chengkp75

Many ships have two foghorns, one on the forecast (above the bridge on a cruise ship) and one on the main master (above the funnel). They also have a "bell and gong" signal for when anchored. All of these are "directional" to an extent, so that, for instance, the sound is louder away from the ship than it is below the horn.

Yes, that's a heat detector. But, the cameras mounted along the ship's side can see onto the balcony to some extent.

German Air Force was having too many accidents with power lines while doing low level training, so they went to training on ships (no power lines).

Moderately common for planes to make practice runs on ships. Seen it many times over 46 years. Pilot not likely to get into trouble.

That really isn't "dirty" water. The discoloration is caused by the calcium scale that has broken off the inside of the water pipes when the pipes are drained for repairs. It is not particularly appealing looking, but is safe. Both caused by lack of vacuum at your toilet, caused by a blockage somewhere downstream from your toilet. And this is what I describe as the "ghost" flush, above.

Not sure what you mean by "get away with it". International law says that when a foreign flag ship is in port, the local laws (port state) only apply to activities "exterior" to the ship, meaning things like pollution, taxes on commerce (sales or liquor taxes), customs duties, or anything that affects the "safety or well being" of the port state. So, Texas has decided to exercise their legal right to require all liquor sold to have paid their tax. Other states do not exercise their right. Since it is a legal right, Texas is not "getting away with" anything. If the cruise lines were to say, "well, we don't pay this in other states", first off, each state is allowed to make their own laws, however different from other states, and secondly, the state could say that no liquor could be sold onboard, while the ship is in Texas waters (out to 3 miles from shore). The ship gets a state or local liquor license to sell liquor just like any bar in Texas, and that license can be revoked if found to be selling liquor without a tax stamp.

Do you mean toilet tissue, or facial tissue? In reality, any toilet tissue is flushable in a well maintained vacuum toilet system. While facial tissue is produced similarly to toilet tissue, and will normally not cause problems, its just better not to flush them. What really cause problems are wipes, whether baby, adult, sanitizing, or make-up types. These products are made differently than toilet or facial tissue, in that the paper fibers are woven, not pressed, and many have plastic fibers in them to provide strength. These can cause clogs almost always.

The law itself is not strange, every state (except NH and Wyoming, in which only the state can sell liquor) has a state liquor tax, that the distiller/brewer/distributor pays when they bring the liquor into the state (and get those funny little seals). What is somewhat unique to Texas, is that they enforce this on foreign flag cruise ships, which they are allowed to do by international law, where other states don't bother, but may charge sales tax on each drink.

Close. Unlike all the other liquor that is used onboard the ship, which has no state liquor tax paid on it, when in Texas waters, only liquor that has had the state liquor tax paid (those little strips of paper over the cap), can be sold. So, since the cruise line doesn't want to pay a higher price for liquor that won't be consumed outside of Texas, they buy a limited stock of taxed liquor, and hence the menu is limited.

Okay, so I'll go with a scrubber/exhaust failure, but it still seems strange. I haven't gone completely back in the thread, but IIRC this is supposed to be a corrosion failure of multiple exhausts? I find it a bit strange that if it was only one engine, that Cunard says they can't do it in service, as other lines have installed scrubbers sequentially across the engines while remaining in service. Only if it was multiple failures that caused a toxic atmosphere inside the funnel while underway would it seem that they couldn't work on it in service. As I've said, they generally don't need all engines, and they certainly could substitute the gas turbines for diesels as needed (each of the gas turbines is 150% of the capacity of each diesel). But, if it is multiple failures, these don't appear overnight, nor do they all happen at the same time. This means that it was known for quite some time that the systems were failing, yet Cunard did nothing while it could have been repaired in service, and that it just finally collapsed the house of cards. I'm surprised the class surveyors were not aware of the failures, and didn't require repairs sooner.

I doubt the above item would be large enough, it looks like it is sized for a pacifier. Any steam sterilizer would be prohibited. Your only hope would be if the medical center has an autoclave (and given today's almost universal use of disposable implements, I'm not sure they have one), and they would do this for you.

No. This is a common myth among cruisers. Some cruise lines will submit the passenger list to third party vetting companies, but they can only find out things that are public record, like registered sex offenders, but it is not required. CBP, which falls under Homeland, doesn't really care about who leaves the country, only those entering the country, so the vetting process for CBP happens during the cruise.

Well, that sounds like individual scrubbers, then, so unless they all failed, there should not be a major problem, just one that may need to pay for more fuel (run the gas turbine more often).

Does she have them? If so, then yes, especially if they are using the multiple engine scrubbers.

