Passenger Space Ratios

[rkacruiser]

23 hours ago, KirkNC said:

I think Roy’s valid point is a smaller negative number is better then a larger negative number.  That will probably be the reality when cruising initially resumes.

 

I understand, I think, about what you are saying.  At some point--and in my opinion it needs to be sooner than later--some profit in operating a cruise has to be shown on the balance sheet.  The debt arrangements that have been arranged are only going to last for awhile.  The Corporation is already in junk status.  The longer they remain in junk status, the larger the interest rates that will have to be paid to get funds.  That makes the hole the Corporation finds itself--through no fault of their own--deeper and more difficult to "climb out of". 

[KirkNC]

And they are trying to raise more debt.

 

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/23149-carnival-raising-more-cash-short-term-loan-facility.html
 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I understand, I think, about what you are saying.  At some point--and in my opinion it needs to be sooner than later--some profit in operating a cruise has to be shown on the balance sheet.  The debt arrangements that have been arranged are only going to last for awhile.  The Corporation is already in junk status.  The longer they remain in junk status, the larger the interest rates that will have to be paid to get funds.  That makes the hole the Corporation finds itself--through no fault of their own--deeper and more difficult to "climb out of". 

Let me repeat what I posted earlier. They have to show they can run the cruises safely and that they are still a fun experience. The only way they can do this is to start up. If and when they can accomplish this, the possibility of making money again will be there.

[rkacruiser]

20 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Let me repeat what I posted earlier. They have to show they can run the cruises safely and that they are still a fun experience. The only way they can do this is to start up. If and when they can accomplish this, the possibility of making money again will be there.

 

Don't disagree with your premise.  

 

#1:  Run cruises without any new Covid infections:  critical

 

#2:  Providing a "fun experience":  Absolutely.  The problem that I have is probably a personal one.  Providing a "fun experience"--at least at this point in my thinking--does not include having to constantly wear a mask while I am in public areas of the ship.  Social distancing?  OK.  I deal with that satisfactorily.  

 

There has been such a radical change in the paradigm of what I think cruising or traveling in general is becoming--and being a person who is in a "high risk" category for the virus--I am grappling with this new "reality".

 

If there are others of my generation who feel as I do, the cruise lines are going to have to find a way of getting us back to their ships.  The desire is there.  The money is in the bank.  I need assurance that I will return home Covid-free and that my money will have been spent for a cruise that I--as I define it--finds "fun".  

[Infi]

Thanks for sharing, OP. Surprised to see some of the HAL ships with lower PSRs while the big RCI ships like Oasis and Allure hold their own quite well. No surprise to see the R-class, Prinsendam etc. with quite favorable ratios - they are some of our favorites because they're so intimate. 

 

Haven't looked into PSRs for many years, but was wondering: wasn't there a different PSR ratio calculated at one point that took into account more nuance of ship design? I remember the argument being made that tonnage/passengers formula didn't encapsulate "wasted" space onboard: for example, airy, multi-deck atriums that held space that passengers couldn't actually "use". Does anyone else remember this?

[Mary229]

I have heard CCL is waiting for the CDC to issue guidelines before they formalize their space limits.    I was disconcerted to hear that AmericanAirlines is planning on full flights as early as a September.   That lack of concern from a major travel industry corporation does not give me a lot of confidence in the travel industry 

[HAL4NOW]

13 minutes ago, Infi said:

Thanks for sharing, OP. Surprised to see some of the HAL ships with lower PSRs while the big RCI ships like Oasis and Allure hold their own quite well. No surprise to see the R-class, Prinsendam etc. with quite favorable ratios - they are some of our favorites because they're so intimate. 

 

Haven't looked into PSRs for many years, but was wondering: wasn't there a different PSR ratio calculated at one point that took into account more nuance of ship design? I remember the argument being made that tonnage/passengers formula didn't encapsulate "wasted" space onboard: for example, airy, multi-deck atriums that held space that passengers couldn't actually "use". Does anyone else remember this?

Your welcome.

