Avoiding the storm?

[JrMafia90]

Not unless they stayed in the Bahamas, or gone to Florida...no way.

 

That's what they should of done. They would of probably saved more money.

[Host CMLA]

I believe the main reason why the N. Dawn was on such a tight (and earlier than usual) schedule to return to NY was that a new commerical was to be filmed prior to the ship leaving on the next voyage.

I wish there was concrete proof of what was really scheduled for Sunday afternoon. There's been lots of speculation and no one has been able to say for sure the real reason.

[kegger]

I agree with you Cecilia...I doubt VERY seriously that they carried this ship through an almost tropical like storm, just to make a commercial shoot.

[DragonLips]

I don't know if this was a smart risk to take. History has shown us to be very reactive and not traditionally proactive when it comes to avoiding disasters and preventing incredible loss of life. The lack of suffient numbers of lifeboats on the Titanic comes to mind in making this point. It took 1,500 people going down for maritime commissions to mandate the proper amount of lifeboats.

 

I certainly don't mean to get too dramatic, especially since many of the long time cruises on this board seemingly enjoy sharing storm stories and comparing scars. I'm very concerned about cruise industry's trend of simply throwing caution to the wind and riding out storms. How long before legislation takes over and mandates that cruising vessels restrict travel in conditions the coast guard label as 'dangerous'. Afterall, if a rogue wave hits a ship correctly, it can sink the vessel. In fact, studies show that tankers are lost all the time in similar conditions. Where is the line drawn? Must we wait until a large liner capsizes from rough seas before cruise lines change their policies regarding sailing through dangerous seas? A lot of people argue that it's about being on time, so the next sailing can depart on schedule. I realize there are costs there to the cruise lines and penalties for tardiness, but does that cheapen the lives of the 3,000 people on their way home? Many will probably scoff and simply remind everyone that these are risks you take when you cruise the ocean. While there is no denying the risk whenever you sail, I strongly feel it's important buck the trend and be more proactive about the protection of human lives. If there is any more risk to the ship, passengers, or crew than normal, why risk it!?

 

Sorry for the soapbox stuff!

[Gingee]

A wave can turn a ship over? Now that is scarry. How do you know?

[Elexman]

I don't know if this was a smart risk to take. History has shown us to be very reactive and not traditionally proactive when it comes to avoiding disasters and preventing incredible loss of life. The lack of suffient numbers of lifeboats on the Titanic comes to mind in making this point. It took 1,500 people going down for maritime commissions to mandate the proper amount of lifeboats.

 

I certainly don't mean to get too dramatic, especially since many of the long time cruises on this board seemingly enjoy sharing storm stories and comparing scars. I'm very concerned about cruise industry's trend of simply throwing caution to the wind and riding out storms. How long before legislation takes over and mandates that cruising vessels restrict travel in conditions the coast guard label as 'dangerous'. Afterall, if a rogue wave hits a ship correctly, it can sink the vessel. In fact, studies show that tankers are lost all the time in similar conditions. Where is the line drawn? Must we wait until a large liner capsizes from rough seas before cruise lines change their policies regarding sailing through dangerous seas? A lot of people argue that it's about being on time, so the next sailing can depart on schedule. I realize there are costs there to the cruise lines and penalties for tardiness, but does that cheapen the lives of the 3,000 people on their way home? Many will probably scoff and simply remind everyone that these are risks you take when you cruise the ocean. While there is no denying the risk whenever you sail, I strongly feel it's important buck the trend and be more proactive about the protection of human lives. If there is any more risk to the ship, passengers, or crew than normal, why risk it!?

 

Sorry for the soapbox stuff!

 

Isn't this post just a bit over dramatic? Just how were they cheapening any lives? If it was so rough out there on the ship, why did the bars onboard NOT secure the glasses and bottles? If it was so bad, why were passengers still playing in the casino!! Yeah, it was bumpy, but not near to the degree the current over reaction is leading us to believe. And what is this "trend" by the cruise industry concerning riding out storms? I know I haven't seen a rash of news stories about ships capsizing due to rogue waves lately...

 

 

I've been through the same type of weather, in that same stretch of water, on a much smaller vessel. It wasn't fun...that I will assure you. It is just amazing how a freak wave and a couple of broken windows has created such an uproar - the typical over reaction that totally loses objectivity. I certainly hope nobody out there talks on their cell phone while driving their car. But I don't see anyone on a soapbox about that. And this is a problem that KILLS people!!! One other thing that all of us could count on...if NCL delyed the trip, there would be all sorts of complaining and griping about that. Likely some speculation that NCL's ships can't handle a storm!! So how does NCL, or any cruise line win. There are just too many people looking for something to sue about or something to complain about. Sadly, few, if any, of these people will actually invest the time and effort to affect a needed change. Just a lot of lip service...

[Cosmopolitan]

BUT..aside from it all...the Dawn did make it through the storm! Bottom line! Thanks to the Captain and crew!

 

For whatever reasons! It was, in the end, the rogue wave that did them in...after the storm. The captain had already gotten them through the storm. Who could have ever predicted a rogue wave to follow the storm?

