Circular Quay Two Ship Turnaround

[campingman]

pretty disgusting that one of the finest harbours in the world can't properly handle 2 decent sized cruise ships at the one time.

 

corruption,corruption.

[Kiwi Kruzer]

Garden Island may not be suitable as it stands now, Brisbane41, but with extensive redevelopment, including reshaping and lengthening of the wharves, it could be made into a very nice cruise terminal which could accommodate a number of ships. Doing some quick measurements based on the length of the OPT I reckon they could fit at least five ships of varying sizes around Garden Island. Of course, they'd need to move the Navy out completely.

 

Pecisely. We are not talking about what is there at the moment.

Isnt renovation the latest buzz word...:D:D

Use your imagination and think of the possibilities. The best cruise facility in the World couldbe built there.:):)

[mrs and mrs]

Is there a "This joke made me sick" emoticon.

 

Why does it make you sick.:)

[MicCanberra]

Of course, they'd need to move the Navy out completely.

 

Good luck with that, may as well start afresh over at Mascot.

[Aus Traveller]

Good luck with that, may as well start afresh over at Mascot.

Kevin Rudd briefly floated the idea of moving the Navy from Sydney Harbour to Brisbane, using the argument that Brisbane is closer to where the navy might have to see action. From what I heard, Kevin's suggestion sank without any survivors.:)

[Brisbane41]

Kevin Rudd briefly floated the idea of moving the Navy from Sydney Harbour to Brisbane, using the argument that Brisbane is closer to where the navy might have to see action. From what I heard, Kevin's suggestion sank without any survivors.:)

 

He only did that because he is a total fool and was an incompetent leader. His remarks were totally irrational and from a man not well educated in military operations.

 

You do not base a Navy closer to where an enemy may come from and closer to ICBM missile range, closer for the enemy to send spy ships and within range of foreign air forces. By keeping the Navy bases south they can protect the southern sea lanes that are vital to trade and imports and exports and keep the country running in a state of war. The majority of the Australian population is in the south of the country with Sydney and Melbourne being the biggest cities in Australia and Perth being a vital point to protect the southern sea routes to supply the south of Australia. In a time of war the enemy will pick off supply ships and merchants as the U-Boat war operated during WWII in an attempt to bring the countries operations to a halt. Having military bases in the south makes perfect sense because it can protect the cities down south and the ships can scramble to protect the seat of government from attack by sea. By having the bases in the north is totally irrational due to ties, spies, foreign air force range. Brisbane was totally unsuitable due to the tidal river and the fact that ships would have to navigate the barrier reef to get to blue water.

 

That man was the worst prime minister out country has ever seen in its entire history and probably will be the worst for all eternity.

 

While I think there is ample land there to dock a cruise ship with major renovations there is still the working dry dock to consider and the fact that maintenance takes place there. The whole base would need a fortune spent on it.

 

My personal belief with Garden Island (Fleet Base East FBE) is that it could be run in cooperation with cruise lines and civilian use. Much like how some RAAF bases share a runway with commercial airlines. Ideally the Navy could benefit by the extra funding and resources that cruise lines could pour into the facilities. Having a dedicated terminal that could also be used for indoor military muster and supply for their ships could be a good idea. The idea would be to share a particular wharf and give access to the cruise lines and visiting naval ships and close off the north side of FBE for exclusive military use. It would provide added security for cruise ships. The base would need a major and extremely expensive make-over and total destruction and rebuilding of some buildings to make this happen and there are bound to be "heritage" buildings there that the tree huggers will not want to see taken down.

[OzKiwiJJ]

Good luck with that, may as well start afresh over at Mascot.

 

But where at Mascot? There really isn't anywhere suitable there either. You've got the airport runways extending out quite a long way into the bay, plus the major commercial shipping wharves, and they need to stay relatively close to the city.

 

In reality the Navy doesn't need to be in Sydney Harbour, it could operate from anywhere on the coast where there is a sheltered harbour.

 

In addition having the cruise ship terminals in Sydney Harbour is a real plus. Sydney Harbour is where everyone wants to cruise to/from. White Bay compensates from its location a little bit as you do get to sail under the Harbour Bridge and past the Opera House but I'm sure most overseas cruisers prefer to depart from the OPT. Also how annoying is it having to spend valuable sightseeing time on a long shuttle bus trip from a port to the main part of whereever you're visiting?

[OzKiwiJJ]

While I think there is ample land there to dock a cruise ship with major renovations there is still the working dry dock to consider and the fact that maintenance takes place there. The whole base would need a fortune spent on it.

