Princess or Holland America

[GTJ]

1 hour ago, Coral said:

The White Pass RR is partially owned by CCL (indirectly) and all lines have access to the train.

Yes, indeed! I believe that the excursion trains operated by the railroad constitute the single largest tourist attraction at this port. From a competitive standpoint, Carnival controls the cards. Passengers on all the cruise lines want to ride the train, and Carnival will certainly take their fares.

 

The interesting question is what would happen if Carnival held back from allowing the other lines from selling its railroad tickets? It could give Carnival an advantage in selling its cruises, being able to advertise that it is the only line able to sell railroad tickets directly. Of course, railroad tickets can be bought be anyone, simply by going to the railroad station and paying for them there. But expecting passengers on other cruise lines to buy tickets directly from the railroad, instead through their cruise line, would be a barrier that would cause a decline in railroad tickets sold; and it would cause more administrative work for the railroad for it to staff its ticket office to sell individual tickets. Well, the railroad might seek to cease being a common carrier, and operate as a private carrier, serving only Carnival cruise line passengers and no walk-up tickets for the general public. (Whether the railroad could get past any carrier regulatory controls is a separate matter.) That would have an even steeper decline in railroad patronage, and would likely amount to a wasting of the railroad's infrastructure (i.e., its right-of-way, track, and equipment). In sum, I think that the highest and best use of the railroad by Carnival is to continue as it is now, selling tickets to its own passengers, authorizing other lines to sell railroad tickets to their passengers, and selling tickets directly to walk-up passengers at the station.

[GTJ]

1 hour ago, wolfie11 said:

Only Princess has used Whittier going back at least to the early 2000’s. HAL started bringing ships into Whittier recently one day a week. I really don’t think that more than one ship a day, especially if it’s a big one, can dock there and efficiently move people and luggage in and out because of the tunnel.

At present, Carnival is hosting only its own vessels, which serve Whittier every Saturday, every Sunday, and alternate Wednesdays. The Alaska Marine Highway has its own separate terminal, at which its Prince William Sound service, using the vessel Aurora, visits Whittier every day, being docked for about one hour during the middle of the day; and its Bellingham, Washington, service, using the vessel Kennicott, visits Whittier every two weeks, northbound on Thursday mornings, southbound on Monday evenings, for about three hours (this service is not operating in 2023). NCL Holdings is planning to build its own separate terminal in Whittier, and it seems likely that it would continue the same schedule it now operates at Seward when it opens its new Whittier terminal. That is, every Wednesday and alternate Mondays.

 

The Alaska Marine Highway clearly needs a separate terminal for its operations, as it provides service every day of the week, and needs distinct facilities to load and unload motor vehicles. Its vessels carry fewer passengers than the cruise lines, the Aurora carrying 250 passengers, and the Kennicott carrying 499 passengers. Since passengers using the Alaska Marine Highway are more inclined to travel to and from Whittier by their own motor vehicle--the Aurora can handle approximately 33 twenty-foot vehicles and the Kennicott can handle approximately 67 to 78 twenty-foot vehicles--these vessels will affect tunnel usage disproportionately to the number of passengers carried.

 

Does NCL really need a terminal separate from that used by Carnival? If it is to continue operating its current schedule, then the answer is "yes," as there would be an overlap with both Princess Cruises and Regent Seven Seas Cruises vessels in port simultaneously on alternate Wednesdays. This does mean that there is the potential for stressing tunnel usage on those alternate Wednesdays, though that stress would be mitigated by the fact that the NCL Holdings vessel, Seven Seas Mariner, is small, with only 700 passengers (the Carnival vessel, Sapphire Princess, carries 2,670 passengers).

 

If there were coordination between Carnival and NCL Holdings, then there would be no need for another terminal in Whittier. The Carnival terminal is not used Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays, nor on alternate Wednesdays. NCL Holdings could easily fit its schedule into these openings. But I suspect that NCL Holdings does not trust Carnival to provide access for NCL Holdings vessels--they are competitors--so to be safe NCL Holdings is building its own terminal. Perhaps instead of Carnival controlling the facility it was controlled by an independent port authority, there could be assurance of fair usage, and that could obviate the building of a new terminal, at least until another carrier wanted to move to Whittier. Indeed, what will happen when Royal Caribbean Cruises wants to move its operations to Whittier? Their present schedule, to and from Seward, is every Thursday and every Friday. No overlap with either Carnival or NCL Holdings, but would Royal Caribbean Cruises want to the at the mercy of either of those two lines?

[Coral]

7 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

Only Princess has used Whittier going back at least to the early 2000’s. HAL started bringing ships into Whittier recently one day a week.  I really don’t think that more than one ship a day, especially if it’s a big one, can dock there and efficiently move people and luggage in and out because of the tunnel. 

I think Princess started using it in 2003. 

 

For example - Crystal cruises used Whittier when they sailed in Alaska. Maybe Silversea. I have seen a few other lines (that most don't think of) who have used Whittier also. Definitely not on a weekly bases all summer but others have used it periodically.

 

Right now - only one ship can dock. It will be interesting what it looks like when NCL (and their companies) move to Whittier and build that pier up.

Edited June 7, 2023 by Coral

[Coral]

5 hours ago, GTJ said:

At present, Carnival is hosting only its own vessels, which serve Whittier every Saturday, every Sunday, and alternate Wednesdays. The Alaska Marine Highway has its own separate terminal, at which its Prince William Sound service, using the vessel Aurora, visits Whittier every day, being docked for about one hour during the middle of the day; and its Bellingham, Washington, service, using the vessel Kennicott, visits Whittier every two weeks, northbound on Thursday mornings, southbound on Monday evenings, for about three hours (this service is not operating in 2023). NCL Holdings is planning to build its own separate terminal in Whittier, and it seems likely that it would continue the same schedule it now operates at Seward when it opens its new Whittier terminal. That is, every Wednesday and alternate Mondays.