Even in the HAL mix of ships there is quite a range of results for PSR. Because of physical distancing concerns, I think it may be a factor that gets looked at more going forward. The chart I shared is a couple years old and strictly used the gross tonnage/passengers to determine the ratio. I do know that not all space is equal and how it is allocated to use will change the feeling of crowded vs. comfortably spacious.

I have not been on HAL's Pinnacle class ships yet. I wonder how much more crowded they will feel based on losing the full promenade deck and the density of passengers in other areas. I think they attempted to make the pool lounging area feel more open by adding the second deck of open space around the pools. I tend to prefer outdoor spaces and have always found quiet space on various decks to walk, sit, read, wander.

I would also be interested in seeing a more nuanced method to determine passenger space ratios. I guess one way to be certain you have more elbow room is to book a larger cabin.

[rkacruiser]

1 hour ago, HAL4NOW said:

I have not been on HAL's Pinnacle class ships yet. I wonder how much more crowded they will feel based on losing the full promenade deck and the density of passengers in other areas. I think they attempted to make the pool lounging area feel more open by adding the second deck of open space around the pools. I tend to prefer outdoor spaces and have always found quiet space on various decks to walk, sit, read, wander.

 

On Nieuw Statendam, I had no difficulty with crowds.  The two decks devoted to the mid-ship pool area and its dining opportunities were not crowded.  (I'll quibble about the design of the deck getting from the front foyer area to the New York Deli and Pizza venue which was mid-ship.  Too many obstructions for an easy access in my opinion.)  

 

In the evening, crowds might be expected at the popular entertainment venues, but, the areas were well designed, I think, and handled those numbers well.

[Hlitner]

Just keep in mind if one is using Gross Tonnage as a factor in space ratios that DOES NOT include exterior space.  I believe (somebody please correct me if wrong) that the calculation of Gross Tonnage only includes the interior volume of the ship.

 

Hank

[Cruzaholic41]

9 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Just keep in mind if one is using Gross Tonnage as a factor in space ratios that DOES NOT include exterior space.  I believe (somebody please correct me if wrong) that the calculation of Gross Tonnage only includes the interior volume of the ship.

 

Hank

That is correct. So on a class like Oasis with a ratio already pushing and exceeding 40, those vast outdoor spaces like Central Park and the Boardwalk aren’t even counted. 

[Hlitner]

4 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

That is correct. So on a class like Oasis with a ratio already pushing and exceeding 40, those vast outdoor spaces like Central Park and the Boardwalk aren’t even counted. 

We have never been on the Oasis Class but used to cruise a lot on RCI on nearly all the other classes.  That line always did a terrific job in providing extensive outdoor space.  One of my minor complaints about many of the HAL vessels was that the pool areas lacked the space we have found on some other lines.   Part of the problem is the design and also HAL's use of the space.  So when we did a long cruise on the Oosterdam which involved a 4 week Pacific crossing, one had to be at the indoor pool by 7:30 to even get a lounger.  I seem to recall they had fewer then 40 loungers in that space (for over 1000 passengers) and utilized a lot of the available space with large round tables (good for eating or playing cards).  RCI would have likely removed those tables and more then doubled the loungers.   Celebrity also does a pretty good job with their outdoor space often having 4+ different outdoor levels.

 

Hank

[USN59-79]

After looking at how and why gross tonnage is calculated, I have concluded that is almost meaningless in measuring how crowded a cruise ship might be.  It is actually a measure of how much cargo space is available in a cargo ship and people areas, like the crew messing and berthing areas are not counted.  I don't think the term was intended to be used to describe whether or not the public areas on a cruise ship would be crowded at full passenger capacity.  I think the size of a similar cabin, such as a standard outside cabin is more meaningful.  We have spent more than 100 days in the same inside cabin on Amsterdam and were very comfortable, because it was large enough to have a love seat and coffee table to sit at for breakfast.  We have been on newer Princess ships in a balcony cabin with no furniture other than a single desk chair in the cabin so you had to sit on the bed to eat breakfast there.  The recent trend to remove libraries has not helped either.

