Dawn's Adrift!

[halos]

 

I don't know how well on a scale from 1-10 NCL handled this. If 1 is perfect and 10 is always wrong its somewhere in between. .

 

I don't know either. Even if I WAS there I might not know how they handled it as far as on what scale, and even if I did come up with a number, my perception would definitely be different than someone else's....all I do know and all I have control over is how I handle 'bad things' when they are tossed at me. I would hope to handle them well.

[uneamie]

I don't know either. Even if I WAS there I might not know how they handled it as far as on what scale, and even if I did come up with a number, my perception would definitely be different than someone else's....all I do know and all I have control over is how I handle 'bad things' when they are tossed at me. I would hope to handle them well.

 

I guess that would depend on "whats happening to YOU". So many people...all with different stories to tell, different experiences. Some not so bad, others were like a nightmare. I don't think anyone should really judge these people. We were not there. I do know that if it were me and my experience was "horrific" I'd NEVER come back here to tell the tales.

[grantyandgrandma]

My freinds went on a 10 day all inclusive 2yrs. ago Very hot climate and very expensive. There was a murder in the room next to them and they were held up for nine days as the investigation went on and on . Murphy's law the electricity went on and off for hours so two things were happening 1 the body was there for 3 days in the heat and 2 the a/c in their room only worked once in a while. Not the resorts fault but now I realize they should had screamed and hollered lots. Then they may have qualified to an expert on C C as it seems this site is getting to be nothing but a big complaint site. With the worlds armchair experts in all situations. COME ON EVERYONE PUT ON YOUR BIG GIRL PANTIES AND GET BACK TO BEING AN INFORMATIVE /FUN SITE.

[beachchick]

Waaaa, Waaaa, Whine and cruise, whine and cruise...

 

Americans are so funny,

Very bloated with entitlements!

Unlike the rest of the world...

 

According to what I read in my "Contract With The Carrier", NCL owed absolutley nothing, and don't try to tell me it will put them out of business if they don't give, they deal with the masses, and when it comes right down to it, money talks and bulldung walks..................

 

They're a good carrier and take good care of their passengers.:D

 

Oh indeed...How selfish and entitled to expect that they would get what they paid for. Silly passengers!

 

Of course some things are beyond NCL's control, but this was their responsibility--it was their ship that broke. Of course it's going to take time to get people home, but they could have eased the situation by offering reasonable reimbursement for passengers who were willing to take the time to make arrangements on their own (and thus relieve NCL of the burden). Yes, some passengers were unreasonable, no question. I do not believe it to be unreasonable to expect NCL to take responsibility for this. After all, we talk about it all the time: Passengers should take responsibility for this and that; cruise lines should be held to the same standard.

 

A couple of thoughts:

 

smeyer: "A hot room is not good but not life threatening" isn't necessarily true. People die every year during heat waves. And when every available space on deck is taken, what do you suggest the rest of the passengers do to escape the stifling heat? Sleep in the lifeboats? (Not that having to sleep on deck chairs in the first place is such a great thing.)

 

riviera: It probably isn't NCL's fault, but it is their responsibility. If the brakes fail on my car (even though I keep my car perfectly maintained), it's not my fault, but the resulting accident is my responsibility. Same concept, IMO.

 

WeBeGone: I don't agree with all of Red_Dawn's comments, opinions, and posts; not at all. But I also don't assume that someone on a first cruise isn't "well traveled." Cruising is only one way to go and some of us have quite a lot of experience with non-cruise travel. With Red_Dawn, I don't really know one way or the other. I do think it's presumptuous to state that "those of us that are well traveled, and that cruise a lot, just need to assure you that everything is ok now" as if lecturing or having superior knowledge.

 

christy123: "Life happens, some good some bad. I don't think in the many years I worked in an airport I have ever seen an airline be this generous due to a mechanical problem on an aircraft. You might get a $8 coupon for a meal and if you throw a fit loud enough maybe a nights hotel but not with a guarantee when you will get on the next flight."

 

Life does happen and things don't always go as expected, but I don't think it's a good analogy to compare cancelled flights with this situation. Well, perhaps the ones where passengers have been forced to remain in a plane on the tarmac overnight. That's comparable. The $8 coupon of a meal and a voucher for a hotel allows people to actually leave the airport and doesn't generally mean that they could be delayed by 4 days due to the mechanical problems of one plane. It's not the same thing at all, IMO.

 

But we also buy travel insurance for every trip, no exceptions. We expect the unexpected and are prepared to take care of issues as needed.

