Thread Discussing Rolls Royce Mermaid Pod ("Pod") Issues Affecting Celebrity Vessels

[Drew B]

Celebrity SUMMIT May 2006 LA - Alaska, Hubbard Glacier ending in Vancouver!!!

Missed Seattle/Sitka/Inside Passage(captain didn't order [pilot)/ shortened Juneau/Ketchikan/Skagway sat 7 miles off Hubbard on a glorious day, watched other ships in there, did 360 o then left after 45 minutes.

 

 

I don't recall Juneau/Ketchikan/Skagway being shortened. Maybe Ketchikan by a bit, but I don't really remember. Juneau and Skagway were both VERY long days in port.

 

As for the Hubbard, If you look at this year's reports from the Mercury (which doesn't have pods, so it can't be based on a pod problem), nearly every week, they are not getting in close to the glacier while other ships do. I've seen pictures of the ice in the water that they have been facing this year, and it looks very much like the ice in the water that we had in May '06.

 

Hubbard seems like a total crap shoot. I have no idea if our problems were really pod-related at all. They probably were, but what difference does it make if you can just as easily miss out on the Hubbard experience on a ship with no pods? Perhaps the problem is timid captains...

[cechase]

Hubbard seems like a total crap shoot. I have no idea if our problems were really pod-related at all. They probably were, but what difference does it make if you can just as easily miss out on the Hubbard experience on a ship with no pods? Perhaps the problem is timid captains...

 

Drew B, I think that you are right. Our experience on Infinity last September was entirely different. At the time, Infinity was limping on its left pod and was restricted to 70% power on that pod. We entered the bay and proceeded to the bottom of the bay where the six mile face of the Hubbard Glacier was located. Infinity traversed the face from right to left for the entire six miles and I would estimate that we were crawling because it took about an hour to hour and half. We all got to see the ice in the water all around us, see and hear the calving - it was spectacular.

 

Just as we traversed the face of Hubbard, the Captain came on the speakers and said "If any captain says he go closer, he is lying". You could hear the cheers all around the ship in response to his message.

 

There may be several reasons for Infinity getting that close. There were no other vessels in the bay or at Hubbard during our entire trip to and from Hubbard. The ice in the water did not seem to be very large, although there was plenty of ice. It also could be that we were there at the right time of the year.

 

Pods were not an issue!

[two rabbits]

The propulsion system used by all four Celebrity M-Class ships are called pods. Per the rules of this board these are the "FACTS ONLY" for the dates of failures for the propulsion systems. These stats were gathered from sources such as: eventsatsea, ebearingnews and posts from this board.

This original post was on the "what you need to know about cruising on Celebrity" thread and has been updated as of July 27, 2007.

 

Millennium Inaugural date June 17, 2000

 

Pod failure dry dock January, 2001

Pod failure dry dock July 16, 2003

Pod failure dry dock December 10, 2006

Pod failure on New Years 2007 cruise and again in January. (Note: ship continued to sail at reduced speed until dry dock in mid April 2007).

 

Infinity Inaugural date March 3, 2001

 

Pod failure dry dock late 2001 (3 weeks)

Pod failure dry dock April 13, 2002

Pod failure dry dock January 29, 2003

Pod failure dry dock March 2004

Pod failure dry dock March 27, 2005

Pod failure Ports skipped and cruise shortened on two cruises

(July 9 and July 16, 2006) Electrical problem in pods.

Pod failure dry dock September 13, 2006

Pod failure November 19, 2006. (Note: this ship continued to sail with altered Itineraries and some missed ports until dry dock on May 20, 2007).

 

Summit Inaugural date October 1, 2001

 

Pod failure dry dock March 2002

Pod failure dry dock July 18, 2003

Pod failure dry dock September 2004

Pod failure dry dock June 3, 2005

Pod failure dry dock May 20, 2006

 

Constellation Inaugural date May 1, 2002

 

Pod failure dry dock May 1, 2002 (salt water leaked into pods at launch time).

