The Isle of Wight Council is considering commissioning an independent review into the troublesome Floating Bridge No.6 to determine whether the vessel is fit for purpose, with proposals to also redesign the vessel to ensure a more reliable service.
The ‘Gateway 5’ review would look at whether the chain ferry is fit for purpose in relation to the original specification, operating requirements and achieving wider outcomes – something that the Solent Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), which partially funded the vessel, have requested.
A decision on whether to commission the review needs to be made by 14th October. In the meantime, councillors are set to learn more about the ongoing legal case against the naval architect and boat builder involving in Floating Bridge No.6.
The Cabinet are also set to decide whether or not to carry out redesign and reconfiguration works to Floating Bridge No.6 to ensure not only a more reliable service, but to reduce the ongoing costs. However, Cabinet members are warned that if the decision was taken not to make the adjustments and to purchase a new chain ferry then it would take between 4 and 6 years to implement.
Yesterday (Tuesday) it was announced that the East Cowes to West Cowes service will be suspended for a further 4 weeks as one of the main engines needs to be replaced. Read more at https://www.islandecho.co.uk/floating-bridge-likely-to-be-out-of-action-for-another-4-weeks/.
The council must make all of its findings public. Somebody is to blame here, but a witch hunt is not going to solve the problem.
I am a retired design engineer, and one of the worst decisions you can make is to try and make a bad design into something good, it very rarely works, silk purses from sows ears, that sort of thing. Order a new one, and get the company who built this white elephant pay for it. Alternately build a bridge.
But whatever is decided get somebody in charge who knows what their doing, PLEASE.
Why is there no legal action. Just money on the poll tax. New council, same old inaction.
No s**t Sherlock, the present design does not work, most people could see that from the outset, as said below it will be more money wasted if they try to modify what is there, needs a new look and possibly a closer resemblance to it’s predecessor.
So the SLEP has finally woken up? What if the study finds the obvious, that the thing is not fit for purpose, etc – will they want their money back? Who pays?
At least this new council recognises that something drastic must be done, and that we can’t wait 4-6 years.
No doubt some minor improvements could be made by tinkering with the current design, but fundamental flaws like unreliability, excessive depth, rapid wear on key components, won’t be cured that way.
All we need is a lift bridge for goodness sake as they have in Poole
Does anyone know of an online (or physical) petition to allow EVERYONES feelings to be made known to those responsible for this absolute pile of crap? I’d gladly sign it!
Stop throwing good money after bad. Hand it over to the navy for torpedo practice and build a swing bridge.
Finally SLEP have awakened – I mentioned this nearly 2 years ago saying if I were them I would ask for my money back. Why has it taken this long SLEP?
Don’t know what is worse – that it is a white elephant or that the council don’t yet know whether it is a white elephant?
I fear for the next stage of this. We don’t want a bridge that isn’t fit for purpose do we!
With “know it all ” on this one I am also a retired engineer ..the best way is to start all over again either a brand new design from scratch or possibly us the Hull and replace Engines ..Hydraulics..and all running gear !!!
Never has never will be fit for purpose!!!!!
When they first ran it car’s got damaged !!!!
It is too big and it’s a push me pull me not floating…….pile of C —……
Council should be ashamed of themselves for purchasing this prototype heap of rubbish…..
But it isn’t a prototype, it’s a near-carbon-copy of previous builds; so similar in fact that one wonders how much if any new design work was done? Maybe they said “here’s one we prepared earlier, you can have it cheap”. An offer no-one in the online trouser-buying business could refuse.
Obviously it was a mistake to the purchase the thing, but I’d like to know who is paying for these repairs? To replace a main engine, taking up to 4 weeks, must be an expensive business, so who is picking up the tab? Is it the Council, in other words us, the tax payer, or the company who built it? I assume it must have come with some sort of warranty, but then making that assumption is probably a mistake knowing how inept our Councils are. Perhaps one of our intrepid journalists could be asking those sorts of questions?
Again my comments are taken out after being printed. What’s your problem island echo ? Be honest and pray tell me ( and other readers) why you are doing this ? I won’t go away easily if that’s your game.
What’s the betting the second engine will go down as soon as the thing starts to move again.
They had s perfect template the old design worked ,this one is bigger and the tide pushes her just copy the old one simples it never broke down .The quality of workmanship is not up to scratch on this one it will keep failing
Look on the bright side, this time it is only one of the main engines & once the ‘lengthy job’ of replacing it has been successfully completed in 4 weeks time there surely cannot be anything left to go wrong…..!? Triggers’ Broom springs to mind……..!
Oh, hang on a minute, when did the navigation systems last have a software update……..?!
Wait for it, as we all know the navigation systems on ‘chain ferries’ are particularly complicated…..
Look on the bright side, this time it is only one of the main engines & once the ‘lengthy job’ of replacing it has been successfully completed in 4 weeks time there surely cannot be anything left to go wrong…..!? Triggers’ Broom springs to mind……..!
Oh, hang on a minute, when did the navigation systems last have a software update……..?!
Wait for it, as we all know the navigation systems on ‘chain ferries’ are particularly complicated…..
We don’t need to commission an independent review at a cost of thousands of pounds surely!!! The council have already got the evidence, all they’ve got to do is add up the number of days it’s been out of action, they’ve got the list of the faults & repairs thus far carried out, review done simples!!!
Forget BRIDGE.. a tunnel. Back in 1900 they were proposing to build a tunnel, but then the war came.. Same goes for getting to Mainland, a bridge would be useless, would be closed more often than not due to weather. Has to be a tunnel.
You want a bridge, then build one over the Medina, so it come out at light by Fighting cocks, and put a new roundabout at end of Racecourse..so traffic does not always have to go0 to Newport to get anywhere else on this Island.
Yes, No witch hunt But whoever is responsible for this Fiasco should be tortured and shot at dawn.