Very Bad HAL Maintenance.....or is it just me?

[chengkp75]

Appreciate your professional knowlewdge and your willingness to share it.

 

I was wondering if any cruise ships use PEX piping with the mechanical expansion joints.

 

How much of the domestic water piping done in plastic? I know I have seen ceilings open on HAL ship nad the piping was defintely stainless steel (4").

 

I'm a bit surprised of two things: one that there was stainless piping, and two that it was 4" along a passenger deck. That's quite a large line, a typical feeder for one entire side of a passenger cabin deck would be 2-1/2". I was thinking you may have been seeing is a gray water drain line, which is bright cadmium plated steel, and could be 4". This pipe typically has a simple o-ring slip joint.

 

But even on ships where the main potable water risers (coming from the engine room to the upper decks) and runners (mains along the passageways) are metallic (more typically copper), the small branch lines leading to each cabin tend to be plastic. It is less susceptible to electrolysis (distilled water tends to be slightly acidic, which is why they add calcium carbonate, the ingredient in Tums, to the water), but also is better in not forming chlorine or carbonate scale in the pipes causing low flow and pressure problems. (Not to mention the ugly color the water turns when the water is off for a while and the scale falls off the pipe and is carried around to accumulate in the static legs at your cabin sink and shower).

 

I haven't seen PEX piping, and I while I've used it in my home, I haven't studied it enough to know if it is flame retardant enough to get a class society approval.

[Tampa Girl]

I don't know what to say. Last year I was on the Zaandam for a month and it was in beautiful condition and it is as old as the Rotterdam. I won't be sailing HAL again unless the itinerary is exceptional and I read current reviews very carefully. I did read the reviews for Rotterdam but must have been blinded to bad reviews as I read nothing in line with my experience. I did write a review and it should be public soon

 

So the whole line is blackballed because of one ship? Perhaps you should test the Rotterdam again after drydock. As has been point out in a preceding post, other cruise lines have similar maintenance problems. Pleasant, no, but also not extraordinary and not always preventable.

[chengkp75]

Hank, I totally agree that front of the house is important for the image of the business, and the satisfaction of the passengers. I am merely saying that drydocks are limited in time, not just from a lost revenue basis, but also on the availability and cost of the dock itself, and so statutory issues like underwater equipment and hull structure tend to be the "critical path" items that drive time in a dock. For sure, if there are issues as bad as you say, and I believe what you say, then there should definitely be time/money assigned for these front of house repairs at the next docking, and if management felt it was cost effective (cost/benefit), then they could have scheduled sub-contractors during operation, as we did with the water piping at NCL. Again, I haven't seen how long these items have been a problem, but if they are long term and not attended to, then it does show a problem at corporate level with their hotel maintenance philosophy.

[Mary229]

So the whole line is blackballed because of one ship? Perhaps you should test the Rotterdam again after drydock. As has been point out in a preceding post, other cruise lines have similar maintenance problems. Pleasant, no, but also not extraordinary and not always preventable.

 

Yes, I am afraid so. fool me once and all of that. The level of disrepair showed an extreme level of disrespect and disregard.

[Dunelm]

I do think that many corporations have cut corners to improve profits, usually that benefit shareholders. Having cruised for several years, I continue to be surprised that prices have not risen more steeply. I think, importantly, most ships are maintained to maximize safety. There is a huge difference, though, between maintaining ships as opposed to condos. Water plays havoc on most materials. Perhaps ships should be at disembarkation ports for longer so that interiors can be adequately maintained. I can guarantee that cruising costs would rise greatly. On my recent cruise, people were complaining about verandah maintenance during the cruise. It's complicated. Companies everywhere, on land and sea have cut staff. Are we willing to pay for a culture that starts to put people over profit?

[Mary229]

Just a point of clarification. The VOV starts at $18,000 per cabin or near $500 per day per cabin. That is for an inside cabin.

[MMDown Under]

I decided to do another post in this thread (which I started) to give Chengkp a big thank you for explaining some of the manufacturing issues. That being said, his comment about being front of the house issues should fall on deaf ears for those of us who cruise. Cruisers expect a quality front of the house product and should accept nothing less! HAL used to have a "Signature of Excellence" theme...and perhaps even they could no longer use that saying with a straight face. Had to smile at one post that mentioned the water leaking "up" from the aft deck. We did see this phenomenon but decided to limit our OP to only a few problems so as to not totally bore the reader.

Yesterday I did complete the normal HAL post cruise Comment Form and did emphasize the excellence of the crew as well as the abysmal condition of the vessel. We have no expectation that our comments will result in HAL cleaning up their act when it comes to maintaining their vessels. Unlike some HAL fans, we are "equal opportunity cruisers" and are not "loyal" to any corporation. . But HAL had best beware. The line is trying to attract new cruisers, but when somebody who has cruised on well maintained vessels steps aboard a HAL leaking bucket.....they will likely not return. And those folks will likely tell their friends who will tell their friends...etc. We saw quite a few cruisers (on the Rotterdam) taking pictures of the leaks, towels, buckets, etc. In the cruise/travel industry it can take a Herculean effort to overcome negative stereotypes. It almost seems like HAL is trying hard to ruin their excellent reputation.

Hank

 

The policy seems to be, when they past their use by date, because of lack of maintenance, the cruise line then transfers them to markets, such as P&O Australia, which gives them a new name and, with much publicity, welcomes a "new ship" to new gullible cruise markets! Buyer beware!

[Hlitner]

Hank, I totally agree that front of the house is important for the image of the business, and the satisfaction of the passengers. I am merely saying that drydocks are limited in time, not just from a lost revenue basis, but also on the availability and cost of the dock itself, and so statutory issues like underwater equipment and hull structure tend to be the "critical path" items that drive time in a dock. For sure, if there are issues as bad as you say, and I believe what you say, then there should definitely be time/money assigned for these front of house repairs at the next docking, and if management felt it was cost effective (cost/benefit), then they could have scheduled sub-contractors during operation, as we did with the water piping at NCL. Again, I haven't seen how long these items have been a problem, but if they are long term and not attended to, then it does show a problem at corporate level with their hotel maintenance philosophy.

 

We did see some evidence of sub-contractors during our overnight stay in Rotterdam (the half way point of the VOV cruise). During that overnight, contractors did replace the worst of the cracked windows (these are large windows) in the MDR......and we passed 3 sub-contractors (as we returned to the ship) who were going ashore carrying caulking guns and lots of various types of caulk. I tried to keep my OP to just the facts. But my "impression" was that the engineering staff were simply overwhelmed with the number of plumbing and leak related problems and had to prioritize. Hence, the very obvious leak on Deck 3 (Forward) was allowed to leak for many days since it would have had a much lower priority then plumbing issues in the cabin. We have no clue as to the situation below decks.....but our ship did seem to perform well and made all of our ports on time (we could not dock at Halifax because of high winds which is not the fault of HAL or the Captain).

 

DW reminds me that in the "olden days" when we were young.....we cruised on several "budget lines" including the long defunct Regency. But even those old budget Regency ships (such as the Regent Spirit) did not show major "front of the house" problems anything like what we experienced on the Rotterdam. One can only wonder what our Captain thought as he had to step around that large leak in the Lido...in full view of hundreds of passengers. HAL is not a "budget" line......but perhaps they are now a good cruise line with "budget" ships. Our next booked HAL cruise is not until the spring of 2019 (we are doing many other cruises on other lines during that interim) and that is on another aging HAL vessel (Maasdam). Some might say we are gluttons for punishment, but we are not giving up on HAL.....yet! To the person that mentioned booking next year's VOV cruise....we say "go for it and have a great time." The VOV is a fascinating itinerary and one should not allow a few leaks to deny them the experience. Cruising through Prince Christian Sound and seeing some large icebergs even made this ole salt smile and enjoy every moment :).

 

Hank

[MMDown Under]

Just a point of clarification. The VOV starts at $18,000 per cabin or near $500 per day per cabin. That is for an inside cabin.

 

WOW This is very expensive for an inside cabin on an old ship in need of maintenance. I can understand people being attracted to the itinerary, but at those prices! No wonder Viking Ocean Cruises is ordering more ships to meet the demand.

[MMDown Under]

Most people understand the simple problem that as machines like automobiles, airplanes, and cruise ships get older, more and more maintenance and repair is required to keep them in good operating condition.

At some point, the owner of an ageing car/airplane/ship needs to decide if he is prepared to spend the extra money to keep his ageing machine in good operating condition - or get rid of it and purchase a newer one.

Strangely the HAL Management people have found a third option. Keep the old one, but pretend that no additional maintenance is required.

When I worked at HAL, Captains and Chief Engineers regularly received some very nasty emails from their superiors, questioning the increasing maintenance costs for the older ships.

Although a 12 year old could probably figure it out, the "suits" at HAL claimed that they were unable to understand why a 20 year old ship would require more repair and maintenance than a new ship.

They steadfastly refused to increase maintenance budgets as the ships aged. Requests for repairs and other maintenance were denied, as there was no budget for them. Drydock plans always start with very promising plans for renovation and repair, but the majority of the plans are cancelled before the drydock begins. By refusing to increase maintenance budgets for ageing ships, HAL Vice Presidents protect their yearly bonuses.

Now you see the results.

HAL's VP of Technical Operations still gets a new car every year. But the older ships cannot fix broken windows and leaky pipes.

Next time you speak to a HAL Captain or Chief Engineer, ask them about the current Carnival/HAL policy on spare parts for HAL ships. You may be quite surprised at their answers.

 

Thank you your comments, as well as other contributors.

 

I have been so tempted to book a long HAL cruise on one of their older ships, as they have great itineraries, however you have all helped my head overrule my heart.

[Sir PMP]

Reality check.....

 

You all want ships to "be new", but you DONT want to pay the fare's associated with new ships. Sure, other lines have new ships... But the only way they can fund these new builds is to either A) Make them so big they get economies of scale, or B) Charge a much higher price per cabin...

 

You all rave about HAL's "small ships", and reasonable prices compared to the premium lines... THIS is the downside to this!

 

This is utter nonsense, don't blame the passenger for the condition of a ship, it doesn't matter what size it is, a cruise ship need to be in tiptop shape at all times both for safety and service, that's why we have both dry dock and wet dock, and the U.S Coast Guard to inspect the condition of the ship

[chengkp75]

This is utter nonsense, don't blame the passenger for the condition of a ship, it doesn't matter what size it is, a cruise ship need to be in tiptop shape at all times both for safety and service, that's why we have both dry dock and wet dock, and the U.S Coast Guard to inspect the condition of the ship

 

I believe I understand what you're saying but would point out that the USCG inspections are only for SOLAS compliance, and not to meet the stricter USCG regulations that apply to US flag cruise ships. The USCG could care less, really, about buckets catching leaks or leaking pipes, or cracked windows on foreign flag cruise ships.

 

It's far more about class inspections that cost money, and especially as a ship gets above 15 years old, these inspections and tests tend to cost more, and highlight more areas requiring repair/replacement, so shipowners will typically sell an older ship when maintenance costs get too high, to a different line whose business model can cover the expenses.

[Cruising-along]

...To the person that mentioned booking next year's VOV cruise....we say "go for it and have a great time." The VOV is a fascinating itinerary and one should not allow a few leaks to deny them the experience. Cruising through Prince Christian Sound and seeing some large icebergs even made this ole salt smile and enjoy every moment :).

 

Hank

 

 

That was me, thank you for the encouragement.

 

I remember years ago you gave me advice about how to see Ephesus on our own (great advice and everything went perfectly). I am expecting to love this cruise too. [emoji846]

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[iancal]

We would consider $500 per diem on a cruise if it was a special itinerary. We would never consider it on a HAL cruise and most especially not on an older HAL cruise ship. Nor would we ever consider it on a HAL inaugural cruise.

 

From our perspective that cost for that product would bring a new perspective to the phrase 'a shake down' cruise.

[SilvertoGold]

We would consider $500 per diem on a cruise if it was a special itinerary. We would never consider it on a HAL cruise and most especially not on an older HAL cruise ship. Nor would we ever consider it on a HAL inaugural cruise.

 

From our perspective that cost for that product would bring a new perspective to the phrase 'a shake down' cruise.

 

Next year's VOV is priced at over CND 600 per day for two in an inside, much more than the WC, Grand S.A. and Grand Med. I didn't even look at the other categories, but I suspect they are scary.

 

I just don't see any HAL cruise being worth that much. Some like Crystal and Regent might be.

Edited September 15, 2017 by SilvertoGold

[innlady1]

We're booked on a 14 day Caribbean cruise in February on the Rotterdam. With Key West, St. Thomas, and Antigua badly damaged, we don't relish being on a ship that's in disrepair also! [emoji44]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FredT]

This is utter nonsense, don't blame the passenger for the condition of a ship, it doesn't matter what size it is, a cruise ship need to be in tiptop shape at all times both for safety and service, that's why we have both dry dock and wet dock, and the U.S Coast Guard to inspect the condition of the ship

 

I am certainly not "blaming the passenger" for the condition of the ship. Simply stating that if the customer base wants small/midsized ships, IN PERFECT CONDITION, they have to resign themselves to paying a LOT more (On every cruise, not JUST the VOV) or having ships that have "aging" issues.

 

And no, I am not talking about safety issues... these are mandated, and always comes to the "head of the line"....

[taxmantoo]

We're booked on a 14 day Caribbean cruise in February on the Rotterdam. With Key West, St. Thomas, and Antigua badly damaged, we don't relish being on a ship that's in disrepair also! [emoji44]

Totally agree. For us, sometimes, the whole point of a Caribbean vacation is escaping the frigid North and travelling on a nice ship. The islands often become secondary.

[iancal]

We don't necessarily want a ship in perfect condition.