 

The Alaska Marine Highway clearly needs a separate terminal for its operations, as it provides service every day of the week, and needs distinct facilities to load and unload motor vehicles. Its vessels carry fewer passengers than the cruise lines, the Aurora carrying 250 passengers, and the Kennicott carrying 499 passengers. Since passengers using the Alaska Marine Highway are more inclined to travel to and from Whittier by their own motor vehicle--the Aurora can handle approximately 33 twenty-foot vehicles and the Kennicott can handle approximately 67 to 78 twenty-foot vehicles--these vessels will affect tunnel usage disproportionately to the number of passengers carried.

 

Does NCL really need a terminal separate from that used by Carnival? If it is to continue operating its current schedule, then the answer is "yes," as there would be an overlap with both Princess Cruises and Regent Seven Seas Cruises vessels in port simultaneously on alternate Wednesdays. This does mean that there is the potential for stressing tunnel usage on those alternate Wednesdays, though that stress would be mitigated by the fact that the NCL Holdings vessel, Seven Seas Mariner, is small, with only 700 passengers (the Carnival vessel, Sapphire Princess, carries 2,670 passengers).

 

If there were coordination between Carnival and NCL Holdings, then there would be no need for another terminal in Whittier. The Carnival terminal is not used Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays, nor on alternate Wednesdays. NCL Holdings could easily fit its schedule into these openings. But I suspect that NCL Holdings does not trust Carnival to provide access for NCL Holdings vessels--they are competitors--so to be safe NCL Holdings is building its own terminal. Perhaps instead of Carnival controlling the facility it was controlled by an independent port authority, there could be assurance of fair usage, and that could obviate the building of a new terminal, at least until another carrier wanted to move to Whittier. Indeed, what will happen when Royal Caribbean Cruises wants to move its operations to Whittier? Their present schedule, to and from Seward, is every Thursday and every Friday. No overlap with either Carnival or NCL Holdings, but would Royal Caribbean Cruises want to the at the mercy of either of those two lines?

They need it to provide more than one ship docking in Whittier. With a lot of cruises starting on Saturday and Sunday - this helps this. It is not purely a port stop but the beginning/ending of cruises. Considering most cruises do start on weekends - this helps that.

[wolfie11]

1 hour ago, Coral said:

They need it to provide more than one ship docking in Whittier. With a lot of cruises starting on Saturday and Sunday - this helps this. It is not purely a port stop but the beginning/ending of cruises. Considering most cruises do start on weekends - this helps that.

With the tunnel open only 15 minutes per hour each way, there is a huge bottleneck getting people in and out.  The ferry arrives with a number of cars, hundreds of local people and cars come in and out on the weekend to use their boats, trains are coming and going, and then you want to move 12,000 to 20,000 people on buses and their luggage on trucks through the tunnel?  Cars are given priority into the tunnel with a car allowed every 2.5 seconds (or around 25 cars a minute).  Buses and commercial trucks can enter at a rate of one every 15 seconds (or four per minute) The number of buses with pax in the tunnel at any given time is limited to around six for fire safety purposes.  Finally, the cruise lines pay a toll for every vehicle.

 

 

[GTJ]

6 hours ago, Coral said:

They need it to provide more than one ship docking in Whittier. * * * Considering most cruises do start on weekends - this helps that.

I would agree to that assertion for most embarkation ports. But for the Alaska one-way cruises, the schedule is more diverse. Only Carnival has arrivals and departures on weekends, while its fifth vessel and all other lines arrive and depart on other days of the week, relatively uniformly distributed (at least at present). Do take a good look at the schedules, for the Alaska timetables are quite distinct from what one sees in Florida.

 

5 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

[T]hen you want to move 12,000 to 20,000 people on buses and their luggage on trucks through the tunnel? Cars are given priority into the tunnel with a car allowed every 2.5 seconds (or around 25 cars a minute). Buses and commercial trucks can enter at a rate of one every 15 seconds (or four per minute) The number of buses with pax in the tunnel at any given time is limited to around six for fire safety purposes.

I am not certain I agree entirely with your projection on bus passenger numbers. The largest vessels now carry about 4,000 passengers, so a complete turnover could involve some 8,000 passengers (4,000 arriving passengers and another 4,000 departing passengers). Yes, there's some crew as well, but most should remain in Whittier. If NCL Holdings is building its new terminal in Whittier with the intention of having in Whittier at the same time as Carnival vessels, then you might reach the numbers you're projecting. This then goes back to the question of whether an additional cruise line terminal in Whittier ought to be built at all . . . if the tunnel can handle the traffic from two large cruise vessels in port simultaneously.

 

The observation on bus use of the tunnel, if true, is troubling. As a matter of transportation policy, buses should have priority. But you're suggesting that fire policy take precedence over transportation policy, ordinarily a good setting of policy priorities. Nonetheless, my experience is that emergency response people do have a tendency to assert themselves aggressively, and persuade decision-makers to acquiesce to their worries, even when not rigorously supported with data and analysis. I would consider the number of people transported simultaneously by bus through the Lincoln Tunnel: it handles 650 buses in the peak hour through three tubes with two lanes in each (up to four lanes in the peak direction). At the same time I remain aware of the Caldecott Tunnel fire in 1982 (though that was caused by a tanker truck hitting an automobile, not a passenger bus). So while I am not prepared to make an argument that the bus throughput limitation is excessive, it is something that is difficult without adequate support.