Well, since most of the thread deals with the customer service aspects of the cancellations, there wasn't much about technical, but I did read it all, looking for nuggets, just didn't attach much importance to the "funnel" thing.

That would be more related to either an engine or boiler issue. An engine could have a problem with the fuel injection system, causing billows of black, sooty smoke, which if there was no wind, would land on deck. But, even with a possible engine failure, the ship should not require time out of service, nor a tug escort. Ship's diesel engines are routinely torn down completely for a 3-4 week overhaul roughly every 2-3 years, so the ship can normally sail its itinerary with one engine down for overhaul, especially as the QM2 could fire up a gas turbine to make up speed if needed. I don't think this is a "funnel" problem. Not even sure what the "funnel system" is. It is merely large pipes carrying the exhaust gas to the highest point to be let out to the atmosphere. Even a complete rotting through of the exhaust pipe, would not create large amounts of soot, it is the engine that would create this. Regardless of the weather, SOLAS requires, though some countries will grant exemptions, two separate systems of steering the ship when in "controlled waters" (under pilotage, in restricted waterways like entering port), where loss of steering could cause a grounding or collision. With only one pod capable of steering, it is required to have a tug for backup steering. In the US, the USCG requires a ship with only one steerable azipod working to have a tug escort from the berth all the way to the sea buoy.

Not sure what you wish me to comment on, there is very little information. If you are asking what I think the problem is ('cause I don't do customer service questions, not my engine room), if the mention of 22 knots on the way to Southampton, and a tug escort into harbor is correct, then I suspect they have had a failure of one of the two outboard azipods (not really azipods, Merlin propulsion pods). QM2 has four pods, so three could still give a top speed of 22 knots easily. Since the two inboard pods are "fixed" (they don't rotate to steer), loss of one steerable pod means the ship has no redundancy in steering (hence the tug escort in case the other steerable pod fails). This is a typical regulatory response to a ship that has azipods, and only has one steerable one. Redundancy in steering is required for entry into most ports, certainly NYC. Also, with steering only on one side of the ship, holding course at sea becomes more difficult for the one pod, and speed and fuel consumption would suffer. As to what has failed on the pod, given the wide variance of time frames mentioned above, I won't even start to speculate, but the Mermaid pods have had thrust bearing problems from their inception (huge lawsuit brought by Princess), and that requires a docking to repair.

What evidence do you have that maintenance has been deferred?

While you would not be breaking any laws bringing open food onboard, you would be violating the USPH/CDC VSP, which prohibits food onboard the ship that is not from a "verifiable" source, and even if you had the snacks in their original, but opened packaging, that food is no longer "verifiable". Again, it is the cruise line's "risk tolerance" in enforcing/not enforcing these regulations that will determine the outcome of your attempt. Whether or not you actually eat the snacks onboard, or save them for your return flight is irrelevant, as there is the possibility that you could eat them onboard.

Again, more likely the deck drain in those "sanitary lockers" is dry from not seeing any leakage in months. But, as you say, report a smell, and either the cabin stewards or the plumbers will pour a glass of water down the drain and fix the smell.

Probably applies to "Depends" as well.

Splash pools for kids in diapers are designed differently, and have different regulations than splash pools for kids who have been potty trained. As I said above, from P&O's own FAQ section, these special pools are only on three of their ships, as follows: Azura: children's pool (aft) and coral pool Britannia: Reef Adventure Zone and Lido pool Ventura: children's pool (aft) and Beachcomber pool Arcadia, Aurora, and Iona have no pools open to children in diapers, swim diapers, or pull-ups.

Elevators are actually part of the emergency power bus, and so they would be available in cases like this, where the emergency generator is providing limited power. The problem is, that the elevators shut down when the power goes out completely for a short period (it takes about 45 seconds for the emergency generator to start and come on line), and need to be reset individually. And, if someone with a mobility disability needed to get back to their cabin, the Captain could call out the Special Needs team, whose emergency duties are to care for those with disabilities during an emergency, and they would carry the person up or down the stairs, if the elevators were not reset.

This is not always true. That engine could be down for maintenance, or the speed required could require all engines, but it is generally true. However, when an engine fails, and drags the others down into a black out, it will take a few minutes for the idle engine to start and come online, and then the breakers for the various circuits need to be reclosed, and they will only restore power as available, until other engines can be put back on line. That gives a totally different feel than your first posts, and I agree that the ship had a total black out. I guess the Captain was trying to speak "passenger" by calling it "back-up" power. Ventilation would have been shut down as well.

If everything was operating other than the elevators, then the ship was not on "emergency power" (not sure of what "back-up power" is). Emergency power, by law, only powers those things necessary to evacuate the ship (limited lighting, steering, lifeboat davits, bridge electronics, bilge pumps).