Florida sues to reopen cruise ports

[hcat]

1 hour ago, lyndarra said:

The initial and colored circle is what you get if you haven't placed a Profile Photo in your Profile. The letter is your CC name first initial. I believe the blue hand indicates a newbie IIRC.

Thanks.. just started seeing the blue hands recently.  To avoid the dup initiais I might pick a  scenic photo to upload .  I assume that would be okay.

 

As to the topic..

Does anyone  think CDC is makiing it  difficult for  Fla and US cruises due to how  cruise lines acted at the start of the pandemic crisis which possibly did not please CDC?   Or  still relying on earlier studies of what is needed..? 

 

 Or possible political motives which really can't be discussed on CC?

 

Or  could they  be looking for a cruise line financial contribution to some type of Covid fund in case things go wrong?

 

Or are things just at a standstill while focus is on vaccines, new  agency agendas etc.?

 

No one seems to know....hope the offshore cruises work well and set a good example  that it can work.

 

 

 

 

 

[Auntiemomo]

2 hours ago, ChucktownSteve said:

The CDC has this week shifted their health threat priorities from cruising. Oh wait, it never was cruising.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-designates-racism-serious-public-health-threat-2021-4?op=1

Seriously?  With these wackadoos in charge, cruising out of the U.S. will be a long time coming.  😢

[morechances]

3 hours ago, ChucktownSteve said:

The CDC has this week shifted their health threat priorities from cruising. Oh wait, it never was cruising.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-designates-racism-serious-public-health-threat-2021-4?op=1

So, let's look at history. 

Cruise ships had terrible outbreaks at the end.

No one's fault. Situational reason. Close quarters, sharing dining spaces, etc. 

So, this is easy to stop the threat. 

 

Stop the ships.

 

Threat gone.

[ChucktownSteve]

5 minutes ago, morechances said:

So, let's look at history. 

Cruise ships had terrible outbreaks at the end.

No one's fault. Situational reason. Close quarters, sharing dining spaces, etc. 

So, this is easy to stop the threat. 

 

Stop the ships.

 

Threat gone.

 

Then the same solution should be imposed with everything that poses a threat.  Howz that working for some states' economies?  The unintended consequences are far more reaching.  That's like having a finger infection so you amputate the arm.  No more infection;  threat gone.

 

Have you ever encountered a stupid person?  By your logic, decapitate them. 😁

Edited April 10, 2021 by ChucktownSteve

[morechances]

Just looked at a list of countries, and their status.

50 countries are completely closed.

122 are partially open

5 are said to be open soon.

43 have no restrictions.

 

Of the partially open, most require mandatory quarantine.

 

Some rate their openings based on country of origin. Typically based on how that county of origin is doing with outbreaks.

 

Let's face it, as much as we want to believe otherwise, the news is not good for ships originating from the US.

 

And this is definitely based on raw data. With Florida having a spike right now, it is not promising.

[morechances]

21 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

 

Then the same solution should be imposed with everything that poses a threat.  Howz that working for some states' economies?  The unintended consequences are far more reaching.  That's like having a finger infection so you amputate the arm.  No more infection;  threat gone.

 

Have you ever encountered a stupid person?  By your logic, decapitate them. 😁

So, are economies more important than deaths?

Or overwhelmed heath care systems?

[ChucktownSteve]

3 minutes ago, morechances said:

Let's face it, as much as we want to believe otherwise, the news is not good for ships originating from the US.

 

And this is definitely based on raw data. With Florida having a spike right now, it is not promising.

 

Would you please supply the data on which you are basing that last statement.  I'd like to see how many people who have received the vaccination are included in the spike.  I'd also like to know the age group associated with the spike and where contracted?  Could it possibly be due to irresponsible acting young people on Spring Break?  And of the vaccinated people included in the spike, how many have been hospitalized or died?

 

I'm not looking for statistics that show how many there have been since the pandemic began.

[morechances]

1 minute ago, ChucktownSteve said:

 

Would you please supply the data on which you are basing that last statement.  I'd like to see how many people who have received the vaccination are included in the spike.  I'd also like to know the age group associated with the spike and where contracted?  Could it possibly be due to irresponsible acting young people on Spring Break?  And of the vaccinated people included in the spike, how many have been hospitalized or died?

 

I'm not looking for statistics that show how many there have been since the pandemic began.

It totally includes irresponsible spring breakers.

That is part of the problem.

 

It is not unheard of for other countries to judge based on biased facts.

Hence why I said raw data.

[ChucktownSteve]

3 minutes ago, morechances said:

So, are economies more important than deaths?

Or overwhelmed heath care systems?

