Zaandam and Rotterdam Situation (merged topics starting March 22, 2020)

[conwakr]

5 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

we're all a little on edge.  At least I am having been under "house arrest" for 3 weeks now.  I let it roll off my back. I keep hearing that the Rotterdam might go to FLL now, pending approval of Canal/Panamanian authorities.  Since there is no way of knowing for sure that none of the transferred passengers were infected but not showing signs, COVID-19 could still be transferred,.  IN any case, any passengers left on any ship need to be taken off the ships and put in isolation for at least 14 days (I'd prefer 4 weeks)...

I believe many of the hotspots around the country are handling it that way.  If you enter from another state you must self quarantine for 14 days. These passengers, while not entering from another state, are about as close a parallel as you can get.  And if I read the news correctly Florida is a hotspot in several counties.  I don't expect the federal government to make the massive moves they did even 3 weeks ago and frankly I would rather see tax dollars go to PPE than to rescuing a thousand people who may or may not be sick and feeding and housing them - the disease is in every state so the focus has turned to those who are symptomatic and at most risk. 

[AncientWanderer]

7 minutes ago, Boatdrill said:

 For me, unless I was at that meeting, I don't know what was said, or what information the Captain had at the time, and what the crew understood to be their options.  

That said,  safety at sea is the highest priority on a ship. The Rotterdam crew that's assisting the Zaandam  may someday need the favor returned.  Ships routinely help other mariners in distress and sometimes crew have to put their own lives at risk to do so. The crew member you don't help today, maybe your life boat captain tomorrow.   

 

 

 

 

We'll probably not cruise again for a very long time, but I agree completely with this.  And if Zaandam comes to our troubled waters here in San Diego, I hope we find the resources to assist.

[rafinmd]

I think I saw that much of the spread of infection on Princess was the result of infected crew passing the virus on to passengers as meals were delivered.  The crew on the Rotterdam should be free of the virus (cannot tell for sure as it can hide for quite a while) and hopefully the Rotterdam brought enough PPE to prevent any spread on the Rotterdam.  I fully agree that moving unsick passengers to the Rotterdam (yes, some COULD be infected but nothing is absolutely certain in this environment) will save a lot of people.

 

As for 2 infected ships trying to find a disembarkation port is concerned, I think the total number of infected passengers is a bigger consideration.

 

Roy

[rkacruiser]

10 minutes ago, Copper10-8 said:

 

So you know for a fact that the decision to take on pax not displaying "flu-like symptoms" from Zaandam to Rotterdam, besides transferring medical staff and supplies from three other HAL ships to Zaandam, was made prior to the March 22 "ship's council" meeting with Rotterdam's crew? 

 

We know nothing  of the details of what the Rotterdam's crew was told other than they were going on a rescue mission for a sister ship.  The "speculation" that her crew was "shanghaied"  into participating into a dangerous situation is unwarranted, in my opinion.  

[Aquahound]

24 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

I think one of the issues driving the plan  is population density. Look at the land "hot spots." They're cities, where people are close together and it's difficult to do social distancing. Epidemiology 101 says the denser the population, the faster a disease spreads. We've all seen posts about "all those people crammed in close quarters on Diamond Princess." They were a VERY dense population, and look what happened.

 

 

First thing's first.  3GC, thank you.  You hit the nail on the head with your post, and I'm not just saying that as an opinion. 

 

Two, ref the topic of crew knowledge, if this thread has taught everyone one thing, it should be to take with a huge grain of salt what is said by a third party under the cover on anonymity.  A frightened person will say anything to get their message out and that's exactly how I took those posts that no longer exist. 

 

Think about it folks.  A slow moving cruise ship was sent with supplies.  Not a warship, not a helicopter, not a mutual aid request through another nation; it was a cruise ship.  Need I say more? 

[zonacruiser25]

From the reports I have seen, it says passengers going aboard Rotterdam are being routed through passageways that eliminate any contact with the crew.  Given the time at sea that Rotterdam had to prepare for this, they may have also had proper materials to do a better job of making isolation better.  No contact food delivery was also mentioned.  Rotterdam's crew may prove to be one of the best prepared crews for this situation.  I would doubt that all crew members knew the scope of their mission when they sailed.  I can also imagine that the teamwork aboard may just be a highlight when all this is over.  Keeping good thoughts for a positive outcome for all.  Norovirus incidents have made ships better prepared to deal with outbreaks.  This is multitudes more than Noro.   And now with nations turning away ships we are in new territory. Cruising IS going to change.