 

beachchick

[MrLee]

 

By the time everyone is on board (or by the end of the first day) have everyone's return plans in a database. For many it would be automatic (NCL booked). For some it could be done when we do the online 'pre check in' (or whatever it's called). For the rest, fill out a form in the room and have staff enter it.

 

 

Am I the only one who had to enter their final destination and how I was getting there on the on-line registration form? :confused:

[ShipsAreTheBest]

 

The ship's maintenance and engineering crew did not have the expertise to troubleshoot the electrical failure. Numerous restarts (a dozen plus??) indicate they were taking a very trial-and-error approach rather than having found a problem via route cause failure analysis. They likewise turned down offers of assistance from the Coast Guard and at least one experienced electrical/mechanical professional on board who may have been able to help.

 

 

KayNMike

 

I'm sorry your cruise was ruined. Not sure that I'd be all that happy either, that's for sure.

 

As someone who (in my past life) was the graduate of a maritime academy, licensed ship's officer, and who operated a large (shore-based) electric generating plant for 7 years, I have a few reflections on your quote above.

 

Ships are a little more complicated than the family car, as you can well imagine. Even more so today, with control automation run by a computer. The Dawn is a diesel-electric ship. That means she has large diesel engines driving generators that produce a large amount of electircity. Most of that is reserved for the propulsion motors (which are electric) and the remaining for "hotel services" - that is the light and power for the ship itself. Like any ship (or power plant), the operation is a fine balance - getting (and keeping) all the key components running in the correct sequence. When an unexpected and unusual failure occurs, "trial and error" is a lot more common than you can imagine, especially when the root cause isn't so obvious. Believe me, I've been there (fortunately not with 2500 backseat drivers looking over my shoulder second guessing my every move).

 

As to turning down Coast Guard assistance; the Coast Guard's mission is search and rescue. They are not the resident experts on every ship ever built and its mechanical and electrical systems. They would be the first to tell you that. You can be sure the engineers on board were consulting with their superivsion and support staff on shoreside who were probably in touch with the manufactuer of the engines/control equipment/electrical equipment getting help in troubleshooting.

 

In my career with the electric utility industry, I have met many electrical/mechanical professionals who may know a lot about what it is they do, and who claim to know about my world, but really have no idea of what it is they are talking about (in my world). Short of the individual you mention being a licensed marine engineer and who worked on Dawn previously (or a simlar ship) or for her shipyard or for the manufacturer of the problem equipment on board, I seriously doubt he/she had anything real to contribute. Sorry. Just how I feel. I mentioned my background above. If I were on board, I wouldn't think of trying to "help". I would only step forward if someone's life were in imminent danger AND I thought I could do something without making it worse.

 

Again, I am sorry for your lousy experience. Doesn't sound fun at all. I've been on a ship at sea with no power. It is disconcerting to say the least.

[Zeno]

EXACTLY!! They were delayed....THIS is what pisses people off; they get 'inconvenienced'.

 

I think no matter what 'plan's are in place, if there is a situation going on, things will be a bit 'off' and passengers are going to be irritated.

 

Someone has posted a thread asking if there should be a passenger 'Bill of rights'....mostly because he thinks you should be compensated for missed ports ( more than port fees returned).

 

 

What I'm trying to say is that no matter how NCL handled what happened on the Dawn, there would be people who would complain. People act as if they handle things poorly intentionally. My feeling is that they did the best they could at the time.....some would say, "well, their best wasn't good enough." To them, I just don't know what to say......

 

I think that pretty much covers it. Even in the event of a major problem, people think that they should not be inconvenienced in any way - very unrealistic expectations.

 

I have a lot of sympathy for the discomfort people went through and I am sure if I had been there I would have been whining with the rest of them.

 

HOWEVER having been involved in large scale disaster planning on a corporate level, I can assure people that there is absolutely NO such thing as anticipating every eventuality and it is impossible to keep everyone happy. The main objectives are to keep everyone SAFE (but not necessarily comfortable), to recover from the event reasonably quickly and to resume normal operations ASAP. NCL accomplished those objectives. At worst passengers were uncomfortable and inconvenienced.

 

Maybe NCL could have done some things better - I really don't know and neither does anyone else because they were not privy to how decisions were made and implemented.

Sometimes no matter what you do, someone will complain. One person here complained that the captain made too many update announcements. In another instance (the Rogue Wave incident) someone else complained that the captain did not make enough announcements. So the captain can't win in these situations no matter what he does.

 

I think NCL's compensation was generous (strictly my opinion).

 

Would I want this happening to me - no - but if it did, I would try to cope as well as some people did and I would try to temper my whining with the realization that an entire ship of people and NCL employees are "all in the same boat" that I am and all our expectations are NOT going to be met and we WILL be uncomfortable and inconvenienced and unhappy. As someone said - sometimes you just have to "put on your big girl panties" and cope.

 

I hope everyone who was on this cruise has a near-perfect next vacation (or at least disaster-free).

[BIG_Steve]

As I read through this thread, my gut feelings are that most folks would have felt better if there were some decent communications. While you can not plan for every contingency, you CAN put in place a hierarchy ahead of time with "go-to" people, and specific lines of communications. Accurate information, even when dispensed by the teaspoon full, is so much better than a wheelbarrow full of bad information.

[MrPete]

As I read through this thread, my gut feelings are that most folks would have felt better if there were some decent communications. While you can not plan for every contingency, you CAN put in place a hierarchy ahead of time with "go-to" people, and specific lines of communications. Accurate information, even when dispensed by the teaspoon full, is so much better than a wheelbarrow full of bad information.

 

The receiver of the information is suspect as well. When I used to communicate info out to my org, I got everything from compliance, to "I didn't know". And I learned who could do what.

 

Some people are just lame.

[halos]

KayNMike

 

I'm sorry your cruise was ruined. Not sure that I'd be all that happy either, that's for sure.

 

As someone who (in my past life) was the graduate of a maritime academy, licensed ship's officer, and who operated a large (shore-based) electric generating plant for 7 years, I have a few reflections on your quote above.

 

Ships are a little more complicated than the family car, as you can well imagine. Even more so today, with control automation run by a computer. The Dawn is a diesel-electric ship. That means she has large diesel engines driving generators that produce a large amount of electircity. Most of that is reserved for the propulsion motors (which are electric) and the remaining for "hotel services" - that is the light and power for the ship itself. Like any ship (or power plant), the operation is a fine balance - getting (and keeping) all the key components running in the correct sequence. When an unexpected and unusual failure occurs, "trial and error" is a lot more common than you can imagine, especially when the root cause isn't so obvious. Believe me, I've been there (fortunately not with 2500 backseat drivers looking over my shoulder second guessing my every move).

 

As to turning down Coast Guard assistance; the Coast Guard's mission is search and rescue. They are not the resident experts on every ship ever built and its mechanical and electrical systems. They would be the first to tell you that. You can be sure the engineers on board were consulting with their superivsion and support staff on shoreside who were probably in touch with the manufactuer of the engines/control equipment/electrical equipment getting help in troubleshooting.

 

In my career with the electric utility industry, I have met many electrical/mechanical professionals who may know a lot about what it is they do, and who claim to know about my world, but really have no idea of what it is they are talking about (in my world). Short of the individual you mention being a licensed marine engineer and who worked on Dawn previously (or a simlar ship) or for her shipyard or for the manufacturer of the problem equipment on board, I seriously doubt he/she had anything real to contribute. Sorry. Just how I feel. I mentioned my background above. If I were on board, I wouldn't think of trying to "help". I would only step forward if someone's life were in imminent danger AND I thought I could do something without making it worse.

 

Again, I am sorry for your lousy experience. Doesn't sound fun at all. I've been on a ship at sea with no power. It is disconcerting to say the least.

 

That was a very awesome response. I don't understand why people who DON'T understand, think they know all the answers.

Why do people think that fixing things (whether it be mechanical OR getting all the passengers back to Miami) is just SO easy??? :confused:

 

The receiver of the information is suspect as well. When I used to communicate info out to my org, I got everything from compliance, to "I didn't know". And I learned who could do what.

 

Some people are just lame.

 

Amen to that. And you know with 2500 people on board that communication was recieved and comprehended in 2500 different ways.

[KayNMike]

KayNMike

 

I'm sorry your cruise was ruined. Not sure that I'd be all that happy either, that's for sure.

 

As someone who (in my past life) was the graduate of a maritime academy, licensed ship's officer, and who operated a large (shore-based) electric generating plant for 7 years, I have a few reflections on your quote above.

 

Ships are a little more complicated than the family car, as you can well imagine. Even more so today, with control automation run by a computer. The Dawn is a diesel-electric ship. That means she has large diesel engines driving generators that produce a large amount of electircity. Most of that is reserved for the propulsion motors (which are electric) and the remaining for "hotel services" - that is the light and power for the ship itself. Like any ship (or power plant), the operation is a fine balance - getting (and keeping) all the key components running in the correct sequence. When an unexpected and unusual failure occurs, "trial and error" is a lot more common than you can imagine, especially when the root cause isn't so obvious. Believe me, I've been there (fortunately not with 2500 backseat drivers looking over my shoulder second guessing my every move).

