Panama Canal widening Freedom Class?

[BillB48]

I was referring to the height issue from a practical point of view, not purely mathematical. Could clear the bridge at low tide, but there could be trouble at peak high water, and since there is no way to coordinate every sailing with low water, it doesn't seem very practical. The other alternative would be some kind of modification to the stack, but I just don't see the costs justifying the sailings of the larger ships. My free opinion, and you know what they say...."Free opinions are usually worth exactly what you paid for them ;)

 

No doubt about it, the timing at the BOA would be critical and it certainly would not be something attempted without a great deal of planning. As mentioned in an earlier post they would no doubt have to arrive early and wait for the right time to pass under the Bridge. Since they project sailings out a couple of years in advance and have to make reservations with the Canal for a date certain, I would think all this would be taken in consideration. If in fact the air draft of 207' is correct, RCI's needs and the Canal's present requirements (205') are not too far apart, so maybe adjustments that won't cost an arm and a leg could be made to the ship that would transit the Canal. While my advice is free, it is certainly invaluable... or is it that valueless:D?

[MermaidWatcher]

While my advice is free, it is certainly invaluable... or is it that valueless :D?

 

From previous post by MermaidWatcher..."Free advice is usually worth exactly what you paid for it"

 

We may not be right, but you can't find an opinion at a better price.:D

Edited December 12, 2013 by MermaidWatcher

[BillB48]

Id love to go on a Panama Canal cruise, I just don't think I would enjoy a smaller ship then what I am used to going on..

 

Although I have not ventured on the O&A ships, I really do enjoy the Voyager class and Freedom class ships with the Royal Promenade. You won't find the RP on the Radiance and Vision class ships (RCI's ships than can fit through the present Canal locks) other than that difference I think the ships deliver a similar product. In spite of all our conjecture here, I really think it will be sometime before there is one of the "larger" ships taking on a Canal itinerary. It's too bad that Royal doesn't offer the partial transit cruise anymore as you could get a good feel for the Canal on a 10 day cruise instead of a 14-15 day cruise they presently offer.

[RCKRZR]

The other alternative would be some kind of modification to the stack, but I just don't see the costs justifying the sailings )

 

 

It's probably cheaper than sailing around the Horn.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/Cruise+ship+mast+will+altered+under+Lions+Gate+Bridge+next+year/8303017/story.html

Edited December 15, 2013 by RCKRZR

[Charles4515]

I thought I read that the new locks would be large enough to handle Freedom and Voyager class ships, but that the ships are too tall for the Bridge of the Americas.

 

Many, maybe most, Panama Canal cruises only do a partial transit. They turn around in Gatung Lake, they don't go all the way to the Pacific so the Bridge of the Americas would not be an issue for many Panama Canal cruises if they did them on partial transits.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Charles4515

[Hoopster95]

Many, maybe most, Panama Canal cruises only do a partial transit. They turn around in Gatung Lake, they don't go all the way to the Pacific so the Bridge of the Americas would not be an issue for many Panama Canal cruises if they did them on partial transits.

 

YES!! What an idiot I am, this didn't cross my mind lol!! :p

So the answer has to be yes for a partial transit Through the "new" Gatun Locks only, hang around the lake for the day and then turn around and go back. (like the existing Celebrity, Princess and HAL itineraries)

 

Well done!:)

[DEIx15x8]

Never been on a panama canal sailing but would love to. Is their any kind of port other destination that ships could use in Gatun Lake? Seems like that could become a prime destination if done right and the new canal is a success. One could easily make the other.

[OCruisers]

From what I understand the Panama Canal is being widen for the now huge and even huger cargo ships being built. Follow the money.

 

Not really being done at all for cruise ships but now larger cruise ships will benefit from being able to use it.

 

LuLu

~~~~

[BillB48]

Never been on a panama canal sailing but would love to. Is their any kind of port other destination that ships could use in Gatun Lake? Seems like that could become a prime destination if done right and the new canal is a success. One could easily make the other.

 

In the long term who knows what they can come up with, however for the foreseeable future I believe that a Gatun Lake destination will be about the same as it is now. Gatun Lake will just be the place where you get off the ship to take a tour after you have gone through the locks. There is practically nothing nearby that is not Canal related in an operational sense, so nothing really to build a tourist industry upon. As it is now, save for a few historical type excursions to Portobelo and Ft. San Lorenzo practically all of the excursions end going to the Pacific side.

 

From what I understand the Panama Canal is being widen for the now huge and even huger cargo ships being built. Follow the money.

 

Not really being done at all for cruise ships but now larger cruise ships will benefit from being able to use it.

 

LuLu

~~~~

 

You are exactly right. Of course any business wants all customers, but if for some reason all the cruise ship traffic should disappear, their absence would hardly be noticed. Presently cruise ship traffic accounts for only about 1½% of the total Canal traffic. The cruise industry will no doubt benefit from the improvements though.

[hellsop]

Never been on a panama canal sailing but would love to. Is their any kind of port other destination that ships could use in Gatun Lake? Seems like that could become a prime destination if done right and the new canal is a success. One could easily make the other.

 

There's not much there, and it's a REAL challenge to even build anything there. One of the biggest problems building the canal is that the ground is so soft and spongy that it won't stay in place. Even the shore moves around a lot, and sinks and rises. Consequently, there's little there of significance other than ship traffic, mud and mosquitoes.

[TravelerThom]

... Present Canal tolls for large passenger ships is $134/berth occupied or not...

The Autoridad del Canal de Panama website <www.pancanal.com/enf/op/tolls.html> lists Tolls per Berth for Passenger Vessels as $134/berth laden and $108/berth ballast. I ASSUME laden means occupied and ballast unoccupied. I will also note that the website seems to have been last updated for 2011 pricing (and may be out of date). Can you give a source for same pricing per berth whether occupied or not?

 

Thom

[chengkp75]

The Autoridad del Canal de Panama website <www.pancanal.com/enf/op/tolls.html> lists Tolls per Berth for Passenger Vessels as $134/berth laden and $108/berth ballast. I ASSUME laden means occupied and ballast unoccupied. I will also note that the website seems to have been last updated for 2011 pricing (and may be out of date). Can you give a source for same pricing per berth whether occupied or not?

 

Thom

 

If you read the description of how the tolls are calculated, it says that the "ballast" rate is for ships that are not carrying any cargo or passengers, so you if the ship has any passengers at all, all berths are at the "laden" rate, but if the ship is transiting with only crew onboard, as the Pride of Aloha did in 2008 going from Hawaii to the Bahamas, then the "ballast" rate is used, again for all passenger berths.

[BillB48]

The Autoridad del Canal de Panama website <www.pancanal.com/enf/op/tolls.html> lists Tolls per Berth for Passenger Vessels as $134/berth laden and $108/berth ballast. I ASSUME laden means occupied and ballast unoccupied. I will also note that the website seems to have been last updated for 2011 pricing (and may be out of date). Can you give a source for same pricing per berth whether occupied or not?

 

Thom

 

I'm sure they are current because the rates listed in the next entry were effective in Oct. '13. As to the "in ballast" portion, this is from another section of the site... "The appropriate rate is applied depending on whether the ship is laden or in ballast (empty). The "laden" rate is applied to ships carrying cargo or passengers, and the "ballast" rate is applied to ships that are not carrying passengers or cargo." In the past for a ship to be considered "in ballast" there could not be any commercial cargo transported whatsoever. That was to mean if so much as one bolt, one screw or one ping pong ball was being transported commercially then the ship was charged the laden rate, regardless if it was minimally loaded or at it's max. While per passenger berth is a relatively new method of assessing tolls, I would think the same criteria of ballast/laden would apply. That was the basic policy under the U.S. administration and I am not aware that has changed since the turnover. Panama has not had any qualms about a robust toll structure.

[chengkp75]

Yes, very few ships other than tankers are assessed at the "ballast" rate, as nearly every other type of ship will always be carrying some type of cargo. Tankers are the only ships that routinely transit the canal in ballast.

[FLACRUISER99]

The new RCI Quantum class ships are designed (have retractable stacks)to be postpanamax ships however RCI has no plans at this time to make a transit through the new canal.

[TravelerThom]

Thanks to those who straightened me out on laden versus ballast. I don't believe everything I read on Cruise Critic [if I did MOST cruises would be simultaneously the best AND the worst cruise ever]. But when there is reasonable consensus among people who seem to know what they are talking about, I do feel that I have learned the correct answer.

 

THANKS

Thom

[chengkp75]

Thanks to those who straightened me out on laden versus ballast. I don't believe everything I read on Cruise Critic and well you shouldn't [if I did MOST cruises would be simultaneously the best AND the worst cruise ever]. But when there is reasonable consensus among people who seem to know what they are talking about, I do feel that I have learned the correct answer.

 

THANKS

Thom

 

No problem. I've been through the canal about 15-20 times in my career (Suez a few times as well). I just hope for all CC members that it doesn't become the boring pain in the a** that it does for most mariners.

[NMG318]

Maybe the Chinese canal thru Nicaragua will support bigger cruise ships. Could begin construction next year and finish by 2021.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523188/Chinese-waterway-Nicaragua-thatll-longer-Panama-Canal.html

[BillB48]

Thanks to those who straightened me out on laden versus ballast. I don't believe everything I read on Cruise Critic [if I did MOST cruises would be simultaneously the best AND the worst cruise ever]. But when there is reasonable consensus among people who seem to know what they are talking about, I do feel that I have learned the correct answer.

 

THANKS

Thom

 

Whoa.... I thought they could not put anything on the internet that wasn't true;):D! I got that from the internet!!:)

[RCKRZR]

The new RCI Quantum class ships are designed (have retractable stacks)to be postpanamax ships however RCI has no plans at this time to make a transit through the new canal.

 

I wonder if any of the Voyager class ships are having (retractable stacks) put in during there dry dock.