and azipods from getting tangled, damaging ship and seafloor. Whether the distance is more or less than the 2 nautical miles it is still a substantial distance from shore when tendering (shuttling or ferrying in other words) especially if the sea state is not flat or conducive to a comfortable ride. This raises the question “what would happen if the sea is rough, will the cruise ship move up the coast and dock at Outer Harbour or will it bypass Adelaide all together since no arrangements were made beforehand with Flinders Ports?” I would think Flinders Ports would still be happy to accommodate them, unless of course the docks at Outer Harbour were already in use by other vessels, then that would constitute a problem. Another issue with anchoring or being stationary out at sea is that the ship would most probably have to forego any re-provisioning (food, sanitaries, etc.), refuelling and discharging of waste. Barges could be used for the re-fuelling and discharging (which would be costly and impractical) and the ship's tenders for re-provisioning (again probably impractical). The other issue is that you need somewhere on the coast where the pax need to land. In an expanded marina a small terminal building would suffice to welcome and farewell tourists. Of course, then you would need good road access and parking facilities at this place for buses, limos and taxis, and possibly trucks to bring supplies to the tenders.

Since Outer Harbour is already up-and-running, it has a good advantage, however it loses much of its advantage when you take into consideration its greater distance from Adelaide, its inhospitable surroundings, its lack of retail and cultural facilities and its infrequent public transport. All this could be changed easily with a little more investment. Wharf 1 and 2 are designated for cruise ships while Wharf 3 and 4 are for vehicle carriers. If the first two wharves where cleared of imported vehicles during the cruise season it would make a big difference. Flinders Ports I recall were interested in developing Wharf 9 adjacent to the new bulk grain terminal west of Pelican Point. I think it was going to be used as a common user berth for RORO (roll-on roll-off) or possibly the defunct livestock exports. Anyway, it would be good if that was a berth for imported vehicles while the exports (Holdens) remained at 3 and 4. Not sure if this would be viable. If a Glenelg plan was gaining support (and looking likely to go ahead) I would think Flinders Ports would fast track improvements for cruise lines and do everything it could not to lose cruise ship revenue (port fees, etc.).

The improvements I would like to see at Outer Harbour are:
  • 1. Restaurant and cafe facilities added to the Overseas Passenger Terminal to be used all-year-round.
    2. Conversion of some floorspace into conference facilities, used for 8-months a year.
    3. Beautification of the terminal surrounds from bitumen to grass, trees and other plants to welcome tourists and locals.
    4. The inclusion of pathways, benches, tables (for picnics), chairs and public art.
    5. More parking space for visitors and workers.
    6. Conversion of the old Pilot’s House into either a small museum, art gallery or a cafe.
    7. Access to the terminal to visitors all-year-round including when cruise ships visit (this would entail changing the security conditions).
    8. Options for a further terminal building on Wharf 1 that could be easily converted to multi-purpose uses.
    9. More frequent buses and (also longer) trains during cruise ship visits.
    10. Improvements to viewing areas for visitors on the southern revetment (breakwater) including paving or asphalting the revetment pathway.
As you cannot compare Outer Harbour to Glenelg for shopping or dining, Port Adelaide and Semaphore come into the frame. They are easily reachable by bus or train. They may not be as glamourous (for the lack of words) as Glenelg, but they too with the right investment would become more attractive. Port Adelaide already has several half decent museums which should be upgraded and expanded. Semaphore could mirror Glenelg for shopping and dining. The permanency of a tram line from Port Adelaide to Glanville station and Semaphore would also indicate to tourists there are things to do and see at both ends and have the option to travel to Adelaide (this is without having to extend the tram line down Port Road). Unfortunately some mistakes have been made at Port Adelaide at the expense of heritage. Heritage and culture is a prerequisite for tourism. They also should go hand-in-hand with good development that includes places to eat, entertain, learn, rest and live.

Cheers

PS. Please add to this.
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#42 Post by stumpjumper » Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:55 am

Georganas' office currently has the parliamentary library researching the question of passenger shipping and Adelaide. They would be glad of any input, so I introduced them to this forum and this thread in particular.

The MV Troubridge definitely went to Pt Lincoln as well as KI. I'm not sure if the Island Seaway went to Pt Lincoln - it may well have.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: VIS: Glenelg ferry terminal

#43 Post by Ho Really » Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:30 pm

From this Sunday's (February 20, 2011) Sunday Mail:

4500 cruise to the mall
But just three hours to spend
Christie Peucker

THOUSANDS of people are expected to cram vantage points around Adelaide today as the world’s biggest cruise ship, the Queen Mary 2, steams into Outer Harbor.

As for vantage points, there aren’t any except for Outer Harbor, unless you want to view a speck on the horizon.

QM2 is the biggest ocean liner not cruise ship. She has no competition in that category. The cruise ship mantle has belonged to the Royal Caribbean ships for sometime now, first with FREEDOM of the SEAS from 2006 and just recently, with the OASIS-class ships: ALLURE of the SEAS (2010) and OASIS of the SEAS (2009), which are absolute monsters at 220,000gt. FREEDOM of the SEAS is 154,400gt and QM2 is 151,400gt. The gt standing for gross tons, a unit of measurement used in maritime circles where 100 cubic feet of enclosed space equals one gross ton.


Accompanied by a smaller passenger vessel, the Amadea, the ships this morning will bring 4500 passengers to Adelaide but passengers will have less than three hours on the ground to spend their cash.

Only those of QM2 (scheduled to leave at 1:00pm) as AMADEA left at 8pm.