Edited March 27, 2020 by zonacruiser25
spelling

[Tampa Girl]

23 minutes ago, conwakr said:

I believe many of the hotspots around the country are handling it that way.  If you enter from another state you must self quarantine for 14 days. These passengers, while not entering from another state, are about as close a parallel as you can get.  And if I read the news correctly Florida is a hotspot in several counties.  I don't expect the federal government to make the massive moves they did even 3 weeks ago and frankly I would rather see tax dollars go to PPE than to rescuing a thousand people who may or may not be sick and feeding and housing them - the disease is in every state so the focus has turned to those who are symptomatic and at most risk. 

 

 

I wonder if you would feel that way if this happened to you?  The passengers didn't ask for this predicament, they did not anticipate such an incident, and it would not have occurred if Chile had kept its promise.  At that point there was no knowledge of any illness.

 

The U.S. has a responsibility to assist in the return of its citizens who have unlawfully or accidentally stranded in a foreign country.  That is one of the purposes of the State Department.  It is now time for the federal government to assure that this ship will be accepted in one of the California ports and our citizens disembarked.  

[LMaxwell]

1 hour ago, sansterre said:

 I put the blame on Chile port authority.

 

No way.  They were protecting their country.   If there are positive tests onboard now and no one has been of the ship since 3/14 that means the virus has been onboard being circulated.  Disembarking at Chile would have meant those with the virus were going through airports and communities, etc.  Being on the ship is not ideal either but condemning Chile for this seems wrong. 

[durangoscots]

On 3/25/2020 at 2:35 PM, Aquahound said:

 

 

 

I hope everyone realizes that with this virus there is no 100% right solution to the problem. I think HAL and other cruise lines are doing what they can, the best they can and since they do not have crystal balls, only time will tell which approaches worked and which did not. I hope that a a U.S port can be found quickly for both ships. What is going to be needed is good medical care for some people and of course, quarantine for others - both passengers and crew. The 4 deaths are truly sad and I feel for the families. However, at the age that many of us, including me,  who do long cruises have attained.... either covid19 or flu may very well be fatal. This is certainly a wake up call for me about cruising in the future .... and perhaps how to evaluate whether a given cruise is really a doable thing.

 

 

[voyageur9]

37 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

We know nothing  of the details of what the Rotterdam's crew was told other than they were going on a rescue mission for a sister ship.  The "speculation" that her crew was "shanghaied"  into participating into a dangerous situation is unwarranted, in my opinion.  

In fact, the much-admired Captain Albert provided a clear and concise account several days ago of the special meeting called by Rotterdam's captain in which he outlined the basis for the voyage which was beyond the scope of the crew's contract. That account may not explicitly deal with all of the fine details but it is not "nothing." 

[Niagarawine]

22 minutes ago, Tampa Girl said:

 

 

I wonder if you would feel that way if this happened to you?  The passengers didn't ask for this predicament, they did not anticipate such an incident, and it would not have occurred if Chile had kept its promise.  At that point there was no knowledge of any illness.

 

The U.S. has a responsibility to assist in the return of its citizens who have unlawfully or accidentally stranded in a foreign country.  That is one of the purposes of the State Department.  It is now time for the federal government to assure that this ship will be accepted in one of the California ports and our citizens disembarked.  

 

[Niagarawine]

21 minutes ago, LMaxwell said:

 

No way.  They were protecting their country.   If there are positive tests onboard now and no one has been of the ship since 3/14 that means the virus has been onboard being circulated.  Disembarking at Chile would have meant those with the virus were going through airports and communities, etc.  Being on the ship is not ideal either but condemning Chile for this seems wrong. 

