Frank5

No impact at all. Don't intend to try Crystal again for 2 to 3 years to evaluate how well the new management operates their old ships. There are too many excellent new ships and luxury cruise lines available to take a chance on Crystal. Looking forward to trying the Explore I after it has been operating for at least 6 months and providing it receives excellent reviews. Also looking forward to trying some of the new luxury expedition ships.

How many stars would you give the quality of the food and service in the main dining room?

How many stars would you give the quality of the food and service in the main dining room?

How many stars would you give the quality of the food and service in the main dining room?

Thank you. 

It looks like a possible upgraded and modernized Crystal Serenity. I'm considering giving them a try after they are in business for at least six months and if they receive positive reviews.

If Carnival Corp is forced to reorganize in bankruptcy, they will eventually reappear after restructuring their debt and resume operations at some level. They may be required to sell some ships and/or operate on a reduced basis.  Their debt holders may even allow them to resume operations until a restructuring agreement can be negotiated.  If Carnival owes customers refunds, they will be treated as unsecured creditors.

A relative empty cruise ship convention!

Read somewhere that it takes approximately 200 crew members to remain on board to keep a mid size cruise ship in warm-up condition which is defined as the ability to get underway and resume operations in about one week.  A more complex task and more time consuming may be to contact replacement crew, sign contracts and transport some of them to the ship once a new schedule is determined.  I'd be surprised if all these tasks could be completed in just a week.  Then you need to move the ship to its first embarkation port.  If you must do this for 10+ ships, the logistics must be very challenging and time consuming.

Apparently the life boats are not a problem going through the new locks.

Perhaps it is less expensive to sail around South America at a fuel miserly slow speed than pay the $100,000+ tolls of the Panama Canal.

How well do you think Cunard did handling this situation?

Roy,

You are fortunate to catch any flight home with so many airlines recently announcing the curtailment or even complete stoppage of their international service.

I wonder if most of the ships will sit offshore outside but close enough to a port to use their tender boats or weather they will remain docked at a port for the duration and presumably pay dockage fees?

Some years ago there was a major economic contraction and the cruise lines took their ships they could not operate profitably out of service and docked them somewhere for 6 to 12 months until the travel market recovered.

For me, the unique health risk of a cruise during the next 1 to 3 months is that there is a significant risk that the ship will be subject to a quarantine if just one passenger or crew member is suspected to have contracted a Coronavirus resulting in the ship being turned away at scheduled ports and the healthy passengers being subject to a greater risk of contracting the virus onboard while the cruise line tries to find a port that will allow the ship to dock.  While I would not take this chance and cancel my reservation, others would be less risk adverse.

I will not do a cruise trip so long as there is a reasonable threat of a global virus pandemic which is the case today.  The French Finance Minister has reported that their tourist business is currently down 30 to 40%.  If the virus spreads to too many countries, there is little public health officials can do to contain it because of the significant number of infected people spread across the globe.  It will run its course much like the flu virus does today.

Hank,

I think you summarized the situation very well and the possible consequences for the passengers and crew on this HAL cruise whether they are still on the ship or whether they are in the process of trying to return home.

Yes.  It works the same way on HAL.  The principal advantage is that you don't need to put out your suitcase the night before or search for it in the customs hall.   Depending upon the number of people using this option, you may or may not exit the ship faster than the conventional method.  There was a long line of people waiting inside the ship with their suitcases to exit when I used this option.

I was surprised that the most fuel efficient speed would not be lower than 17 knots but this shows that I no nothing about this subject.

Correction: He said that the most efficient causing speed was 17 knots. I assume that slow speeds used for entering and exiting ports use less fuel.

I had a captain tell me on a different cruise line that his company places considerable emphasis on planning its schedules on permitting their ships to travel at the most fuel efficient speed. This was a new Holland America ship and much larger than any of the Seabourn ships. He said that the most fuel efficient speed of this ship was 17 knots but this can vary from vessel to vessel. I was mildly surprised when he said that this ship is the most fuel efficient in their fleet when it travels at 17 knots.

The question may only be relevant for cruises involving long distances between ports and those who prefer maximizing their time visiting ports rather than enjoying ship amenities. As previously mentioned, additional speed is helpful in being able to get back on schedule due to port departure or weather delays. A more remote advantage is being able to use more powerful engine capacity to hold a docked ship in place when heavy winds hitting the superstructure create a significant risk that mooring ropes are inadequate alone. You probably recall the Encore accident when it broke free from its mooring lines due to heavy wind (gusts) conditions. A captain once told me once that his cruise line sets a docking wind velocity limit for each of their ships and that he feels more comfortable navigating in close quarters and through heavy traffic when his ship has a significant amount of reserve power available for him to quickly access beyond the optimum power designed to maximize fuel consumption. I doubt this should be a concern for an Encore or Ovation passenger. My question is more a matter of curiosity. The explanation someone offered that the addition of a deck to the smaller ship hull without expanding the power plant probably makes good economic sense.

I read that the maximum cruising speed for these two ships is only 15 knots versus 19 knots for the smaller ships. This may be a problem for me depending upon the itinerary. Is it a potential problem for anyone else?

Her last cruise will probably be Captain Dag's as well.

Sorry to hear that Captain Dag will retire. Unfortunately, there are few cruise ships left that match his requirements because the industry has so rapidly moved away from the traditional cruise ship experience to appeal to a larger customer base. I hope he tires of staying at home and returns because he is a cut way above the typical cruise ship captain.