Oceania Regatta - Propulsion Issue - Anyone onboard current voyage?

I heard that Regatta experienced a propulsion and power failure this morning, and that while power to guest facilities has now been restored, the propulsion issue is still not addressed and the ship is awaiting a tug to tow her back to Honolulu for further inspection.

Anyone currently onboard this voyage by chance that can provide any updates?

Fingers crossed this won't impact the current itinerary too much or cause a cancellation mid-cruise.

Morning before last the ships crew did an excellent job maintaining calm during a pre-sunrise mustering of all passengers at 2 locations, so information could be conveyed via ships officers & crew as,at that time, all power was out. We returned to Honolulu under tow of 3 tugs & are currently waiting for the announced mid-afternoon departure. We completely missed the scheduled islands of Kauai and Maui and surely a quality line as Oceania will offer refunds. If we depart per the captain's estimated time we should be back on schedule and unless there are more unforeseen issues the ship should make her other voyages on schedule.

It was yesterday it lost power (2 am local time) as you say guest facilities have power. It is currently docked in Honolulu. Itinerary was to be at Kahului, Maui. Not a bad place to be way layed. Hope it gets underway soon.

Morning before last the ships crew did an excellent job maintaining calm during a pre-sunrise mustering of all passengers at 2 locations, so information could be conveyed via ships officers & crew as,at that time, all power was out. We returned to Honolulu under tow of 3 tugs & are currently waiting for the announced mid-afternoon departure. We completely missed the scheduled islands of Kauai and Maui and surely a quality line as Oceania will offer refunds. If we depart per the captain's estimated time we should be back on schedule and unless there are more unforeseen issues the ship should make her other voyages on schedule.

Thanks for the update. The pre dawn muster sounds kind of wild but glad to hear crew kept everyone calm and sounds like things were handled well.

Are you back on the move now?

After bring towed back to Honolulu, Regatta had USCG inspections and was finally allowed to depart at 9pm local time on November 9. Although reasons for power failure have not been announced, bad fuel is "suspected". Emergency generator failed to properly function.

We missed two port calls in Hawaii. Fakarava, French Polynesia will also be missed. The current trip is still scheduled to visit Bora Bora, Moorea and Papeete on schedule.

Each guest is being given a $500 Future Cruise Credit, usable towards any 2018 or 2019 voyage.

good to hear she is underway again

Hope the rest of the trip is uneventful

Sure hope she is ready for us in December. For those onboard, hopefully you will enjoy the rest of your cruise. It's bound to be something you will talk about for quite a while.

Sure hope she is ready for us in December. For those onboard, hopefully you will enjoy the rest of your cruise. It's bound to be something you will talk about for quite a while.

Was thinking same Cathi..

The Oceania's $500 might be great credit towards a future cruise for someone in an inside cabin but it's insulting for those who paid for suites. The cost difference of the owners suite is 4-5 times the interior; so I think Oceania should adjust their credit accordingly. Additionally their timeline of 2 years, most suites are already sold. Upper level suites credit should remain valid into 2020.

The Oceania's $500 might be great credit towards a future cruise for someone in an inside cabin but it's insulting for those who paid for suites. The cost difference of the owners suite is 4-5 times the interior; so I think Oceania should adjust their credit accordingly. Additionally their timeline of 2 years, most suites are already sold. Upper level suites credit should remain valid into 2020.

It is unfortunate you are offended by receiving the same compensation as the riff raff. The credit is for missing the ports and the ensuing angst. Missing a port affects everyone equally, though some may be more distressed than others. The credit is not compensation for losing your suite experience which is unchanged.

Does your travel insurance compensate for missing a port? Some do. If your insurance does cover that you might get more money based on your suite purchase. If you self insured or relied on your credit card you might only get what the cruise line is giving to all pax who suffered the loss of a port.

It is unfortunate you are offended by receiving the same compensation as the riff raff. The credit is for missing the ports and the ensuing angst. Missing a port affects everyone equally, though some may be more distressed than others. The credit is not compensation for losing your suite experience which is unchanged.

 

Does your travel insurance compensate for missing a port? Some do. If your insurance does cover that you might get more money based on your suite purchase. If you self insured or relied on your credit card you might only get what the cruise line is giving to all pax who suffered the loss of a port.

Have to agree with YoHoHo. The compensation is not for your cabin/suite. It's for missing ports. Everyone misses the port not just those who opted for the more expensive suites.

Have to agree with YoHoHo. The compensation is not for your cabin/suite. It's for missing ports. Everyone misses the port not just those who opted for the more expensive suites.

I do not agree. It should be a percentage of the fare that you paid. Every cabin class pays a different fare to go to the same ports so the compensation should reflect that. Just my opinion.

I do not agree. It should be a percentage of the fare that you paid. Every cabin class pays a different fare to go to the same ports so the compensation should reflect that. Just my opinion.

+1, agree any credit should reflect what you pay.

I can see both sides of this little debate. Yes, I think the intent is to just cover missed ports but, isn't the credit about future bookings (it's not a refund we are talking about, correct?).

I think a win-win for everyone would have been a % credit towards future bookings, say like 20%. That way if a future booking is for a inside or a PH it would still hold a decent value for what the customer would normally book. It would also act as an incentive for a customer to book a higher value cabin than they would normally book in hopes to get even a greater value of the credit. And of course we all know once you go up in class it's hard to go back down with other future cruises (lol).

And of course, O has a new booking as a result of the incentive credit. What I would view as a win-win for everyone :)

Of course, I don't run a cruise company so maybe this doesn't make any sense to them????

Cheers,

John

Everyone on the ship missed the same ports

So everyone should get the same credit amount it has nothing to do with your cabin location

The cabin was still there for your use

Now if your cabin was moved off the ship then I can see getting a greater discount

JMO

Everyone on the ship missed the same ports

So everyone should get the same credit amount it has nothing to do with your cabin location

The cabin was still there for your use

Now if your cabin was moved off the ship then I can see getting a greater discount

 

JMO

Just a matter of different opinions. When we came back early from a noro cruise a few years ago we got a percentage of what we paid as a refund and the same percentage in addition as a discount for a future cruise. What we paid was the factor, not where we were located. Only fair way to do it.

I have some chums who are currently on the Regatta and they are disappointed that they missed two ports in the Hawaiian Islands. They are on a round the world tour which only incorporated the Oceania cruise because it happened to take in several of the places they wished to visit en route and this enabled them to combine transportation and accommodation in one package. While missed ports because of weather conditions, strikes or even civil unrest can be put down to bad luck, the breakdown of the vessel was wholly within the control of the cruise line... even if the fuel was contaminated as previous posters have suggested, it is still the company's responsibility to have procedures in place to monitor the quality of the diesel being pumped into the vessel's tanks. So, returning to the subject of the compensation being offered, only if one books another trip with a line that has demonstrably questionable standards of maintenance will there be any recompense for missing two stops on the itinerary. If, like my friends, you have no intention of taking another Oceania cruise, there is nothing.

This is not fair. I have advised them to contact Oceania in the UK as soon as they have disembarked in Papeete and if there is no better offer, take the matter up with the UK Trading Standards Office.

to. So, returning to the subject of the compensation being offered, only if one books another trip with a line that has demonstrably questionable standards of maintenance will there be any recompense for missing two stops on the itinerary. If, like my friends, you have no intention of taking another Oceania cruise, there is nothing.

 

This is not fair. I have advised them to contact Oceania in the UK as soon as they have disembarked in Papeete and if there is no better offer, take the matter up with the UK Trading Standards Office.

Have you read any of the cruise line T & C's ?

If you really want to see a specific city/town then do not go with a cruise ship there is always a chance they will not make it

Most of the time they do but sometimes things just happen

JMO

YMMV

In the UK, companies can (and do) put what they like in the Terms & Conditions but if Trading Standards deem something to be unfair, it will be over-ridden and a customer will be able to claim compensation.

If you use T&Cs as a benchmark, the ship wouldn't have to visit any of the advertised ports of call and there would still be no comeback for the customer.

In the UK, companies can (and do) put what they like in the Terms & Conditions but if Trading Standards deem something to be unfair, it will be over-ridden and a customer will be able to claim compensation.

 

If you use T&Cs as a benchmark, the ship wouldn't have to visit any of the advertised ports of call and there would still be no comeback for the customer.

exactly!! that is why companies have T & C's

:halo:It would have been better if they just refunded pax the port fees like other cruise lines do when ports are missed

. even if the fuel was contaminated as previous posters have suggested, it is still the company's responsibility to have procedures in place to monitor the quality of the diesel being pumped into the vessel's tanks

Wow, just Wow.......

Wow, just Wow.......

Don't understand what you mean by your posting. Can't tell who you think is wrong. Very confusing. :confused::confused:

Wow, just Wow.......

J & S,

That's weird, as that was almost exactly my response when I read that "responsibility" phrase. Although, to be honest, mine was more "Wowee, that guy can't be serious, can he?"

. even if the fuel was contaminated as previous posters have suggested, it is still the company's responsibility to have procedures in place to monitor the quality of the diesel being pumped into the vessel's tanks.

As those who know my posting history, I won't get involved with a compensation, or guest relations question, but I'd like to weigh in on a few technical points.

First, I'll quibble with the "bad fuel" reason. These engines are designed to run on the worst fuel out there. And to your direct point, the company does have a procedure to monitor the quality of the fuel being bunkered, virtually every shipping company sends out a bunker sample immediately after bunkering for analysis at a third party testing facility.

Now, what most likely happened is that the fuel that was already onboard, and the fuel that was bunkered (or was switched to when the problem happened) are what are known as "incompatible" fuels, based on the molecular structure of the crude oil it is refined from. Blending of two incompatible fuels can result in "waxing" of long chain molecules, that will clog fuel filters, and deprive the engines of fuel. This is most likely what happened, if even the engines that were not running could not start and come on to restore power. As for knowing whether the two fuels are compatible, there are tests for this, but there is also the characteristic of some fuels to react to centrifuging, where the fuel is spun at high speed to remove solid contaminants. This centrifuging can result in waxing of otherwise compatible fuels, and you really have no way of knowing if this is going to happen until it happens. I speak from 42 years experience handling residual fuels on ships.

What worries me is that the emergency generator did not come online as it is supposed to. That, I'm sure, drew a lot of attention from the USCG.

After bring towed back to Honolulu, Regatta had USCG inspections and was finally allowed to depart at 9pm local time on November 9. Although reasons for power failure have not been announced, bad fuel is "suspected". Emergency generator failed to properly function.

We missed two port calls in Hawaii. Fakarava, French Polynesia will also be missed. The current trip is still scheduled to visit Bora Bora, Moorea and Papeete on schedule.

Each guest is being given a $500 Future Cruise Credit, usable towards any 2018 or 2019 voyage.

Who suspected it a passenger???

Jancruz1