[Coral]

TMillennium Inaugural date June 17, 2000

 

Pod failure dry dock January, 2001

Pod failure dry dock July 16, 2003

Pod failure dry dock December 10, 2006

Pod failure on New Years 2007 cruise and again in January. (Note: ship continued to sail at reduced speed until dry dock in mid April 2007).

 

 

I was booked on the Millie the first of Dec in 2000. I ended up switching to the Grand Princess and to my recollection, the Millie ended up dry docked that first week in December. I remember thinking how lucky I was that I switched ships.

[woodofpine]

Friday afternoon... law office...

 

It dawned on me that this thread and its predecessors could be used as evidence in the RR case...

 

For what? You ask...

 

After itemizing all the repairs, refunds, quantifiable lost revenue caused by the pod breakdowns it would worth arguing to a court that RR defense arguements minimizing and deminishing Celeb's damage numbers should be disregarded because of the additional enormous and incalculable "loss of goodwill" created by the pob problems. While lost goodwill is not readily calculated or awarded as a money damage, it can certainly be evidenced in the consumer doubt and disparagements expressed in this CC forum.

 

Presenting it could make an effective argument to avoid a fact finder's possible tendancy to discount the damages that are quantifiable.

 

Back to work now...

[LeftcoastBC]

Friday afternoon... law office...

 

It dawned on me that this thread and its predecessors could be used as evidence in the RR case...

 

For what? You ask...

 

After itemizing all the repairs, refunds, quantifiable lost revenue caused by the pod breakdowns it would worth arguing to a court that RR defense arguements minimizing and deminishing Celeb's damage numbers should be disregarded because of the additional enormous and incalculable "loss of goodwill" created by the pob problems. While lost goodwill is not readily calculated or awarded as a money damage, it can certainly be evidenced in the consumer doubt and disparagements expressed in this CC forum.

 

Presenting it could make an effective argument to avoid a fact finder's possible tendancy to discount the damages that are quantifiable.

 

Back to work now...

 

Brought smile to my face...... thks:)

[cechase]

Other than Millie hitting rocks with her propellers in Villefranche, have there been any pod failures on the M class vessels this year?

[sasset]

Millennium in January I believe.

 

Regards

[chillijilli]

Thanks more than I can say for the heads up and candor re: Infinity and our impending SA cruise. Our TA pretends to have never heard a thing about pods, yet her company is 1 of the largest discount suppliers online. I suspect what she doesn't know can't come back and bite her later, should itineraries be shortened or changed. Feigned ignorance is bliss.

It seems unreal that when a consumer is spending ~$10,000, neither the cruise line nor the TAs have any responsibility to disclose known issues which could certainly impact a scheduled cruise. I'm sooooo grateful for this board and the incredible honesty of its' members. Thank you, thank you. The few extra dollars we'll spend on another line will more than make up for a possible major disappointment to those of us who don't cruise often.

[Drew B]

The few extra dollars we'll spend on another line will more than make up for a possible major disappointment to those of us who don't cruise often.

 

Best of luck to you. I sincerely, SINCERELY hope that the other line you choose doesn't have any problems of it's own. I would hate to see you steered away from X by this board, only to wind up on a cruise that gets cancelled/shortened/altered for some other reason. Remember, it happens on other lines, too.

[bobbyleduck]

Thanks more than I can say for the heads up and candor re: Infinity and our impending SA cruise. Our TA pretends to have never heard a thing about pods, yet her company is 1 of the largest discount suppliers online. I suspect what she doesn't know can't come back and bite her later, should itineraries be shortened or changed. Feigned ignorance is bliss.

It seems unreal that when a consumer is spending ~$10,000, neither the cruise line nor the TAs have any responsibility to disclose known issues which could certainly impact a scheduled cruise. I'm sooooo grateful for this board and the incredible honesty of its' members. Thank you, thank you. The few extra dollars we'll spend on another line will more than make up for a possible major disappointment to those of us who don't cruise often.

 

I'm very sorry that you've decided against Infinity. She is a wonderful ship. My whole family, 9 of us, sailed aboard Infinity in March, prior to Dry Dock, through the Panama Canal. We had a wonderful, once in a lifetime trip. We checked out this board prior to final payment and decided the ship, and itinery were well worth the risk. You talk about $10,000. My Mom (Thank you Mom) spent more than $43,000 for the cruise portion and an additional $5,000 in airfare for this family experience. It was so good, that my wife and I are doing a Trans Atlantic cruise aboard Millenium in December. We scheduled that just as Millenium was suspending one cruise and canceling the next because of the "Rocks" incident. Of course, I must admit that part of the reason we are sailing on Millenium in December is because of the incredible people we met onboard. We are meeting up with 10 of our new best friends, people we met on this board prior to the Panama Canal cruise and whom we found to be so delightful that we have to join them again. The rest of my family can't be there, but we have our new Celebrity family to share the TA crossing with.

 

My point in all of this is: CELEBRITY is worth it!

 

Happy cruising to all!

 

Bob

[Daffydd]

I'm very sorry that you've decided against Infinity. She is a wonderful ship. My whole family, 9 of us, sailed aboard Infinity in March, prior to Dry Dock, through the Panama Canal. We had a wonderful, once in a lifetime trip. We checked out this board prior to final payment and decided the ship, and itinery were well worth the risk. You talk about $10,000. My Mom (Thank you Mom) spent more than $43,000 for the cruise portion and an additional $5,000 in airfare for this family experience. It was so good, that my wife and I are doing a Trans Atlantic cruise aboard Millenium in December. We scheduled that just as Millenium was suspending one cruise and canceling the next because of the "Rocks" incident. Of course, I must admit that part of the reason we are sailing on Millenium in December is because of the incredible people we met onboard. We are meeting up with 10 of our new best friends, people we met on this board prior to the Panama Canal cruise and whom we found to be so delightful that we have to join them again. The rest of my family can't be there, but we have our new Celebrity family to share the TA crossing with.

 

My point in all of this is: CELEBRITY is worth it!

 

Happy cruising to all!

 

Bob

 

Bob

I must admit I found a lot of new friends going through the Panama Canal and am sailing in a M class ship again in December even though she had problems in the Mediterranean this year

I Think we will have steak at our table and not Crispy Duck this December

 

David

[fud2468]

After following this thread for some time, I must say that if Celebrity had not refunded all of our money and given us a free trip after last year's cancelled Alaska cruise on Infinity, we would not be cruising on Celebrity next month. As it is, we will take our chances.

It's dismaying to read that after last year's stint in drydock, Infinity had pod problems again soon after, and limped along in that condition another 6 months!

How does Celebrity manage to hang onto its #1 status through all this?

Ray Mac.

[Pontius Navigator]

Celebrity would at least replace the bearings in both pods while the ship was in dry dock.

 

I have not followed this thread but it is interesting what you said here. We thought the Connie was particularly quiet. In our cabin deck 7 port midships forward you could have been in a very quiet hotel room. last couple of days in the buffet aft one passenger commented that there appeared to have been a slight increase in vibration and increased noise level on the starboard side.

 

On every leg we were doing near 19 kts all the time except when slowing for navigation.

 

Pod bearing?

[Days off]

Days at sea are the best! I am booked on teh Mercury sailing from Hawaii to Tahiti and on to New Zealand. A big draw on that trip is the days at sea! I have also sailed Infinity to and from Hawaii on 2 occasions and its the best! ENJOY!:D

[Pontius Navigator]

Ty Preacher. Having nothing to compare it with I would not have known.

 

Interesting on the speed. I don't believe we were told its maximum capability but the itinerary didn't allow time for dawdling.

[Drew B]

I am personally of the opinion that there is no real timetable to the pods and that, while Summit may experience pod problems between now and when you sail, it may not as well. Moreover, I imagine that if she has pod problems next week and gets a bearing replaced in dry dock the week after (knock on wood), it wouldn't substantially change your odds of having pod problems more than six months later.