 

As to turning down Coast Guard assistance; the Coast Guard's mission is search and rescue. They are not the resident experts on every ship ever built and its mechanical and electrical systems. They would be the first to tell you that. You can be sure the engineers on board were consulting with their superivsion and support staff on shoreside who were probably in touch with the manufactuer of the engines/control equipment/electrical equipment getting help in troubleshooting.

 

In my career with the electric utility industry, I have met many electrical/mechanical professionals who may know a lot about what it is they do, and who claim to know about my world, but really have no idea of what it is they are talking about (in my world). Short of the individual you mention being a licensed marine engineer and who worked on Dawn previously (or a simlar ship) or for her shipyard or for the manufacturer of the problem equipment on board, I seriously doubt he/she had anything real to contribute. Sorry. Just how I feel. I mentioned my background above. If I were on board, I wouldn't think of trying to "help". I would only step forward if someone's life were in imminent danger AND I thought I could do something without making it worse.

 

Again, I am sorry for your lousy experience. Doesn't sound fun at all. I've been on a ship at sea with no power. It is disconcerting to say the least.

 

Thanks for your concern and very professional response ShipsAreTheBest. It's much appreciated. The bottom line is it wasn't a pleasant experience. :)

 

I was careful in my original wording ... I chose the words "did not have the expertise to troubleshoot" intentionally. One does not need to know the specifics of a particular piece of equipment to troubleshoot or facilitate a route cause failure analysis using a methodology like Kepnor-Tregoe. In this case, the person in question was a certified troubleshooter that has done work of this type for Fortune 500 companies around the globe. This was explained to one of the ship's officers after NCL had restarted the system unsuccessfully a number of times during a 3 hour period. Perhaps the officer chose not to carry it forward or maybe someone up the line decided against using such a resource. The point is they had a free resource that could have possibly helped.

 

As for the coast guard, there were elderly people with interior cabins that could have been transported off the ship. I personally saw 2 people go down from heat exhaustion. Keep in mind it was very humid and the temperatures inside the ship were well over 100 deg F. One such incident can be seen

.

[sjbdtz]

This was my first cruise and I saw things that I never saw before (LOL). Did you go on the excursion where a young lady took her infant into the ocean for the Sting Ray feeding? Better than sending him there alone...or actually feeding him to the stingrays. I can document that also. My comment about not being obese was not discrimination, it is a fact. There were people on board who should not have been there. (Like you?)

 

Furthermore, people who were not on the ship shouldn't be throwing stones in a glass house. This is an entirely misused idiom.

 

I am/was angry at the corporate level because of the lack of communication.

I did receive a call from someone (Carolyn) at the Miami NCL office this afternoon. At first we had it out on the phone and then I explained to her I was more upset about the lack of Emergency Plans that NCL had in place for things like this than I was about the actual incident. She apologized to me and then tried to explain that NCL doesn't have Emergency Plans in place for unforseeable incidents like this.

I am sorry, that answer was not good enough for me. So I guess that the 10-12 cruise ships NCL has traveling with apx. 2500 people per week you cannot tell me that you do not have some type of contract with the airlines/plane chartering companies/hotels/travel agents so when/if this happens you can just make a few calls and get things done? She also told me they ONLY booked people on chartered planes that they never attempted to put people on commerical airlines because they didn't have the "manpower" to make those calls to book the flights. Again, lack of Emergency Plan. They certainly have enough reps to answer my calls when I want to go on a cruise but not enough to help in an Emergency?

 

I'm sorry, I am not really a "seasoned" cruiser having only been on 4 cruises in 5 years on 4 different cruise lines but I should HOPE that other cruise lines have an Emergency Plan in place when (if) I do decide to cruise again.

 

a) lack of manpower on Thanksgiving weekend? NOBODY was at work. Including NCL staff. They got a LOT done, with barebones staff.

 

b) Do other cruise lines have the Emergency Plan that you want in place. Nope. You'll be disappointed every time, because you are being unrealistic.

 

 

The ship's maintenance and engineering crew did not have the expertise to troubleshoot the electrical failure. Or was it the PARTS? Numerous restarts (a dozen plus??) indicate (empirically?) they were taking a very trial-and-error approach rather than having found a problem via route cause failure analysis. They likewise turned down offers of assistance from the Coast Guard and at least one experienced electrical/mechanical professional (you?) on board who may have been able to help.

 

We echo the need for a crisis management plan/team. I do however take exception to the captain making updates every 15 to 30 minutes ... especially when the updates essentially said "I know nothing and have nothing to report." We all would have been better served had he taken a more active oversight role rather than worrying about the updates. Likewise, someone intimately involved in the repair had to be pulled away to update him (and likely everyone in the chain of command between them).