 

What we do want is a cabin where the AC works, the plumbing works/no floods, a cabin where there is not mold in the walls or floors from previous floods or water pipe breakages, and a cabin where the HVAC cabin filter has been changed on a regular basis to reduce the amount of mold and spores in the air.

 

After that we are extremely flexible. But, we are not going to take a chance on ending up in a cabin like this on a poorly maintained ship when we can spend the same money and greatly reduce our chances of ending up in a cabin like this simply by selecting a different ship or different cruise line. For us this is about in cabin creature comforts and health,. Some rust around the window is not a deal breaker for us in the least. We also like the cabin fittings to be in reasonable condition. Stained, dirty carpets turn us off when our bare feet get blackened by walking on them. Same for sofas or chairs that have dirt ground into them. These are all fairly standard mtce components that any reasonable person would expect to have been taken care of in a hotel room or on a cruise.

 

We expect the basics-a cabin in good condition. We expect to get what we paid for and we are not shy to complain if we do not. Nor do we have a loyalty to any cruise line, hotel chain etc. that causes us to overlook these basics, explain them away, blame them on other customers, or indeed claim that the issues are blown out of proportion, Or claim that we paid to little to expect this basic standard of accommodation. Just regular folks expecting to get what we paid for. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edited September 15, 2017 by iancal

[Dunelm]

Actually, Lancal, considering how hard the crew worked on our cruise this July, I felt I was getting a lot more than what we had paid. Obviously, the Rotterdam must need some work. All the complaints on this thread will encourage some folk to choose a different cruise line. If so, I hope they have a good experience.

[innlady1]

Actually, Lancal, considering how hard the crew worked on our cruise this July, I felt I was getting a lot more than what we had paid. Obviously, the Rotterdam must need some work. All the complaints on this thread will encourage some folk to choose a different cruise line. If so, I hope they have a good experience.

 

 

 

Not necessarily a different cruise line...just a newer HAL ship. [emoji849]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SilvertoGold]

We don't necessarily want a ship in perfect condition.

 

What we do want is a cabin where the AC works, the plumbing works/no floods, a cabin where there is not mold in the walls or floors from previous floods or water pipe breakages, and a cabin where the HVAC cabin filter has been changed on a regular basis to reduce the amount of mold and spores in the air.

 

After that we are extremely flexible. But, we are not going to take a chance on ending up in a cabin like this on a poorly maintained ship when we can spend the same money and greatly reduce our chances of ending up in a cabin like this simply by selecting a different ship or different cruise line.

 

Good post, iancal.

 

Can you help me understand a couple of things? Not quite sure how you accomplish finding the ship/cabin which will meet all your (very

reasonable, I agree) criteria.

 

Things happen, all the time, not based on what happened or didn't happen last week or last month.

 

So many factors involved (and not all because of "poorly maintained ships") in whether your A/C works well or not; if your plumbing has a blockade or not; if your water piping springs a leak. Are these planned events that can be foreseen, a week in advance, a month, a year? Routine maintenance just does not guarentee that nothing bad will happen.

 

How does one pick the right ship/cabin to "greatly reduce your chances of ending up in a cabin like this"? A bad review - maybe ithe problem(s) will be fixed when you sail in month. No bad reviews - maybe all hell will finally break loose, as some think it did on the Rotterdam.

[MMDown Under]

If a hotel chain maintained their hotels like HAL does their old ships, the hotel chain would soon go out of business with holiday travellers.

 

HAL's badly maintained older ships survive because of their excellent staff and their great itineraries, despite their poor management.

[kazu]

If a hotel chain maintained their hotels like HAL does their old ships, the hotel chain would soon go out of business with holiday travellers.

 

HAL's badly maintained older ships survive because of their excellent staff and their great itineraries, despite their poor management.

 

When was the last time you were on an older HAL ship?

 

I didn't see any in your signature?

 

I sail the oldest ship in the fleet often - do live threads and do report issues I see.

 

Yes, stuff can happen. The window in the Crow's Nest was cracked on that ship from a major storm. It couldn't be replaced until it got to a certain port as the windows for that ship have to be specially ordered.

 

It's not that they wouldn't fix the problem -they couldn't. The window had to be ordered, made and then they needed to get to a port where they had the people who could install it. Older ships have some intricacies about them that go beyond regular maintenance.

 

And, this is not a cheerlead post, nor making excuses, just pointing out that some issues cannot be fixed immediately, sadly.

[Mary229]

 

And, this is not a cheerlead post, nor making excuses, just pointing out that some issues cannot be fixed immediately, sadly.

 

Sorry, but it pretty much is. This ship not only had apparent problems it had multiple signs of old and continue maintenance problems. It should not have sailed. Bluntly, it was nasty and unacceptable. There were many 4 and 5 star mariners on board and many who were as disgusted as the folks posting here.