Anthem of the seas is headed back to Cape Liberty now due to a storm

[BND]

Back on the topic of weather vs. Anthem of the Seas:

 

Here is a link to the NOAA Wind/Wave analysis for today.

 

Whatever RCL sees that is threatening, I invite you to see if you can find it for yourself. I see highest waves of around 12 ft off of Cape Hatteras where the sea lanes are and higher at 16 ft. more inshore. Winds? I don't see them on the map, can you find the 100 mph winds someone mentioned on this board?

 

http://www.opc.ncep.noaa.gov/shtml/ira1.gif

 

Someone posted a link to a map showing 150 mph winds without reading what the map actually was. It was the winds at 40,000 feet, not the surface. The storm bringing rain/storms to the mid-atlantic on Wed and one bringing snow to the east coast on Friday aren't as strong as they were forecast to be just a couple of days ago. I do think it's an overraction due to the previous storm. As I said on one thread, they're damned if they do and damned if thy don't. Can you blame them? I can't.

Edited March 1, 2016 by BND

[KevinKruzer]

Ok, this is a bit of a ranty editorial, but its just my gut feeling/opinion so here goes...

 

In my opinion, RCCL's product has been watered down in recent years with the double whammy of reduced quality and higher costs. Still better than most but either the others (NCL for ex) are catching up or RCCL is playing down to their competition.... I still plan to travel RCCL but will at least, in light of recent events (and principle) at least give a look to what others are offering.

 

Also, I think most objective people will say that RCCL made a bad judgement call to take the ship out into that bad storm several weeks ago.

 

Most objective people I believe would also conclude that the ship is coming back now NOT because of the weather (as stated by RCCL) but because of the virus.

 

In both cases- virus & bad judgement call to go into storm, it is reflecting badly on RCCL. Like in politics- its often the cover up is worse than the crime. Sh*t happens to people (and companies) , but if you deal ALWAYS in honesty & integrity you will come out ahead. People are forgiving... But if you are dishonest....

 

Something smells badly in RCCL land when you consider their actions of the last few years in total...... from the dishonest BOGO sales, skyrocketing drink prices, going into a storm when it was a know iffy proposition, lying to customers about it, lying about the "weather" etc...

 

Just a few short years ago- Grandeur caught fire.... Adam Goldstein was on the ground in the bahamas BEFORE the ship got there to greet ALL of the passengers..... He paid a pretty penny to charter a lineup of 747's to get EVERYONE home asap. He was universally praised for his textbook crisis management.

 

I don't get the same warm fuzzy feelings from RCCL that I did just a few short years ago. They changed CEO's and possibly other execs and likely some philosophy it appears in how they "operate". :(

 

Is it just a coincidence? Am i out of my mind? Am I on to something? Idk....

 

End/rant.

Edited March 1, 2016 by KevinKruzer

[OBX-Cruisers]

BND.........agree with your good points.

 

With as many crew sick as many have been posting on this and other threads, I think RCL is doing to right thing to get the whole ship back and where the crew might actually be able to get 8+ hrs sleep and regain some of their health and resistance from overwork during the earlier hurricane cruise and now cleaning and cleaning with probable 16+ hr work days/nights

[bobby3334]

Interesting article speculating about Anthem's returning early yet again to Cape Liberty.

 

http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2016/02/articles/rough-weather-1/anthem-of-the-seas-afraid-of-the-weather-or-more-bad-publicity/

 

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

[KevinKruzer]

BND.........agree with your good points.

 

With as many crew sick as many have been posting on this and other threads, I think RCL is doing to right thing to get the whole ship back and where the crew might actually be able to get 8+ hrs sleep and regain some of their health and resistance from overwork during the earlier hurricane cruise and now cleaning and cleaning with probable 16+ hr work days/nights

 

That makes sense to me..... but then RCCL should be HONEST and say this is the reason rather than a phantom storm.

 

Honesty IS always the right policy. Especially after what they went through.

 

General advice- when you are in a proverbial hole, reach for a ladder, not a shovel.

 

Telling the truth might piss a few people off, but they will get over it and in the end usually respect you for it.....but getting caught in lies will piss almost everyone off and have no one respect you.

[mmckm]

i f the seas were going to be that bad,then why did the NCL Breakaway leave New York yesterday at 4pm going to do the same itinerary.

They will be ahead of the storm.

[Cuizer2]

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

 

Do you have even the slightest idea of what it takes to get a ship certified? The ship is seaworthy. That said, I'm not so sure the lawyer, whose article you linked to is as seaworthy.

[cpufrost]

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

 

I loved the sound track to Jurassic Park. :eek:

[MattInFLL]

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

 

Is Anthem sea-worthy? I'm not sure what more of a test anyone would like than the one a couple of weeks ago. She made the hour long turn in heavy winds that had to hit her broadside so that she could face into the storm and the eventual cat 4 hurricane conditions and ride it out that way. And she came through with only minor injuries to a few passengers and mostly superficial damage. Even with the damage to the azipod clutches, she sailed home under her own power.

 

I am completely perplexed that anyone would wonder if Anthem is sea-worthy.

[11madmic]

If winter storms will continue to be an issue during the winter months, a solution would be to relocate Anthem to Florida during the winter months. Just a thought.

[OBX-Cruisers]

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

 

Your question is truly odd when you are questioning performance of a ship that went through 35+ft waves in hurricane force winds of 125+ mph and suffered minimal damage and only a few injuries to passengers.

 

Maybe an explanation of why you are asking this seemingly ridiculous question would help those of us who don't understand your concerns.

[Clarea]

If winter storms will continue to be an issue during the winter months, a solution would be to relocate Anthem to Florida during the winter months. Just a thought.

I'd book that if the price was not too bad.:)

[11madmic]

Yea me too! I remember looking into our January cruise and didnt even consider Anthem only because it left from New jersey rather than Florida and didnt want to miss valuable sea days in the cold atlantic

Edited March 1, 2016 by 11madmic

[cruisenfever]

Thanks for posting that, Patti! Do you know when Captain Andersen will be back aboard?

Judy

All I know is that he will be returning to Anthem, I just don't know when.

[Ocean Dancer]

Concerning Noro, how long does it take to come down with it? 48 to 72 hours? And how long are you sick? On average, 3 to 5 days? Thanks.

[Coralc]

Concerning Noro, how long does it take to come down with it? 48 to 72 hours? And how long are you sick? On average, 3 to 5 days? Thanks.

 

I had a land based case. I was exposed on Saturday evening. I went to work Monday morning (felt fine). I threw up twice, about 10 AM and went home. The symptoms from the other end started about noon. By 3 PM I was in the ER for severe dehydration. I was there until about 8PM receiving IV fluids. (It was before Norwalk virus was identified and well known)

 

I spent the next day and following day at home in bed and returned to work on Thursday......so your guesstimate is pretty close. :D

 

3 years ago DH and I both came down with a NORO like gastrointestinal issue immediately following a February cruise. It was at home (thankfully) and we didn't have any vomiting, just the other part. :D That one also necessitated two days off of work.

Edited March 1, 2016 by Coralc

[whirlybird3]

5 minutes ago in from the the guest services desk someone lost control of the bowels and it went EVERYWHERE. Ugh the poor crew that has to deal with cleaning that.

 

 

 

Dining staff and cabin stewards are hit hard. I'd guess 30% reduction in staff.

 

 

 

My room is getting picked up but not cleaned in a normal way. Our steward has been I incapacitated for 4 going on 5 days.

 

 

 

The ship is deserted at night. The majority of infected people that won't show up on the official records because the medical facility was was swamped and can't handle any more and others don't want to be quarantined.

 

 

That's a problem when sick contagious people are among the ship refusing to be quarantined. The Noro will continue to spread quickly.

[robtulipe]

Concerning Noro, how long does it take to come down with it? 48 to 72 hours? And how long are you sick? On average, 3 to 5 days? Thanks.

 

The time I had it on those side to side cruises we did two years on the Ruby Princess and X Century, I believe I contacted the virus on Grand Cayman in the mid afternoon the way I mentioned on our roll call, had a sea day back to Pt. Everglades, boarded the Century around 11am and started feeling badly in the late afternoon, didn't eat supper and was really sick around 8pm, after which is when I went to the ship's medical center so it was just over 48 hours for me.

[cpufrost]

I had it and there's no way I could even think about walking around to do anything. It's misery and can easily incapacitate you for 18 hours or more.

 

You lose so much fluid that dehydration is a real problem. And you can't keep anything down. I remember lying on my side would feel better for a while then I would have to face mister bucket! If I rolled over on my back I didn't feel nauseated but then it felt like I swallowed an airstone and someone was turning up the pump. It was incredibly uncomfortable to the point where you want to scream. Then comes the explosive bowel movements. It's literally like walking on a mine field while turned inside out. :eek:

 

I'm pretty healthy, colds never really are with me more than two days. The flu is bad, fever, etc. and the aches. But it's over in a few days with maybe 1 bad day. Norwalk? Makes the other two feel like a sniffle in comparison. Besides trauma or MOB, there is no quicker way to ruin your vacation.

[read52]

I am sure that it has been said (I did not read the whole post). RCCL will continue to leave from winter ports as long as their are people who will book on their ships. Most of the ships are full all the time. The New York and DC area have people with money but maybe they don't want to fly. Warm areas can have weather problems too like hurricanes, etc.

[denatravels]

I am sure that it has been said (I did not read the whole post). RCCL will continue to leave from winter ports as long as their are people who will book on their ships. Most of the ships are full all the time. The New York and DC area have people with money but maybe they don't want to fly. Warm areas can have weather problems too like hurricanes, etc.

 

 

Not flying in February from the Northeast isn't really so much about money-- it's not very reliable with potential weather issues. I've had more than one flight cancelled since I moved to New York, and taking a cruise directly from here is easier.

That being said, I do think it may be crazy to get on a plane and fly here. Most tend not to, but if I WAS flying, it wouldn't be to the Northeast to get a cruise in the dead of winter-- but since I'm already HERE, it makes the most sense for ME.

[ducklite]

I had it and there's no way I could even think about walking around to do anything. It's misery and can easily incapacitate you for 18 hours or more.

 

You lose so much fluid that dehydration is a real problem. And you can't keep anything down. I remember lying on my side would feel better for a while then I would have to face mister bucket! If I rolled over on my back I didn't feel nauseated but then it felt like I swallowed an airstone and someone was turning up the pump. It was incredibly uncomfortable to the point where you want to scream. Then comes the explosive bowel movements. It's literally like walking on a mine field while turned inside out. :eek:

 

I'm pretty healthy, colds never really are with me more than two days. The flu is bad, fever, etc. and the aches. But it's over in a few days with maybe 1 bad day. Norwalk? Makes the other two feel like a sniffle in comparison. Besides trauma or MOB, there is no quicker way to ruin your vacation.

 

 

I agree. I had it a decade ago (land based). I as fine, got out of the car and lost my cookies in the shrubs in front of the house. The other end started about six hours later. All I could do was lay in a fetal position on the bathroom floor for the next 36 hours to be in proximity to the toilet. (It was only 12 feet to the bed, but that was too far.)

 

As fast as it hits you it goes away, and about 44 hours after I first got sick, I was sitting in MSG watching Rush and eating a grease burger.

[Biker19]

 

Also, I think most objective people will say that RCCL made a bad judgement call to take the ship out into that bad storm several weeks ago. I think you are wrong on this one

 

Most objective people I believe would also conclude that the ship is coming back now NOT because of the weather (as stated by RCCL) but because of the virus.and this one

 

Something smells badly in RCCL land when you consider their actions of the last few years in total...... from the dishonest BOGO sales, skyrocketing drink prices, going into a storm when it was a know iffy proposition, lying to customers about it, lying about the "weather" etc... and yet, their bookings and profits are up, why do you think that is?

 

Just a few short years ago- Grandeur caught fire.... Adam Goldstein was on the ground in the bahamas BEFORE the ship got there to greet ALL of the passengers..... He paid a pretty penny to charter a lineup of 747's to get EVERYONE home asap. He was universally praised for his textbook crisis management. Do you think any appreciable number of customers remember that when they book a cruise?

 

I don't get the same warm fuzzy feelings from RCCL that I did just a few short years ago. They changed CEO's and possibly other execs and likely some philosophy it appears in how they "operate". Goldstein is still there - just moved up to COO of RCCL:(

 

Is it just a coincidence? Yep Am i out of my mind? Probaly not Am I on to something? Nope

 

Biker, who thinks some folks need a vacation from CC.

Edited March 1, 2016 by Biker19

[chengkp75]

I have been tied up next to Anthem (and other Quantum class ships). They look like a large apartment building. The real question is are they "sea worthy". See a specialist on specs at the the link supplied above: John Williams

 

And nowhere in his post does Mr. Williams give his credentials, nor does he state that the ships are "unseaworthy". He only states that the design of the ships will increase rolling leading to decreased passenger comfort. Since he spends much of his time blaming the "long, thin" hull shape, he contradicts any claim to "unseaworthiness" by stating that ships like this have been around for centuries.

 

His claims that a narrow flat bottom and hard chines exacerbates the rolling, is somewhat disingenuous, since a rounded bottom actually reduces stability for the sake of comfortable ride. He quickly alludes to the real aspect of stability, when he mentions the height of the center of gravity coupled with hull shape (which determines the height of the center of buoyancy), since the relation between the two creates the "metacentric height" which is the true measure of stability.

 

Ships with a large metacentric height are quick to roll, but the force to resist the roll becomes very great at very small angles of roll, and the ship tends to roll back and forth very quickly, which is uncomfortable, but these ships have the greatest resistance to overturning. Ships with a very low metacentric height will not roll as easily, but once rolling will do so in a long, slow period, which is most comfortable. However, these ships have very little righting moment, and are most susceptible to overturning.

 

Every ship is designed with a balance of metacentric height to produce a roll motion that is comfortable, but still meets or exceeds the minimum stability required by the IMO. Cruise ships tend to fall in the relatively high (though by no means excessive) metacentric height design. These stability and roll characteristics are required to be met by the basic ship design, before the consideration of stabilizer effects are added.

[denatravels]

And nowhere in his post does Mr. Williams give his credentials, nor does he state that the ships are "unseaworthy". He only states that the design of the ships will increase rolling leading to decreased passenger comfort. Since he spends much of his time blaming the "long, thin" hull shape, he contradicts any claim to "unseaworthiness" by stating that ships like this have been around for centuries.

 

 

 

His claims that a narrow flat bottom and hard chines exacerbates the rolling, is somewhat disingenuous, since a rounded bottom actually reduces stability for the sake of comfortable ride. He quickly alludes to the real aspect of stability, when he mentions the height of the center of gravity coupled with hull shape (which determines the height of the center of buoyancy), since the relation between the two creates the "metacentric height" which is the true measure of stability.

 

 

 

Ships with a large metacentric height are quick to roll, but the force to resist the roll becomes very great at very small angles of roll, and the ship tends to roll back and forth very quickly, which is uncomfortable, but these ships have the greatest resistance to overturning. Ships with a very low metacentric height will not roll as easily, but once rolling will do so in a long, slow period, which is most comfortable. However, these ships have very little righting moment, and are most susceptible to overturning.

 

 

 

Every ship is designed with a balance of metacentric height to produce a roll motion that is comfortable, but still meets or exceeds the minimum stability required by the IMO. Cruise ships tend to fall in the relatively high (though by no means excessive) metacentric height design. These stability and roll characteristics are required to be met by the basic ship design, before the consideration of stabilizer effects are added.

 

 

In my experience, anthem did have a lot of roll, and when looking outside, the conditions didn't exactly match. I've read other reports of this, too. Granted, I was on the cruise AFTER the hurricane, so the rolling wasn't too excessive. (Apparently the only successful Anthem cruise in the last six weeks!)