 

Update date me now. Oh...you don't know anything? Well...I need an update....but not from you....you go figure out the problem....but don't ask any of the people trying to solve the problem, you'll only slow them down..... :rolleyes:

[Harleycat]

I found your post very well written (calm and honest) and I wish my postings would have been the same so I wouldn't have been attacked with my version of how I saw things. I do feel for the crew because they made the best of the situation and I am not angry with anyone ON the ship, I am/was angry at the corporate level because of the lack of communication.

I did receive a call from someone (Carolyn) at the Miami NCL office this afternoon. At first we had it out on the phone and then I explained to her I was more upset about the lack of Emergency Plans that NCL had in place for things like this than I was about the actual incident. She apologized to me and then tried to explain that NCL doesn't have Emergency Plans in place for unforseeable incidents like this.

I am sorry, that answer was not good enough for me. So I guess that the 10-12 cruise ships NCL has traveling with apx. 2500 people per week you cannot tell me that you do not have some type of contract with the airlines/plane chartering companies/hotels/travel agents so when/if this happens you can just make a few calls and get things done? She also told me they ONLY booked people on chartered planes that they never attempted to put people on commerical airlines because they didn't have the "manpower" to make those calls to book the flights. Again, lack of Emergency Plan. They certainly have enough reps to answer my calls when I want to go on a cruise but not enough to help in an Emergency?

 

To the people who saw photos of us sleeping out on deck and called us "whiners" and saw we are "lucky" to have gotten 75% of our cruise monies back, let me remind you I paid A LOT of money to CRUISE not to CAMP. I choose to cruise because I like to relax and be pampered. I didn't pay thousands of dollars to sleep on a lawnchair, eat grilled food, drink warm water, walk in other peoples urine. The 75% refund we got on our cruise monies didn't even cover my flights home.

 

I'm sorry, I am not really a "seasoned" cruiser having only been on 4 cruises in 5 years on 4 different cruise lines but I should HOPE that other cruise lines have an Emergency Plan in place when (if) I do decide to cruise again.

 

They can't have a contract with the airlines/plane chartering companies just in case they are going to need planes. It would cost a fortune to hold planes for a contingency. Airlines themselves rarely have spare aircraft. How many times have airlines cancelled flights when they couldn't resolve a mechanical issue?

[lakeuser2002]

As I said earlier in this thread, if fog had set in and the ship arrived four hours late, with many missing their flights, the complainers would have complained... There aren't any precautions or plans to be made for fog delays.

 

 

The issue to me is that 'the fog set in' on Friday afternoon (that was when the decision to go to San Juan was made). Plenty of time to engage the emergency plan (if they had one) to get peole home on time.

[Harleycat]

Thanks for your concern and very professional response ShipsAreTheBest. It's much appreciated. The bottom line is it wasn't a pleasant experience. :)

 

I was careful in my original wording ... I chose the words "did not have the expertise to troubleshoot" intentionally. One does not need to know the specifics of a particular piece of equipment to troubleshoot or facilitate a route cause failure analysis using a methodology like Kepnor-Tregoe. In this case, the person in question was a certified troubleshooter that has done work of this type for Fortune 500 companies around the globe. This was explained to one of the ship's officers after NCL had restarted the system unsuccessfully a number of times during a 3 hour period. Perhaps the officer chose not to carry it forward or maybe someone up the line decided against using such a resource. The point is they had a free resource that could have possibly helped.

 

As for the coast guard, there were elderly people with interior cabins that could have been transported off the ship. I personally saw 2 people go down from heat exhaustion. Keep in mind it was very humid and the temperatures inside the ship were well over 100 deg F. One such incident can be seen

.

 

Troubleshooting "by the book" does not always work either. I used to do Telecom support on a large trading floor. I got to work on a Monday to find that half the floor had no telephone service. Our department VP and telephone tech were troubleshooting "by the book" and nothing was working.

 

I, being an electrician's wife, went about it differently. Two cabinets, one had power one did not. Both were plugged in but they were plugged into different recepticles (not outlets folks). I walked over to the electrical panel and sure enough, one circuit breaker was tripped. A simple flip of the switch accomplished what the by the book folks couldn't.

 

There may have been a reason the Coast Guard chose not to evacuate some people off the ship. From what I understand, some of those CG choppers are too big to land on the ship so the people would have to be hoisted up in baskets. That might be more than some elderly people could handle, I know I couldn't handle it due to my fear of heights.

