No Dynamic Dining on Oasis Class

[Paulette3028]

This seems like the culmination of a lot of bad decisions. They never should have tried to convert Oasis and Allure to Dynamic Dining. A traditional MDR is not multiple individual venues and cannot easily be made into that. They should have designed Harmony and Oasis 4 with this in mind from the start to offer a truly DD venue setup that would function. That would have also given them class diversity so that multiple Oasis class vessels sailing from Florida would offer different dining types to allow guests another detail to decide on since the itineraries are all basically the same 7 night ones. The real backlash also seemed to start with the announcement and conversion of Oasis so they could have completely avoided that. This looks like one of those times where they had a good idea that if walked carefully could have succeeded, but they chose to push it to hard and fast causing heavy pushback from guests. As a result it's reputation has been tarnished beyond saving. Many companies have done this before, it's never smart to jump to quickly with new ideas this drastically different than the existing. I think it would have been a huge success if done right on Harmony. The Oasis class has always had Dynamic Entertainment but static dining, this would have been the key to making that class finally work properly. Now we'll never get to find out.

 

They tried something -- it did not work out the way they expected. They changed it again....now they have reverted back to their original early and late traditional dining with the MTD element....NO their reputation has not been TARNISHED -- in any way, never mind, beyond saving as you say.

 

A company's reputation gets tarnished by serious life threatening incidents and the poor handling of matters regarding it.....the Costa Concordia....comes to my mind.

 

I don't put a dining option that was tried and proved to be less than the success they had hoped for in the same category.

 

It is there for those who cruise on Quantum.

[nealstuber]

I really enjoyed DD on the Quantum! Food was delicious and we had great service! I did not think I would like it as I am a fan of the MDR, but I loved the flexibility and the diverse menus. I am a picky eater but there were pretty many and delicious options to chose. I agree with MADFlyer who said the MDR is just not as full as it used to be, so I give a lot of credit to Royal for trying something new and exciting. I was looking forward to having DD on Harmony next year, but will still be very happy with regular dining. Can't wait to try Anthem one day!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

There is any easy fix for empty tables at 2nd seating: Get rid of the specialty restaurants.

As much as my last post applauded RCCL's decision to try this and then drop back and punt, I do not think their motives were based primarily in negative customer feedback. With more different free choices every night, my guess is DD succeeded in filling what used to be the MDR on Oasis and Allure - leaving the pay venues empty. Without having sailed the Quantum class, I'm supposing that the dining venues were balanced in such a way that reservations for free venues may have dried up at prime times and pax would be more inclined to book a pay venue if the reservation times fit in with the other things they wanted to do.

 

As a person who usually books at the last minute (after the dining and show reservations have been open for a couple of weeks) I feel like I might be on the sort end of the stick. This feeling is based on my experience with the shows when we booked our Oasis cruise 3 weeks out. At least with the shows there was a standby option and there weren't pay options to choose from if the shows were closed out.

 

Personally, I don't want to think that much about planning and making schedules on vacation. I'd rather go eat when I'm supposed to eat and not worry about making the show I want to see because its planned to start before or after my meal.

Edited July 19, 2015 by nealstuber

[steveru621]

They tried something -- it did not work out the way they expected. They changed it again....now they have reverted back to their original early and late traditional dining with the MTD element....NO their reputation has not been TARNISHED -- in any way, never mind, beyond saving as you say.

 

A company's reputation gets tarnished by serious life threatening incidents and the poor handling of matters regarding it.....the Costa Concordia....comes to my mind.

 

I don't put a dining option that was tried and proved to be less than the success they had hoped for in the same category.

 

It is there for those who cruise on Quantum.

 

The best that can be said for me is it was not the worst experience I have ever endured. Will I avoid DD in the future? I don't know, but I prefer traditional dining.

 

I agree it did not tarnish the reputation of RCI, but the poor implementation highlighted by lost reservations certainly did not help.

 

Haven't we beat this to death?

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

They tried something -- it did not work out the way they expected. They changed it again....now they have reverted back to their original early and late traditional dining with the MTD element....NO their reputation has not been TARNISHED -- in any way, never mind, beyond saving as you say.

 

A company's reputation gets tarnished by serious life threatening incidents and the poor handling of matters regarding it.....the Costa Concordia....comes to my mind.

 

I don't put a dining option that was tried and proved to be less than the success they had hoped for in the same category.

 

It is there for those who cruise on Quantum.

 

I could be wrong, but I do not think that that poster was saying that the cruise line's reputation has been tarnished. I believe he was saying that the reputation of DD had been tarnished beyond saving, and will have a very hard time becoming popular because of the many, many issues DD has endured.

[RocketMan275]

I give them credit for trying and making a correction relatively quickly when they saw it wasn't working. Things that seem like a good idea on paper don't always work out that way and sometimes there are great unintended results from trying something different. Sure seems like they gave it enough time to make it work and made corrections along the way. When you made a big announcement like this and have invested time and money in such a high profile way, it takes a lot of managerial courage to reverse course.

 

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. RCI did not remove DD from Quantum classes. They simply didn't roll DD to the Oasis class. So how can you say that they "saw it wasn't working" when it was never tried on Oasis class.

[Paulette3028]

I could be wrong, but I do not think that that poster was saying that the cruise line's reputation has been tarnished. I believe he was saying that the reputation of DD had been tarnished beyond saving, and will have a very hard time becoming popular because of the many, many issues DD has endured.

 

The cruise line would be the institution that would have a reputation... not the service that the institution is offering.

[RocketMan275]

This seems like the culmination of a lot of bad decisions. They never should have tried to convert Oasis and Allure to Dynamic Dining. A traditional MDR is not multiple individual venues and cannot easily be made into that. They should have designed Harmony and Oasis 4 with this in mind from the start to offer a truly DD venue setup that would function.

 

I'm curious. What are the design differences between a DD venue and a "traditional MDR"? What things are inherent to DD that prevents it from being implemented in the MDR on Oasis/Allure?

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

The cruise line would be the institution that would have a reputation... not the service that the institution is offering.

 

Please read the post that you were referring to again. To me, it does not sound like he was saying Royal's reputation was being tarnished, it sounded like he was referring to Dynamic Dining's reputation... But that's just how I took it. Hopefully DEIx15x8 will return to clarify.

 

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. RCI did not remove DD from Quantum classes. They simply didn't roll DD to the Oasis class. So how can you say that they "saw it wasn't working" when it was never tried on Oasis class.

 

I did not write the post that you quoted, but here's my opinion... Can you honestly say that the response to DD on Q Class has been overwhelmingly positive? I understand that there are many supporters of the concept, but there were clearly enough complaints to justify the cancellation of DD on other ships. If DD isn't even working on ships that were designed for it, I can only imagine what it would be like on a ship that was retrofitted for it.

Edited July 20, 2015 by OfTheSeasCruiser

[SherriZ366]

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. RCI did not remove DD from Quantum classes. They simply didn't roll DD to the Oasis class. So how can you say that they "saw it wasn't working" when it was never tried on Oasis class.

And they added the Classic option which allows you to have the same tablemates and waitstaff and rotate from one dining room to another.

[RocketMan275]

And they added the Classic option which allows you to have the same tablemates and waitstaff and rotate from one dining room to another.

 

Yes, they did that on Quantum. DD was never implemented on Oasis/Allure so there never was a classic option on those ships. If it was never implemented on Oasis/Allure, how can it be said it didn't work?

[RocketMan275]

I did not write the post that you quoted, but here's my opinion... Can you honestly say that the response to DD on Q Class has been overwhelmingly positive? I understand that there are many supporters of the concept, but there were clearly enough complaints to justify the cancellation of DD on other ships. If DD isn't even working on ships that were designed for it, I can only imagine what it would be like on a ship that was retrofitted for it.

 

 

No, the responses were not all that favorable at least initially. Things do seem to have improved. There have been several positive comments in this thread alone.

 

Once again, can you explain what are the design differences for DD and the design differences for traditional dining? Until someone can explain those differences statements that it will never work on a ship unless that ship is designed for it make no sense.

Edited July 20, 2015 by RocketMan275

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

No, the responses were not all that favorable at least initially. Things do seem to have improved. There have been several positive comments in this thread alone.

 

Once again, can you explain what are the design differences for DD and the design differences for traditional dining? Until someone can explain those differences statements that it will never work on a ship unless that ship is designed for it make no sense.

 

Honestly, I don't know the exact design differences, but I do know that DD requires less seating. Another thing that comes to the top of my head is 3 venues instead of 4. That's less options right off the bat. Ya know what, maybe it would work fine on a retrofitted ship, no one knows! But we now know that Royal did not want to take that chance. I never said that it would "never" work, but I guess I'm just leaning towards the ideas of... "Is it really worth it to retrofit a ship for DD?" Obviously, Royal doesn't think so. "What would they have gained with the switch?" My guess...not much.

Edited July 20, 2015 by OfTheSeasCruiser

[abridalmaven]

Curious (and disappointing) that Harmony will be the same as Oasis and Allure. I wonder if they will change the design plans for the MDR or keep them as is. No change (yet) in the Harmony "dining options" description - still DD. The majority of reviews appear to have a negative opinion.

 

 

I'm booked on Harmony and had my TA change it to second seating. We had MTD if it had DD.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brfan]

No, the responses were not all that favorable at least initially. Things do seem to have improved. There have been several positive comments in this thread alone.

 

Once again, can you explain what are the design differences for DD and the design differences for traditional dining? Until someone can explain those differences statements that it will never work on a ship unless that ship is designed for it make no sense.

 

The only thing I can think of when it comes to the Oasis class ships is they have 1 less (2 less if you count Divinely Decadence) included restaurants. So if you are the type of passenger that only wants to eat in the MDR (or DD equivalent) then you have fewer choices. If you have classic dining, depending on how the rotation works for longer cruises you might end up with twice the number for formal dining (eg. on a 12 night cruise you would be in Grande 4 times - so unless Grande is the first night you would have 4 formals). Plus if you didn't like one of the restaurants, such as Silk, then you only have 2 left to pick and one of them is formal.

 

Keep in mind the above is for those passengers who don't want to eat dinner in the buffet or speciality dining.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

The only thing I can think of when it comes to the Oasis class ships is they have 1 less (2 less if you count Divinely Decadence) included restaurants. So if you are the type of passenger that only wants to eat in the MDR (or DD equivalent) then you have fewer choices. If you have classic dining, depending on how the rotation works for longer cruises you might end up with twice the number for formal dining (eg. on a 12 night cruise you would be in Grande 4 times - so unless Grande is the first night you would have 4 formals). Plus if you didn't like one of the restaurants, such as Silk, then you only have 2 left to pick and one of them is formal.

 

Keep in mind the above is for those passengers who don't want to eat dinner in the buffet or speciality dining.

 

Yup, this is definitely an issue of mine. I only eat in the MDR (or if I'm on the OA/AL in a suite, CK) and usually don't go to the windjammer or any speciality restaurants. Like you said, it gives less options to those wanting to only utilize the free venues. For example, on a 7 night cruise, I could probably handle eating in each venue twice, but I would definitely not want to go to Silk a third time. I could handle the food in Icon or Grande a third time, but I wouldn't want a third formal night, so that would leave American Icon or a specialty restaurant for my last night. But then you add in Classic dining, which I would probably choose, and there's no telling what venue you're scheduled for a third time. Could be Silk, which results in a specialty restaurant (or WJ), could be Grande, which I'd be unprepared for because I don't think you see your dinner rotation pre-cruise and I would be expecting 2 formal nights. Then again, it could be Icon, and everything would be fine. With DD, and even DD Classic, there's too many "if's".

 

YMMV. :)

[RocketMan275]

Honestly, I don't know the exact design differences, but I do know that DD requires less seating. Another thing that comes to the top of my head is 3 venues instead of 4. That's less options right off the bat. Ya know what, maybe it would work fine on a retrofitted ship, no one knows! But we now know that Royal did not want to take that chance. I never said that it would "never" work, but I guess I'm just leaning towards the ideas of... "Is it really worth it to retrofit a ship for DD?" Obviously, Royal doesn't think so. "What would they have gained with the switch?" My guess...not much.

 

The only difference I can see between the two concepts is that DD 'turns the tables' three times versus twice for TD. While that would allow DD to use less floor space, that would only be an advantage for ships designed for DD. I do not see how that would be an impediment to transitioning a ship to DD.

 

You are correct in there being fewer venues on Oasis (3) rather than on Quantum (4). This does result in a bit fewer menu selections. But, that not something inherent to DD. It could easily be fixed by placing more selections on the menus or having three menus per week instead of two.

 

Many have made the claim that a converting a ship designed for TD to DD will not work, no one has been able to document these design differences that would adversely affect the conversation. Until someone does, this claim has to be considered an unsubstantiated DD myth. Only one of many.

[negc]

Most non-Quantum class ships have a multi-level main dining room with one level dedicated to My Time Dining and a total capacity approximately half of the passenger complement at any one time. Quantum class ship dining venues have capacities that will accommodate approximately 400-430 passengers at a time. Each dining venue has its own galley where the meals, which are specific to a particular venue, are prepared. Ships with a main dining room with one galley that prepares the single menus served each evening, might find it difficult when dealing with three or four different menus each evening. I just think that the physical configuration of the main dining room is just ill-suited to provide multiple dining venues each with its own special menu. If you compare the deck plans for Quantum class ships and other ships in the fleet, the difference should be clear.

[RocketMan275]

Most non-Quantum class ships have a multi-level main dining room with one level dedicated to My Time Dining and a total capacity approximately half of the passenger complement at any one time. Quantum class ship dining venues have capacities that will accommodate approximately 400-430 passengers at a time. Each dining venue has its own galley where the meals, which are specific to a particular venue, are prepared. Ships with a main dining room with one galley that prepares the single menus served each evening, might find it difficult when dealing with three or four different menus each evening. I just think that the physical configuration of the main dining room is just ill-suited to provide multiple dining venues each with its own special menu. If you compare the deck plans for Quantum class ships and other ships in the fleet, the difference should be clear.

 

Well, they might find it difficult to handle the extra menus so let's do the math.

 

TD turns the tables twice in an evening. Since Oasis/Allure can carry from 5400 to 6300 passengers depending upon occupancy, the single galley on Oasis/Allure must be sized to serve up to 3150 passengers at a time (50%). DD turns the tables three times versus twice for TD. Therefore, the single dining room would only have to serve 2100 passengers at a time (33%). Furthermore, the DD menus do not change every night so the galleys don't have to change their set up every night.

 

There are valid reasons for opposing DD. It adversely affects solo cruisers. It does not satisfy those who prefer TD. I just do not see any intrinsic dining room design features that would preclude it's adoption on ships not designed for DD.

 

BTW, the deck plans do not show design differences. They only show open spaces.

[negc]

Well, they might find it difficult to handle the extra menus so let's do the math.

 

TD turns the tables twice in an evening. Since Oasis/Allure can carry from 5400 to 6300 passengers depending upon occupancy, the single galley on Oasis/Allure must be sized to serve up to 3150 passengers at a time (50%). DD turns the tables three times versus twice for TD. Therefore, the single dining room would only have to serve 2100 passengers at a time (33%). Furthermore, the DD menus do not change every night so the galleys don't have to change their set up every night.

 

There are valid reasons for opposing DD. It adversely affects solo cruisers. It does not satisfy those who prefer TD. I just do not see any intrinsic dining room design features that would preclude it's adoption on ships not designed for DD.

 

BTW, the deck plans do not show design differences. They only show open spaces.

The deck plans show that ships with a main dining room have two or three levels stacked atop one another in one section of the ship, while Quantum ship plans show the various dining venues spread among two decks, each with its dedicated galley. The galleys in the main dining room would need to handle three or more different menus which might require segregating different sections of the galley to a specific dining venue. You may not see structural differences, but they are there.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

Well, they might find it difficult to handle the extra menus so let's do the math.

 

TD turns the tables twice in an evening. Since Oasis/Allure can carry from 5400 to 6300 passengers depending upon occupancy, the single galley on Oasis/Allure must be sized to serve up to 3150 passengers at a time (50%). DD turns the tables three times versus twice for TD. Therefore, the single dining room would only have to serve 2100 passengers at a time (33%). Furthermore, the DD menus do not change every night so the galleys don't have to change their set up every night.

 

There are valid reasons for opposing DD. It adversely affects solo cruisers. It does not satisfy those who prefer TD. I just do not see any intrinsic dining room design features that would preclude it's adoption on ships not designed for DD.

 

BTW, the deck plans do not show design differences. They only show open spaces.

 

You have a valid point. I guess some people might fall into the mindset of "Why change the dining rooms to DD, when they work fine as they are. DD is never going to work!" despite the fact that DD could actually work fine. Follow what I'm trying to say?

Edited July 20, 2015 by OfTheSeasCruiser

[steveru621]

TD turns the tables twice in an evening. DD turns the tables three times versus twice for TD.

 

I was told by a head waiter that very few of the tables are turned over 3 times with dynamic dining. Tables were held for 2 hours before and two hours after a reservation. A 7:30 reservation would tie up a table from 5:30 to 9:30. Even at 90 minutes (5:30-7:00 reserved-8:30) that's still only twice. You need to adjust your numbers.

Edited July 20, 2015 by steveru621

[John&LaLa]

I was under the impression that each level on Oasis ships have their own galley. I think this is also the case with Freedom and Voyager. If this is accurate, how will that put undo stress on the galley

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[RocketMan275]

The deck plans show that ships with a main dining room have two or three levels stacked atop one another in one section of the ship, while Quantum ship plans show the various dining venues spread among two decks, each with its dedicated galley. The galleys in the main dining room would need to handle three or more different menus which might require segregating different sections of the galley to a specific dining venue. You may not see structural differences, but they are there.

 

I will admit I'm not an experienced designer of dining rooms but the issues you've identified are not convincing. I would like to have a true professional in this area chime in before I believe this to be true.

 

I've just never seen an explanation of the structural differences that would preclude a successful implementation of DD on Oasis/Allure. It would seem that with so many saying that these differences exist, someone would be able to provide supporting rationale.

 

Segregating the galley might be an issue but it's not like the galley only produces one entree per night on TD. And, I would imagine that if the galley was unable to support DD, that would have been apparent to the housekeeping staff well before now. Why wasn't this identified if this was really an issue a long time ago?

Edited July 20, 2015 by RocketMan275

[Clarea]

I was under the impression that each level on Oasis ships have their own galley. I think this is also the case with Freedom and Voyager. If this is accurate, how will that put undo stress on the galley

There is a galley on each floor, but if I recall correctly, the galley on deck 3 was the main MDR galley, with some capabilities the others did not have.

[John&LaLa]

There is a galley on each floor, but if I recall correctly, the galley on deck 3 was the main MDR galley, with some capabilities the others did not have.

Thanks Bob, I guess I need to take the galley tour next time. Was going to go on Legend, but it was same time frame as bridge tour

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk