WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO RESTART CRUISE SHIPS???

[Oceangoer2]

30 minutes ago, MrCoachRentz said:

Key is time and exposure.  More time outside, even if fairly close to others, limits exposure.  Masks do very little in most cases outside.

 

Cruises could limit passengers so there aren't as many, speed up dinner service so that you don't spend as much time in a place with poor airflow, etc.

 

Most of us haven't been 100% isolated from others so we carry a risk of infection no matter, might as well start living...

 

Not sure "most of us" is correct....we are isolating pretty well in my community and apparently here in Canada.  Numbers could always be better, but happy that they are not as some in other countries...now...if only the nursing homes had more attention as those poor folks can't get 'out' and away from those infected as easily as 'most of us', the covid numbers would be greatly improved and maybe we could get back to some 'normalcy' whatever that will prove to be.

Edited May 10, 2020 by oceangoer2

[npcl]

54 minutes ago, CGTNORMANDIE said:

Hi Prim8,

 

Abbott Labs are currently producing 50,000  5 minute tests per day.  If passengers (pax) arrive at terminal and enter wearing masks and then are tested in the terminal as part of the security process then pax would be able to go onboard a ship that is totally negative.  The test also identifies those who are incubating.  You either have it or you don’t.  A ship that has tested negative can sail without much worry.  The problem then would be where to land?  Most likely the only island would be the private island.  Unless arrangements could be made for an isolation area on an island I’m afraid there are no fast answers.  If by some chance a pax show signs of any virus they would be isolated and removed from the ship immediately...by prior arrangement.  The cruise lines will design new methods of handling crew and passengers just as the airlines will have to do.

However that is 5 minutes for 1 test on 1 machine.  For 1000 people that would be 5000 minutes of machine time 83.3 hours of processing time. To get it down to a reasonable wait you will need 30 machines.  Then what happens if anyone waiting in the terminal tests positive? You need to make sure that everyone is isolated during the boarding process otherwise 1 positive result might mean exposure to others.

 

A rather difficult process, considering that cruise lines have trouble during normal boarding.  

[Blackduck59]

I think as cruisers all we can do is wait for the powers that be to set the criteria for the restart. Then you have to make the adult decision whether those measures are acceptable to you. You enter this being aware of the virus and you are also aware of things that help mitigate your own exposure. The key word here is "Adult" you have to make your choice just like I do. The cruise company can do everything right and still there is a possibility of exposure. Are you confident that being in the scrum at the Martini bar is the thing to do? Every time we travel we take a chance of something going wrong. You could get hit by a bus, crash your car or fall down the stairs without leaving your home town. 

It will not be up to travelers to make the rules, it will be up to us to choose to follow them or not travel.

[CGTNORMANDIE]

21 minutes ago, npcl said:

However that is 5 minutes for 1 test on 1 machine.  For 1000 people that would be 5000 minutes of machine time 83.3 hours of processing time. To get it down to a reasonable wait you will need 30 machines.  Then what happens if anyone waiting in the terminal tests positive? You need to make sure that everyone is isolated during the boarding process otherwise 1 positive result might mean exposure to others.

 

A rather difficult process, considering that cruise lines have trouble during normal boarding.  

I am sure that they will find a way to remedy that.  I can see 1 machine processing more than 1,000 tests in minutes.  It won’t be long.  Necessity is the mother of invention.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by CGTNORMANDIE

[Fouremco]

1 hour ago, TeeRick said:

Reference?  What studies?

My thought too.

[CGTNORMANDIE]

11 minutes ago, Blackduck59 said:

I think as cruisers all we can do is wait for the powers that be to set the criteria for the restart. Then you have to make the adult decision whether those measures are acceptable to you. You enter this being aware of the virus and you are also aware of things that help mitigate your own exposure. The key word here is "Adult" you have to make your choice just like I do. The cruise company can do everything right and still there is a possibility of exposure. Are you confident that being in the scrum at the Martini bar is the thing to do? Every time we travel we take a chance of something going wrong. You could get hit by a bus, crash your car or fall down the stairs without leaving your home town. 

It will not be up to travelers to make the rules, it will be up to us to choose to follow them or not travel.

Most accidents happen within a mile of home...lol.  I think we are all going to have to accept a certain amount of risk involving the CV.  

[deliver42]

You can still get a false negative, but I'd be willing to take a chance. I'm and essential worker, and so far have been lucky, but that still makes me confident of traveling.

[charmed101]

 

 

All passengers and staff to show up 14 days ahead of cruise,  all will live in a warehouse spaced 10 ft. apart.  Then on day of cruise all will be tested before getting on ship. No ports, just sail, eat and drink.  That's what it would take to get me on a cruise!!   ( I'm joking,  but as much as I enjoy it I'm not getting on a cruise ship in the foreseeable future.)

[Blackduck59]

Just now, charmed101 said:

 

 

All passengers and staff to show up 14 days ahead of cruise,  all will live in a warehouse spaced 10 ft. apart.  Then on day of cruise all will be tested before getting on ship. No ports, just sail, eat and drink.  That's what it would take to get me on a cruise!!   ( I'm joking,  but as much as I enjoy it I'm not getting on a cruise ship in the foreseeable future.)

 

That will be your Adult choice, as it should be

[CGTNORMANDIE]

1 minute ago, charmed101 said:

 

 

All passengers and staff to show up 14 days ahead of cruise,  all will live in a warehouse spaced 10 ft. apart.  Then on day of cruise all will be tested before getting on ship. No ports, just sail, eat and drink.  That's what it would take to get me on a cruise!!   ( I'm joking,  but as much as I enjoy it I'm not getting on a cruise ship in the foreseeable future.)

You are not far off.  It has been suggested that a certain cruise line buy a hotel in Miami and quarantine every crew member as they come to join the ship.  They will also get the 5 minute test coming and going.  

[prim8keeper]

1 hour ago, CGTNORMANDIE said:

Hi Prim8,

 

Abbott Labs are currently producing 50,000  5 minute tests per day.  If passengers (pax) arrive at terminal and enter wearing masks and then are tested in the terminal as part of the security process then pax would be able to go onboard a ship that is totally negative.  The test also identifies those who are incubating.  You either have it or you don’t.  A ship that has tested negative can sail without much worry.  The problem then would be where to land?  Most likely the only island would be the private island.  Unless arrangements could be made for an isolation area on an island I’m afraid there are no fast answers.  If by some chance a pax show signs of any virus they would be isolated and removed from the ship immediately...by prior arrangement.  The cruise lines will design new methods of handling crew and passengers just as the airlines will have to do.

I’m aware of the test. Our health system is actually one of their customers for other lab test. However, even with that we still can not get the rapid test and have been given no time frame for when it will be available. Due to that fact alone there is no way they can supply the volume of test cruise lines will need anytime soon since they will continue to go to health systems/existing customers first. However, another lab may be able to step in and fill this need. That would be the route I personally would try to go. However, you will still have the issue though of someone being exposed during traveling right before boarding since the test may not pick it up yet since you have no way of knowing what they did/did not do as far as any precautions. You would need testing availability on the ships as well. It’s a complicated problem with no good/easy/cheap answers, but I have no doubt someone will eventually figure it out. It’s going to be interesting.

[yorky]

18 minutes ago, Blackduck59 said:

I think as cruisers all we can do is wait for the powers that be to set the criteria for the restart. Then you have to make the adult decision whether those measures are acceptable to you. You enter this being aware of the virus and you are also aware of things that help mitigate your own exposure. The key word here is "Adult" you have to make your choice just like I do. The cruise company can do everything right and still there is a possibility of exposure. Are you confident that being in the scrum at the Martini bar is the thing to do? Every time we travel we take a chance of something going wrong. You could get hit by a bus, crash your car or fall down the stairs without leaving your home town. 

It will not be up to travelers to make the rules, it will be up to us to choose to follow them or not travel.

We have always said we will make a judgement when we reach the stage that we need to make a decision, and that decision will be made based on what’s acceptable to us, as you say it’s an individual choice. Without a virus we won’t wait for ever though, we are not locking our selves away for years, life is full of risks. When the authorities state it’s ok to travel and cruise that’s the green light, no one will be breaking any laws. I respect those that say they will never cruise again without a vaccine, fully understand that point of view. We can all see what’s going on around us, no one is blind here.

[CGTNORMANDIE]

Just now, prim8keeper said:

I’m aware of the test. Our health system is actually one of their customers for other lab test. However, even with that we still can not get the rapid test and have been given no time frame for when it will be available. Due to that fact alone there is no way they can supply the volume of test cruise lines will need anytime soon since they will continue to go to health systems/existing customers first. However, another lab may be able to step in and fill this need. That would be the route I personally would try to go. However, you will still have the issue though of someone being exposed during traveling right before boarding since the test may not pick it up yet since you have no way of knowing what they did/did not do as far as any precautions. You would need testing availability on the ships as well. It’s a complicated problem with no good/easy/cheap answers, but I have no doubt someone will eventually figure it out. It’s going to be interesting.

A Presidential order invoking the Wartime Manufacturing Act could change that in minutes.  You are right...it’s going to be very interesting.

[markeb]

With nothing better to do for the most part, and nothing but reruns on the television, I've stumbled across a lot of Amazon Prime and Netflix documentaries on the space program. Just as a reminder, Alan Shepard's flight on May 5, 1961 lasted 15 minutes; 20 days later Kennedy announced we were going to the moon. No one had a clue how to do it!

 

NASA flight engineers were really good. They laid out a series of events necessary to get to the moon and back. Each event was designed to practice or prove a step necessary to get to the moon. Someone was going to get out on the moon, so you needed to figure out how to maneuver in a space suit. We were going to do a lunar orbit rendezvous, so you had to figure out how to dock two spacecraft. Etc. Hope wasn't a method. They laid out the steps, tested each one, and implemented them along the way. And we landed on the moon. We also lost a number of astronauts along the way, mostly in high performance aircraft and if memory serves car accidents, but three on the pad. 

 

There are a ton of risk mitigation strategies out there that can be adapted. Food safety, pharmaceutical industry, NASA, etc. All largely revolve around starting with the risk, what you know about it, what you can do to mitigate it, what information you need, and where to find it, and the residual risk after applying that control. Then you look at the next control measure, and continue. Ultimately, your controls bring you into some form of acceptable risk, you implement, and monitor. There are already engineering controls in the industry; it's part of how they decide to skip a port or wave off docking.

 

So far, what I'm seeing from the industry are fragments of a plan. Testing needs a goal. It needs clear underpinnings as to what it can and can't accomplish and references to the underlying science to make it as effective as possible, and for passengers to have appropriate confidence in the results. If the data supports testing, do the testing the data supports, and move on to the next mitigation. Maybe that's daily temperature checks, but you need to have a reason and some data as to what that accomplishes. Etc. You won't reach zero, and some of us (I'm high risk for complications at this point) probably won't reach a level of acceptable risk with any reasonable shipboard mitigation at least for the foreseeable future.

 

IMHO, the worst thing the industry can do is throw together a half-baked set of measures and have another infected ship. They really have one shot. I don't know that it has to be perfect, but it has to be pretty close. And if they're doing a cold, logical review and the answer keeps being "we don't know", they don't have the data to implement that control measure, and if it's critical, they're stuck.

 

So my answer to the OP's question is you need an end to end risk mitigation strategy, based in science, that can be explained to the cruising public and public health authorities that lays out what your can accomplish and your limitations. If that crosses the acceptable risk threshold for the various stakeholders, then you've got a shot.

[sheffield]

It doesn’t matter how many tests you do prior to sailing, or on board, if you don’t have a plan in place as to what you will do if someone becomes sick with the virus. I have read nothing from any cruise line that they are implementing what the CDC required of them.

[az_tchr]

2 hours ago, oceangoer2 said:

Why do you say nonsense? All content re testing aside and just the wording in the post, would you get on a plane if you knew someone tested positive? Not sure your response is what you meant to say....and perhaps a little harsh?  I think we all probably have our own criteria to resume travelling....IMO Poster meant well and is only sharing his opinion as we all are.

The OP meant well.  Ok.  Problem is with tests 80% reliable and all they show is a virus load that might be different the following day - meaningless without a change in tests or a vaccine.

Testing is really only good today to verify illness.  Sad but maybe next year.

