Is Viking Sky having problems?

[OnTheJourney]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

 

My guess for the Sky is that they've either had another engine down for overhaul (which can take 3-4 weeks), and the 4 engine configuration of the Viking ships makes these overhauls more critical to itinerary completion, or they've had an engine failure, or that the problem they had with the Star early on with the transformers for the propulsion motors has cropped back up.

 

Thanks for coming to the rescue! See what further news emerges on it. 

[PlanoTim]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I saw the "bat signal" and came over here.  The requirements for tugs in a US port is when the ship has lost it's redundant steering, not propulsion.  So, a ship like the Sky with shafted propellers and rudders would only need a tug escort if the ship lost two of the four steering systems (two for each rudder), not for loss of one propulsion system (one propeller).  The other thing is whether the tug escorted the ship all the way to the sea buoy or not.  It would have to be at least following along (likely not tied up) all the way out of the port if it was a "steering escort", but if only used at the dock, then it was merely an operational decision, perhaps caused by prevailing weather.

 

While cruise ships only make up about 5% of the world's shipping, they are the main users of multiple propellers.  Most ships have only one propeller, and one engine bolted to that propeller, so operating with only one means of propulsion is almost ubiquitous.

 

My guess for the Sky is that they've either had another engine down for overhaul (which can take 3-4 weeks), and the 4 engine configuration of the Viking ships makes these overhauls more critical to itinerary completion, or they've had an engine failure, or that the problem they had with the Star early on with the transformers for the propulsion motors has cropped back up.

Thanks for correcting my understanding of the requirement, Chief.  I appreciate you knowledge and your willingness to share it with us here.

Tim

[Not a Georgia Peach]

I don't think they had the engine down for overhaul, as they were able to maintain speed on the trip to Belize.  It was after we were at Cozumel that we received notification about the speed and missed port.  The full notification we received on board was: "We wanted to take this time to inform you that due to a technical issue, our maximum speed at which we can sail has been reduced.  Unfortunately, this means we would be unable to achieve the required speed between the ports of Progreso and Miami and would face a significant delay to our planned arrival time in Miami.  We are acutely aware that you will have flight arrangements in place for Miami that cannot easily be adjusted for a possible late arrival into Miami.  Therefore, and after consultation with our Head Office, we will cancel our call to Progreso on Wednesday, January 15 and instead reschedule the call to Key West this coming Thursday, January 16."  I do not know if the current Viking Sky cruise is still experiencing speed issues.

 

[Emma]

On 1/20/2020 at 8:31 AM, Emma said:

Good idea, I just sent them an email, I will share any comments.

I am very happy to report that a Viking representative just called to address my concerns with the ship, she said they did have a problem and needed a part to fix it and had difficulty getting it in Mexico but it was repaired in Miami and all is good.

[odblnt]

On 1/19/2020 at 10:50 AM, Clay Clayton said:

Hmmm, could make our Atlantic crossing in 47 days interesting!

 

Hopefully you mean that your cruise starts in 47 days, not that you're expecting it to take 47 days. :-)

 

(Yes, I'm just being a smarta--.)

[PlanoTim]

14 minutes ago, Emma said:

I am very happy to report that a Viking representative just called to address my concerns with the ship, she said they did have a problem and needed a part to fix it and had difficulty getting it in Mexico but it was repaired in Miami and all is good.

That's great news!  Thanks for checking on that.  Viking Sky has left Cozumel and appears to be headed to Merida (Progreso).

Tim

[aungrl]

1 hour ago, Emma said:

I am very happy to report that a Viking representative just called to address my concerns with the ship, she said they did have a problem and needed a part to fix it and had difficulty getting it in Mexico but it was repaired in Miami and all is good.

Did the rep give you any detail as to what, specifically, the problem was?

[Emma]

10 hours ago, aungrl said:

Did the rep give you any detail as to what, specifically, the problem was?

Nothing really specific, just that there was a problem and they needed a part to fix it, I was happy for that.

[Peregrina651]

On 1/21/2020 at 6:34 PM, odblnt said:

 

Hopefully you mean that your cruise starts in 47 days, not that you're expecting it to take 47 days. 🙂

 

(Yes, I'm just being a smarta--.)

 

It being Clay, I am sure he means that he hopes it takes 47 days. He does like to cruise. 😇

[Clay Clayton]

Hmm, while a 47 day cruise sounds good, I don’t think I would want it to be that long unless I knew it ahead of time!  

 

Its only 14 days long starting in 43!

[Paulal]

Super!

Thanks Emma.

We will see you on board!

[D_ziner]

On 1/24/2020 at 10:40 AM, Paulal said:

Super!

Thanks Emma.

We will see you on board!

I really appreciate the posts concerning the Sky posted here (Emma, et al)! I will be boarding on 2-7 & hoping that engine issues have been resolved. Checking cruisemapper.com (love that app!) today, I see you are leaving Roatan & would love to hear back that sailing has been "smooth". I am really looking forward to my 1st cruise on Viking next week. Thanks for any updates!

[PlanoTim]

We’re on Viking Sky and the cruise is going great. Weather and seas have been perfect. The cruise schedule has been as planned so far. You may have to drag me off when we get back to Miami. 😉

[D_ziner]

1 hour ago, PlanoTim said:

We’re on Viking Sky and the cruise is going great. Weather and seas have been perfect. The cruise schedule has been as planned so far. You may have to drag me off when we get back to Miami. 😉

Awesome news! Keep us informed! 

[Peregrina651]

28 minutes ago, D_ziner said:

Awesome news! Keep us informed! 

 

 

LOL. If PlanoTim has his way, he'll be telling you in person.

 

[Heidi13]

On 1/20/2020 at 11:46 PM, chengkp75 said:

I saw the "bat signal" and came over here.  The requirements for tugs in a US port is when the ship has lost it's redundant steering, not propulsion.  So, a ship like the Sky with shafted propellers and rudders would only need a tug escort if the ship lost two of the four steering systems (two for each rudder), not for loss of one propulsion system (one propeller).  The other thing is whether the tug escorted the ship all the way to the sea buoy or not.  It would have to be at least following along (likely not tied up) all the way out of the port if it was a "steering escort", but if only used at the dock, then it was merely an operational decision, perhaps caused by prevailing weather.

 

While cruise ships only make up about 5% of the world's shipping, they are the main users of multiple propellers.  Most ships have only one propeller, and one engine bolted to that propeller, so operating with only one means of propulsion is almost ubiquitous.

 

My guess for the Sky is that they've either had another engine down for overhaul (which can take 3-4 weeks), and the 4 engine configuration of the Viking ships makes these overhauls more critical to itinerary completion, or they've had an engine failure, or that the problem they had with the Star early on with the transformers for the propulsion motors has cropped back up.

Further to the Chief's reply, in addition to regulatory/port requirements, the Master may request a tug anytime, either to assist with docking, or to stand-by. The Viking ships can only be manoeuvred  comfortably in a 20 kts wind, so anything in excess the Master will probably request a tug. If the ship is not fully operational, the SMS may require tugs at lower wind speeds.

 

In almost every port since departing L/A, we have had 1 or more tugs standing-by during arrivals and departures. The Viking Sun is fully operational, based on some of our transit speeds, so a tug standing-by is not that unusual.

[D_ziner]

17 hours ago, Peregrina651 said:

 

 

LOL. If PlanoTim has his way, he'll be telling you in person.

 

That will be fine as long as he's not in my cabin! LOL! My prior cruises have been on the big ships, so have been a bit anxious about sailing on the smaller Sky. Glad to know engine (?) probs are fixed. Thx for updating here!

[_alan_]

On 1/30/2020 at 10:53 AM, PlanoTim said:

We’re on Viking Sky and the cruise is going great. Weather and seas have been perfect. The cruise schedule has been as planned so far. You may have to drag me off when we get back to Miami. 😉

 

I know that we our last cruise ended, I suffered some serious depression.

[neutrino78x]

I would definitely feel safer on a ship under the flag of Norway -- a NATO ally with a descent Navy (though not as powerful as that of the USA or Britain) -- than on one flying a Flag of Convenience! And I would know the crew is taken of better too!  🙂

[Emma]

On 2/1/2020 at 1:34 PM, flashfearless said:

 

I know that we our last cruise ended, I suffered some serious depression.

 

On 2/1/2020 at 1:34 PM, flashfearless said:

 

I know that we our last cruise ended, I suffered some serious depression.

Agree that we have had wonderful weather and smooth sailing. Tonight they have an over the top super bowel party on the pool deck as well as colossal king crab legs and jumbo shrimp in the buffet. Yesterday a pop up taco station at the pool bar at lunch that was delicious.   Can not beat food and service. We have booked our 2nd Viking ocean cruise.

[DaveSJ711]

3 minutes ago, Emma said:

 

Agree that we have had wonderful weather and smooth sailing. Tonight they have an over the top super bowel party on the pool deck as well as colossal king crab legs and jumbo shrimp in the buffet. Yesterday a pop up taco station at the pool bar at lunch that was delicious.   Can not beat food and service. We have booked our 2nd Viking ocean cruise.

 

Super bowel party?

[Heidi13]

5 hours ago, neutrino78x said:

I would definitely feel safer on a ship under the flag of Norway -- a NATO ally with a descent Navy (though not as powerful as that of the USA or Britain) -- than on one flying a Flag of Convenience! And I would know the crew is taken of better too!  🙂

The Viking crew are very well treated and looked after by the company, however it isn't based on Flag State. Viking's terms and conditions for the crew are their company standard, which is way better than Flag State Marine Personnel Regs and the other cruise lines.

[neutrino78x]

1 hour ago, Heidi13 said:

The Viking crew are very well treated and looked after by the company, however it isn't based on Flag State. Viking's terms and conditions for the crew are their company standard, which is way better than Flag State Marine Personnel Regs and the other cruise lines.

Are you kidding, it is very much about the flag state. If the ship were flagged in the Bahamas, they wouldn't be required to pay at least the minimum wage in Norway, they wouldn't be required to fulfill the crew safety requirements of the Norwegian (equivalent of the) Coast Guard, etc. It's a big issue for the sailors who operate vessels upon the High Seas:

 

https://www.itfglobal.org/en/sector/seafarers/flags-of-convenience

 

No FoC for me. As a Navy veteran I would never support that. That's why Viking would be a top choice for me, and I would cease sailing with them if they changed flags to a FoC. :)

[Heidi13]

3 hours ago, neutrino78x said:

Are you kidding, it is very much about the flag state. If the ship were flagged in the Bahamas, they wouldn't be required to pay at least the minimum wage in Norway, they wouldn't be required to fulfill the crew safety requirements of the Norwegian (equivalent of the) Coast Guard, etc. It's a big issue for the sailors who operate vessels upon the High Seas:

 

https://www.itfglobal.org/en/sector/seafarers/flags-of-convenience

 

No FoC for me. As a Navy veteran I would never support that. That's why Viking would be a top choice for me, and I would cease sailing with them if they changed flags to a FoC. :)

Might not want to believe everything you read on the internet, especially when it is comes from what is basically a union. Didn't read the link, since I noted the "ITF" in the URL. They aren't known for balanced reporting.

 

Thanks for the info, but having spent 40 years in the Merchant Navy mostly on passenger vessels, with 28 yrs in Command, I might just know a little about the respective minimal Flag State regulations. While I haven't sailed under Norwegian flag ships, I have experience with both UK and Canada Flag States, which similar to Norway. They are on the "White List".

 

Flag State regs (including UK, Canada and probably Norway) are minimum standards, which are based on IMO requirements. The "White List" Flag States certainly have more detailed Acts and Regulations, than FoC states, but they are still minimal requirements. BTW - Since you are questioning my response, I assume you understand the term "White List". If not, try Google.

 

Many passenger ship companies, which include cruise lines and ferry operators, operate SMS systems that incorporate human factors and risk management standards that provide very clear direction to the Master, on how the owner wants their vessel operated. They also provide crew terms and conditions, well in excess of "White List" minimums.

 

With respect to crew hours of work, remuneration, etc these are enacted by Flag States in their respective Marine Personnel Regulations, which are actually based on the ILO Manila Convention of 2006, as amended. When any Flag State is signatory to MLC 2006, they are required to implement regulations for their ships that comply with the ILO Convention. MLC 2006  has been ratified by almost 100 Flag States, which includes all of the most popular Flag States used by cruise ship operators. Unfortunately, these approved requirements are minimal. You will find Carnival ships operated by P&O with UK Flag have similar crew employment T&C to ships with Panama Flag. The UK & Norway Flags will have similar regulations.

 

Therefore your mega ships owned by Carnival, RCI, NCL all comply with MLC 2006, which is the normal minimal standard, Norway is also signatory to MLC 2006, but Viking provide vastly superior T&C to that required by Flag State.

 

Having already spent a month aboard Viking Sun, I have chatted with many crew members regarding their terms and conditions. They are treated very well, but most differences between Viking and FoC are not included in MLC 2006. Viking retains 96% of their crew, because the company provides standards VASTLY superior to MLC 2006 and Norwegian Flag State requirements.

 

A couple of examples - the Viking ratings in the hotel dept receive:

• Free and unlimited wi-fi
• Work/leave ratio of 6 months on and 2 months off
• Work schedules 3 contracts in advance

These are key crew benefits and are not included in MLC 2006 or any Flag State Regs that i researched. As an Officer on UK ships, I didn't get free wi-fi, nor did I know my next ship when I left the current one.

 

In the marine industry, Viking is considered a premium employer, which provides T&C vastly superior to the minimum requirements of any Flag State. While Viking choose Norway as Flag State, they also look after the crew well in excess of minimum standards, which is reflected in the exceptional service, we as passengers receive.

 

 

[Emma]

11 hours ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

Super bowel party?

Sorry,