Superferry in Dry Dock

Superferry in Dry Dock

Below are 3 pictures of the Superferry in dry dock - Distant, mid-range and close-up. The close-up picture is a blow-up of part of the mid-range picture. Note the workers standing near the pontoons. The pictures were taken by a friend who is a great professional photographer and who wishes to remain anonymous.

It might be helpful to get pictures from different angles – but it would require filming from a boat. Can anyone recommend a small boat owner in Honolulu who would be willing to take him to Sand island??

The Superferry planned to go into dry dock to repair cracks around the opening(s) where the auxiliary rudder post(s) went through the hull.   There was originally great confusion as to the nature and cause of these cracks. I tried to clear up the confusion in an e-mail of Feb. 14 and on my web site at
http://web.mac.com/leetepley/Site/Superferry_Rudder_Problems_-_New_Data.html

As of 11 days later, I have received no criticism of my analysis (but maybe hardly anyone has read it.)

Anyhow, the following is a statement from the Honolulu Advertiser on Feb. 21, 2008,

“Hawaii Superferry president and CEO John Garibaldi said the rudder problem is the result of a design flaw, and that staff from shipbuilder Austal USA came to Honolulu to assist with repairs, which involve strengthening the metal around the housing. He said a similar vessel built by Austal recently experienced the same rudder trouble.”
In the past, I have not considered John Garibaldi to be a reliable source of information. However, this time he seems to be right-on because I recently received information indirectly from a reliable Coast Guard source that other fast ferries built by Austal in Alabama had developed similar cracks in the hull and, in fact, this had alerted the Coast Guard to look for such cracks in the Superferry – and (surprise!! surprise!!) Coast Guard inspectors found them.
Austal is a very large company that has built a great many fast ferries in its main factory in Australia and I have not heard of any so-called ”rudder problems”.   The Austal factory in Mobile, Alabama is fairly recent and has probably built only a few models of fast ferries before the Superferry project – and they apparently have not built some of them very well. Maybe they have been using illegal cheap foreign labor.
So much for the so-called “rudder problem” – but now it appears that the Superferry also has a “vibration problem” which may or may not be related to the “rudder problem”. This information was obtained from a very reliable source who may wish to remain anonymous. I may go into the vibration problem in another web page later. But let's go on to other Superferry problems.
While the Superferry was being towed into dry dock things went badly wrong. The following is taken From Juan Wilson’s web site at http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath.

Did tug seriously damage Superferry? by Bill Schultz on 19 February 2008

“I just heard an unconfirmed report from a sea-faring friend on Maui. She says the ferry was being towed into drydock when the lines parted. She went aground and got stuck in the mud. A tug was called to push her off. It pushed a big hole in the side, damaging two of her ribs and at least two of the decks. Major repairs. Cursed ship. Have you heard anything about this?”
The above was partly confirmed in The Honolulu Advertiser the following day.

“The Hawaii Superferry will remain in drydock until March 24, three weeks longer than originally planned. Superferry officials said today the extended drydock time is needed to repair damage to the Alakai's hull that occurred during the drydocking process and additional maintenance needs have been identified.” (What additional needs??)
Then from The Honolulu Advertiser on 21 February 2008
“Terry O'Halloran, Hawaii Superferry director of business development, said the rudder repairs are expected to be completed in the next few days, but that work will continue on fixing the Alakai's hull, which suffered dents while it was being maneuvered into drydock by a tugboat and during the drydock operation.”
Well, a few “dents” would be less serious than a “big hole in the side”. But could O’Halloran be trying to play the damage down??
So the poor Superferry has been going from one disaster to another – not to mention the recent problems with the barge on Maui breaking loose from it’s mooring. I presently believe that the 4 barges - which may end up costing the taxpayer $40 million dollars plus tugboat fees - serve no practical purpose other than to help the Superferry get around Federal and State environmental laws. I may do another web page on this soon.
Finally, the poor Superferry may suffer a another disaster worse than any of the above.  It seems more and more likely that HSF doesn’t really care about running a successful commercial operation. It's main purpose may be to demonstrate the operational reliability of the Superferry to impress the military and ultimately to make money for John Lehman's companies. But because of the Superferry’s miserable performance so far, the military may lose interest in dealing with John Lehman to use the Superferry (and future Superferry’s) to carry weapons and troops. This would be the ultimate disaster for the Superferry.