 

My personal belief with Garden Island (Fleet Base East FBE) is that it could be run in cooperation with cruise lines and civilian use. Much like how some RAAF bases share a runway with commercial airlines. Ideally the Navy could benefit by the extra funding and resources that cruise lines could pour into the facilities. Having a dedicated terminal that could also be used for indoor military muster and supply for their ships could be a good idea. The idea would be to share a particular wharf and give access to the cruise lines and visiting naval ships and close off the north side of FBE for exclusive military use. It would provide added security for cruise ships. The base would need a major and extremely expensive make-over and total destruction and rebuilding of some buildings to make this happen and there are bound to be "heritage" buildings there that the tree huggers will not want to see taken down.

 

Yes, it would be an expensive exercise, and for serious forward planning there needs to be the capacity for more than one cruise ship there. I actually don't think trying to combine a cruise terminal with a Naval Base is a good idea. Move the Navy elsewhere, build a seriously good cruise terminal complete (incorporating any heritage buildings into the design), add a few cafes and good public transport. It might be feasible to leave the dry dock there or they might have to build a new one elsewhere - if they do they could sell off some of that land to developers, and recoup some of the costs.

[Womble99]

 

In reality the Navy doesn't need to be in Sydney Harbour, it could operate from anywhere on the coast where there is a sheltered harbour.

 

Seems this thread has a couple of sides but I am curious as to what you base this statement on? Other than the requirement to have access to water for naval vessels is there any other military/economic/social/political considerations required for where they are based?

 

The location for a cruise terminal seems to really only need to be as close as possible to a main tourist destination, everything else is secondary.

[Brisbane41]

Regarding the Navy base in Sydney harbour. Certain facilities exist within the base that civilians do not know about that are vital and important for its operations that makes it necessary to keep the base there and certain parts of it off limits to the public.

 

The navy will never move out of Sydney. It is too important and it wont happen.

[OzKiwiJJ]

Regarding the Navy base in Sydney harbour. Certain facilities exist within the base that civilians do not know about that are vital and important for its operations that makes it necessary to keep the base there and certain parts of it off limits to the public.

 

The navy will never move out of Sydney. It is too important and it wont happen.

 

Are those facilities unable to be moved?

 

Anyway, even if it was feasible it will never happen. The NSW government is not exactly well known for building stuff like that in a timely manner. For example public transport is already a joke yet developers are being allowed to build massive apartment complexes in areas where the roads are already choked, schools are packed to the gills, and there is insufficient hospital funding to provide reasonable services.

[palks]

One of the big difficulties with using the Navy base as a combined Navy/cruise ship wharf is the ability to predict the Naval ships movements. By that, as you all know, cruise companies schedule 18 plus months in advance, but the Navy does not have the ability to confirm that there will be room at the base. Naval ships programs are much more fluid than cruise ships (ask any Naval member or family member) simply because they react to operational requirements. Naval ships programs change often...and need the ability to use the base when it does change. I'm not aware of anyone who can predict when disasters will happen and the Navy needs to respond..or when Russian warships turn up off our coast as happened a year or so ago with limited warning.

 

Longer term, moving the Naval base is not just the cost of the physical move to a suitable location (as Brisbane41 pointed out..Brisbane is not), but the moving of over 4000 families and the upheaval. Its not something that can be done without a huge amount of money and a long lead time.

[MicCanberra]

That man was the worst prime minister out country has ever seen in its entire history and probably will be the worst for all eternity.

 

LOL, but tell us what you really think.:eek:

[OzKiwiJJ]

That's a very good point re sharing the facilities, palks.

 

And yes, I realise it wouldn't be an easy thing to move the naval base. But it seems like the only location east of the harbour bridge that could possibly be capable of handling multiple cruise ships.

 

The cruise industry is undoubtably growing in Australia:

- Princess keeps 3 ships here permanently at the moment and increases that to 5 (or 6?) over summer.

- P&O will have 6 ships once Pacific Explorer is up and running.

- Carnival still only have two and I don't think there are any rumours of more in the near future but who knows longterm.

- Royal Caribbean will have 5 ships in our region over summer

- Celebrity will only have 1 next summer

- Holland America will have 2.

 

Then there are the ones that blow through at various times:

- Cunard

- Crystal

- Azamara

- Costa

- Seabourn

- Seven Seas

- The World

and probably a few others.

 

The cruise industry in China and Japan is also booming and we may start seeing some long cruises coming down from there during our summer - the reverse of the Princess cherry blossom cruise for example.

