Healthy Sail Panel Recommendations

[hhalliv]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/09/21/norwegian-royal-caribbean-cruise-panel-suggests-covid-19-rules/5839739002/

[hhalliv]

I am assuming there must be some other threat where this is posted, but I can’t find it so I posted it here since NCL is a part of that panel.

 

Looks like the panel recommends face coverings, testing before arrival at the terminal, and daily temperature checks.

 

Also included, apparently a recommendation for shorter itineraries.

[njhorseman]

27 minutes ago, hhalliv said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/09/21/norwegian-royal-caribbean-cruise-panel-suggests-covid-19-rules/5839739002/

This still isn't a comprehensive plan that includes all the protocols required to be addressed per the No Sail Order, and the two cruise lines admit that. The bottom line is that we're not much closer to a restart of cruising than we were when the two companies started this process. How long s it going to take them to submit the necessary plans?

 

From the article:

 

"But there are still other milestones to hit before cruising from the U.S. can return, such as the CDC giving the green light for cruising to return and approving cruise lines' plans.

Richard Fain, CEO of Royal Caribbean Group, and Frank Del Rio, CEO of Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd., told USA TODAY that the two companies will use the recommendations to help them develop new operating protocols, and cruise lines will turn in detailed plans to the CDC for approval. 

At this stage, the recommendations are being submitted to the CDC for consideration on the return to cruising in U.S. waters — not for approval to implement. 

When final protocols can be put in place and implemented though remains unclear. Del Rio explained it's more complicated than when the CDC's "no-sail" order is lifted.

"It will take some time, and a lot depends on when we get the green light — how much advance notice there is and the extent of the technologies that we need to start," Del Rio said, referencing COVID-19 testing, the implementation of new technology, getting crew back on board and training crew to adapt to new protocols, among other factors. 

"Testing, for example, is something that’s key," he said. "And those products are in limited quantities.""

[hhalliv]

Definitely agree that there is much more procedurally that needs to be done...I imagine whoever is working on this at CDC has a lot of homework to do!

 

I’d like to read their actual recommendations (I can’t seem to find that document anywhere if anyone finds it) but I do think it’s interesting to see what they view as a potential path forward.

[PelicanBill]

Here is the report

 

https://www.royalcaribbeangroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Healthy-Sail-Panel_Full-Recommendations_9.21.20_FINAL.pdf

 

 

[shof515]

2 minutes ago, hhalliv said:

I’d like to read their actual recommendations (I can’t seem to find that document anywhere if anyone finds it) but I do think it’s interesting to see what they view as a potential path forward.

 

here is the full report for those that want to read it. it is 65 page report:

https://www.royalcaribbeangroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Healthy-Sail-Panel_Full-Recommendations_9.21.20_FINAL.pdf

[PelicanBill]

Analyzing. Let's talk about things that may be challenging.

 

#4

All guests joining a ship, regardless of method of travel to the ship, should be tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 5 days and 24 hours before boarding and receive a negative result that is shared with the cruise operator, before coming on board.

 

This one troubles me a but. In Winter I travel 2-3 days prior to sailing. Gives me a narrow 2 day window to get a test, and then hope I can get results in a form that can be shared.  In some cases here you just get a phone call 2-3 days after the test and a letter that arrives a week after that.  We don't have consistent testing and results delivery nationwide.

 

[PelicanBill]

#34-42  Medical personnel and space and facilities.  

 

A lot to do on the ships here.  Hope they have started already on some ships.

[PelicanBill]

#50-54 Debarkation

 

This requires new procedures and plans in the ports with local medical and transportation resources.

 

it does NOT say what to do with sick people. Where to send them, for how long.  Only to keep them separated from those who are not sick.

 

Here is some of the detail.  There is a LOT to do here to have a specific detailed plan for any port that starts backup:

 

The Panel therefore recommends planning, practicing, and revising operational plans to best prepare for this unlikely but resource-intensive scenario. Importantly, all protocols and preparations should ensure that the cruise operators are prepared to provide for a fullscale debarkation without burdening the resources of any federal, state, or local governments. Specifically, full-scale debarkation plans should be sure to account for onshore care delivery (and transportation to the appropriate care facility) should the situation/individual medical condition warrant it. In a full-scale debarkation, all guests (including individuals with a SARS-CoV-2 infection and those who are healthy) will be removed from the ship and safely transported to the appropriate destination.

...

A safe path home or to medical treatment is the goal of any debarkation, whether small- or large-scale. In order to implement the recommendation of appropriately separating infectious and healthy individuals, it is very important that arrangements be made in advance for potential quarantine and treatment facilities, as well as privately contracted transportation that keeps infected individuals, close contacts, and suspected cases from using commercial means of transportation and potentially spreading infections during transport. The panel discussed and felt that in any scenario, including in a full-scale debarkation, it would be appropriate for healthy individuals not identified through contact tracing, or who have tested negative for SARS-CoV-2, to use commercial transportation.

Edited September 21, 2020 by PelicanBill

[PelicanBill]

For these, these two are a deal breaker for me to want to cruise.  It does not define "shorter"... is 7 days short enough?  Fewer than 7 days is not cost effective for those of us with significant travel costs. Not interested in cruises that only visit private islands and guided bus tours.

 

EDIT: found the detail.  Shorter trips is "10 days or fewer."  I am surprised at that but relieved.

 

57

In the startup phase, cruises itineraries should be as simple as possible, utilizing private, cruise line-owned and operated destinations or ports where there can be tight control of the onshore experience.

 

58

Cruise operators should initially return to service with shorter length trips.

 

Here's some detail on shore experiences:

Therefore, the Panel recommends that cruise operators initially prohibit self guided tours and independent exploration and only allow certain curated indoor activities until further notice. This is a significant change to the cruise experience, so the Panel recommends this information be communicated clearly and early on to guests.

...

the Panel recommends that in the startup phase, guests should only be permitted to disembark at ports if they are taking cruise line sponsored excursions where such efforts would be subject to vendor management considerations described below. Cruise operators should consider employing strategies that would make these cruise line-sponsored excursions more appealing to guests (e.g., potentially reconsidering the cost of curated experiences, offering a wider variety of excursions to private beach locations) than self-exploration or other externally sponsored excursions. As noted above, guests should be well informed about this new requirement at the time of booking and again prior to sailing.

Edited September 21, 2020 by PelicanBill

[JAMESCC]

2-5 days before tested is not gonna work really. Even a test that morning is not fool proof, it's better than 2-5 days before sailing. Need an instant test at the port that morning and then other tests during the cruise.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[roger001]

Until there is a cure/vaccine, it is all pretty much a logistics impossibility...or at least so cumbersome and user unfriendly as to make a cruise under those circumstances very undesirable to most of the potential guests.   With all that's proposed, no way would I pay money for it.  

 

I just read the first 70 or so proposed protocols.  Bless their hearts.  But to implement all of that would be a workload impossibility I think for a ship load of passengers.  And, just little things like where do we line u for our daily temp check, so much that would just not be compatible with the terms "relaxed and fun".  Nope.  But thanks for trying..... I guess.  

Edited September 21, 2020 by roger001

[PelicanBill]

They clearly do not want to commit to doing 3000 tests and determine results while trying to handle embarkation. I can't imagine how you would manage it unless you stretched out the embarkation over 2 days.

 

The maturity of (reliability), and mass availability of, instant testing is not ready for this kind of use.

[PelicanBill]

This is very interesting.

 

Recommendation 73: In their return to sailing, cruise operators should use a phased approach to demonstrate that protocols can be successfully implemented on board their ships before returning to full operations with guests on board. 60 | P a g e As cruise operators return to service, they will be adjusting to many new processes in terminals, on board their ships, and at the destinations they visit. We see great benefit in testing these new procedures in a stepwise fashion, with a deliberate and careful expansion through a pre-determined series of phases. The Panel recommends cruise operators develop the specific details of their phased return to service as part of their return to sailing planning. Ideally working with regulators, cruise operators should agree in advance for a defined set of sailings in graduated phases, as described below, that would permit the cruise operator to move to the next step without seeking additional approvals. A first step under this proposal would be a dockside simulation of a cruise using employees to role play guests. The pre-arrival and boarding protocols would be tested along with a limited number of onboard activities. Independent observers could watch the process and afterwards a full debrief with those observers would be done and corrective actions or modifications could be made. Following this, a short overnight cruise with a limited load factor would be conducted. Again, employees would simulate the role of guests and a wider array of onboard activities would be conducted and additional protocols tested. Similarly, an assessment and debrief with designated observers would follow. Next, a short cruise to a single destination would take place, preferably at a cruise operator’s privately owned and operated destination. This would allow testing of embark and debark processes as well as the private destination protocols. As cruise operators move to commercial sailings initial cruises should be as simple as possible with limited destinations, controlled excursions, and short trip lengths. Once these initial sailings are conducted and internally examined, it may be appropriate to carefully expand operations. Overall, the Panel believes a controlled, phased approach to the return to sailing would build confidence among cruise operators and regulators alike that the new protocols can be implemented successfully or adapted as needed before full operations resume.

[PelicanBill]

My overall impressions after reading the entire report.

 

The people who conducted the study and created the report is a long list with respectable credentials.

 

A lot of the recommendations are exactly what we all knew are needed.

 

There is a lot of detail that is "TBD" - much work is required to develop new processes, new IT shoreside and onboard, development of new crew training, changes to ship facilities, hiring of medical personnel, many many many things to do with local resources at each port, and all sailings re-evaluated for capacity and itinerary with lots of communication to all booked guests and restating expectations for sailings.

 

I would think each line would have to focus on just 2 or 3 ships to start, as the resources to get all this done will be stretched thin.  

 

I cannot any cruise line being ready with all of this in just 39 days (November 1.)

Edited September 21, 2020 by PelicanBill

[JAMESCC]

My overall impressions after reading the entire report.
 
The people who conducted the study and created the report is a long list with respectable credentials.
 
A lot of the recommendations are exactly what we all knew are needed.
 
There is a lot of detail that is "TBD" - much work is required to develop new processes, new IT shoreside and onboard, development of new crew training, changes to ship facilities, hiring of medical personnel, many many many things to do with local resources at each port, and all sailings re-evaluated for capacity and itinerary with lots of communication to all booked guests and restating expectations for sailings.
 
I would think each line would have to focus on just 2 or 3 ships to start, as the resources to get all this done will be stretched thin.  
 
I cannot any cruise line being ready with all of this in just 39 days (November 1.)

My best guess which is worth absolutely nothing it's late spring or early summer before cruises restart in the US.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Nclcruise1415]

1 hour ago, JAMESCC said:

2-5 days before tested is not gonna work really. Even a test that morning is not fool proof, it's better than 2-5 days before sailing. Need an instant test at the port that morning and then other tests during the cruise.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

I certainly believe most areas are different in terms of testing availability, results, etc. but I can tell you I work (medical field) in West Michigan and we're getting results back in approximately 24 hours at this point. I believe the testing and result process is getting increasingly better across the board.

[PelicanBill]

3 minutes ago, Nclcruise1415 said:

I certainly believe most areas are different in terms of testing availability, results, etc. but I can tell you I work (medical field) in West Michigan and we're getting results back in approximately 24 hours at this point. I believe the testing and result process is getting increasingly better across the board.

 

New York is the worst in testing.

[macandlucy]

Unanswered questions for me:

 

What is the percentage of humans infected that qualifies as an uncontained outbreak and what is the threshold for cruise cancellation, while sailing. .01, .1%, .5% etc?

 

Will the lines be required to be transparent about improved air filtration, so we know exactly what improvements have been made, on what ship, before sailing.  The vagaries about age of the ship and the possibility of even making such improvements is not good enough. (In fact, if it's not possible to make those improvements to a particular ship, then maybe cold-layup for those ships until the pandemic has fizzled out.)  Improved air filtration is an absolute deal breaker for me.  I want to know I can remove my mask while I'm in my cabin.

 

----

 

24 hours to five days before boarding for a negative test? I don't think that's good enough to instill confidence.  MSC is doing testing at embark. That's going to have to be the standard for passengers, and should be even more stringent for crew, imo.

[shof515]

13 minutes ago, PelicanBill said:

 

New York is the worst in testing.

it depends on where you get the testing done. New York City Health and Hospital testing seems to get results back quickly, usually in a day or a two. If you go to a regular doctor office or some other clinic that sends your sample to an out of state lab like Labcorp then those results can take weeks, many weeks to get back

 

New York is suppose to have their own testing facility to do testing instead of relying on other company's to do the testing

Edited September 21, 2020 by shof515

[PelicanBill]

3 minutes ago, shof515 said:

it depends on where you get the testing done. New York City Health and Hospital testing seems to get results back quickly, usually in a day or a two. If you go to a regular doctor office or some other clinic that sends your sample to an out of state lab like Labcorp then those results can take weeks, many weeks to get back

 

New York is suppose to have their own testing facility to do testing instead of relying on other company's to do the testing

Exactly.  NY does not have enough in state or regional labs.  Those that exist are at max capacity to test per day, running 7 days a week. They can't run more shifts because they don't have more equipment.  Equipment availability is slowing opening more labs.

 

It's why in Rochester NY until recently you could not get a test unless you had a doctor request it.  A few months ago we got one and only one site where you could make an appointment to get tested without a doctor referral.  And only now are there a few more.

 

And I agree that testing 5 days ahead leaves a huge opening for someone who gets on a crowded plane to arrive with an asymptomatic infection.

[Trimone]

A friend, senior Rugby coach has returned recently to Tokyo to commence work, to travel to Japan, he has had to base himself in London near the embassy, in a week he has had to have three Covid-19 tests, two days apart and all be negative, that’s just to board plane, then he has to quarantine for two weeks before training commences.

[Marine Mom]

1 hour ago, roger001 said:

Until there is a cure/vaccine, it is all pretty much a logistics impossibility...or at least so cumbersome and user unfriendly as to make a cruise under those circumstances very undesirable to most of the potential guests.   With all that's proposed, no way would I pay money for it.  

 

I just read the first 70 or so proposed protocols.  Bless their hearts.  But to implement all of that would be a workload impossibility I think for a ship load of passengers.  And, just little things like where do we line u for our daily temp check, so much that would just not be compatible with the terms "relaxed and fun".  Nope.  But thanks for trying..... I guess.  

I agree 100%.....plus, don't forget your mask.......

 

No thanks, I'd rather stay home......

[oteixeira]

4 minutes ago, Trimone said:

A friend, senior Rugby coach has returned recently to Tokyo to commence work, to travel to Japan, he has had to base himself in London near the embassy, in a week he has had to have three Covid-19 tests, two days apart and all be negative, that’s just to board plane, then he has to quarantine for two weeks before training commences.

I find this interesting, as they must be requirements of Japan.  I say this because there is a Youtube video documenting a person going from Tampa Fl to the UK, through Ireland, just 2 weeks ago.  No tests required, no temp checks EVER taken, planes mostly full on each leg (4 planes)...I will be happy to share the link if you want to watch his progress through the trip.

[Trimone]

For US citizens it’s far easier to travel to Dublin then onto London, same the other way for us, we can clear US customs in Dublin, then have a carefree landing in the US, years ago it was the done thing for stag nights to start in Dublin, then somehow end up in New York ? Yes it’s Japans rules, they are almost Covid-19 free. In the U.K. Covid-19 is accelerating beyond control, and tomorrow there is a cobra meeting, some areas are in lockdown now, it’s the reason we are unable to see cruises commence until a vaccine is openly available.

A good friend works in the cruise industry, Very high level, talking to him the other day, I said I was about to book the epic out of Barcelona next September, he said I would wait!