Sixty buses will deliver passengers from the Queen Mary 2 into the city at 9am, but are scheduled to depart just 2 and half hours later.

Rundle Mall shops will be open from 9am to accommodate the influx.

I wonder how many locals took advantage of this?

Tables and tents will line the centre of the mall with five SA wineries showcasing their top wines through tastings. Fringe acts will entertain the masses under the Gawler Place canopy from 9:30am.

This was a great idea since these passengers had no way of getting to the wineries. Pity they couldn’t have tried the NWC. Commendable though.

Meanwhile, the Federal Member for Hindmarsh, Steve Georganas, said yesterday he had requested a parliamentary research paper exploring the possibility of having boats dock at Glenelg or slightly offshore, enabling passengers to disembark directly into Jetty Road shopping and dining precinct.

If they were boats, you’d have no problem mooring them somewhere at the bay. So please refer to them as ships. Do you want to go on a cruise in boat? Think about it!

The move follows comments from Carnival bosses to a Labor tourism committee that the company would bring more ships to the state if transit times were reduced.

I presume the transit times mentioned here is any time the ship is at slow speed when arriving and departing at Outer Harbor (pilot boarding, transiting shipping channel, manoeuvring in harbour, gangway up and down, etc.). All up I would think going to Glenelg may save maybe between 3 to 4 hours. I am guessing also that Carnival would like to avoid port fees (which they may charge the pax anyway). If Carnival can have its ships anchor or stay stationary not far from land it may save them money. Anchorages will also give them more destinations elsewhere in SA (such as Penneshaw which is attracting several visits over the next couple of years, with the first one later this year).

Carnival operates the P&O Cruises and Princess Cruises fleet.

And not only these but the Carnival Corp., owns Seabourn, HAL, and Cunard who also visit or have visited SA. They also own Italian cruise line Costa who will bring a ship to Australia next year on a world cruise (but not Adelaide or SA). Carnival Cruise Line will homeport a ship in Sydney from next season as well. Carnival Corp., owns other cruise lines but those operate mostly in Europe.

“They have told me they would bring more ships to South Australia and stay for longer if they could dock at Glenelg, because passengers prefer to hop straight off the ship and into the shops,” Mr Georganas said.

MP Georganas makes it sound like it all depends on Glenelg and that they all want to hop into shops, which they don’t. They may hop onto the tram though. I do understand what he is trying to say. Obviously Glenelg is more attractive than a commercial port.

Cruise ships usually dock at Outer Harbor anywhere between 7 and 8am, and depart anywhere between 4 and midnight. So this thing about staying longer at Glenelg is not quite true. In relation to QM2 and her early departure for Sydney, she had to leave to arrive in time to meet up with QUEEN ELIZABETH, otherwise she would have departed at 6pm, which was the case the last time she was here. Time and slower speed saves fuel too if that is what they intended with the short stay.


“If we can get boats to dock at Glenelg there is zero travel time for shopping and dining which means more time for passengers to spend up big in or local businesses.

Again they are not boats. MP Georganas seems to be very concerned about businesses in Glenelg missing out. Is it because he is the local member? Why should these passengers/tourists have to spend big there, can’t they do that elsewhere? Can’t they see the rest of the city first and then maybe decide whether Glenelg is the right place when they come back before boarding? Maybe MP Georganas shouldn’t get the traders’ hopes too high.

“With a schedule this tight, SA restaurateurs and cafe owners will be the big losers because passengers from the Queen Mary 2 won’t even have time for lunch. It’s costing us a big slice of the pie and that shouldn’t be the case because we have so much to offer to visitors coming to SA.”

What nonsense. As mentioned before QM2 had its reasons why she only had a short time in Adelaide. This is not the norm with any cruise ship. Why is MP Georganas now refering to SA and not Glenelg - is he trying to cover his rear end? It should be the other way round, like I said, most tourists are not going to stay at Glenelg, they’ll go to the touristy places in the city or beyond. If they decide they are not happy shopping there they can always come back and spend the precious money MP Georganas wants spent in his electorate before they board. Sheesh!

Direct expenditure in Australia from cruise ships was $662 million in 2009-10 but SA received only $9.2 million - about 1 per cent - of the revenue.

Passengers have no option but to spend elsewhere (mostly on the east coast and New Zealand) either before getting here or waiting till they have left here. We need to not just attract more ships, but also give the tourist good value for money. Then maybe the word will go out that Adelaide is a worthwhile place where to spend money, and not just a quaint town referred to as “the city of churches”.

Just 27 cruise ships visited SA last financial year compared with 33 in the Northern territory, 49 in Victoria, 55 in Tasmania, 106 in Western Australia, 125 in NSW and 182 in Queensland.

What do you expect? We are in the worst location in Australia for cruise ship visits. Adelaide needs to offer something different or give cruise lines incentives. To bolster cruise ship visits we need a cruise line to homeport one of their ships here and this for a period of at least 3 months out the possible 4-5 months and back this up with plenty of international and domestic flights and pre and post cruise tours. We should also work hard with Victoria and Tasmania to organise suitable itineraries, possibly aimed more at the international visitor. If we get this and a handful of other cruise ships calling we could easily have more than 50 visits putting us on par with Victoria and Tasmania, which considering our location is absolutely terrific.

peuckerc@sundaymail.com.au

Cheers

PS. I am not having a go at MP Steve Georganas. I commend him for taking this further. If questions are not asked we won’t get any answers. I hope the journo is not offended, but she should get some of her facts right… and please from now on let’s call a cruise ship a ship. :)
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests