Cruise liner fends off pirate attack (Spirit)

[Keith1010]

As I mentioned yesterday, I am quite sure that Seabourn will do it's own post-mortem of what happened as all companies do in similar situations. I think we should let the experts do this review and count on them to make whatever adjustments, if any, that are required.

 

While everyone has the right to express their own speculations, my own experience tells me that nothing constructive ever comes from those who post negative thoughts and opinions and start speculating about various events that in reality they know little about.

 

I have 100% confidence in Seabourn that if they need to make any changes going forward that they will.

 

What is important is that the captain and the crew responded to this event in a most professional manner and that the crew, and staff are safe.

 

What happened does not change my view of Seabourn nor will it change any of my crusing plans.

 

Keith

[alita]

Thank you Doug for your measured response.

 

I understand that the Spirit was met in the Seychelles by US explosives experts who removed an unexploded grenade embedded in the wall of a cabin before the ship was allowed to dock. If that grenade had by chance exploded at the time of attack would some of the posters here have been singing the same tune?

 

The passengers and crew aboard the Spirit are incredibly lucky to be walking ashore today... it could have been a major tragedy.

 

Yes, I have sailed Seabourn and plan to sail her again.

[Iamboatman]

FYI, according to CNN the US Navy has removed all ordinance from the Seabourn Spirit and all activities, including the tours in the Sheychelles are now continuing in normal fashion.

 

CNN also quoted Deborah Natansohn again, stating:

 

"Natansohn said efforts were under way to locate the pirates. "We have notified U.S., Canadian and Australian authorities, because most of our passengers come from those three countries, as well as local authorities in Africa," she said.

 

The company will re-evaluate whether to offer future cruises off Somalia, Natansohn said. "We'll obviously be looking at the incident to determine what to do in the future," she said. "We're always looking for adventure, but this is probably a little more than we would normally look for."

 

So for all of those wondering what Seabourn will do, it obviously is evaluating the situation, has confirmed its adventerous spirit, and is moving forward. Good Idea!:)

[texanaust]

For all those Seabourn fanatics…FYI…this is the CruiseCRITIC message board for Seabourn. You ARE allowed to criticize and make negative comments should one wish to. I suggest that Cruise Critic makes a second Seabourn board called “Seabourn-Positive comments only”. A special password can be obtained only when sufficient funds are deposited into the Seabourn Crew Welfare Fund. Martita can host…

[Keith1010]

Some interesting posts today by some who clearly do not care for Seabourn. So we should have folks post on the board who do not like the cruise line either based on their own experience or just because that's the way it is. Ummm....I have sailed a variety of cruise lines over the years. About 10 or 11 in total. Of this number, there are three lines that I enjoy. Each one for different reasons. For the ones that I don't care for I don't take the time to either post or read the threads on Cruise Critic. My view on them is that while I don't care for them, others do so why post comments. I have said this many times. Most cruise lines are good and typically their differences are based on cost or on the type of cruise they offer. Over the years I have learned that what I enjoy others might not and what I dislike others might like. So, for the cruise lines that I don't care for I would never think of constantly posting negative things about the line on the cruise critic board. I just don't think that is a constructive use of my time. Sure, I could say, I have the right...But give me a break.....

 

As I said there are three cruise lines that I like and each provides a different cruise experience. On the luxury end, there are two cruise lines that I particularly enjoy and Seabourn is one of them.

 

For most of us who really enjoy Seabourn, we are not going to let this incident impact our plans to cruise on Seabourn again. We're going to realize that what happened could have happened to other cruise lines, be thankful that no one was seriously hurt, and realize that the captain and crew took the approrpriate action in a very serious situation. And, that Seabourn will likely review their procedures based on what has happened and take appropriate action, as required.

 

I guess there are some who don't care for Seabourn to begin with who are going to continue to post negative comments about this incident as if Seabourn did this on purpose or did this recklessly. They certainly have their right to do this, but it's too bad. You know the other luxury cruise line as similar thing happened on their board a few months ago. Something went wrong on a particular cruise that was out of their control and those people who don't care for that cruise line decided to post some unflatering comments and those who do like the cruise line posted postivie comments about the line. And those who didn't posted the same comments that I read today.

 

Anyway, I am very glad that I enjoy Seabourn, and I look forward to my next cruise on them.

 

Keith

[texanaust]

These boards are in many respects an avenue to garner information about specific cruise-lines. Sure, if you have ruled out a line based on previous experience, then I don't expect that person to comment continuously (although he/she has the right to). However, it is my opinion that those who enjoy Seabourn (myself included) have the opportunity to read negative posts (however rare they may be) without these posters being assailed. I can then assemble the facts and decide if I will give Seabourn my patronage this time or choose someone or something else.

[canadagal]

However, it is my opinion that those who enjoy Seabourn (myself included) have the opportunity to read negative posts (however rare they may be) without these posters being assailed. I can then assemble the facts and decide if I will give Seabourn my patronage this time or choose someone or something else.

 

I totally agree with your sentiments. I want to hear both the bad and the good not only of Seabourn but all cruiselines and then I can in my own wisdom and logic decide if it's still the right cruise for me. In the meantime, I wouldn't hesitate to travel on Seabourn again but I hold myself responsible to determine if certain parts of the world are a tad uncomfortable for me to travel to...........because of safety issues. Sure I guess, I expect the cruiselines to research and determine if a place is safe but ultimately it's me that has to make the final decision............ after all they are not forcing me to book with them.

Pat

[nancygp]

As usual, I really appreciate the post from Keith. We both post regularly on the other luxury line and Keith always has great insight and thoughts. This board should not be a forum for people to bash a line, it's for sharing information. This situation in Kenya is so out of the realm of any of the threads that are posted. While I have yet to sail Seabourn and know I will one day, the other board I post on was so helpful when I was planning my first Crystal cruise and continues to be a wonderful forum just like the Seabourn board. Kudos to Norm and all the other loyal Seabournites. Nancy

[SantaAna,CA]

I'm not in the know about these things...but looking at that little boat, albeit supplied with some (worn-looking) artillery...what were they really thinking? That they were going to have the captain and all his officers come out on deck with their hands up? I'm scratching my head over this one. By the way, it took me forever to get on this website today....I wanted to read what was going on first-hand.

 

Also...why do some people use every single thread (they know who they are) to say something unpleasant? I guess these boards can be used to pitch a fit about anything. Why are you blaming Seabourn? You don't have to be off the coast of Somalia to be attacked. You can get in the way of evil people just about anywhere. And anyone who leaves the US of A should always be aware of travel advisories. My guess is the Spirit's passengers are well traveled and know the risks of certain parts of the world.

 

My sister, brother-in-law and I are sailing on the Legend in April to the Caribbean; I heard about the attack on the Spirit over the weekend. I'm glad all on board are okay, and I salute the captain and crew for their quick thinking. Hope they catch the guys who did this.

 

Jane

[dougnewmanatsea]

As far as I am aware,prior to the attack on the Spirit,vessels attacked,and held hostage,have been cargo ships

Of course, most of the ships travelling in these waters are cargo ships to begin with.

 

It is stated that 60 cruise ships per year pass by the 1800 mile long Somalia coast line,presumably,up until now,without incident.

Well, relatively speaking, 60 is quite few. I don't know how many other ships (other than passenger ships) pass by this coastline a year, but I imagine it must be many, many times that.

 

Also, this is a fairly new and emerging problem. There were two pirate attacks off Somalia in all of 2004. There were twice that number in the month of October 2005 alone. Clearly this is a problem which is growing rapidly.

 

Thus, just because they have passed without incident before does not mean they will do it again. Most cruise ships in this area of the world are there in the Northern Winter; the real escalation in piracy off Somalia seems to have started just when they would have been leaving the area.

 

Have the relevent authorities stated that an attack can not take place at 150-200 nm?

No. As of yet this has happened up to 170 nm out, but the majority of attacks seem to take place within 100 nm. (SPIRIT was apparently between 70 and 90 nm off the coast, well within the area where most hijackings occur.)

 

However, clearly, the further one is from the coast, the more likely it is that an attack will occur.

 

Some interesting posts today by some who clearly do not care for Seabourn.

Well, I cannot be sure who you are referring to, but I will state for the record that as I do not happen to have cruised Seabourn before, I cannot say whether I care for them or not.

 

However, if anyone doubts my willingness to try Seabourn, I would be more than glad to sample the product should the "regulars" on this wish to buy me a ticket on a future Seabourn cruise ;) ...

 

And for the record, this incident has not affected my willingness to try Seabourn (I would gladly do so) or to sail off the coast of Somalia (I would not have done it before this, and still would not do it, but that's just me).

 

I'm not in the know about these things...but looking at that little boat, albeit supplied with some (worn-looking) artillery...what were they really thinking?

Apparently, they may have been thinking that she was a research vessel.

 

Or perhaps they did not realize that cruise ships are better defended than the vessels which they are accustomed to attacking.

 

Why are you blaming Seabourn?

I am not aware that anyone has actually blamed Seabourn for anything. Some of us have raised concerns that perhaps this was an ill-advised situation for them to place their ship in, but that's all.

 

You don't have to be off the coast of Somalia to be attacked.

No, but that makes it a lot more likely!

[jhp]

Hindsight is 20/20 in a situation like this. Last year, I sailed on Silversea, Singapore to Singapore, and our route included the Straits of Malacca, some of the most dangerous waters for piracy in that area of the world. Our captain even included this information in his morning announcements. But he told us not to worry, as the pirates "never bothered cruise ships" because of the security and the size of the crews on these ships. Sometimes I "don't need to know" certain information, and leave it to those in charge to take care of things, like security. Now that there has been an "incident", maybe I will feel a little differently now. I would bet that Seabourn used only those means to repel the pirates/terrorists, whatever they were, to get the job done without inviting a "battle of gunfire". I'd also bet that they had many more tricks in their "arsenal" had events made a turn for the worse, and they were unable to get out of harm's way. Have you ever given your card to one of those gurkha security men? I applaud the Captain and crew for their handling of the situation. I have cruise friends from RSSC that are on this itinerary, and am thankful to see them in the news with smiles and comments that they will not stop cruising because of this!

[Titan(ic)5.6]

Hindsight is 20/20 in a situation like this.

 

 

Why do people use terms like "hindsight" and "Monday morning quarterbacking" when there have been two dozen pirate attacks off the cost of Somolia this year and the International Maritime Bureau has been warning ship owners about the extreme danger in this area?

[Ides of March]

I am going on HAL's Circle of the Sun cruise in January and in March we make port at Mombassa. We then head for the Seychelles en route to Munbai. I must say this incident adds an extra dimension of excitement to the cruise. I am more concerned about the weather near Capes Horn and Good Hope and the trip down to Anarctica than I am about pirates.

 

In September we were on the Galaxy which spent 9/11 in Istanbul. We spent a good part of that day in the Blue Mosque. We stayed at the wharf overnight and they had police boats patrolling all night. Some said there were divers under the ship. We then went to Kusadasi where four tourists have died this year going to Ephusis. The cruise was reduced in price by about 40% over others that travelled the same itinerary at less sensative times which was a great deal. Some of us assess risk and enjoy the moderatly increased element of danger especially if there is a cost saving.

 

That been said I welcome the increased surveillance and measures that the lines will now no doubt deploy as a result of this publicity.

[jhp]

Why do people use terms like "hindsight" and "Monday morning quarterbacking" when there have been two dozen pirate attacks off the cost of Somolia this year and the International Maritime Bureau has been warning ship owners about the extreme danger in this area?

 

 

I suppose that was my point in relaying my former cruise. We all have choices. Titani(ic)5.6, will you please tell all of us the circumstances of those pirate attacks and the TYPES of ships that were accosted?? Please do! When something had never happened to a CRUISE SHIP I took the Silversea Shadow captain (and this was in the Malacca Straits, not Somalia coast) at his word that we were in no danger, because all piracies (OMG is that a word?) had in the past been directed at cargo ships which were not heavy in personnel and would therefore have a problem repelling any incursion. Cruise ships would not because they have so many crew onboard and more security.

 

I think each of you out there should choose to cruise or not, where you feel comfortable. I for one am not going to let this incident "jail" me any more than I did 9/11, the Madrid Bombings, the Bali Bombing, the Kusadasi bombings...

[Titan(ic)5.6]

I suppose that was my point in relaying my former cruise. We all have choices. Titani(ic)5.6, will you please tell all of us the circumstances of those pirate attacks and the TYPES of ships that were accosted?? Please do! When something had never happened to a CRUISE SHIP I took the Silversea Shadow captain (and this was in the Malacca Straits, not Somalia coast) at his word that we were in no danger, because all piracies (OMG is that a word?) had in the past been directed at cargo ships which were not heavy in personnel and would therefore have a problem repelling any incursion. Cruise ships would not because they have so many crew onboard and more security.

 

Did I miss something? Did the pirates have a previous "gentleman's agreement" with the cruise lines not to attack cruise ships??? Wouldn't a cruise ship be a bigger "prize" to pirates than cargo ships? The International Maritime Bureau warning was for all ships to stay 200 miles away from Somalia, not just cargo ships. Maybe Seabourn was the only cruise line to be negligent and ignore the Internal Maritime Bureau warning.

 

If you think that cruise ships have enough crew and security to fend off a pirate or terrorist attack - think again. A small dinghy was enough to cause massive death and destruction aboard the USS Cole, a destroyer that was armed to the teeth!!

 

[Boatdrill]

I have to say, though, taking on a cruise ship seems pretty ambitious.

 

I'm afraid that this episode is only the beginning.... :(

 

Now that CNN and international media have given it air time, the "pirates" know they can become famous almost overnight. The bigger the target, the bigger the fame.

[deadzone1003]

I'm not a regular on Seabourn as some of you may quickly recognize, but I have been following this one for the last 3 days. What was originally great insight into a breaking news story seemed to have been reduced to a chat room brawl. :mad: Cheers to Norm and the regulars of the Seabourn thread for providing information one would normally not get.

[safein]

I resent the whole idea that because some of us have not sailed on Seabourn that we shouldn't care as concerned cruisers. I really think the name calling has gotten way out of hand and please let's not let this thread get pulled because of it.

 

Did anyone watch CNN's Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer today? He interviewed by phone Norm who provided the pics! I think we should care more about those passengers who were on that sailing and less on how Seabourn or any other cruise line could have, would have, should have handled the situation.

 

REMEMBER WE ALL LOVE ONE THING: CRUISING!

 

Anita

[dougnewmanatsea]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

 

As I feel this thread has gotten far out of control, I have gone back to the beginning and deleted a large number of posts which were personal attacks completely irrelevent to this discussion.

 

I also deleted posts which quoted or referenced those, so please do not take it personally if one of your posts has been deleted; that doesn't necessarily mean there's something wrong with what you said.

 

I would also like to once again extend my congratulations to the captain and crew of SEABOURN SPIRIT for their stellar performance, and my best wishes to all her passengers who endured this terrifying ordeal. I wish all of them a very safe trip home, and hope that their next, free Seabourn cruise is less eventful! (I might add that the provision of a free cruise is an extraordinary level of compensation for Seabourn to extend, and for this they should be commended.)

 

Special mention must go to Norm who has kept us all up to date with his excellent posts and photos. I think I speak for all members of this board when I say that I greatly appreciate it.

 

Anyhow, for the time being I am continuing to allow posting on this thread as I believe there is still room for legitimate, civlized discussion of this topic. However, personal attacks are not welcome or permitted here and I must emphasize that in the future they will not be tolerated. I know Dan is not around right now but please do not think back to that day in the second grade when you had a substitute teacher ;) ... (I've been there and done that, and probably more recently than most of you!)

 

I anticipate and appreciate your future cooperation.

[lahore]

I was cruising when I was a little kid and remember that ships even back then had Gurkha security guards, so I don't think it's a new-'terrorism'-post September 11th' thing. The security gaurds on RCL on our most recent cruise were mostly Ghurka/Nepali men so it seems to me to be a long tradition. They're fierce little guys and I would trust them with my life, all though of course I would prefer not to have to!

 

Great photos Norm...I am almost envious, being a keen photographer;) , but not quite.

[uk1]

Like Host Doug, I’ve been perplexed by some of the stuff the “regulars” have been posting with respect to this issue. They seem to have taken the quite reasonable questions people have asked about why the ship was there with a mixture of rudeness and desire to not see the issue discussed. In the attacks, much of it has been highly personalised and has inaccurately stated what posters have actually said, has misstated their motives and even said that they were not entitled to be here because they haven’t sailed on Seabourn. Some have said that “nowhere in the world is safe” as though any sensible person would go somewhere that was known to be say 80% unsafe. Others have talked about “hindsight” whilst the actual point others have been making is about the puzzling aspect of a lack of fairly intelligent “foresight”. The captain who took his passengers into the area has been hailed as a hero for doing his job effectively, but those same people will not allow others to simply ask “what on earth was he doing there”. I'm waiting to be accused as being either unpatriotic or anti-American!

 

This issue has nothing at all towards loyalty to the Seabourn brand, or is a criticism of the product or most of those that manage it. It’s simply a question about what standards of safety should customers expect from the Captain primarily and the line secondarily. For the record – I’m 70% certain my next cruise wll be with Seabourn, so it is detatched in that sense from Seabourn. We must understnad what happened here so that we're beeter informed in future.

 

The reason why the question is important in my mind is because you have to see the Captains role compared to that say of an airline pilot. They both have both ultimate responsibility for the safety of their passengers (not the head office of the shipping line or airline) and in order to discharge that responsibility they are also given by international law and agreement ultimate power to discharge their responsibility. In a ship or aircraft you place your destiny and safety entirely in the hands of the pilot or captain and you must comply with anything he tells you. In return you should expect of him REASONABLE levels of care in not taking you into danger.

 

If an airline pilot flies into a danger zone, questions will be asked of the airline about why they sent him there. If he flies in a craft that is unairwowrthy questions will be asked about the airline’s maintenance. But if things do go wrong it is the pilot who is held accountable and has to answer for his actions. In the uk, BALPA, the professional pilots airline association regularly tells airlines that their members will not fly into certain airports. I think Athens was on the list some years ago. Captains of Bahamian registered cruise ships, don't appear to have such an association. That's why customers MUST ask the questions, one of them being what happened to cause the ship to be there; did the captain object; was he "overuled". If he didn't object did he know know it was clearly a very dangerous place to be etc etc. A question is, "If this were not a Carnival craft and the captain were talking to the owner instead of a middle manager, would it have been there?" It is a worrying question that should be asked and I think the Captain deserves to have the question asked. Just questions - but lot's of them.

 

In the UK if a ship has a problem then a Board of Trade (I think it still is) will suspend the captain and look into what happened. The last thing in the world you’d do is expect the shipping line to conduct it’s own enquiry.

 

So why is this so important to all cruisers rather than just Seabourn cruisers?

 

Firstly, on the basis of previous pirate activity the going rate appears to be somewhere between say $250k to $1m dollars. But I guess that if they had managed to board they would have realised for the first time that guests were probably carrying that amount in cash and possessions. This situation could well have sparked the pirates targeting proactively other lines, with both the geographic areas of activity widening and the number of pirates increasing to meet what would be an attractive new market for them. They can find the craft, the weapons, and the technology to track vessels and target them when they are most vulnerable. Nowhere in the world are you further away from help than in the middle of an ocean.

 

Secondly, to answer another question asked, the pirates normally fire a rocket into the bridge first, and then try to board the ship. If they had access to this ship, this being neither a research or cargo ship, they would have discovered that the valuable cargo was an overwhelming number of very rich customers. You have to ask what might have happened if they had managed to board the ship and how safe would the passengers have been.

 

Finally, this could have so easily been the trigger point for the end of many players in the cruise market. If the situation had ended slightly differently, there would have been panic in cruises generally and some people that might have otherwise cruise would not have done. Look at what happened to flying and travelling after 9/11 for Americans when arguable other countries were safer than staying at home. They simply didn’t want to fly. This could easily have started a domino effect with many lines having been forced out of business.

 

Some clearly prefer not to have this debate, and they are entitled to turn the page and read something else. But those that are puzzled by how this came about and to have the background to the decision questioned are also entitled to have the issue questioned properly by those in authority. I hope it isn’t a Bahamas based authority but a US led authority, and it certainly should not be Carnival.

 

Please let's stop the personal abuse, behave like adults, agree that Seabourn produces a wonderful product, but let us surely be able to ask the simple question "what was he doing there".

 

Jeff

[Martita B.]

Jeff......please post when you decide on a Seabourn voyage booking.

 

Thank you,

Martita B.

[canadagal]

No offense taken Doug, perfectly understandable and thanks for the clean up!

Pat

[CruisinMatt]

This report give a lot more details about what it was like from the passengers point of view! Imagine the lady in the bathtub!! :o

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051107/ap_on_re_af/seychelles_pirate_cruise

[English Voyager]

The management of Seabourn were negligent to send cruises to these waters.

 

Once again no doubt the usual apologists will cook up some story for what is by any normal criteria a criminal decision to go there. Seabourn customers should be outraged.

 

Jeff

Well,judging by the number of deleted posts,outrage on this board was certainly achieved!

One must await the outcome of any enquiries to ascertain the true facts of the case,as opposed to media reports which may contain factual errors,eg who has confirmed the position of the ship when it was attacked?

Whether this recent attack is the start of a trend remains to be seen,but it is worth reiterating that worldwide it is the first on a cruise ship for 21 years.