Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Posted on Another Site...Ruby Princess Hits Dock in SF

Jaymuxman

By Jaymuxman,
in Princess Cruises

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ipeeinthepools

Ipeeinthepools

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Crystabel said:

 

 

Wow.  Thanks for that video.  The current or wind must have been tremendous when they were trying to dock.  I would have never guessed that's how the collision happened.  It seems like the one tug bailed on the Ruby Princess.  I wonder if the tug Captain made that decision on his own or if someone ordered him to move away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JG&Lcruisingnewbies

JG&Lcruisingnewbies

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Amy G said:

https://abc7news.com/ruby-princess-cruise-ship-departing-san-francisco-sf-pier-crash-collision-27/13482208/ 

From article:

 

Passengers who boarded the ship Thursday have been asked to stay on board and not come ashore

 

Is this right? You can’t go and explore the city while waiting for departure? 😬

 

I hope this isn’t correct! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ONECRUISER

ONECRUISER

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Steelers36 said:

This thread should be merged into the other - or deep-sixed since it doesn't serve a purpose any longer.

Agree, couple yrs ago had great Mod on Royal thread and he'd combine Threads. Was almost daily when CV started

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steelers36

Steelers36

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

Of course not, but that doesn't mean that GS may decide to book someone onto the ship at the port.  It may not work, but if someone was interested yesterday and had a short drive with nothing to lose other than time and some gas, who knows?  @Cruise Raider was just wondering/speculating and if it were me - and I was interested to "drop and go", I'd really consider heading over there yesterday and finding out.

It would appear from the local ABC news video feed from above, that any opportunity to jump on board ended at 11:00am PT because that was the deadline for guests to decide to go or stay.  That indicates to me finalizing the manifest process which hour mentioned is also the typical hour to commence boarding a new voyage.  So, the discussion is moot now and no one has reported on CC (at least) making the attempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steelers36

Steelers36

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, JG&Lcruisingnewbies said:

From article:

 

Passengers who boarded the ship Thursday have been asked to stay on board and not come ashore

 

Is this right? You can’t go and explore the city while waiting for departure? 😬

 

I hope this isn’t correct! 

It can't be correct since the news report posted above featured interviews of guests departing and of guests staying.  ETA:  One woman interviewed was all smiles as they had the "drink package", so must be on the Plus or Premier.  It was a good marketing clip for PCL.

Edited by Steelers36
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PacnGoNow Holiday Sharing Rare

PacnGoNow

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, JG&Lcruisingnewbies said:

From article:

 

Passengers who boarded the ship Thursday have been asked to stay on board and not come ashore

 

Is this right? You can’t go and explore the city while waiting for departure? 😬

 

I hope this isn’t correct! 

Old news from day 1.  Read through the thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 cruises a year

2 cruises a year

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, DCThunder said:

Because I wasn't familiar with the term "allision" as used by NavArch64, I did a little Google-fu to see what it meant.  I could figure the basic meaning out but wanted to learn more.  I came across the following from the law offices of what appears to be a personal injury firm that specialized in maritime injuries.  It had an interesting discussion of collisions and allisions at sea and the liability that arises from them.  

 

Our maritime experts might quibble with what's up on this law firm's site, but I thought it interesting.

 

Allision (Not Collision) Nautical Term Definition | Naylor Law

Thank you for this.  I didn't think anything of it.  I read it as "a collision", blaming it on that darned auto-correct.

That's my learn something new every day, for today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wsue22

wsue22

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, JG&Lcruisingnewbies said:

From article:

 

Passengers who boarded the ship Thursday have been asked to stay on board and not come ashore

 

Is this right? You can’t go and explore the city while waiting for departure? 😬

 

I hope this isn’t correct! 

It's not, I know people on board and they spent their Friday evening at Coit Tower and their Saturday in Chinatown, etc.  One even returned to Northern California for a funeral Saturday.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JG&Lcruisingnewbies

JG&Lcruisingnewbies

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, wsue22 said:

It's not, I know people on board and they spent their Friday evening at Coit Tower and their Saturday in Chinatown, etc.  One even returned to Northern California for a funeral Saturday.

Thanks to all those who have replied to my question.

 

i hadn’t watched any clips- just read the article, I should have been more thorough.

 

husband & I were discussing what we’d do- We both would have stayed on board after coming from UK- Yes we’d be v disappointed to be missing so many stops, but we would love the opportunity to see more of SF. was shocked when I read that snippet

 

Alaska is on our ‘once in a lifetime’ bucket list

With the refund & FCC that’s flights sorted for 2nd Alaska cruise & we possibly get to see parts of Alaska twice. Bonus!


 I’ve read most of the thread. Thought I’d miss-remembered  people exploring SF when I read the article. my bad

 

to be honest large parts of the thread have been far too technical for this newbie. Think it fried my brain 😉

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PacnGoNow Holiday Sharing Rare

PacnGoNow

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, JG&Lcruisingnewbies said:

Thanks to all those who have replied to my question.

 

i hadn’t watched any clips- just read the article, I should have been more thorough.

 

husband & I were discussing what we’d do- We both would have stayed on board after coming from UK- Yes we’d be v disappointed to be missing so many stops, but we would love the opportunity to see more of SF. was shocked when I read that snippet

 

Alaska is on our ‘once in a lifetime’ bucket list

With the refund & FCC that’s flights sorted for 2nd Alaska cruise & we possibly get to see parts of Alaska twice. Bonus!


 I’ve read most of the thread. Thought I’d miss-remembered  people exploring SF when I read the article. my bad

 

to be honest large parts of the thread have been far too technical for this newbie. Think it fried my brain 😉

 

I apologize for my quick, short response.

Normally, I don’t do that. I think my brain is fried too.😳

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SCX22

SCX22

Posted
Posted

I'm still interested to which party is at fault.  There was property damage to the pier.  The Port of San Francisco isn't allowed to dip into public tax revenue but they are allowed to raise bonds, which conveniently land into homeowner's property tax assessments.  Who's coughing up the money to fix the pier?  Hope the investigation comes up as conclusive and not force majeure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skiingj

skiingj

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

This thread should be merged into the other - or deep-sixed since it doesn't serve a purpose any longer.

Can you link the other thread.  I cannot find it.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chengkp75

chengkp75

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, SCX22 said:

I'm still interested to which party is at fault.  There was property damage to the pier.  The Port of San Francisco isn't allowed to dip into public tax revenue but they are allowed to raise bonds, which conveniently land into homeowner's property tax assessments.  Who's coughing up the money to fix the pier?  Hope the investigation comes up as conclusive and not force majeure.

Regardless of who is "at fault", the ship is responsible for all  damages that it causes.  Particularly in the case of an allision, just like a moving car is always responsible for damages when it hits a stationary car.  Even in a case of force majeure, the ship is responsible.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thrak

Thrak

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, CalTexCruiser said:

 

Thanks for the video showing the collision!!

 

Reminds me of when I was learning how to dock a power boat in the SF Bay and the winds (20+ mph) would blow the boat right up against the dock even when I tried to apply power to move away from the dock.

 

Although one would hope an experienced pilot/captain would do better than a novice.

 

 

Consider the gigantic wind sail that a ship that size represents. I think it's amazing that they can handle these ships as well as they do.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirclean

sirclean

Posted
Posted (edited)

When I was in Kindergarten my father was sure that a tree jumped right behind the car and took a bite out of the bumper!  Im sure that a well watered dock could move just as fast if sufficiently angered! 

Edited by sirclean
correct spelling error
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ONECRUISER

ONECRUISER

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, JG&Lcruisingnewbies said:

From article:

 

Passengers who boarded the ship Thursday have been asked to stay on board and not come ashore

 

Is this right? You can’t go and explore the city while waiting for departure? 😬

 

I hope this isn’t correct! 

Nope, News was interviewing Passengers that were staying on the rest of the Cruise but were ashore to catch a game

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ONECRUISER

ONECRUISER

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Thrak said:

 

Consider the gigantic wind sail that a ship that size represents. I think it's amazing that they can handle these ships as well as they do.

Skill of Capt, Crew, Pilot......and sometimes not

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NavArch64

NavArch64

Posted
Posted

Given the excellent video provided earlier today showing the details of the allision, and given that the only "hands" on the thruster controls were a Princess Navigation Officer (presumably the Master), assuming the SF Bar Pilot did his/her job of properly advising the Captain, and assuming that there were no ship system failures (which we don't know yet), it appears that we can come to a preliminary conclusion, pending additional information. I am interested in any comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...