NCL Breakaway to have Fireworks

[woody73]

Originally Posted by Rogillio

Always a good thing when the competition is following you (not leading).

NCL began operations in 1966.

Woody

[kaseyC]

Originally Posted by woody73

NCL began operations in 1966.

Woody

[Capt_BJ]

the only 'approvals' I'm aware of for a cruise ship to launch fireworks would come from their insurance company. As a CG Cutter Commanding Officer working the Carib' I was aware of no law or regulation prohibiting the launching of fireworks at sea - so long as they would not be mistaken for marine distress flares and even then jurisdiction is questionable). Plenty of private boat owners shoot off fireworks at night.

ALL ships already carry a quantity of pyrotechnics - another name for safety and signaling flares (let's not even open the issue of ammunition) IMO and SOLAS already cover storage for those materials on cruise ships. DCL simply wanted to carry more. BTW, don't forget DCL stopped fireworks for a time, after they set their ship on fire (a boo boo) Hence the new launch system?

Disney got approval from LLoyds in my opinion ... and probably pursued it mostly because they have a LARGE in house fireworks production capability - they could do fireworks at sea at less cost then other cruise lines. Don't they launch/make more annually than any other company therefore their cost was minimal? Possibly something like the half truth they tell {told} about being the only ship with approval for yellow lifeboats. Yes they petitioned IMO for a change which was approved. Nothing stopped others from doing it B4 - no one else saw the need. Today a bunch of ships have yellow lifeboats.

I like DCL ... but sometimes their PR department is a bit overly creative for my liking ...

[Rogillio]

Originally Posted by woody73

NCL began operations in 1966.

Woody

And for over 50 years they did not have fireworks. LOL

DCL has taken away 4 cruiseship's worth of passengers from the other cruise lines. Actually, that's not true. Many are like me and cruising never even on the radar till DISNEY got involved and now we've cruised a oxen times on DCL, NCL and HAL.

[Rogillio]

Originally Posted by Capt_BJ

the only 'approvals' I'm aware of for a cruise ship to launch fireworks would come from their insurance company. As a CG Cutter Commanding Officer working the Carib' I was aware of no law or regulation prohibiting the launching of fireworks at sea - so long as they would not be mistaken for marine distress flares and even then jurisdiction is questionable). Plenty of private boat owners shoot off fireworks at night.

ALL ships already carry a quantity of pyrotechnics - another name for safety and signaling flares (let's not even open the issue of ammunition) IMO and SOLAS already cover storage for those materials on cruise ships. DCL simply wanted to carry more. BTW, don't forget DCL stopped fireworks for a time, after they set their ship on fire (a boo boo) Hence the new launch system?

Disney got approval from LLoyds in my opinion ... and probably pursued it mostly because they have a LARGE in house fireworks production capability - they could do fireworks at sea at less cost then other cruise lines. Don't they launch/make more annually than any other company therefore their cost was minimal? Possibly something like the half truth they tell {told} about being the only ship with approval for yellow lifeboats. Yes they petitioned IMO for a change which was approved. Nothing stopped others from doing it B4 - no one else saw the need. Today a bunch of ships have yellow lifeboats.

I like DCL ... but sometimes their PR department is a bit overly creative for my liking ...

Really!? You think a $55 billion dollar company buys insurance? My guess is they are self insured like most billion dollar companies. They may pay an administrator of their insurance but they are the underwriter and carry the risk on their books.

[insureman]

Originally Posted by Rogillio

Really!? You think a $55 billion dollar company buys insurance? My guess is they are self insured like most billion dollar companies. They may pay an administrator of their insurance but they are the underwriter and carry the risk on their books.

Risk management would not carry that type of liability for even a company such as Disney. Although the probability of a major loss (including property and bodily injury claims) is small the monetary risk of such a loss is tremendous. I believe the Captain is correct that most likely they're insured by Lloyds with a big big big deductible for self insurance to take care of.

[Capt_BJ]

if self insured (which I do not agree with)

then who did they need approval from?

do you think the Costa Concordia was insured?

btw while Disney is HUGE, isn't DCL a sep' company ... perhaps to separate liability?

[Rogillio]

Originally Posted by Capt_BJ

if self insured (which I do not agree with)

then who did they need approval from?

do you think the Costa Concordia was insured?

btw while Disney is HUGE, isn't DCL a sep' company ... perhaps to separate liability?

US Coast Guard for loading the pyrotechnic devices (gun powder) on the ship at Port Canaveral? IDK.

I can see DCL wanting to retire risk if possible....but I do NOT see them taking a risk like this if they thought it was a credible risk. If the ship sank, no insurance company could cover the loss better than the Disney Corp. if there was a misfire and some got injured or burned, the cost to Disney is nothing.....hundred million at best.

[chateau]

Originally Posted by Rogillio

Many are like me and cruising never even on the radar till DISNEY got involved and now we've cruised a oxen times on DCL, NCL and HAL.

sometimes computers make what we're trying to say rather comedic!

[moomy-san]

Originally Posted by chateau

sometimes computers make what we're trying to say rather comedic!

Is that more or less than a gaggle? I've cruised a gaggle of times.

[Capt_BJ]

Originally Posted by Rogillio

US Coast Guard for loading the pyrotechnic devices (gun powder) on the ship at Port Canaveral? IDK.

I can see DCL wanting to retire risk if possible....but I do NOT see them taking a risk like this if they thought it was a credible risk. If the ship sank, no insurance company could cover the loss better than the Disney Corp. if there was a misfire and some got injured or burned, the cost to Disney is nothing.....hundred million at best.

I was in the CG when DCL began operations and stationed in Port Canaveral - the amounts they load and what they load don't fall under 'explosives' and there is no CG inspection or oversite of any loading of DCL ships other than the regular inspections for security that I am aware of .... they have an approved loading plan that ANY ship could also get. Like I said - all cruise ships already carry an amount of pyro . . .

Nice guess tho ....

this one

I can see DCL wanting to retire risk if possible....but I do NOT see them taking a risk like this if they thought it was a credible risk. If the ship sank, no insurance company could cover the loss better than the Disney Corp. if there was a misfire and some got injured or burned, the cost to Disney is nothing.....hundred million at best

I don't follow at all . . .

[Rogillio]

Originally Posted by chateau

sometimes computers make what we're trying to say rather comedic!

Lol, but I love my iPad. She corrects more than she uncorrects....:-). I think

[CrawfordMomof2]

Originally Posted by lilpooh108

Thank you for being kind. I usually don't respond to the snark on these threads but that guy's comment really got to me. I try not to judge other people's parenting choices because I don't personally know their circumstance. I always wonder why people think that they can judge.

It's wonderful that your family is willing to compromise to make the experience great for your 7 year old. My DD has gone through some occupational therapy during her lifetime and we've spent alot of time with kids with different needs. Although I can't imagine the challenges your family has faced, I can relate just a bit. Good luck to you and have a great time on your cruise!

I feel the same way about other people's parenting choices. It drives me CRAZY when people have tried to tell me how to raise my children. If you don't know my circumstances, and my beliefs about raising my children,than please keep your ideas to yourself. What works for one child will not work for another.

Thank-you by the way for your understanding also. I'm glad to live in a time that Autism is starting to be understood, but some people still don't understand, or even want to for that matter. I don't need everyone feeling sorry for us, but a little bit of understanding goes a long way.

Last summer my husband's employer paid for everyone to go to a theme park by our house as a thank-you for 25 years of production. We went not knowing that the train had a real horn, and boy o boy was Hunter freaked out. He was covering his ears, shaking and crying. So I did what any Mommy would do which was hold him, and try to calm him down. He is big for his age and I have a hard time carrying him. We got him into a quiet restroom, and he calmed down, so all is well. But what kills me is the dirty looks that people felt the need to give us..... I have never been so ticked off in my life!

The good news is that that was one of our bad days. He is usually a happy7 year old boy. We are still working on him socializing, but one day at a time.

Anyway, I'm done with my rant. Thanks again for your understanding! You are very much appreciated!

[Rogillio]

Originally Posted by Capt_BJ

I was in the CG when DCL began operations and stationed in Port Canaveral - the amounts they load and what they load don't fall under 'explosives' and there is no CG inspection or oversite of any loading of DCL ships other than the regular inspections for security that I am aware of .... they have an approved loading plan that ANY ship could also get. Like I said - all cruise ships already carry an amount of pyro . . .

Nice guess tho ....

this one

I can see DCL wanting to retire risk if possible....but I do NOT see them taking a risk like this if they thought it was a credible risk. If the ship sank, no insurance company could cover the loss better than the Disney Corp. if there was a misfire and some got injured or burned, the cost to Disney is nothing.....hundred million at best

I don't follow at all . . .

This was about self insurance. I should have said DCL could sell some risk, not retire it. DCL is worth 8X what Loyds is worth so they can only insure Disney up to their worth. make sense?

[woody73]

Originally Posted by Rogillio

. . . Many are like me and cruising never even on the radar till DISNEY got involved and now we've cruised a oxen times on DCL, NCL and HAL.

Bull perhaps?

Woody