[Planer's Edge]

 

I was careful in my original wording ... I chose the words "did not have the expertise to troubleshoot" intentionally. One does not need to know the specifics of a particular piece of equipment to troubleshoot or facilitate a route cause failure analysis using a methodology like Kepnor-Tregoe. In this case, the person in question was a certified troubleshooter that has done work of this type for Fortune 500 companies around the globe. This was explained to one of the ship's officers after NCL had restarted the system unsuccessfully a number of times during a 3 hour period. Perhaps the officer chose not to carry it forward or maybe someone up the line decided against using such a resource. The point is they had a free resource that could have possibly helped.

 

There could be many reasons for not accepting this offered assistance. Insurance is the one that comes most quickly to my mind. That is the only reason given for why tours are not allowed in the engine room. Maybe it applies to anyone entering the engine room no matter how qualified they might think they are.

 

Another thing that comes to mind is the the old saying about too many cooks in the kitchen. Maybe??

 

PE

[WeBeGone]

The issue to me is that 'the fog set in' on Friday afternoon (that was when the decision to go to San Juan was made). Plenty of time to engage the emergency plan (if they had one) to get peole home on time.

 

I believe "the plan" was set in motion the minute the Captain decided to head for San Juan. What you folks can't seem to comprehend is that enough empty planes that weren't already scheduled to be elsewhere had to be found - enough for 2224 passengers. Does anyone really believe that all 2224 people could have been flown out of San Juan within a 24 hour period? Good grief, the San Juan airport could not have handled so many planes even if that many planes could have been found.

[Planer's Edge]

I, being an electrician's wife, went about it differently. Two cabinets, one had power one did not. Both were plugged in but they were plugged into different recepticles (not outlets folks). I walked over to the electrical panel and sure enough, one circuit breaker was tripped. A simple flip of the switch accomplished what the by the book folks couldn't.

 

 

Those men would have gotten to that solution sooner or later. But, you women keep telling us men to read the instructions and they were doing just that. :D :D :D

 

PE

[lakeuser2002]

I believe "the plan" was set in motion the minute the Captain decided to head for San Juan. What you folks can't seem to comprehend is that enough empty planes that weren't already scheduled to be elsewhere had to be found - enough for 2224 passengers. Does anyone really believe that all 2224 people could have been flown out of San Juan within a 24 hour period? Good grief, the San Juan airport could not have handled so many planes even if that many planes could have been found.

 

You don't think San Juan could handle 10 more planes in 24 hours? During our 4 hours at the airport the runways and gates didn't seem to be anywhere near capacity. There was large gaps between planes taking off and landing. Did you see something I missed?

 

And we can agree to disagree that 10 planes couldn't be found in 24 hours (or 5 doing 2 round trips). I think they found 2 for Sat., and added one more on Sun. It may have taken 4 hours to find plans and pilots (if a plan had been pre-arranged), 6 hours to get them to San Juan (depending on where in the country they got them). I'd be curious if they searched beyond MIA and FLL (or even Florida).

 

Plus, I know that there were planes with vacant seats leaving San Juan on Saturday. With a plan... they could of been used.

[MrLee]

Does anyone think NCL didn't do everything in their power to try to make things as easy and comfortable as possible and try to get them to Miami in as timely a manner as possible? If for no other reason than the PR concerns. 2500 upset passengers would certainly not be on their agenda. Actually, I'm surprised they're aren't a lot more on here. No matter how loudly they speak,none of them are actually speaking for the majority.

[Ormond Beach 321]

Machines fail. Big machines, with lots of moving parts, fail.

But when a cruise ship fails, as the Norwegian Dawn did on a Friday morning on the cusp of the Caribbean, the organization responsible for the machine and to the passengers aboard should not fail. Norwegian Cruise Lines failed big-time.

Oh, the ship didn’t sink. There was plenty of food. They didn’t run out of alcohol. The never-ending huckstering didn’t let up. And we eventually got back to Miami.

Where NCL failed was in communications.

Friday morning, enroute from St. Kitts to Miami, everything stopped. For an hour or two after the electrical system stopped, the people in charge of the ship seemed to have their act together. The captain was on the PA system every 15 minutes or so with brief updates. Not much in they way of information, and nothing passengers didn’t know (it was hard to miss the fact that the ship was dead in the water and the lights were out), but it was reassuring to know that the captain was keeping us informed.

Hours after we lost power, we watched one smokestack after another came to life. The ship attempted to resume its run to Miami. Then the systems failed again. The captain announced that we were going to San Juan.

After that – silence. An enormous information vacuum. Passengers were left to learn what they could without help from NCL or the ship management. We shared information and rumors. We made repeated trips to Deck 7 in the vain hope that we might learn what was happening.