[ontheweb]

8 hours ago, USN59-79 said:

After looking at how and why gross tonnage is calculated, I have concluded that is almost meaningless in measuring how crowded a cruise ship might be.  It is actually a measure of how much cargo space is available in a cargo ship and people areas, like the crew messing and berthing areas are not counted.  I don't think the term was intended to be used to describe whether or not the public areas on a cruise ship would be crowded at full passenger capacity.  I think the size of a similar cabin, such as a standard outside cabin is more meaningful.  We have spent more than 100 days in the same inside cabin on Amsterdam and were very comfortable, because it was large enough to have a love seat and coffee table to sit at for breakfast.  We have been on newer Princess ships in a balcony cabin with no furniture other than a single desk chair in the cabin so you had to sit on the bed to eat breakfast there.  The recent trend to remove libraries has not helped either.

A very large BOO to HAL for removing libraries. Our first HAL cruise was several years back on the Noordam in the Eastern Mediterranean, and I was truly impressed by the library.

[KirkNC]

13 hours ago, Hlitner said:

We have never been on the Oasis Class but used to cruise a lot on RCI on nearly all the other classes.  That line always did a terrific job in providing extensive outdoor space.  One of my minor complaints about many of the HAL vessels was that the pool areas lacked the space we have found on some other lines.   Part of the problem is the design and also HAL's use of the space.  So when we did a long cruise on the Oosterdam which involved a 4 week Pacific crossing, one had to be at the indoor pool by 7:30 to even get a lounger.  I seem to recall they had fewer then 40 loungers in that space (for over 1000 passengers) and utilized a lot of the available space with large round tables (good for eating or playing cards).  RCI would have likely removed those tables and more then doubled the loungers.   Celebrity also does a pretty good job with their outdoor space often having 4+ different outdoor levels.

 

Hank

Your setup around the pool area is correct but on all our HAL cruising (over 700 days) we very rarely have seen the loungers full.  On the other hand, we have seen the tables around the pool full.  I think it reflects demographics on HAL where there is less interest in a pool.  I am not talking about Carribean cruises as we virtually never sail on those.

[Lido - Lanai]

47 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

A very large BOO to HAL for removing libraries. Our first HAL cruise was several years back on the Noordam in the Eastern Mediterranean, and I was truly impressed by the library.

I can't speak to all the ships, but the library still remains on the Amsterdam, located on deck 4 in the Explorations Cafe area.

[Hlitner]

1 hour ago, KirkNC said:

Your setup around the pool area is correct but on all our HAL cruising (over 700 days) we very rarely have seen the loungers full.  On the other hand, we have seen the tables around the pool full.  I think it reflects demographics on HAL where there is less interest in a pool.  I am not talking about Carribean cruises as we virtually never sail on those.

I guess "demographics" is HAL code for floating assisted living care :).  And yes, we are also seniors.  DW and I spend most sea days in a lounger with our Kindles.  When the weather is good,  we can usually find an outside lounger although getting them in the shade can be difficult.  But when the weather is not great we tend to head for the indoor pool.  While we appreciate that HAL does have those all-weather pool areas we do think the space is misallocated with a lack of sufficient loungers and lounging chairs.  We once mentioned this to a Hotel Manager who told us that he actually agreed but his hands were tied by Seattle who thought it best to dictate micro-policies from afar.  This is a two edged sword because it helps ensure some consistency across the fleet but also limits the flexibility of the onboard staff.  That same Hotel boss laughed when he further explained that being able to blame things on Seattle was a great tool for Hotel Managers :).   

 

I should add that DW and I are now suffering from "acute cruise withdrawal syndrome" and would love to now be on a HAL cruise.   Our last two long HAL cruises have been cancelled and our next HAL booking (next April) is also in jeopardy.  To use an expression loved by many younger folks, "this sucks!"

 

Hank

[rkacruiser]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

We once mentioned this to a Hotel Manager who told us that he actually agreed but his hands were tied by Seattle who thought it best to dictate micro-policies from afar.  

 

The micro-management from Seattle in recent years is a major reason why the HAL experience has been diminished.  Hotel Directors complain about it.  Captains complain about it.  At least one senior Master retired because of it.  

 

My cruises during 2019 and early 2020 provide hope that such is changing because the hiring of different Executive Vice-Presidents.