 

[Niagarawine]

This ship should not have sailed. It was two days before Trump declared the thirty day moratorium on cruise ships. Passengers should have been cancelled and even if not should have decided to stay off ships particularly in view of the Princess ships issues ,especially on two of their ships. We have Canadian demanding to get off a few days ago but why did they embark?  Inking stopped sailing and gVe full refund. That’s what should have happened.

[sansterre]

17 minutes ago, LMaxwell said:

 

No way.  They were protecting their country.   If there are positive tests onboard now and no one has been of the ship since 3/14 that means the virus has been onboard being circulated.  Disembarking at Chile would have meant those with the virus were going through airports and communities, etc.  Being on the ship is not ideal either but condemning Chile for this seems wrong. 

Hmmm, the first illness on Zaandam was reported around the 21st.  Do you suppose someone contracted the illness(es) in Buonos Aires on the 7th, Falkland Islands, in Antarctica, or Puerto Monte (Chile) on the 14th?  

Since the cruise was to end in the port near Valpariso (Chile), do you suppose there might have been some Chilean people planning to disembark there?  Might they still be on board, some sick and some healthy, and might they be going through airports and communities, etc. in the United States in a few more days?

Sorry, but on March 18th, I was on the Eurodam when it was greeted by the port of San Diego.  As far as anyone knew, the Eurodam was a healthy ship.  And as far as anyone knew, the Zaandam was a healthy ship when it was turned away by Chile March 16th and 17th.

I still think Chile caused a whole lot of trouble and misery to many, not to mention the huge cost involved.

Thank you to San Diego and the United States for not sending us away.

[sansterre]

10 minutes ago, Niagarawine said:

This ship should not have sailed. It was two days before Trump declared the thirty day moratorium on cruise ships. Passengers should have been cancelled and even if not should have decided to stay off ships particularly in view of the Princess ships issues ,especially on two of their ships. We have Canadian demanding to get off a few days ago but why did they embark?  Inking stopped sailing and gVe full refund. That’s what should have happened.

??????????

The 30 day moratorium on cruise ships was around March 15th.  Chile refused to let people disembark.

The Zaandam had no choice but to sail on to Ft. Lauderdale (Peru, Ecuador who also refused to let them in).

[PhoenixCruiser]

13 minutes ago, Niagarawine said:

This ship should not have sailed. It was two days before Trump declared the thirty day moratorium on cruise ships. Passengers should have been cancelled and even if not should have decided to stay off ships particularly in view of the Princess ships issues ,especially on two of their ships. We have Canadian demanding to get off a few days ago but why did they embark?  Inking stopped sailing and gVe full refund. That’s what should have happened.

 

Well that ship has sailed

[LMaxwell]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

We know nothing  of the details of what the Rotterdam's crew was told other than they were going on a rescue mission for a sister ship.  The "speculation" that her crew was "shanghaied"  into participating into a dangerous situation is unwarranted, in my opinion.  

 

Even Captain Alberts blog said the ship was headed to deliver medical supplies and medical staff.  Of this we can all be sure the crew were informed.  It seems the situation changed between that meeting and the events of last night.  I would not go so far as to say that 4 days ago the plan was to transfer guests, that obviously had changed along the way, but the crew did not sign up for that either.  Like I said, use a little empathy for the crew and put yourself in their position.  They are probably frightened 

[LMaxwell]

7 minutes ago, sansterre said:

Hmmm, the first illness on Zaandam was reported around the 21st.  Do you suppose someone contracted the illness(es) in Buonos Aires on the 7th, Falkland Islands, in Antarctica, or Puerto Monte (Chile) on the 14th?  

Since the cruise was to end in the port near Valpariso (Chile), do you suppose there might have been some Chilean people planning to disembark there?  Might they still be on board, some sick and some healthy, and might they be going through airports and communities, etc. in the United States in a few more days?

Sorry, but on March 18th, I was on the Eurodam when it was greeted by the port of San Diego.  As far as anyone knew, the Eurodam was a healthy ship.  And as far as anyone knew, the Zaandam was a healthy ship when it was turned away by Chile March 16th and 17th.

I still think Chile caused a whole lot of trouble and misery to many, not to mention the huge cost involved.

Thank you to San Diego and the United States for not sending us away.

That's impossible to know for me or for you; but we do know that the decision was made to halt sailings on 3/13 and on 3/14 the Zaandam made a port of call and continued operating their scheduled itinerary.  Why the decision was made not to terminate the voyage and send people home on 3/14 simply given the unprecedented pause the industry had announced is baffling; no one had a crystal ball on 3/14 but to think the cruise would have run regularly to 3/21 doesn't make sense either.  There were, and still are, ships at sea unfortunately being denied entry at all ports and the situations have no clear play book.  I would agree that the result of Chiles decisions are indeed hardships and high costs; but they did not cause it 

[Sunshine3601]

58 minutes ago, Tampa Girl said:

 

 

I wonder if you would feel that way if this happened to you?  The passengers didn't ask for this predicament, they did not anticipate such an incident, and it would not have occurred if Chile had kept its promise.  At that point there was no knowledge of any illness.

 

The U.S. has a responsibility to assist in the return of its citizens who have unlawfully or accidentally stranded in a foreign country.  That is one of the purposes of the State Department.  It is now time for the federal government to assure that this ship will be accepted in one of the California ports and our citizens disembarked.  

I believe this ship initially left out of South America.    Do we have any idea how many US citizens are onboard?    

[qoap24]

My thoughts and prayers are with everyone on board. I haven't had the chance to read the entire thread, but hearing that 4 people have died is just so sad. I cannot imagine what those on board must be going through. I hope they can find their ways home very soon. 

 

 

[dockman]

Update five minutes ago:  They are telling healthy passengers  with CPAC machines that they cannot be transferred to Rotterdam.  Apparently a lot of people have these and are upset.  Ship is checking with CDC re this so these people are anxiously awaiting to hear response.

 

No idea why a cpac would be a factor.

[KAKcruiser]

I have read that around 300 US citizens are onboard.

[Sir PMP]

6 minutes ago, qoap24 said:

My thoughts and prayers are with everyone on board. I haven't had the chance to read the entire thread, but hearing that 4 people have died is just so sad. I cannot imagine what those on board must be going through. I hope they can find their ways home very soon. 

 

 

There are now 127 sick people on board, The closest U.S port is San Diego, that's where they should go..

[npcl]

32 minutes ago, sansterre said:

Hmmm, the first illness on Zaandam was reported around the 21st.  Do you suppose someone contracted the illness(es) in Buonos Aires on the 7th, Falkland Islands, in Antarctica, or Puerto Monte (Chile) on the 14th?  

Since the cruise was to end in the port near Valpariso (Chile), do you suppose there might have been some Chilean people planning to disembark there?  Might they still be on board, some sick and some healthy, and might they be going through airports and communities, etc. in the United States in a few more days?

Sorry, but on March 18th, I was on the Eurodam when it was greeted by the port of San Diego.  As far as anyone knew, the Eurodam was a healthy ship.  And as far as anyone knew, the Zaandam was a healthy ship when it was turned away by Chile March 16th and 17th.

I still think Chile caused a whole lot of trouble and misery to many, not to mention the huge cost involved.

Thank you to San Diego and the United States for not sending us away.

I still wonder if more was known when the ship was off Chile than we are being told.  For example how did they get positive test results back on the two.  They have not been to any other port since Chile. They would not have had the equipment on board to run the tests.  The Rotterdam would not have the equipment either.  So to have the positive test results they would have had to take samples, and have them run on a land based lab.  It seems like the last place for that to have been done was Chile.

 

It also seems that it is a large number of people to be showing symptoms now, if no one at all was symptomatic when they were at Chile (just based upon the way it progressed on the Diamond).

Edited March 27, 2020 by npcl

[arabrab]

3 minutes ago, dockman said:

Update five minutes ago:  They are telling healthy passengers  with CPAC machines that they cannot be transferred to Rotterdam.  Apparently a lot of people have these and are upset.  Ship is checking with CDC re this so these people are anxiously awaiting to hear response.

 

No idea why a cpac would be a factor.

Yes, it may be a factor:

 It is possible that using CPAP could increase the risk of spreading the virus to others around you. Be sure to talk to your medical provider about this risk.

https://aasm.org/coronavirus-covid-19-faqs-cpap-sleep-apnea-patients/