So White Bay???

[gbenjo]

1 hour ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

No way do I eant to go near Sydney airport to check-in for a cruise. It's bad enough having to go there if I'm flying somewhere.

 

Wherever the new cruise terminal ends up it need to have a proper terminal building with good vehicle access, good public transport links, and plenty of undercover seating in case of delays (says someone who stood in heavy rain at Circular Quay, for almost an hour, waiting to board Sea Princess because some selfish gits decided that the customs check didn't apply to them).

Don’t worry ....It will 👍👍👍

Edited October 10, 2020 by gbenjo

[gbenjo]

1 hour ago, Chiliburn said:

You just don’t like the idea because you won’t get a free lunch.

And you don’t like the idea of a water slide.

You don’t know that. 👌👌. But you are correct ..the slide is a stupid idea.

[gbenjo]

40 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Probably White Bay terminal then a tedious bus ride! Why build a new check-in terminal when they can use the white elephant.

They will not use White Bay for check in.  That is almost as implausible as Chilliburn's stupid waterslide idea and airport check in.

[OzKiwiJJ]

13 minutes ago, gbenjo said:

They will not use White Bay for check in.  That is almost as implausible as Chilliburn's stupid waterslide idea and airport check in.

It might sound implausible but where our government is concerned it would probably be seen as a great idea, maximizing the use of a facility which will be underutilized in the future. 

 

But, yes, it is stupid.

[Chiliburn]

15 minutes ago, gbenjo said:

They will not use White Bay for check in.  That is almost as implausible as Chilliburn's stupid waterslide idea and airport check in.

Grey-ham 

White bay to Botany water slide would be a difficult thing to do.

But we have a open mind here on this forum,

[NSWP]

18 hours ago, Chiliburn said:

Grey-ham 

White bay to Botany water slide would be a difficult thing to do.

But we have a open mind here on this forum,

And we are forward planners.

[NSWP]

On 10/6/2020 at 8:16 PM, eamondzhang said:

I know.

 

 

Read somewhere on this forum she was suppoed to add 600 beds.

 

Guess now with cruising not restarting till at least mid-Dec there's time for it - not sure if Golden has had sailed the normal LAX-SIN repo would the ship have reached Singapore by now or not?

 

Michael

Extra berths will impact on public space, theatre, lounges, dining areas. Why do these ex Princess ships get butchered when they are handed down to P and O Australia.

[NSWP]

On 10/6/2020 at 8:37 PM, Aus Traveller said:

The passenger capacity of the Golden Princess is listed as 2,600. Here is what Wikipedia says about the Golden Princess shifting to P&O

After Golden Princess transitions into P&O's fleet, her guest capacity will be increased to 3,100, with modifications including the addition of five-berth cabins. P&O also invited the public to contribute suggestions in order to design a more family-oriented experience on the ship.Other new features will consist of a new adults-only lounge space and a recreational park.

 

Five-berth cabins will appeal to a lot of families. Although they are going to add 500 berths, I don't think they would ever fill all of them. There will be some people travelling as solos, and some couples in four-berth cabins.

But if the additional berths were sold, it would impact on most public areas. All about the mighty dollar.

[Aus Traveller]

4 minutes ago, NSWP said:

But if the additional berths were sold, it would impact on most public areas. All about the mighty dollar.

Yes, it is all about the mighty dollar. Companies are in business for one reason - to make a profit. It is the legal obligation of company directors to try to have the company make a profit.

 

With ships, there is a legal limit on the number of people that can be on board. Even without that, there is no way all the additional berths would be filled. From what I have observed, most cabins have only two people, even if SOME of those cabins have four sleeping spaces. A smaller number of cabins have a person travelling solo.

[OzKiwiJJ]

We did a cruise to the South Pacific on Ruby Princess late last year. She was packed to the gills with around 3400 passengers. Lots of families. It was crazy crowded, with long waits to get a table for Anytime dining and if you wanted a table for two in the MDR or breakfast you had to get there at least 15mins before the dining room opened. It w as almost impossible to get a table in the buffet either. I won't be cruising on Ruby or Emerald ever again, they just have too many cabins for that size of ship.

Edited October 11, 2020 by OzKiwiJJ

[NSWP]

2 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

Yes, it is all about the mighty dollar. Companies are in business for one reason - to make a profit. It is the legal obligation of company directors to try to have the company make a profit.

 

With ships, there is a legal limit on the number of people that can be on board. Even without that, there is no way all the additional berths would be filled. From what I have observed, most cabins have only two people, even if SOME of those cabins have four sleeping spaces. A smaller number of cabins have a person travelling solo.

School holiday times, Golden will be packed to the rafters, you will have to get to the theatre 3 hrs before a show. Princess theatre on Golden holds about 800 max so even with two shows a night, half the ship will miss out.

[NSWP]

7 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

We did a cruise to the South Pacific on Ruby Princess late last year. She was packed to the gills with around 3400 passenger. It was crazy crowded, with long waits to get a table for Anytime dining and if you wanted a table for two in the MDR or breakfast you had to get there at least 15mins before the dining room opened. It w as almost impossible to get a table in the buffet either. I won't be cruising on Ruby or Emerald ever again, they just have too many cabins for that size of ship.

Golden will be the same post fit out. I have been on most Princess ships, inc Ruby and Golden. Yes that additional passenger deck on Ruby and Crown make for a crammed vessel.

Edited October 11, 2020 by NSWP

[OzKiwiJJ]

1 hour ago, NSWP said:

Golden will be the same post fit out. I have been on most Princess ships, inc Ruby and Golden. Yes that additional passenger deck on Ruby and Crown make for a crammed vessel.

Even more so with families so the extra berths are being used. Ruby is rated for 3080 lower berths so there would have been 300+ extra berths being used. Not a nice experience.

[Chiliburn]

22 hours ago, gbenjo said:

They will not use White Bay for check in.  That is almost as implausible as Chilliburn's stupid waterslide idea and airport check in.

Graham 

all respect but why can’t there be a off site check in?

We all know your experience but possibly you could explain to us dumb #astardards.

 

 

[NSWP]

26 minutes ago, Chiliburn said:

Graham 

all respect but why can’t there be a off site check in?

We all know your experience but possibly you could explain to us dumb #astardards.

 

 

Like they have in HK, check in for Cathay Pacific can be done in the city, also in London for Heathrow, check in at Paddington Rail Stn if you are taking the Paddington Express to LHR.  Could be done with Sydney cruises, check in offsite.

Edited October 11, 2020 by NSWP

[eamondzhang]

On 10/10/2020 at 7:24 PM, gbenjo said:

They will not use White Bay for check in.  That is almost as implausible as Chilliburn's stupid waterslide idea and airport check in.

They can, in fact it was actively practised down in Australia until very recently - for Pacific Dawn at Hamilton.

 

Once a while the ship would not be able to dock at the Hamilton terminal due to wind; and would be docked at FI Grain terminal (which is just tiny little more than a shed).

 

 

Computers are transferred from FI Grain to Hamilton, luggage and pax are checked in at Hamilton and transferred to FI Grain.

 

Michael

Edited October 11, 2020 by eamondzhang

[eamondzhang]

7 hours ago, NSWP said:

Extra berths will impact on public space, theatre, lounges, dining areas. Why do these ex Princess ships get butchered when they are handed down to P and O Australia.

They always do that - means they can push down the unit prices to get the same yield and cater to more families

 

P&O is not really PCL level when it comes to customer experience for sure

 

Michael

[gbenjo]

13 hours ago, Chiliburn said:

Graham 

all respect but why can’t there be a off site check in?

We all know your experience but possibly you could explain to us dumb #astardards.

 

 

Firstly let me say I know (hope🤣) you make the suggestions of the water slide  etc in jest and  I reply to them accordingly.

 

Physically it can ( and has)  be done. Solstice pax/luggage were "processed" at White Bay and ferried to the OPT when the OPT was being renovated but it was a once off. We (well ..... not me) are talking about doing this  for ships with up to 5000 pax on an almost daily  basis.

To start,  the computers that are used at check in come from the ship and would need to be transported half way across Sydney and back. IT crew from the ship(s) set up/break down the computers. This immediately presents a "security problem" as they too would have to be gotten to the terminal from the ship.   Oops we left the "whatsamacallit" for the "thingo "  back on the ship I will just duck back and get it ..see you in an hour.They would also have to get all  the equipment back to the ship in time for sailing , there goes another hour or so..dont arrive late.

The computers are normally connected to the ships systems via a hard  cable. (gonna need a longer cable) Security (Apass) photos taken in the terminal are sent to the ship for security check as you board. Do you take them when you check in at the terminal and have the passengers leave a secured area to be transported in coaches to the ship (by the way...you will need about 100 coaches for the bigger ships...all that extra pollution) or wait till they get to the ship and run the "risk" of security breaches along the way . Border Force and security scanning would be another obstacle........  terminal or ship or both????

Luggage....probably five or six thousand pieces of luggage to be loaded/transported/ unloaded and then reloaded onto the ships luggage carts at the pier.....just don't leave your passport in your check in luggage.

At every "turn" there are always situations that require Officers/crew from the ship to come to the terminal eg medical/documentation etc etc..they are busy have other duties to fulfill on board and cannot sit around at the terminal all day .

These are just a few obstacles that come quickly to mind,  as I said earlier, maybe OK in a one off situation with a smaller ship but not for a terminal in a major city and mega size cruise ships on a regular basis.

Oh,and another minor thing, if you get all those 5000 pax onto the ship they will need to come off at the end of the cruise so unless you have a facility at  the pier to handle all that luggage /customs/ transport etc its back to White Bay (or wherever)...add a couple of hours to your debark.

 

Start building that waterslide from the airport.

 

[Chiliburn]

@gbenjo
Ok , I can dig that.

It was proposed as a temporary thing for Hayes dock but I a reasonable person.

As you said with a big ship such as Oasis there would be a 10,000 or more passenger movements in a turnaround. It would be a logical nightmare.

 

On a different tangent.

In the Mediterranean the cruise terminals can’t cope with Oasis class and what they do is split the cruise in Rome with the departures from Barcelona.

So if wonder of the sea was here. They could embark 3,000 in Sydney and another 2000 in Brisbane .
The ship could do the islands and return to Sydney for a regular circle.
What’s your thoughts on that graham?  
I will sit down before I read your response.  LOL 

 

Edited October 12, 2020 by Chiliburn

[GUT2407]

21 hours ago, NSWP said:

Extra berths will impact on public space, theatre, lounges, dining areas. Why do these ex Princess ships get butchered when they are handed down to P and O Australia.

Princess do it themselves even to new ships, Diamond I loved, Emerald is almost the same ship with an extra deck of cabins, makes a massive difference.

[MicCanberra]

The ship was built and designed specifically for a certain number of people, so I am against adding more cabins / berths to any ship after it is built as this compromises the space/design.

[OzKiwiJJ]

Just now, MicCanberra said:

The ship was built and designed specifically for a certain number of people, so I am against adding more cabins / berths to any ship after it is built as this compromises the space/design.

I agree.

 

At least with Emerald Princess and Ruby Princess the extra deck of cabins was added when they were originally built but the design of the public areas wasn't changed to cater for the larger numbers. 

[OzKiwiJJ]

Actually it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years re new builds for the various cruise lines. Will they move away from building bigger and bigger ships to building efficient and more spacious smaller ships?

[MicCanberra]

3 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

I agree.

 

At least with Emerald Princess and Ruby Princess the extra deck of cabins was added when they were originally built but the design of the public areas wasn't changed to cater for the larger numbers. 

Caribbean Princess was so much more cramped than the Diamond Princess for those same reasons.

[MicCanberra]

Just now, OzKiwiJJ said:

Actually it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years re new builds for the various cruise lines. Will they move away from building bigger and bigger ships to building efficient and more spacious smaller ships?

I am fine with them building the bigger ships and putting less pax on them than the other way around.