Deck 7 midship is where people book excursions, pay bills and get information. Call it Norwegian Dawn Central. After the captain announced that we were going to Puerto Rico, lines quickly formed as people sought information so they could make plans and notify family. Norwegian Dawn Central would become the one point on the ship every passenger visited, sometimes hourly. The problem was that nobody knew anything.

No, that’s wrong. People at corporate HQ probably knew what was happening. The ship’s command may have known. But no one else did. Certainly the poor crew members behind the information desk had no information. All they could do was hand out a business card with the number for NCL corporate headquarters in Miami.

At some point late Friday afternoon, an officer appeared in Norwegian Dawn Central and announced to the hundred or so people who happened to be there that NCL was arranging charter flights to Miami. Half a dozen crew members at the information desk, suddenly no longer the center of attention and irritation, stood in a group and listened. One said, “Why didn’t they tell us that?” They was a frustrated as the passengers.

(The crew shared our misery and continued to be as attentive, positive and responsive as they had been since the cruise began. From the day we sailed, the Dawn’s crew were friendly and energetic and provided superior service. Only near the end did they seem to lose interest, probably because they were not receiving direction from supervisors. While empty glasses, beer bottles and trash accumulated in the pool area, crew members were hunkered down on the promenade deck, using their laptops.)

Friday night, needless to say, was tedious. People found a breath of air where they could, sleeping on balconies, sleeping with stateroom doors open, sleeping on deck. Air conditioning has made wimps of us.

Saturday morning. Up bright and early. With flights back to Florida in the offing, we were packed and ready to go … nowhere.

Through word of mouth at breakfast, we learned that some passengers had found notices outside their stateroom door that they had flights (that system proved to be hit or miss as flights were added and some passengers were never notified that they had been scheduled for a flight.) Passengers learned from each other that three flights had been scheduled. Many hours would go by before word of additional flights was passed from passenger to passenger.

In Norwegian Dawn Central, a single copy of each flight manifest was posted. Scores of people jostled and pushed to looked for their names. The only reason it wasn’t hundreds of people searching for their names was that the bridge never announced that the manifests were available. As flights were added, one or two of copies of those lists were left on counters for people to peruse.

Sometime Saturday afternoon, the cruise director came on the PA system to inform us that everyone would have a flight assigned by dinner time. In the meantime, stay away from Norwegian Dawn Central, he said. Folks there didn’t have any information. (And besides, he might have added, our priority is that passengers settle their accounts before they leave the ship and frustrated passengers were interfering with that process.) As it turned out, near day’s end a handful of hotel staff showed up at one of the information desks to help passengers find out when they would fly out of San Juan. Most of Saturday passed with no useful information coming from the bridge.

What would I have liked to have known? And when?

The when part is easy – immediately and constantly.

What?

For starters, I would have liked to have been told the plan at the same time that management was trying to spin the story with the news media by showing NCL as caring, safety-conscious, fair-minded, generous and concerned about their passengers. The cruise line sent out a self-serving news release on Friday afternoon. Passengers didn’t receive the same information until the next morning.

I would have liked to know that they were working to arrange charter flights. Here’s a sample announcement that could have come from the bridge on Friday:

“NCL headquarters in Miami has an emergency plan in place. The staff there is working with pre-identified charter carriers to arrange flights from San Juan to Miami. As you can imagine, this may take some time, especially since it’s Thanksgiving weekend. However, we will be on the job non-stop until every passenger has a flight.”

I would have liked to know that flights had been arranged and the rationale for selecting which passengers flew first. Try this:

“Ladies and gentlemen. So far, we have been successful in arranging three charter flights for Saturday. We estimate that 600 passengers will be able to travel on those three flights. We have given priority to passengers who are members of our Latitudes program and travelers who must make international connections.”

It didn’t matter whether we were on the first flight or the last. Frequent travelers have dibs on certain benefits. Families with small children should have priority. Just tell us what’s happening.

Amazingly, as NCL or the Dawn scheduled passengers to fly back to Miami, they broke up families and couples – people sharing the same cabin. They assigned a man to one flight while his wife and infant son were assigned to another.

Possibly more amazing, they didn’t tell passengers who were booked to continue the cruise from Miami to the Western Caribbean that second leg of the cruise had been cancelled. I broke the news to the English couple on our evacuation flight. They thought they were headed to the Miami cruise terminal for five more days of sailing.

Or this:

“Ladies and gentlemen, we are now posting the flight lists on Channel 2 on you cabin televisions. The lists will scroll continuously and we will notify you over the public address system when a new list is available.”