 

How many people before the Covid pandemic died of the flu? What about vehicle accidents?  Since they cause deaths, shouldn't we ban driving? Besides the economies of the pandemic have had a deadly side effect.  Look at the increased suicide rate. Were their deaths any less tragic than those claimed to be of covid?  Or are they also counted in those who died of covid?

 

Things need to be put into perspective. 

 

 

[morechances]

1 minute ago, morechances said:

It totally includes irresponsible spring breakers.

That is part of the problem.

 

It is not unheard of for other countries to judge based on biased facts.

Hence why I said raw data.

The only news that some people are seeing in other countries are the clips of 10,000 college students on a beach. Or 35,000 fans in a baseball stadium.

And they are judging based on that.

[ChucktownSteve]

1 minute ago, morechances said:

The only news that some people are seeing in other countries are the clips of 10,000 college students on a beach. Or 35,000 fans in a baseball stadium.

And they are judging based on that.

 

So you should shut down everything based upon what the media uses for click bait and the uninformed foreigners who take the sound bite as universal gospel?  Please stop the hyperbole. It doesn't work towards solving the problem.

[morechances]

1 minute ago, ChucktownSteve said:

 

So you should shut down everything based upon what the media uses for click bait and the uninformed foreigners who take the sound bite as universal gospel?  Please stop the hyperbole. It doesn't work towards solving the problem.

How many cruises stay solely in the US?

[ChucktownSteve]

1 minute ago, morechances said:

How many cruises stay solely in the US?

Irrelevant.

[cruisestitch]

No cruises other than the one NCL ship in the Hawaiian Islands stay solely in the US

[morechances]

7 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

Irrelevant.

So, let's open the ports here, and get on ships that are not allowed to go anywhere, because foreign countries view the US as a high Covid risk.

[ChucktownSteve]

8 minutes ago, morechances said:

So, let's open the ports here, and get on ships that are not allowed to go anywhere, because foreign countries view the US as a high Covid risk.

 

Irrelevant because U.S. citizens can fly to the islands to embark cruises not sailing to the U.S. and territories. What about the cruises in Greece?

 

Besides, just about every country is considered a high Covid risk except maybe China because that would be considered xenophobic.

Edited April 10, 2021 by ChucktownSteve

[cruisestitch]

Morechances, you seem to be promoting what are called “cruise to nowhere “. These are not allowed under US regulations. Nothing to do with the CDC. It has to do with the types of work visas and permits that crew would need if the ships do not visit at least one foreign port.

 

Every cruise that leaves the US and returns to the same port must visit a foreign port. Every cruise that leaves the US and returned to a different USB port must visit a “distant “foreign port as prescribed in the PVSA.

 

As I mentioned, there is only one ship currently allowed to have an itinerary entirely within the US, and that is the Norwegian Cruise lines ship that traverses the Hawaiian islands.  All others must stop at a foreign port.

[Ride-The-Waves]

23 hours ago, blueboro said:

 

I believe they HAVE tried a cooperative one but the CDC has not.  Unfortunately IMO the CDC has become very political.

Cruise lines and CLIA have not played ball with the CDC, and not with the CDC equivalents in other countries in the Med and UK.  Cruise lines are playing politics and it's not getting anywhere.  The CDC, and most Americans, will not return to cruising until its deem safe.  CDC's political aspect disappeared on 20 January.  Good discussion of its political nature and politicians forcing changes to CDC reports to support White House politics can be found here:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/09/cdc-covid-political-interference/

[morechances]

26 minutes ago, cruisestitch said:

Morechances, you seem to be promoting what are called “cruise to nowhere “. These are not allowed under US regulations. Nothing to do with the CDC. It has to do with the types of work visas and permits that crew would need if the ships do not visit at least one foreign port.

 

Every cruise that leaves the US and returns to the same port must visit a foreign port. Every cruise that leaves the US and returned to a different USB port must visit a “distant “foreign port as prescribed in the PVSA.

 

As I mentioned, there is only one ship currently allowed to have an itinerary entirely within the US, and that is the Norwegian Cruise lines ship that traverses the Hawaiian islands.  All others must stop at a foreign port.

Quite the opposite.

I am pointing out that until we have our house in order, many countries will not allow US departed ships to dock.

[morechances]

36 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

 

Irrelevant because U.S. citizens can fly to the islands to embark cruises not sailing to the U.S. and territories. What about the cruises in Greece?

 

Besides, just about every country is considered a high Covid risk except maybe China because that would be considered xenophobic.

All very true. 

Another truth is, countries change their rules all the time. For good reason, and also for pointless reasons.

There is still way too much instability and ongoing spikes in rates all over the world.

And borders open and close all the time right now.

Cruise lines are in rough shape these days.

Sure, opening up the industry would be great. I want to cruise as well.

But, it is still too soon.

If ships started sailing today, and then there was a spike, the ship is turned away from ports, returns here, and all guests receive partial refunds.

That is even more of a burden on the industry.

[Ken the cruiser]

15 hours ago, nocl said:

They provided the technical instructions because they were getting no response from the cruise lines in submitting a plan.  Not unusual for a regulatory authority to provide a guidance document or in this case technical instruction when requested by industry to clarify the requirements. 

 

Back around the time that the ships started coming back to the US and getting approval for offloading crew (the Green, Yellow, Red color code system).  There was an interview with one of the CDC people managing this activity.  At that time he indicated that there was disappointment that the cruise lines were not engaging.  I will see if I can dig up the interview

 

From what I have seen it is the cruise lines that have not been actively working with the CDC.  As I have said before there is nothing that stops a regulated industry from submitting a proposal or plan to a regulatory authority, even if they are waiting for a technical document.  All that industry has done is to request first through the CLIA and now individually that the CDC drop the order.  Not modify it, but to drop it.

 

In the order it specifically says that the CDC would respond promptly to submitted plans for test cruises. Has any cruise indicated that they have submitted such a plan and when they have submitted it?  

 

Basically the cruise lines do not like the requirements in the order and would rather try to out wait it than to really try to sail under it.

I've been thinking about what you wrote and I have to agree with you.

 

Let's take Celebrity, for example (or any other individual cruise line, such as HAL, Princess, Oceania, etc.). It really doesn't make logical sense why X doesn't go out on their own to perform the required Phase 2A preparatory work for one or two of their cruise ships (e.g., the Edge and Equinox) based out of Ft Lauderdale in preparation for Phase 2B test cruises, ultimately leading to restricted Phase 4 cruises in July. Just think of all the pent up demand of those that want to go cruising again they could tap into before anyone else. As they say, "the early bird catches the worm".

 

- UNLESS -

 

The big dogs, RCG, NCLH and Carnival in coordination with the CLIA, have told all of their subordinate cruise lines to "hold the line", to coin the phrase, as "there is power in numbers" to get the CDC to totally rescind the NSO.

 

I'm probably totally wrong, but none of the individual Technical Instructions seem all that difficult to overcome, especially if all applicable ship and shore cruise-affiliated organizations as well as the CDC want to make it happen.

 

But, as with everything else, it's just speculation on my part and I'll just continue to sit over in the peanut gallery and hope one day soon we'll be cruising again, maybe even on a B2B on one of the expanding number of cruise lines establishing new home ports in the Caribbean.  🙃

[TeeRick]

22 hours ago, Ken the cruiser said:

I've been thinking about what you wrote and I have to agree with you.

 

Let's take Celebrity, for example (or any other individual cruise line, such as HAL, Princess, Oceania, etc.). It really doesn't make logical sense why X doesn't go out on their own to perform the required Phase 2A preparatory work for one or two of their cruise ships (e.g., the Edge and Equinox) based out of Ft Lauderdale in preparation for Phase 2B test cruises, ultimately leading to restricted Phase 4 cruises in July. Just think of all the pent up demand of those that want to go cruising again they could tap into before anyone else. As they say, "the early bird catches the worm".

 

- UNLESS -

 

The big dogs, RCG, NCLH and Carnival in coordination with the CLIA, have told all of their subordinate cruise lines to "hold the line", to coin the phrase, as "there is power in numbers" to get the CDC to totally rescind the NSO.

 

I'm probably totally wrong, but none of the individual Technical Instructions seem all that difficult to overcome, especially if all applicable ship and shore cruise-affiliated organizations as well as the CDC want to make it happen.

 

But, as with everything else, it's just speculation on my part and I'll just continue to sit over in the peanut gallery and hope one day soon we'll be cruising again, maybe even on a B2B on one of the expanding number of cruise lines establishing new home ports in the Caribbean.  🙃

Ken you are funny.  You make a lot of good points, insightful comments and ask a lot of good questions.  I hardly think you are in the peanut gallery!😀

[NMTraveller]

23 hours ago, Ken the cruiser said:

I've been thinking about what you wrote and I have to agree with you.

 

Let's take Celebrity, for example (or any other individual cruise line, such as HAL, Princess, Oceania, etc.). It really doesn't make logical sense why X doesn't go out on their own to perform the required Phase 2A preparatory work for one or two of their cruise ships (e.g., the Edge and Equinox) based out of Ft Lauderdale in preparation for Phase 2B test cruises, ultimately leading to restricted Phase 4 cruises in July. Just think of all the pent up demand of those that want to go cruising again they could tap into before anyone else. As they say, "the early bird catches the worm".