 

Sydney really needs to start planning, now, for the volume of cruise ships that could be expected in ten years time.

Edited September 10, 2016 by OzKiwiJJ

[rkmw]

LOL, but tell us what you really think.:eek:

 

going by the radio Turnbulls not much better

[GUT2407]

Yet they spent all that money on White Bay, which a two year old could tell you would be less useful every year as bigger ships arrived.

 

When they left Hickson Road the opportunity was there to do a proper job, but nope too hard.

 

Botany Bay looks like the best bet, but problems there two. Probably the answer will be using other ports more often, Melbourne and Brisbane are already taking more load, maybe Newcastle and Wollongong, but both need $$$$ first.

[palks]

Sydney really needs to start planning, now, for the volume of cruise ships that could be expected in ten years time.

 

I agree...but just don't think the Naval base is a viable option. I think things like Botany offer a much easier and less expensive option (noting it will be us as taxpayers paying for it). Ships could then do a 'lap' of Sydney Harbour after sailing Botany.

[OzKiwiJJ]

I agree...but just don't think the Naval base is a viable option. I think things like Botany offer a much easier and less expensive option (noting it will be us as taxpayers paying for it). Ships could then do a 'lap' of Sydney Harbour after sailing Botany.

 

But where in Botany Bay? There isn't much space left on the northern side, plus having planes flying low overhead all the time wouldn't be very good. The southern side takes ages to get to and from.

Edited September 10, 2016 by OzKiwiJJ

[Aus Traveller]

Brisbane's Portside terminal opened in 2006. Prior to that a big white tent was used in that same location. It was soon obvious that larger cruise ships could not use the terminal either because they could not fit under the Gateway Bridge, or they could not safely turn in the river - or both.

 

With this lesson in front of them, the decision was made to locate Sydney's new terminal west of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. It opened in 2013. With the size of ships used by P&O and Princess' present Australian fleet, it can be used by these ships, but as we all know, a large number of ships that are based in Australia, cannot use the White Bay Terminal.

 

I liked the comment from GUT2407: "When they left Hickson Road the opportunity was there to do a proper job, but nope too hard."

 

I think it gets harder every year to solve the dilemma.

[Dobby_The_Ship_Elf]

First off I have to admit that Sydney Harbour has to be one of the most picturesque places to experience a departure and arrival on a cruise ship.

 

In fact I love it if you can get the sun reflection off the city buildings as you enter the harbour on arrival.

 

The first sights of the bridge and then the Opera House as you pass through middle head and into the harbour proper have brought me to tears on a previous cruise - don't ask - still hurts.

 

So the current push is for Ozzie to become a republik if that happens we won't need Kirribilli House (or however you spell it) for the President to live in Oz will build our version of the White House.

 

I call for all cruisers to support the move to replace Kirribilli House (cos who cares about heritage) with the new OPT ...........

 

Oh dear I know I am going to get some heat for that .....

[MicCanberra]

Maybe if the bridge is raised so that the bigger ships can get under it. The bridge must be getting to replacement stage soon anyway.

[OzKiwiJJ]

 

So the current push is for Ozzie to become a republik if that happens we won't need Kirribilli House (or however you spell it) for the President to live in Oz will build our version of the White House.

 

I call for all cruisers to support the move to replace Kirribilli House (cos who cares about heritage) with the new OPT ...........

 

Oh dear I know I am going to get some heat for that .....

 

I considered that but it's not big enough. Even with replacing Admiralty House as well you'd only just have enough space for one cruise ship berth.

 

If they got rid of the Opera House and extended that point a bit there would probably be room for two ships. Nah! Without the Opera House nobody would want to come to Sydney. :rolleyes:

[cheznandy]

If we are raising the bridge and demolishing the opera house.....how about we ban the ships that come for 6 months of the year, charge in USD and don't include gratuities:p......problem solved!!!:eek:

Edited September 10, 2016 by cheznandy

[OzKiwiJJ]

If we are raising the bridge and demolishing the opera house.....how about we ban the ships that come for 6 months of the year, charge in USD and don't include gratuities:p......problem solved!!!:eek:

 

But ... but ... but then prices will rise on the other ships and we won't be able to afford to cruise. :eek: :(

[cheznandy]

But ... but ... but then prices will rise on the other ships and we won't be able to afford to cruise. :eek: :(

 

Yeah back to the old days.....when I paid $2300p/p in 2003 for an inside cabin on the Pacific Sky......and the beds didnt even push together......and Fiesta deck.:eek: