Small Clothes Steamer

Pack clothes with dry cleaner bags and they won't wrinkle.

While i appreciate your noting that they are not allowed, period.. you have every right to make that point and you are correct.

 

But as for what you pack and when you pack.. i dont think its reasonable to explain how and when you do things, and therefore if everyone followed your idea there would be no need for a steamer.

 

Firstly, i and many others will not buy a whole new wardrobe consisting of materials that ' you' have... and therefore have no worries about wrinkles. Our clothes is our clothes, and while many will purchase an item or two prior to a cruise, i dont see a huge line up to purchase a new wardrobe based on your recommendation of what type of clothing to pack.

 

secondly, as for when to pack... there are times i left my home on a sunday evening, to be working on the road as an auditor thru to Friday, only to return friday evening and fly saturday to catch a cruise. If my clothes is not packed prior to leaving for work, well i guess i wouldnt be going. So i also dont think you have a right to suggest to people when to pack, and reference the other threads as to when people start... everyone has their own reasons, and not everyone is sitting at home counting the hours until the time arrives to leave... some work to the last minute.

WOW, a little defensive are we? Just do the right thing, follow the rules.

not at all, im stating facts.. and there were simply

 

we cannot purchase a whole new wardrobe based on the recommendation to pack certain materials and secondly

 

not everyone can wait and pack the last minute.. as noted, i packed one weekend, work a week on the road to leave sat morning only after returning friday evening.

 

no choice, clothes packed for a week or more.

 

Simple facts, not sure how you find that defensive at all, and i didnt use any bad language, or go nuts on the OP... ???

I pack at least 2 weeks ahead of time just the OCD nature of me. Never have I worried about wrinkles or needing to bring a steamer or iron especially since they are not allowed. No I don't like wrinkles but they either fall out due the humidity in the Caribbean or the humidity created by the shower. Please stop breaking the rules or you ( the collective you) will make it to the point other items people can't do without are not allowed. You are not that entitled that the rules do not apply to you no matter how many times you've been doing it

not at all, im stating facts.. and there were simply

 

we cannot purchase a whole new wardrobe based on the recommendation to pack certain materials and secondly

 

not everyone can wait and pack the last minute.. as noted, i packed one weekend, work a week on the road to leave sat morning only after returning friday evening.

 

no choice, clothes packed for a week or more.

 

Simple facts, not sure how you find that defensive at all, and i didnt use any bad language, or go nuts on the OP... ???

Your lengthy takedown of my original post mistates what I wrote. You said: "But as for what you pack and when you pack.. i dont think its reasonable to explain how and when you do things, and therefore if everyone followed your idea there would be no need for a steamer"

I never said that at all! Here's what I wrote: In close to 50 cruises, I have never found a need to iron anything. I've learnt to pack simple, non wrinkleable clothing, and I pack the night before a cruise, not weeks before as some describe here in "when do you start packing" threads. The longer a garment sits folded, the more likely it is to get creases, especially if there are other articles pressing down on it.

I said what I do, that's all. You and anyone else can pack when it is convenient for you, or buy cruise clothes or not, that's your choice.

We agree that a steamer is prohibited. After that I'll do what I do and you'll do what you do. It's all good. Just don't misrepresent what I wrote.

I wasn't going to weigh in on this thread, but since someone asked, here goes.

As far as crew/concessionaires having steamers, any heating appliance used onboard by the crew/concessionaires is regularly inspected for proper operation, especially of the "auto-off" function. These "auto-off" thermostatic switches are the most common cause of fires with appliances that heat. They routinely fail. Mr. Coffee almost went out of business back in the 80's from lawsuits resulting from fires caused by their faulty "auto-off" switches. The cruise line cannot control whether your steamer has been inspected and tested recently, so they don't allow them. Also, there is a difference in insurance risk if an employee uses a device, or if a customer uses it.

It really isn't about current draw, or heating of wiring. It is about the heating element continuing to heat, and once the water is gone from the steamer, the temperature will rise (which is when the "auto-off" switch is supposed to activate), and eventually melt the plastic case, causing either the plastic to burn, or to drip on something that will burn.

As for why hair care appliances and not steamers? The cruise lines realize they cannot ban hair care appliances and still have women cruise, and they cannot possibly provide all the varied appliances that women would prefer in each cabin. So, the insurance underwriter agrees that hair care appliances, while dangerous, are allowed, and write the risk policy as such. Clothing steamers and irons are a different thing, in that probably the vast majority of cruisers wouldn't take one along, and perhaps the cruise line supplies them, properly inspected and tested. So, the insurance underwriter can say no to these items, as it is less disruptive to the cruise demographic.

I see no reason to bring anything that glows when traveling. As for clothes care, there are people who will do it for you. When I am on vacation I will pay the money for such service. Also my grandmother always told me it is a poor seat that cannot iron its own pants.

Every cruise

Every time

Hubby is in charge of steaming any clothing we cannot have time to steam in the shower or get the wrinkles out on the balcony. :)

Whoopppss I brought one once. I didn't know it was prohibited. I actually didn't even end up using it.

Please read chengkp75's response and then do a search for his other posts, He isn't one of us who think they know, HE KNOWS and when he tells you this is a bad thing, he means it.

Sent this to hubby to re-read the fine print. :cool:

Are these allowed? Leave in 3 days and just curious. Hate running to iron every day. ;p

Why iron everyday? Do it in batches or all at once. Could have your SO run the items back and forth if they need to be hung up right away.

As for those of you who are so worried about breaking rules. I suppose none of you have ever went over the speed limit, changed lanes without a signal or rolled through a stop sign. All of which could hurt or kill someone.

Yes, bringing a steamer is against the rules. It is the prerogative for anyone to break rules and take the chance of getting penalized for it (like getting a speeding ticket). As for the comparison of an open flame to using a steamer, that is like comparing apples to oranges. As to the comment about the bigger the steamer the more the amps, that is correct, but all circuits are protected by circuit breakers which prevents the wiring from overheating by tripping the breaker. With a steamer or any other device with a heating element, the fact that if used per manufacture directions they are not dangerous. Now if you have the cord knotted up or pinch, then yes the cord will over heat without tripping a breaker. It is the responsibility of Carnival to keep everyone safe and that is why there are rules, some can decide to circumvent the rules. I do not recall in recent history of hearing about fire started by a curling iron or steamer on a cruise ship.

You could say there should be a rule not to drink alcohol on a ship as a drunk passenger can do many stupid things to injure or kill another passenger, which is way more likely to happen then a steamer causing a fire. But alcohol make the ships a lot of money, so you will never see that rule.:)

Well, my philosophy, and that of many professional mariners, over 42 years on ships, is that fire prevention is always superior to fire fighting. Yes, steamers are certified by UL, but only if used as directed, which will always state: "unplug when not in use, do not leave unattended". Since the cruise lines cannot control whether you or anyone uses the steamer correctly, they disallow them. That is fire prevention. Even with heating appliances that are regularly inspected, there can be failures. We had a coffee maker that was in the electrician's shop for testing that went up in flames from a failed auto-off switch.

Since there is no national clearing house for reporting fires on foreign flag cruise ships, you probably never will hear about a fire started by a heating appliance, since in 99% of the cases they are extinguished quickly.

I take your comparison to drinking as somewhat specious, as drinking will normally only cause harm to yourself, or perhaps a couple of people, while a fire at sea can threaten the lives of everyone onboard, passengers and crew.

Well, my philosophy, and that of many professional mariners, over 42 years on ships, is that fire prevention is always superior to fire fighting. Yes, steamers are certified by UL, but only if used as directed, which will always state: "unplug when not in use, do not leave unattended". Since the cruise lines cannot control whether you or anyone uses the steamer correctly, they disallow them. That is fire prevention. Even with heating appliances that are regularly inspected, there can be failures. We had a coffee maker that was in the electrician's shop for testing that went up in flames from a failed auto-off switch.

 

Since there is no national clearing house for reporting fires on foreign flag cruise ships, you probably never will hear about a fire started by a heating appliance, since in 99% of the cases they are extinguished quickly.

 

I take your comparison to drinking as somewhat specious, as drinking will normally only cause harm to yourself, or perhaps a couple of people, while a fire at sea can threaten the lives of everyone onboard, passengers and crew.

Well said! Same goes for the surge protector issue too.

It really irritates me when people people pick and choose which rules they feel don't apply to them because they think they know better than the people that put them there in the first place. And it is quite childish to constantly bring up the speed limit or whatever lame butt excuse they come up with to try and justify their selfishness. That's right - selfishness. Plain and simple. Take a look at every rule that people try and skate around and there really is no other reason besides that.

Well, my philosophy, and that of many professional mariners, over 42 years on ships, is that fire prevention is always superior to fire fighting. Yes, steamers are certified by UL, but only if used as directed, which will always state: "unplug when not in use, do not leave unattended". Since the cruise lines cannot control whether you or anyone uses the steamer correctly, they disallow them. That is fire prevention. Even with heating appliances that are regularly inspected, there can be failures. We had a coffee maker that was in the electrician's shop for testing that went up in flames from a failed auto-off switch.

 

 

 

Since there is no national clearing house for reporting fires on foreign flag cruise ships, you probably never will hear about a fire started by a heating appliance, since in 99% of the cases they are extinguished quickly.

 

 

 

I take your comparison to drinking as somewhat specious, as drinking will normally only cause harm to yourself, or perhaps a couple of people, while a fire at sea can threaten the lives of everyone onboard, passengers and crew.

Only takes one careless drunk smoker not following the rules to start a fire. I do not see my comparison too far off base but appreciate your comments.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Since there is no national clearing house for reporting fires on foreign flag cruise ships, you probably never will hear about a fire started by a heating appliance, since in 99% of the cases they are extinguished quickly

Are you saying that Noro percentages have to be reported, and fires are not? Noro is a nuisance, but it's not as if infected passengers pose a threat to the US population. I'd say that Noro reports could be taken care of by consumer organizations if they think consumers are that interested in the odds of having a partially spoiled vacation.

Fires on a ship however are a very real danger to (mostly US) passengers, I'm a bit amazed there's no official record of those.

Only takes one careless drunk smoker not following the rules to start a fire. I do not see my comparison too far off base but appreciate your comments.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Right. And if the drunk person is smoking in an non smoking area, it could be a real problem. However, if they are smoking in a designated area, the area is designed for smoking so proper precautions are put into place to minimize the risks. Should a fire start, it would be taken care of right away. But not all people that drink smoke as well, so there's that.

In either the steamer or smoker case taking place inside a cabin, they are doing prohibited things and the fire could go undetected for an amount of time as to become a huge issue. Both are capable of causing damage and loss of life. If everyone followed the rules, then the risks could be practically eliminated. Just because someone "could" do something to cause something bad to happen, it doesn't mean you "should" do something that you KNOW isn't allowed whether or not you agree with it. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Are you saying that Noro percentages have to be reported, and fires are not? Noro is a nuisance, but it's not as if infected passengers pose a threat to the US population. I'd say that Noro reports could be taken care of by consumer organizations if they think consumers are that interested in the odds of having a partially spoiled vacation.

 

Fires on a ship however are a very real danger to (mostly US) passengers, I'm a bit amazed there's no official record of those.

Again, it has to do with jurisdiction and flagging. A health report has to be filed by every ship, cruise ship or not, prior to entering the US, as the USPH's mandate is to prevent the introduction of infectious diseases into the US, not to monitor the health of cruise passengers. Why have the USPH inspection scores and noro outbreak updates become public on a website? Most likely due to a freedom of information filing, and since it is a US government document, it would be made public. And it is for all infectious diseases, not just noro. There are a lot of more dangerous diseases out there, like ebola, that could be brought in on a ship (and again, these regulations are for every ship, not just cruise ships). Most countries have public health inspections of foreign ships, but most do not publish any results.

As for fire, while under the international conventions of UNCLOS, MARPOL, and SOLAS, it is the flag state's responsibility to investigate a "serious marine incident", it is up to the flag state as to whether they make this public knowledge or not. Since these documents are property of the flag state, it is up to their law as to what can be challenged to be made public. The threshold for these investigations is "causing loss of life or serious injury to nationals of another State or serious damage to ships or installations of another State or to the marine environment." Now, again it is up to the flag state to determine the level of damage that falls under "serious damage". The USCG, for instance, calls a "serious marine accident" to be any damage to the ship over $20k. Would a cabin fire on a cruise ship exceed that $20k threshold? Most likely not, unless it got out of hand.

Right. And if the drunk person is smoking in an non smoking area, it could be a real problem. However, if they are smoking in a designated area, the area is designed for smoking so proper precautions are put into place to minimize the risks. Should a fire start, it would be taken care of right away. But not all people that drink smoke as well, so there's that.

 

In either the steamer or smoker case taking place inside a cabin, they are doing prohibited things and the fire could go undetected for an amount of time as to become a huge issue. Both are capable of causing damage and loss of life. If everyone followed the rules, then the risks could be practically eliminated. Just because someone "could" do something to cause something bad to happen, it doesn't mean you "should" do something that you KNOW isn't allowed whether or not you agree with it. Two wrongs don't make a right.

As I said. Someone drunk who smokes in a nonsmoking area. I am not saying you should break the rules. I am saying people shouldn’t be on a soap box saying shame on you when most people break rules in everyday life

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

As I said. Someone drunk who smokes in a nonsmoking area. I am not saying you should break the rules. I am saying people shouldn’t be on a soap box saying shame on you when most people break rules in everyday life

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I can see what you mean and there are some things I can let go, but when greedy, selfish people put my or my family's life in danger especially in the middle of the ocean, I can't. What I or anyone else does in "everyday life" is of no concern to me when I'm on a cruise. While I'm sure everyone has done something that they shouldn't have at some point, it doesn't matter. Nor does it negate their right to voice concern and pass judgement (whether someone else agrees with it or not) on the people that feel their selfishness overrules others' rights to be safe.

If saying the people that purposefully ignore the rules because they think they know better are ding-dongs is wrong and frowned upon, oh well. Consider me guilty. I don't apologize for it at all.

Only takes one careless drunk smoker not following the rules to start a fire. I do not see my comparison too far off base but appreciate your comments.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Are you saying that Noro percentages have to be reported, and fires are not? Noro is a nuisance, but it's not as if infected passengers pose a threat to the US population. I'd say that Noro reports could be taken care of by consumer organizations if they think consumers are that interested in the odds of having a partially spoiled vacation.

 

Fires on a ship however are a very real danger to (mostly US) passengers, I'm a bit amazed there's no official record of those.

Mr. chengkp75 is not a keyboard warrior. He is a professional, seafaring, honest to goodness ship engineer, mostly likely at sea now. If he says it, bank on it.

Again, it has to do with jurisdiction and flagging. A health report has to be filed by every ship, cruise ship or not, prior to entering the US, as the USPH's mandate is to prevent the introduction of infectious diseases into the US, not to monitor the health of cruise passengers. Why have the USPH inspection scores and noro outbreak updates become public on a website? Most likely due to a freedom of information filing, and since it is a US government document, it would be made public. And it is for all infectious diseases, not just noro. There are a lot of more dangerous diseases out there, like ebola, that could be brought in on a ship (and again, these regulations are for every ship, not just cruise ships). Most countries have public health inspections of foreign ships, but most do not publish any results.

 

As for fire, while under the international conventions of UNCLOS, MARPOL, and SOLAS, it is the flag state's responsibility to investigate a "serious marine incident", it is up to the flag state as to whether they make this public knowledge or not. Since these documents are property of the flag state, it is up to their law as to what can be challenged to be made public. The threshold for these investigations is "causing loss of life or serious injury to nationals of another State or serious damage to ships or installations of another State or to the marine environment." Now, again it is up to the flag state to determine the level of damage that falls under "serious damage". The USCG, for instance, calls a "serious marine accident" to be any damage to the ship over $20k. Would a cabin fire on a cruise ship exceed that $20k threshold? Most likely not, unless it got out of hand.

I understand that USPH doesn't want the introduction of noro and how it now has some semi-jurisdiction on ships because eventually those ships want to disembark at FLL. But noro is not exactly ebola or smallpox. A ship with 100% infected pax would probably still be allowed to disembark, just like you are allowed to leave a land based institution that has a massive infection rate.

What I don't understand is why some US organization cannot use that same kind of "semi-jurisdiction", which is "we can't tell you what to do because you have a Panamese flag, but if your ship, or any of the ships in your fleet, ever wants to visit one of our ports you must listen to us".

And then, the US-defined rules could be something like "any fire that needed a crew member to be extinguished needs to be reported".

As a passenger, I don't care about noro. I wash my hands, don't touch my eyes, and in the unlikely event I would be infected I can cope with a few vacation days lost in my cabin. If however, cruise line x has to take care of a tiny fire every week because they are sloppy at the gangway stopping people from bringing kettles, or sloppy at the incinerator, or a chef puts too many sparkles on birthday cakes, or whatever, while cruise line y had their last incident 8 years ago, I might choose y.

Mr. chengkp75 is not a keyboard warrior. He is a professional, seafaring, honest to goodness ship engineer, mostly likely at sea now. If he says it, bank on it.

That's why I ask him when I have questions for the last 4 years or so. :D

 

What I don't understand is why some US organization cannot use that same kind of "semi-jurisdiction", which is "we can't tell you what to do because you have a Panamese flag, but if your ship, or any of the ships in your fleet, ever wants to visit one of our ports you must listen to us".

 

And then, the US-defined rules could be something like "any fire that needed a crew member to be extinguished needs to be reported".

 

Because there is a long, long, standing legal status of "national sovereignty" where a ship that flies the flag of a nation is considered to be part of that nation. Do impose any jurisdiction on that ship requires something codified like the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) (which each member nation has enacted into national law through enabling legislation), or through precedent in international courts, and this would require reciprocity, so that US ships visiting foreign ports would be subject to similar requirements (not just reporting of fires). And how do you parse Panamanian flag cruise ships from Panamanian flag container ships. If we said, "we're going to impose our laws on your ships" the Panamanian government could say, fine, we won't allow our ships to enter the US. The US imports way more than we export, and the Panamanian merchant fleet is the single largest fleet in the world, with close to 16% of the world's tonnage under their flag. Would shipping companies suffer under this drastic measure, sure, but the US economy would suffer an order of magnitude or two more.

I roll all my clothes. Rarely have wrinkles.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I must question, feeling so strongly about the clothes steamer issue, why havent you and / or others, taken action to ensure no curling irons or straighteners, are allowed on the ship AND, only carnival supplied hair dryers, to name a few items.

 

 

 

You DO NOT want your family put in danger on the high seas, and i absolutely understand, but if you fee so strongly and a steamer causes SUCH concern, i would expect you would have already taken action to ensure none of the above mentioned items are on the ship either. .. i mean, they can equally put your family in danger.

 

 

 

You seem to feel very strong about this, and im wondering if you have contacted carnival asking that curling irons straighteners etc, also not be allowed because of your concerns.

 

 

 

I read in a post below, Carnival allows those because women would stop cruising if they were disallowed.. i guess thats not good enough... they can just as easily start a fire, am i incorrect in thinking that?

 

 

 

Im asking you, are we all ding dongs to step foot on a ship which allows hair straighteners, hair curling irons, hair dyers other than those supplied by carnival? Shouldnt we insist they also be part of the not permitted rule? Curious

I think it was pretty well explained in post #36. I am not looking to make policy, rather I believe that the current rules need to be followed. If they saw the things you mentioned as a large enough fire hazard and banned them, then fine. Apparently steamers, clothes irons, surge protectors and the like are more of their concern so they prohibit them.

Anyone who purposefully disregards the precautions put in place for safety is nothing but selfish. It seems you are the one that is so concerned with curling irons and the like so maybe you should petition the cruise lines to ban them. Either way, steamers are not allowed no matter how many times you have brought them.

To the OP... I hate ironing and use a steamer at home, so I have a deal with my hubby and he does any needed ironing BUT we do it on the first day before muster and get it over with before the trip even begins. Thats my best suggestion. Also, a hair straightener works on many things if youre in a pinch.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Forums mobile app