 

The Nassau stop had been eliminated well before the storm and a week before they set to sail. Had nothing to do with it all.

Kudos to the Captain and staff of NCL!

[DragonLips]

Isn't this post just a bit over dramatic? Just how were they cheapening any lives? If it was so rough out there on the ship, why did the bars onboard NOT secure the glasses and bottles? If it was so bad, why were passengers still playing in the casino!! Yeah, it was bumpy, but not near to the degree the current over reaction is leading us to believe. And what is this "trend" by the cruise industry concerning riding out storms? I know I haven't seen a rash of news stories about ships capsizing due to rogue waves lately...

 

 

I've been through the same type of weather, in that same stretch of water, on a much smaller vessel. It wasn't fun...that I will assure you. It is just amazing how a freak wave and a couple of broken windows has created such an uproar - the typical over reaction that totally loses objectivity. I certainly hope nobody out there talks on their cell phone while driving their car. But I don't see anyone on a soapbox about that. And this is a problem that KILLS people!!! One other thing that all of us could count on...if NCL delyed the trip, there would be all sorts of complaining and griping about that. Likely some speculation that NCL's ships can't handle a storm!! So how does NCL, or any cruise line win. There are just too many people looking for something to sue about or something to complain about. Sadly, few, if any, of these people will actually invest the time and effort to affect a needed change. Just a lot of lip service...

 

Do rogue waves sink ships, you bet. Supertankers and super freighters are lost at sea all the time because of weather.

 

Legislation has been passed in almost all states regarding cell phone use while driving, because people have been killed. That point that you raise is another example of what I'm referring to. That legislation is a reactive response to the danger of the cell phone use while driving. It took a few deaths to get the laws passed.

 

Back to the Dawn incident. You mentioned that you've been in similar conditions, minus the 'rogue', and I speculated that we had a lot people on the boards just like yourself. I think what a lot of people lose sight of is that this ship was in horrible coniditions for almost 17 hours. Video I've seen shows caved in ceilings, turned over video games and a downed ceiling fixture. Nevermind the wave. The captain got into something that he couldn't get out of- (he backed down to 4 knots to save the ship and ride it out). Those passengers were put in that position 'to keep to the schedule'. I'm not sure the safety of 3,000 passengers was worth that. My only suggestion was that why do we need to wait for lose of life before policy is instituted.

 

I will agree I may be looking at the worse case scenario in this situation. Yes, that may be seen as "dramatic". For those turned off, my apologies.

[greenie]

But I don't understand how you can know that being in stormy weather for 12 hours was actually dangerous, and not just uncomfortable? It just keeps sounding like conjecture--are any of you (other than, perhaps, the mets) maritime professionals? I'm serious--not trying to me smart mouthed...

 

Also ... Kegger, I hope you'll hang around until at least the 5/1 cruise. I'd love to know what weather to expect, as would all my roll-call mates, I am sure! :)

[mshe]

I'm very concerned about cruise industry's trend of simply throwing caution to the wind and riding out storms.

 

... While there is no denying the risk whenever you sail, I strongly feel it's important buck the trend and be more proactive about the protection of human lives. If there is any more risk to the ship, passengers, or crew than normal, why risk it!?

 

I agree with you... and in another thread, a poster WANTED to be on the Dawn for the thrill of "adventure". When people are hurt and the ship is partially flooded, wanting to be on the ship is just looney. Gee, some people have a loose nut :D

[mshe]

But I don't understand how you can know that being in stormy weather for 12 hours was actually dangerous, and not just uncomfortable?

 

Wave height, wind speed, size of storm... I guess if you were a captain of a ship or a metorologist, you would know the conditions at sea based on the weather data you had right?

[vacationgogo]

Kegger, thank you for your professional viewpoint. Based on the charts, it seems like things have calmed down a bit out there. I'm sailing Sunday and a little worried about rough conditions. Given the fact that so recently there was such a severe and lengthy storm, would that make us more or less likely to encounter rough waters? Thanks for your opinion.

[kegger]

Here is another article from a weather point of view....this backs up what I said earlier. The folks at NCL should have known, and claim they did know the position of the storm. The question is who made the decisions to carry through it and was it the right decision. And what were the motives....

Guess we'll never know...but I bet NCL will make some admin. tactical changes.

 

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--cruiseshipdiverte0419apr19,0,6198544.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

[kegger]

Vactogo: Weather patterns are called "patterns" for a reason. Though I doubt the conditions will be matched, certainly there have been quite a few storms or closed-low type weather systems over the last couple of weeks.

 

Current models are showing an approaching system along the East Coast by Sunday Waves are forecast to be generally 12-15 ft (as of now) and winds from the southwest at 20-30 kts. Things may change, but waves like that are not totally uncommon AND nothing like the Dawn saw late last week. Where are you going?

[gemsm]

But I don't understand how you can know that being in stormy weather for 12 hours was actually dangerous, and not just uncomfortable? It just keeps sounding like conjecture--are any of you (other than, perhaps, the mets) maritime professionals? I'm serious--not trying to me smart mouthed...

 

Generally the best place to be in Stormy Weather in a ship the size of the Dawn is in open ocean. It is not very likely from where the ship's position was at the time this storm "kicked up" that they could find a port sheltered enough to keep the ship safe.

[vllygrrl]

Weren't there two "lows" actually involved? One rotating off the mid-Atlantic coast with the other rotating off the Georgia-South Carolina coast?

 

There really was no way around this one. :o

 

No, it was a low that had developed off the carolina coast and a high pressure system that was in the ocean in the northeast.

 

The problem is where are ship was pummeled was when the top of the low (rotating counter clockwise) met the bottom of the high (rotating clockwise). This essentially caused the extremely high winds and waves since winds from both pressure systems were going in the same direction at this point.

 

Only thing mising from making this "a perfect storm" was a hurricane (two out of three ain't bad .. lol)

[kegger]

Only thing mising from making this "a perfect storm" was a hurricane (two out of three ain't bad .. lol)

It's funny you say that, because a few folks think that the low could have been a warm-core tropical system. Its possible.....you may have had a tropical low...

[halos]

I'm not an NCL cruiser but I have been following these threads dilligently.

The thing I take away from this incident is that the ship was hit with a mega wave...something I'd like to not have to experience by any means in my life, but it came out OK...the passengers got away with minor injuries and the ship, minor damage.

In my eyes, this is comforting....it's comforting to know that the ship can withstand a hit like that and also comforting to know the crew managed to keep her as steady as possible through all that.

I also admire all the passengers who managed to keep themselves from hysteria, and got off the ship planning their next cruise.....definitely my kind of people. :D

 

I also believe that even if it is true that the captain made a choice to go through that storm when there was another option, there is NO way he could have predicted that wave, correct???

 

Anyway...I am sincerely grateful that all the people that were on board are OK...because in the end, that's all that really matters.

[vacationgogo]

Kegger, We'll be on the Dawn! Right down the East Coast! I'm traveling with my family (DH and 2 daughters) and friends. One of my friends tends to get VERY seasick and has gotten the patch for herself. She only agreed to the cruise in the first place because we are celebrating our daughters' 16th birthdays (cruise together instead of Sweet 16 parties). Do you think the rough seas will subside as we go further south? Do you think it will still be an issue on our return (May 1st)? In any event, 12 foot waves, given what happened last week, doesn't seem so bad. Thanks again for the information.

[kegger]

Halos: Right. No way to predict that wave. Maybe 30-50 ft waves perhaps...but not a 70 ft wave toward at the end of this 12 hour event. I definately give props to the Captain and crew...

My main points are that though this wave may have been freak....but what the media had failed to point out is that this whole event was not freak. The 12 hours of 30+ waves was not freak Friday night into Saturday morning. It was very predictable....

[kegger]

Vactogo: The waves should subside the farther south you go, yes....from what I see on the models today. Should see some showers and thunderstorms as well...

[halos]

Halos: Right. No way to predict that wave. Maybe 30-50 ft waves perhaps...but not a 70 ft wave toward at the end of this 12 hour event. I definately give props to the Captain and crew...

My main points are that though this wave may have been freak....but what the media had failed to point out is that this whole event was not freak. The 12 hours of 30+ waves was not freak Friday night into Saturday morning. It was very predictable....

 

 

OK....I understand that. But if he sailed through the storm, and the wave hadn't hit...people most likely wouldn't have been upset...they would have just accepted that, right?? Because it may be possible that avoiding the storm would have caused a huge delay in their time of arrival back at port...and then people who had flights to catch and jobs to get back to would have been pissed....correct??? So the poor guy had a decision to make, and the wave hit and therefore the decision he made was now the 'wrong' one.

If the wave hadn't hit, it would have been the right decision.

So, I guess I'm trying to say that I feel for the guy..I certainly wouldn't blame him.

 

Am I way off track here??? :confused:

[kegger]

What concerns me is, ships have had no problem in the past of delaying its arrival at the next destination because of a serious storm. Why not this one? Don't get me wrong either, I don't think they had much of a choice based on their position. My question is where is the line drawn on situations like this. The whole thing could have been avoided as well. I agree with what you are saying and I also disagree because it could have been avoided...

[vacationgogo]

Kegger, I know there's a good chance of rain on Sunday. PLEASE tell me that's what you're talking about . Just Sunday, right? Also, I have tried to find a websight where I could see what the weather would be like during our cruise (not just the temp but fronts coming in and the sailing conditions). Any ideas? I don't want to keep bothering you with my questions. Thanks for your help.

[gemsm]

Kegger, I know there's a good chance of rain on Sunday. PLEASE tell me that's what you're talking about . Just Sunday, right? Also, I have tried to find a websight where I could see what the weather would be like during our cruise (not just the temp but fronts coming in and the sailing conditions). Any ideas? I don't want to keep bothering you with my questions. Thanks for your help.

 

Have you tried http://www.nws.noaa.gov/? They have a lot of really neat stuff on their website if you are interested in the weather at all