What an amazing idea! Use technology to inform passengers instead of the endless blather about shopping and cruise line destinations. It didn’t happen. In fact, they could have planted the chatty cruise director in front of a microphone and had him read the names. That didn’t happen either.

Emergencies happen. Well-run organizations have emergency plans in place. Give NCL the benefit of the doubt and assume they have a playbook for emergencies at sea. But every good emergency plan has a communications component. In an emergency, people need information. They need to be able to plan. They need reassurance. They are entitled to know what is being done on their behalf.

NCL and the people in charge of the Norwegian Dawn failed their passengers miserably. They seemed to think that as long as the booze flowed (full price, of course), food was shoveled onto plates and the Caribbean band played, we would behave like docile, obedient children. The attitude, actions – and inaction – of the cruise line and the ship’s command were unprofessional and insulting.

[WeBeGone]

You don't think San Juan could handle 10 more planes in 24 hours? During our 4 hours at the airport the runways and gates didn't seem to be anywhere near capacity. There was large gaps between planes taking off and landing. Did you see something I missed?

 

And we can agree to disagree that 10 planes couldn't be found in 24 hours (or 5 doing 2 round trips). I think they found 2 for Sat., and added one more on Sun. It may have taken 4 hours to find plans and pilots (if a plan had been pre-arranged), 6 hours to get them to San Juan (depending on where in the country they got them). I'd be curious if they searched beyond MIA and FLL (or even Florida).

 

Plus, I know that there were planes with vacant seats leaving San Juan on Saturday. With a plan... they could of been used.

 

Everyone keeps writing about "an emergency plan". Do you actually think that cruise lines have plans for every concievable, or unheard of, or never happened before, emergency? Does anyone actually think that at a corporate office somewhere, men in suits sat around and thought "well, if the Dawn loses power and no one on board can adequetly fix the problem, and we have to get her to San Juan, and we have to fly 2224 people back to Miami, let's have these planes standing by, just in case"....... good grief :eek:.

[halos]

There could be many reasons for not accepting this offered assistance. Insurance is the one that comes most quickly to my mind. That is the only reason given for why tours are not allowed in the engine room. Maybe it applies to anyone entering the engine room no matter how qualified they might think they are.

 

 

 

PE

 

I think this is what people are 'missing'.

There are reasons for everything. Nothing can be handled as simply as what people think.

 

Does anyone think NCL didn't do everything in their power to try to make things as easy and comfortable as possible and try to get them to Miami in as timely a manner as possible? If for no other reason than the PR concerns.

 

I agree.

 

Everyone keeps writing about "an emergency plan". Do you actually think that cruise lines have plans for every concievable' date=' or unheard of, or never happened before, emergency? Does anyone actually think that at a corporate office somewhere, men in suits sat around and thought "well, if the Dawn loses power and no one on board can adequetly fix the problem, and we have to get her to San Juan, and we have to fly 2224 people back to Miami, let's have these planes standing by, just in case"....... good grief :eek:.[/quote']

 

It's funny that NCL is supposed to have 'plans' but the passengers complaining that NCL wasn't prepared weren't prepared themselves.

Did the people complaining have travel insurance?

Did they have plans in place if they couldn't return back to work on schedule?

Did the ones with a fear of flying ever consider that a ship might actually, possibly break down while they are on it and cause them to have to get on a plane??

Did any of these people do enough research to know that a screwed up cruise (for whatever reason) happens quite a bit??

 

just very curious why NCL needs to be prepared for anything but the passengers don't.

Maybe all their anger is misdirected and should be on themselves for not being prepared.

[lakeuser2002]

Does anyone think NCL didn't do everything in their power to try to make things as easy and comfortable as possible and try to get them to Miami in as timely a manner as possible? If for no other reason than the PR concerns. 2500 upset passengers would certainly not be on their agenda. Actually, I'm surprised they're aren't a lot more on here. No matter how loudly they speak,none of them are actually speaking for the majority.

 

Yes, I don't.

 

For example, filling the open seats on planes leaving San Juan on Sat (all day) been within their power? I think it could of been, or at least should of been.

 

I don't know (and likely none others on the board know) how many people were called in to work on getting everyone home, how much budget was given to get charter planes, why commercial seats weren't filled, how wide the search for charter planes went... and many other whys.

 

I'll give you that they may have did everything they could with a limited (or no) plan. My point all along is that they should have had a better plan.

 

And for the record, the manafest showed 2041 passangers.

[lakeuser2002]

I think this is what people are 'missing'.

There are reasons for everything. Nothing can be handled as simply as what people think.

 

 

 

I agree.

 

There's some who think that accidents are accidents. There are others who think that accidents are preventable (or work hard towards that goal).