[az_tchr]

12 minutes ago, sheffield said:

It doesn’t matter how many tests you do prior to sailing, or on board, if you don’t have a plan in place as to what you will do if someone becomes sick with the virus. I have read nothing from any cruise line that they are implementing what the CDC required of them.

Because it is not possible. Returning passengers to their home via private transport can easily cost $50K per person - AFTER the cruiseline finds a port where a sick COVID patient can disembark.  😥

[sheffield]

Then realistically how can any cruise line sail?

[Fouremco]

2 hours ago, CGTNORMANDIE said:

Abbott Labs are currently producing 50,000  5 minute tests per day.  If passengers (pax) arrive at terminal and enter wearing masks and then are tested in the terminal as part of the security process then pax would be able to go onboard a ship that is totally negative.

Neither Abbott Labs nor any of the other companies producing test kits have been tested at 100% accuracy. Consequently, no one should assume that a ship is "totally negative" even if everyone is tested when they board initially and when they reboard throughout the cruise. Testing is certainly a step in the right direction, but like vaccines, isn't a complete solution in and of itself.

[ECCruise]

3 minutes ago, sheffield said:

Then realistically how can any cruise line sail?

I think we will have a lot of information available in the next month, not on cruise lines, but on the states that are opening now.  Either things will not spike or Darwin will rise from the grave.  Or something in between (also not a positive).

No matter how many suggestions are out there for social distancing, wearing masks in public places and the like, this was a TJ Maxx store in Arkansas, just yesterday.  No reason why, even with new procedures from the cruise lines, that the Atrium or Oceanview Cafe wouldn't look just like this.

[cruise kitty]

25 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

I think we will have a lot of information available in the next month, not on cruise lines, but on the states that are opening now.  Either things will not spike or Darwin will rise from the grave.  Or something in between (also not a positive).

No matter how many suggestions are out there for social distancing, wearing masks in public places and the like, this was a TJ Maxx store in Arkansas, just yesterday.  No reason why, even with new procedures from the cruise lines, that the Atrium or Oceanview Cafe wouldn't look just like this.

 

How are they allowing people inside buildings without masks?  Distancing? Absolute madness, things are definitely not like that here.  

[yorky]

45 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

I think we will have a lot of information available in the next month, not on cruise lines, but on the states that are opening now.  Either things will not spike or Darwin will rise from the grave.  Or something in between (also not a positive).

No matter how many suggestions are out there for social distancing, wearing masks in public places and the like, this was a TJ Maxx store in Arkansas, just yesterday.  No reason why, even with new procedures from the cruise lines, that the Atrium or Oceanview Cafe wouldn't look just like this.

Wow, crazy people.

[npcl]

1 hour ago, CGTNORMANDIE said:

A Presidential order invoking the Wartime Manufacturing Act could change that in minutes.  You are right...it’s going to be very interesting.

Not really, it has been evoked for several things.  Still takes time.

Edited May 10, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

1 hour ago, az_tchr said:

Because it is not possible. Returning passengers to their home via private transport can easily cost $50K per person - AFTER the cruiseline finds a port where a sick COVID patient can disembark.  😥

Does not cost 50k per person.  A 10 passenger corporate jet rental, probably the most expensive option, costs around $4000 per hour of flight time.  So flying 10 people from Miami to Seattle would cost about 20k or about $2,000 per person. The cruise lines can get far cheaper rates than that on larger planes, especially with so many currently setting idle. 

 

Keep in mind that when travel agencies charter flights for trips they are doing so because the cost of the charter is less than the standard commercial tickets. So for a large number you can get the cost quite reasonable. Especially with the volume from the cruise lines.

 

[npcl]

56 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

I think we will have a lot of information available in the next month, not on cruise lines, but on the states that are opening now.  Either things will not spike or Darwin will rise from the grave.  Or something in between (also not a positive).

No matter how many suggestions are out there for social distancing, wearing masks in public places and the like, this was a TJ Maxx store in Arkansas, just yesterday.  No reason why, even with new procedures from the cruise lines, that the Atrium or Oceanview Cafe wouldn't look just like this.

Prepare for wave two, worst than the first in many parts of the country.