Benita Posted August 15, 2011 #1 Share Posted August 15, 2011 I just received notice that Oceania is planning preventative maintenance on one of their engines during our August 26 Regatta Alaska cruise. This will cause us to skip Victoria, halve the time in Juneau, causing cancellation of many tours, and shorten the time in Vancouver. Bummer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruzmaven Posted August 15, 2011 #2 Share Posted August 15, 2011 That's a shame. Victoria is a lovely stop. At least they are giving you notice now so you can plan accordingly rather than wait until you board to spring it on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #3 Share Posted August 16, 2011 That must be the answer for all the disappearing cruises that people have been wondering about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benita Posted August 16, 2011 Author #4 Share Posted August 16, 2011 That must be the answer for all the disappearing cruises that people have been wondering about. I sure hope they fix the problem and not disappoint Passengers for the next year- the disappearing cruises are not for another year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #5 Share Posted August 16, 2011 oooops .... Still, I'm wondering about the age of the "R" ships. First Insignia's generators, now Regatta's engine ... It's not like they are 50 years old, but they are about 20 years old. Don't get me wrong, I love the ships ... And I know they are well maintained. Mura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyQuinn Posted August 16, 2011 #6 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I just received notice that Oceania is planning preventative maintenance on one of their engines during our August 26 Regatta Alaska cruise. This will cause us to skip Victoria, halve the time in Juneau, causing cancellation of many tours, and shorten the time in Vancouver. Bummer.Benita, that's quite a change! The problem must be unforeseen and unavoidable as I can't imagine that Oceania would chose to obviously weaken the itinerary. Bummer indeed. Not a great way to end their 1st (and maybe only) season in Alaska. I hope they do right by all the disappointed passengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benita Posted August 16, 2011 Author #7 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Benita, that's quite a change! The problem must be unforeseen and unavoidable as I can't imagine that Oceania would chose to obviously weaken the itinerary. Bummer indeed. Not a great way to end their 1st (and maybe only) season in Alaska. I hope they do right by all the disappointed passengers. Since the cruise does not leave for 11 days, there is lots of time now to fix a problem - obviously if something was seriously wrong, they would not wait until our sailing.They are under no obligation to do anything, but I was surprised that they gave a "Goodwill" offering of a $250 credit towards a future cruise. Saying in effect, sorry that we are disappointing you, but if you sail with us in the future, we will give you $250 to make up for a really mediocre itinerary. (My paraphrasing, not their words). Oh well, I hope the seas are calm, because now we have lots of sailing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunding Posted August 16, 2011 #8 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Since the cruise does not leave for 11 days, there is lots of time now to fix a problem - obviously if something was seriously wrong, they would not wait until our sailing.They are under no obligation to do anything, but I was surprised that they gave a "Goodwill" offering of a $250 credit towards a future cruise. Saying in effect, sorry that we are disappointing you, but if you sail with us in the future, we will give you $250 to make up for a really mediocre itinerary. (My paraphrasing, not their words). Oh well, I hope the seas are calm, because now we have lots of sailing time. Too bad they can't do the work during our SF-to-NYC Panama Canal cruise -- I certainly wouldn't begrudge missing a couple of ports in Mexico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Citizen Posted August 16, 2011 #9 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Too bad they can't do the work during our SF-to-NYC Panama Canal cruise -- I certainly wouldn't begrudge missing a couple of ports in Mexico. That's a very kind offering. I'm on the Alaska sailing with Benita and I'm very disappointed with the changes. I've waited a long time to cruise Alaska and the original O itinerary was exceptional. Now, like Benita says, it is mediocre. And to think that I encouraged people who haven't cruised before to take this cruise because of the ship and the itinerary. First time cruisers are usually more interested in port days than sea days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterjohn Posted August 16, 2011 #10 Share Posted August 16, 2011 oooops .... Still, I'm wondering about the age of the "R" ships. First Insignia's generators, now Regatta's engine ... It's not like they are 50 years old, but they are about 20 years old. Don't get me wrong, I love the ships ... And I know they are well maintained. Mura My guess is that they canceled some ports on the current cruise, also. This policy of repairs on the fly saves a huge expense and keeps them operating. It's possible the work makes the ships more fuel efficient. We were on the Insignia last month to Norway, and I have to say it was spectacular even with truncated itinerary. The service was over the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Citizen Posted August 16, 2011 #11 Share Posted August 16, 2011 My guess is that they canceled some ports on the current cruise, also. This policy of repairs on the fly saves a huge expense and keeps them operating. It's possible the work makes the ships more fuel efficient. We were on the Insignia last month to Norway, and I have to say it was spectacular even with truncated itinerary. The service was over the top. O's service is always over the top. However, if these changed itineraries become the norm, people are going to think twice before they book with O. Your Midnight Sun itinerary was truncated and I remember reading a lot of very angry responses to that situation. Now our Alaska itinerary is truncated. Hope we can come home and say it was spectacular in spite of not stopping in Victoria and seeing Butchart Gardens and not being able to see Tracy Arm Fjords which native Alaskans report to be more beautiful than Glacier bay and after having ported in Hoonah for 11 hours and in Sitka for 12 hours. I hope we can still say the cruise was spectacular... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare LHT28 Posted August 16, 2011 #12 Share Posted August 16, 2011 That must be the answer for all the disappearing cruises that people have been wondering about. Isn't it the 2012 cruise that are disappearing?? The ships I think were built in 1998 so not quite 20 years old ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimandStan Posted August 16, 2011 #13 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Isn't it the 2012 cruise that are disappearing?? The ships I think were built in 1998 so not quite 20 years old ;) I'm feeling mighty pleased with myself about now.....:D Although you all swore that it would never happen- Who was it that said that mechanical problems would start to turn the old guard away from the older generation of ships. This is SO Cunard circa 1968, Home Lines circa 1981 and Holland America circa 1984 Been there, fought for the older, smaller ships, learned my lesson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #14 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lyn, As Benita pointed out, it IS the 2012 itineraries that are disappearing. That was my brain fart! But Regatta and Insignia do date from about 1990 -- as I recall. We first sailed on the R2 (Regatta) in November 1999 and she was not a new ship. They were already up to the R4 at that point. R5 (Nautica) was launched in early 2000. We were on her "fourth" voyage in February 2000, but those voyages were only 5 days long. After that the new ships came out quickly ... too quickly. I have always thought that Ren could have survived if they weren't building so many ships so fast. But 9-11 didn't help them since they were due to talk to their bankers on 9-12. So at least Regatta and Insignia are about 20 years old. Nautica is only about 11 years old. Mura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare LHT28 Posted August 16, 2011 #15 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lyn,But Regatta and Insignia do date from about 1990 -- as I recall. Mura Not to belabor the point but according to Oceania's website all 3 ships were built in 1998 http://www.oceaniacruises.com/ships/regatta/default.aspx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Cruises#The_Fleet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare LHT28 Posted August 16, 2011 #16 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Who was it that said that mechanical problems would start to turn the old guard away from the older generation of ships. This is SO Cunard circa 1968, Home Lines circa 1981 and Holland America circa 1984 Been there, fought for the older, smaller ships, learned my lesson We sailed on the Alexandr Pushkin in 1974 then she was the Marco Polo in 2003 she was built in 1965 Probably in the knackers yard now ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #17 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Not to belabor the point but according to Oceania's website all 3 ships were built in 1998http://www.oceaniacruises.com/ships/regatta/default.aspx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Cruises#The_Fleet Not to belabor the point but my recollection is that is NOT AT ALL what Renaissance said. There's one way to answer this ... if you take a bridge tour on Regatta or Insignia, they show the original documents on the wall (complete with the original names). I was there once upon a time but I didn't check the DATE ...but I'm sure it was not 1998! But arguing about whether it is 1990 or 1998 is perhaps pointless. Mura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #18 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I'm feeling mighty pleased with myself about now.....:DAlthough you all swore that it would never happen- Who was it that said that mechanical problems would start to turn the old guard away from the older generation of ships. This is SO Cunard circa 1968, Home Lines circa 1981 and Holland America circa 1984 Been there, fought for the older, smaller ships, learned my lesson Just to be clear, J&S, I wasn't trying to say that because I believe the first "R" ships date from around 1990 that they are falling apart. But I WAS wondering if they might be having some engine/generator problems after possibly 20 years of service. The QE2 was in service for many more years and I don't think she was retired because she was falling apart. Mura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare LHT28 Posted August 16, 2011 #19 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Not to belabor the point but my recollection is that is NOT AT ALL what Renaissance said. Mura I am sure someone has the correct answer :confused::confused: All the sites I checked say 1998 for Regatta & Insignia & Nautica was 2000 But we will just agree to disagree ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mura Posted August 16, 2011 #20 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lyn, It looks like you were right and I was wrong. I apologize. I firmly remembered that the first "R" ships dated from the early 1990s. But I've just seen a couple of websites that say R2 was "built/refurbished" in 1998. We were on board in October 1999 and they did NOT refer to it as a "new" ship. And I firmly remember seeing info that the R2 dated from around 1990. But I don't recall where I saw that ... and it looks like my memory was wrong. However, that adds weight to my theory that Ren built too many ships too fast! Mura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyQuinn Posted August 16, 2011 #21 Share Posted August 16, 2011 ...They are under no obligation to do anything, but I was surprised that they gave a "Goodwill" offering of a $250 credit towards a future cruise. Saying in effect, sorry that we are disappointing you, but if you sail with us in the future, we will give you $250 to make up for a really mediocre itinerary. It's always difficult to quantify the intangible of disappointment. But $250 seems light to me (especially if it's per stateroom and not pp). If I was on this affected Alaska sailing with engine problems, I'd prefer to have the credit issued towards my CURRENT cruise. Who knows - if I was really unhappy, I may never sail Oceania again and the future credit would expire worthless. Just saying'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Citizen Posted August 16, 2011 #22 Share Posted August 16, 2011 It's always difficult to quantify the intangible of disappointment. But $250 seems light to me (especially if it's per stateroom and not pp). If I was on this affected Alaska sailing with engine problems, I'd prefer to have the credit issued towards my CURRENT cruise. Who knows - if I was really unhappy, I may never sail Oceania again and the future credit would expire worthless. Just saying'. But everyone already has $1,000+ in OBC. With one less port and two shortened port calls, what are we going to do with yet another $500 on this cruise? Drink away our misery? OTOH... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Citizen Posted August 16, 2011 #23 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I guess getting hit with the loss of Victoria, which has a world-class garden, on top of losing a well-respected and reknown naturalist in Terry Breen---it's enough to send one over the edge. In this economy, who wants to spend their precious $$$ on a "mediocre" itinerary? There are so many other places we could go... I guess I didn't think anything was wrong when I was speaking to a tour operator in Hoonah the other day and she said that the Regatta has been shortening its stay in port lately. She said she was looking into Regatta's upcoming port calls because passengers had booked all day outings with them and that's not possible if the stay is shortened. I'll have to contact my friend who was on the June 29 sailing to see if any of her itinerary was changed. FDR can bring back Victoria. He probably doesn't even know that our sailing seems to be taking the biggest "hit" with Regatta's mechanical problems. We need to let him know that we really, really don't care for the way his staff altered our itinerary. Three sea days to start out??!! No Victoria??!! No Butchart Gardens??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimandStan Posted August 16, 2011 #24 Share Posted August 16, 2011 The QE2 was in service for many more years and I don't think she was retired because she was falling apart. In the first place, as much as I love modern cruise ships (and I do), one simply cannot compare the quality of the construction of the QE2 with ANY ship built since 1970. She was built to be the flagship of her countries Merchant Marine, at a time when that still meant something, and as a national showpiece. Although British shipbuilding was just beginning to come apart at the seams at that time, QE2 was completed to a level of finish, and with a quality of materials, that would be economic suicide today. Many say that she was the last ship built to those specifications. QE2 was not retired because she was mechanically worn out, however, her engines were completely replaced at least twice during her 39 year career. What killed QE2 as a passenger ship were the costs of keeping her in compliance with the new Safety of Life at Sea regulations in combination with her lack of new millennium bells and whistles such as multiple specialty restaurants and standard cabins with private verandas. Something else to be considered, when comparing QE2 to the R ships is that QE2 was never idle (as the Ren fleet was until the rise of Oceania). Idleness is very rough on a ship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tanny18 Posted August 16, 2011 #25 Share Posted August 16, 2011 My questions are many concerning this change, but there are some things that stand out -- 12 hours in Sitka is pushing the envelope; but where else would they go; another 1/2 day at sea? Victoria was high on everyone's list and probably all 684 of us are so very disappointed. Cutting out 3 hours in Juneau is not quite understandable to me. We leave Skagway at the same time as the original itinerary, but get into Juneau 2 hours later and sail an hour earlier. There's slow and then there's slooooooooow. The credit is $250 per person, but again, if you don't choose to sail with O again, that money is gone. Why not credit everyone's charge card with that gesture of "goodwill?" Another tidbit, Mura, the ship was built, I believe, in 1997 because I sailed on her in 1999 when it was a Ren ship, so it's not quite 20 years old. Mr. Del Rio, if you are looking, how about a better explanation to this "slow down" of the Regatta. You have some very loyal passengers out there, but you're upsetting a lot of people and for very good reasons. Cancelling a port for safety reasons in a country where there is unrest (just came back from a Middle East cruise, and Port Said and Alexandria were cancelled because of unrest, which is totally acceptable), but for maintenance for an engine, I don't think so. Why is it being done 11+ days from the day you told us. If it needs to be done, why not today? We have more cruises booked with O, and we'll continue to sail because we do love the ships and the itineraries, but will look at other lines later on. Arlene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.