 

When an M-Class ship DOES experience pod problems, the normal course of action is to slow down and drydock the ship as soon as possible in order to replace the bearing. That is NOT what happened with Infinity and Millenium last winter, though. I am not sure, but I believe that the problems faced by those two ships last year were not the recurring problems with the bearing. I think they suffered a different problem -- one that may or may not be chronic and recurring.

 

If you are a glass-half-full person, I suggest that you simply tell yourself that your cruise will go off without a hitch. Chances are GREAT that that will be the case (whether or not Summit goes into dry dock between now and then).

[Drew B]

The past instances where they immediately put the ship into dry dock the next week were all to replace worn bearings. The situation with the Infinity last year had nothing to do with a worn bearing. It was an electrical situation and I believe that the solution was that they had to replace the entire pod. Well, I don't think that dry dock facilities have compatible spare pods lying around in case a ship that uses them HAPPENS to break down in the vicinity. I think that a new pod is clearly a "special order" item, and it wouldn't be possible to have it ready the next week. They would need to schedule a dry-dock down the road to do a job like replacing a pod. Was the wait longer than it had to be with Infinity? I don't know. I also don't know WHAT the pod problem was with Millenium and whether it was solved by replacing a bearing or with more drastic action.

 

ready 2 sail, please read the previous post by the Preacher and give it some thought, but DON'T treat it as fact. Most pod problems have been caused by worn bearings. Worn bearings CAN and usually ARE replaced pretty immediately in an emergency dry dock. While it is possible that Celebrity wouldn't immediately dry dock a ship for a worn bearing, WE DON'T KNOW THAT (Preacher's "evidence" to the contrary). It is also very possible, likely even, that they WOULD immediately dry dock the ship and replace the bearing. Please note, however, that that wouldn't eliminate the possibility of your cruise experiencing pod problems. I think they really can occur at any time, even with a recently-replaced bearing. Even if relative newness of the bearing meant safety from wear (I don't believe it does), the ship has TWO pods and TWO bearings. Just because one has been replaced recently doesn't mean that the OTHER one couldn't fail...

[sasset]

The Millennium limped along for at least two cruises, a Med and a Transatlantic, last November before going into dry dock December 10.

 

 

As far as the Summit: After finishing Alaska, it's doing several San Diego/Hawaii round trips. Even though I have done that itinerary on The Infinity, I never really paid attention if full or near full speed is required for the crossing. If it can make the crossing at a reduced speed, if needed they could probably limp along to finish those since they have one less port than they had last year.

 

Regards

[Drew B]

The Millennium limped along for at least two cruises, a Med and a Transatlantic, last November before going into dry dock December 10.

 

Millenium's problems continued for a while AFTER the drydock. I remember a lot of Caribbean cruises with missed ports, late departures, etc. I was never sure if it was pod-related or not.

 

 

As far as the Summit: After finishing Alaska, it's doing several San Diego/Hawaii round trips. Even though I have done that itinerary on The Infinity, I never really paid attention if full or near full speed is required for the crossing. If it can make the crossing at a reduced speed, if needed they could probably limp along to finish those since they have one less port than they had last year.

 

Regards

 

 

I believe the crossings do require full (or nearly full) speeds. If not, they have to shave time off of the ports.

[LeftcoastBC]

I just returned from Infinity Alaska. I had the fortune of getting invited to tour the Engine Room control centre and speak with a Young engineer who has been with the ship since the get go. He was also working the cruise that I had the misfortune to be on when they canceled the cruise 3/4's way through in Acapulco and we were all flown from there to San Diego with varying adventures.

After making sure we were talking about the same incident. He started the conversation...."Oh YOU WERE ON THAT ONE" and we had a bit of a chuckle. The engine room had a real experience then as they eventually lost most power in the second pod. He advises that they actually had to change the oil in the system every two/three hours because of pieces of bearing that had become detached. They got no sleep for most of the trip and had a small oil tanker meet them in the Caribbean to keep them in oil.