 

- UNLESS -

 

The big dogs, RCG, NCLH and Carnival in coordination with the CLIA, have told all of their subordinate cruise lines to "hold the line", to coin the phrase, as "there is power in numbers" to get the CDC to totally rescind the NSO.

 

I'm probably totally wrong, but none of the individual Technical Instructions seem all that difficult to overcome, especially if all applicable ship and shore cruise-affiliated organizations as well as the CDC want to make it happen.

 

But, as with everything else, it's just speculation on my part and I'll just continue to sit over in the peanut gallery and hope one day soon we'll be cruising again, maybe even on a B2B on one of the expanding number of cruise lines establishing new home ports in the Caribbean.  🙃

 

If you look at some of the requirements in the CDC order they look to be untenable.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/management/technical-instructions-for-cruise-ships.html

 

Which cruise ship has crew members one to a room without sharing restrooms?  If my memory is correct they have 2 to 4.  Will the cruise lines start building new ships to meet the requirement?  Probably not.  Will they sail ships half full?  Perhaps but they will not be profitable.

 

If you look at NCLs counteroffer they dropped the shoreside quarantine contracts and the one to a room crewmember stipulation.  I would think that those are the deal breakers for the cruise industry.   I would think that contracting to quarantine a ship load of people (AKA Diamond Princess) would be expensive and a low probability event with everyone vaccinated.  NCLs offer seems reasonable to me,  but I speculate that full scale cruising will not happen until November.  The CDC is in no hurry to respond to NCLs counteroffer.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by NMTraveller

[Ken the cruiser]

 

43 minutes ago, NMTraveller said:

 

If you look at some of the requirements in the CDC order they look to be untenable.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/management/technical-instructions-for-cruise-ships.html

 

Which cruise ship has crew members one to a room without sharing restrooms?  If my memory is correct they have 2 to 4.  Will the cruise lines start building new ships to meet the requirement?  Probably not.  Will they sail ships half full?  Perhaps but they will not be profitable.

 

If you look at NCLs counteroffer they dropped the shoreside quarantine contracts and the one to a room crewmember stipulation.  I would guess that those are the deal breakers for the cruise industry.   I would suppose that contracting to quarantine a ship load of people (AKA Diamond Princess) would be expensive and a low probability event with everyone vaccinated.  NCLs offer seems reasonable to me,  but I am speculating that full scale cruisiing will not happen until November.

The document you referenced, Technical Instructions for Mitigation of COVID-19 Among Cruise Ship Crew, covers the following:

 

"This document provides instructions for the initial phases of CDC’s Framework for Conditional Sailing Order for cruise ship operations in U.S. waters to ensure health and safety protections for the crew prior to resuming passenger operations in a way that mitigates the risk of spreading COVID-19."

 

or am I missing something as I was referring in my post to the CDC Technical Instructions Phase 2A preparatory requirement to start Phase 2B test cruise certification:

 

Also, I thought the COVID mitigation issues you referenced regarding the crew had been resolved a while back since all applicable cruise ships have been coded Green for quite sometime. 

 

Cruise Ship Color and Commercial Travel Status | CDC

 

As far as NCL dropping the "shoreside quarantine contracts", my question is why did they do that since the Phase 2A protocols only relate to the simulated or restricted passenger voyages associated with Phases 2B and 4?

 

"This document is intended to assist cruise ship operators in documenting the approval of U.S. port and local health authorities as a condition of receiving or retaining controlled free pratique to conduct one or more simulated voyages or restricted passenger voyages under a COVID-19 Conditional Sailing Certificate. This includes documenting the approval of U.S. port and local health authorities in developing medical care, housing, and port components (including a vaccination component) of an agreement as per the terms of CDC’s Framework for Conditional Sailing Order."

 

Technical Instructions for a Cruise Ship Operator’s Agreement with Port and Local Health Authorities under CDC’s Framework for Conditional Sailing Order | Quarantine | CDC

Edited April 11, 2021 by Ken the cruiser

[NMTraveller]

18 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

As far as NCL dropping the "shoreside quarantine contracts", my question is why did they do that since the Phase 2A protocols only relate to the simulated or restricted passenger voyages associated with Phases 2B and 4?

 

 

You are correct.  I missed the prior part for crew accomodations.

 

I would think that cost would be the factor.  How much did it cost to remove and quarantine the Diamond Princess?  How many tens of millions for a single ship?  Having contracts in place for a mass evacation requires a big operation and potentially many contracts.  The contracts would be contracting to ensure that quarantine quarters were available even though they may not be utilized.  How many hotels or other facilities are going to want to provide quarantine rooms for Covid now that travel is picking back up?

 

If it was a reasonable ask they would be sailing when the numbers are lower.  Their accountants crunch the numbers and figure out how and if they can make money.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by NMTraveller