 

Why they do not schedule maintenance ???? If it is working properly there is nothing wrong. When they fail and there is no known time when that will happen is when the work has to be done. They think that the builder has got a handle on it..but ????? They do not travel as fast as they used too as a general rule. They have/are considering returning to shaft drives on the M class... but ???

 

Solstice will have shafts.

 

Infinity is working well since it's dry dock in May at Esquimalt according to him. According to me it is the smoothest ride that I can recall on her. (4th ride) we recently cruised on the Zenith (final cruise) and it sure beat her.

[Drew B]

If it is working properly there is nothing wrong. When they fail and there is no known time when that will happen is when the work has to be done.

 

 

Thank you. That's what I thought.

[Drew B]

The Mermaid pods are made up of a 19.5 MW electric motor that has TWO large bearings in each pod. It is possible to split hairs about which bearing failed or if the failed bearing affected the electrical part of the pods or the electrical part of the pods affected the bearings. At the end of the day you have a POD FAILURE and a ship that is unable to maintain the designed speed to complete itineraries in a timely fashion. Repairing these pods does require dry docking and there were facilities in the area for dry dock when these last two problems first began. This however, would have resulted in a another cancelled cruise,as it does take about five days to replace the bearings.

 

Maybe I was not clear in my other post about the length of time to go to dry dock for the last two failures. What I meant to say was that the only PLAUSIBLE reason for the long delay these last two times was the revenue that would have been lost from the cost of canceling another cruise when a dry dock time was already established for the Infinity some six months later and the same for the Millennium about three months after the pod failure.

 

But was the FIX these last two times simple bearing replacement or something else? If there was something else that needed to be done, then it may not have been feasible to do an unscheduled dry dock the next week. (I sincerely don't know the answer to this question)

 

 

but there is definitely a higher probability of failure when a ship has gone beyond what its maximum historical range between pod failures.

 

a. How do you know this? Do you have any evidence or is it simply a matter of logical reasoning?

 

b. Even if there is a higher probability that their is an increased probability of failure at some point, the increase in probability for each individual cruise will not be great.

 

I'm not trying to minimize people's need to be aware. However, I would hate to see somebody feel unduly safe because a ship had a bearing replaced 6 months before. I'd also hate to see them feel unduly concerned because a ship hasn't had a bearing replaced in 18 months. In both cases, there is a slim but notable possibility of pod problems for their particular cruise. I don't think the probabilities would be markedly different (say, less than a 5% difference). In BOTH cases, the guest needs to weigh their "tolerance" for a disrupted cruise and make a decision accordingly.

[florisdekort]

Millennium

Pod failure on New Years 2007 cruise and again in January. (Note: ship continued to sail at reduced speed until dry dock in mid April 2007).

 

Thank you for the detailed overview. The above is the only in-accuracy I could find. January's POD problems were fixed in January. On my Transatlantic crossing, from Ft. Lauderdale to Southampton (the last cruise before the dry dock in Brest, France) Millennium sailed at her top speed, 24 knots (and sometimes even hit 25 knots).

 

To my understanding, January 2007 was also the last POD problem on record for a M-class ship. So far 2007 has been a good year (knock on wood...).

 

Floris

[Shirley and Les]

...Before I get jumped on, I know the "official explanation" for the lateness of the Infinity from Celebrity was the trade winds around the Hawaiian Islands with no mention of the fact that the pods were working at a reduced speed...

If you get jumped on too badly, you could point out the Summit was able to contend with the trade winds quite nicely without schedule delay while she was in the Hawaii to California service at the same time as the Infinity. We were on the Infinity on the last Hawaii cruise. During a bridge tour, the officer on duty said the only ship we had encountered was the Summit. I had to bite my tongue and not ask "Was she sailing at full speed?" :rolleyes:

Les