Carnival ship ...fire out..now adrift

[Jestocost]

I'm confused..I thought it was required if you were planning to visit a foriegn port?

Passports are not required by the U.S. for passengers on closed-loop cruises that start end end at the same U.S. port, and the usual Caribbean cruise ports do not require passports from cruise passengers. A passport would be required for cruises that are not closed-loop itineraries, cruises that sail out of a non-U.S. port and any cruises with stops in countries that do require a passport for entry.

 

[DMMarla07860]

Didn't the same thing happen to another carnival ship in like 2010 or 2011?

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

How can YOU not permit your friends from traveling with Carnival? Do they ask your permission before booking?

I have given them my opinion.and I guess they respect it, becuase none of them have sailed Carnival again.........Thank GOD!

I suggest DCL and RCL.

AKK

 

[Rogillio]

They add asked my opinion.and I guess they respect it, becuase none of them have sailed Carnival again.........Thank GOD!

I suggest DCL and RCL.

AKK

Kinda like drinking and driving....."Friends don't let friends sail on Carnival." ?

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Didn't the same thing happen to another carnival ship in like 2010 or 2011?

Good Day,

The Carnival Spendour had a major fire off the MR., poorly handled per the inverstigation.........towed to San deiago, I think 5 days.

The Costa Allergo. owned by Carnival Inc, had another Major fire.........vessel being scrapped.

The QMII, owned by Canivail and a very similiar electrical system had a Major Fire, but due to the better trained crew the fire was contained.

The Carnival Extacy........aft

Those fires off the top of my head.

AKK

 

[Rogillio]

Didn't the same thing happen to another carnival ship in like 2010 or 2011?

I have the same recollection.....can't remember the details but this sure seems like deja vu all over again.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Regardless of the fact that Carnival seems to be having a lot of headline making problems over the past several years. This sort of incident can happen on any ship, of any age, from any cruise line, at any time. As PP mentioned, because of the much larger fleet, statistically it is more likely to happen on Carnival than Disney, but that doesn't mean it can't or won't happen just because it is "Disney"

The point is these fires and incidents keep happening over and over to Carnival line and Carnival Inc line vessels, which shows a pattern. You are correct it can and does happen to any vessel, but the facts show if you add in vessels from.......like RCCL, NCL and others ..........DCL as well, it doesn't seem to be happened to them or at least near as much. This adds up to many vessels, like carnivail Inc.

PS. I am not talking about minor smoke/fires.

AKK

 

[lbgraves]

Talk about guardian angels. My grandmother and cousin just got off that boat on Thursday. ...

Have they mentioned to you that there were any issues on their cruise? Wondering since comments on one of the articles claims that the ship had issues two cruises before this one saying something was "broken".

 

[DMMarla07860]

Good Day,

The Carnival Spendour had a major fire off the MR., poorly handled per the inverstigation.........towed to San deiago, I think 5 days.

The Costa Allergo. owned by Carnival Inc, had another Major fire.........vessel being scrapped.

The QMII, owned by Canivail and a very similiar electrical system had a Major Fire, but due to the better trained crew the fire was contained.

The Carnival Extacy........aft

Those fires off the top of my head.

AKK

Yeah I remember Carnival Spendour, first thing that came to mind lol

 

[TifffanyD]

Thank God everyone is ok and they are towing her to the closest port.

These probems wit Carnivial line and Carnivail Inc just seem to continue and continue, over and over.

Last week it was the Destiny with mechcanical issues. The Trumph had mechcanical problems leaving Galveston and now a fire.

IMHO and many of those in the Maritime insdustry, see a patten here and not a good one.

Seems we should be asking why Carnival can offer bargin basement cruises?

Bescuase they dont seem to be putting money into their vessels operation and maintiance. If you read the carnivail bogs, alot of the passingers are seeing their perks and services being reducing/illiminated.

I repeat, after years at sea, I will not permit my family and friends to sail Carnivail, now more then ever due to many MAJOR incidents and safety issues.

AKK

How do you stop them? Dependents I can see but friends? Do you tie them up?

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

How do you stop them? Dependents I can see but friends? Do you tie them up?

I have given them my opinion and I guess they respect it, becuase none of them have sailed Carnival again.........Thank GOD!

I suggest DCL and RCL.

AKK
Today 09:48 AM

 

[TifffanyD]

I have given them my opinion and I guess they respect it, becuase none of them have sailed Carnival again.........Thank GOD!

I suggest DCL and RCL.

AKK
Today 09:48 AM

OK so you don't suggest it.


I haven't done RCCL but I loved our NCL cruise a ton. I also liked our Carnival cruise - there was a thing or 2 I thought they did better than DCL and of course things they did worse.

Altho DCL does not have all these fire/engine troubles... I have gotten sick on about 70% of the cruises I've taken with them.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

OK so you don't suggest it.


I haven't done RCCL but I loved our NCL cruise a ton. I also liked our Carnival cruise - there was a thing or 2 I thought they did better than DCL and of course things they did worse.

Altho DCL does not have all these fire/engine troubles... I have gotten sick on about 70% of the cruises I've taken with them.

To each thier opinions.........but my point is more that none of the other major lines have had these problems....its not just about DCL. Its about many fires, incidents and problems with Carnivail line and Carinival Inc. vessls.

I won't take my families safety over a less expensive cruise.

AKK

 

[ilovetexas]

Good Day,

The Carnival Spendour had a major fire off the MR., poorly handled per the inverstigation.........towed to San deiago, I think 5 days.

The Costa Allergo. owned by Carnival Inc, had another Major fire.........vessel being scrapped.

The QMII, owned by Canivail and a very similiar electrical system had a Major Fire, but due to the better trained crew the fire was contained.

The Carnival Extacy........aft

Those fires off the top of my head.

AKK

For once, I'm not going to argue the merits of Carnival with you! Not because there aren't any, but I think we have to agree to disagree.

However, the bolded statement isn't exactly accurate. Considering what they had to work with (especially on Splendor, where the CO2 system was faulty and the manual didn't match the system on the ship), the crew must have been pretty good if they kept everyone alive.

Let's not blame the crew when they put out the fires and kept the situation from getting FAR worse. My issue is not with the fire, that happens. Far more often than we realize.

http://www.cruiselawnews.com/articles/fires-1/

My issue is with a ship dead in the water when it was already having problems very recently. I'm not any more afraid to sail on Carnival than I was last week or three years ago, but I think someone needs to take a look at what the heck is going on. I'm going back to Celebrity for my next cruise.

BTW, for anyone interested, while I don't think this is fun for anyone aboard, it's thankfully not as bad as the Splendor incident was, they've got electricity, fresh water, sewage system restored quickly in half the ship and they were/are working on the other half. Ecstasy arrived with supplies yesterday and Legend is headed there today to do same and take on a passenger who needs medical assist.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/11/travel/cruise-ship-fire/index.html

And Tiffany D - we've gotten sick on 100% of our DCL cruises!

 

[over50visits]

And they will take you through a hurricane.

Agreed! Put me adrift the last day of a cruise, "rescue" me the next day, refund my fare in full, and give me fare credit for another future cruise.

Or....choose to take me through a hurricane when other cruise lines wait for it to pass, and offer a 25% "credit" which is just like GT sales in the future anyway.

Let's see...which is better....just sayin'

 

[TifffanyD]

To each thier opinions.........but my point is more that none of the other major lines have had these problems....its not just about DCL. Its about many fires, incidents and problems with Carnivail line and Carinival Inc. vessls.

I won't take my families safety over a less expensive cruise.

AKK

Getting sick (more often than now) is a safety issue too...

Yeah Carnival def needs to clean up their (recent) act tho. I hope they straighten things out and this ends up a bad time in their past...

 

[Rogillio]

To each thier opinions.........but my point is more that none of the other major lines have had these problems....its not just about DCL. Its about many fires, incidents and problems with Carnivail line and Carinival Inc. vessls.

I won't take my families safety over a less expensive cruise.

AKK

Amen brother! Carnival is cheaper for a reason. Maybe becuase the only change the oil every 50,000 miles instead of every 10,000 miles.

Point being, profit margin is a funtion of operating expenses and if your sell your cruises cheaper than the other cruiselines it probably means you have cut costs somewhere...that is not visible to the consumer.

I've been thinking about why I like I think intuitively that a cruise line with fewer ships is safer and I think it has to do with the workload of the experts. Say each cruise line has to have a safety engineer on staff to inspect the ships. Say one safety enginner can handel 10 ships. Whether your cruiseline has 10 ships or 4 ships, you still need 1 safety engineer. But the safety engineer with only 4 ships has a lot more time to do his job than the one that has 10 ships to keep up with.

Disclaimer, I have no insight into cruise line operations. The above is purely conjecture and speculation.

 

[TifffanyD]

What if it was 1 engineer for every 4 ships? Then the 4-ship line has 1 and the 10-ship line has 3... giving it a ratio of 1 engineer for every 3 1/3 ships.

And what if that 1 engineer on the 4-ship line quits... who teaches the next guy?

Just sayin'


Moreso... I think the line with 10 ships has less to lose if one goes "belly up" (bad word choice...heh). They would lose 10% of profits (assuming all ships are equal)... vs the 4-ship line losing 25%. So the smaller line has more incentive to keep all ships operational and lining their pockets.

 

[ilovetexas]

Amen brother! Carnival is cheaper for a reason. Maybe becuase the only change the oil every 50,000 miles instead of every 10,000 miles.

Point being, profit margin is a funtion of operating expenses and if your sell your cruises cheaper than the other cruiselines it probably means you have cut costs somewhere...that is not visible to the consumer.

I've been thinking about why I like I think intuitively that a cruise line with fewer ships is safer and I think it has to do with the workload of the experts. Say each cruise line has to have a safety engineer on staff to inspect the ships. Say one safety enginner can handel 10 ships. Whether your cruiseline has 10 ships or 4 ships, you still need 1 safety engineer. But the safety engineer with only 4 ships has a lot more time to do his job than the one that has 10 ships to keep up with.

Disclaimer, I have no insight into cruise line operations. The above is purely conjecture and speculation.

Your point about profit margin is more than a little bit over-simplified, but let's not get into a lengthy discussion of net income, revenue and EBITDA.

You are also leaving out the concept of supply and demand (in relation to price) and the notion of movement along a demand curve vs. a shift in the demand curve. Supply and demand have a HUGE impact on cost and since there is no problem with demand for Carnival cruises, you are way out of line to suggest that they are compromising safety to earn money.


It's statements like this that irritate the crap out of Carnival fans on this board. If you want to complain that they have safety issues, go ahead. But to say "you probably have to cut your costs somewhere", implying that they intentionally compromise the safety of their guests in order to pad the bottom line is ridiculous.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

For once, I'm not going to argue the merits of Carnival with you! Not because there aren't any, but I think we have to agree to disagree.

However, the bolded statement isn't exactly accurate. Considering what they had to work with (especially on Splendor, where the CO2 system was faulty and the manual didn't match the system on the ship), the crew must have been pretty good if they kept everyone alive.

Let's not blame the crew when they put out the fires and kept the situation from getting FAR worse. My issue is not with the fire, that happens. Far more often than we realize.

http://www.cruiselawnews.com/articles/fires-1/

My issue is with a ship dead in the water when it was already having problems very recently. I'm not any more afraid to sail on Carnival than I was last week or three years ago, but I think someone needs to take a look at what the heck is going on. I'm going back to Celebrity for my next cruise.

BTW, for anyone interested, while I don't think this is fun for anyone aboard, it's thankfully not as bad as the Splendor incident was, they've got electricity, fresh water, sewage system restored quickly in half the ship and they were/are working on the other half. Ecstasy arrived with supplies yesterday and Legend is headed there today to do same and take on a passenger who needs medical assist.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/11/travel/cruise-ship-fire/index.html

And Tiffany D - we've gotten sick on 100% of our DCL cruises!

Hello again......


Nothing was ever personal on our debates.




I am NOT blaming the crews and never did! We can agree to disagree. Those fires are for the most part minor galley, closet fries and I have not been talking about them becuase those do happen.




1. The USCG report stated that the reason the fire on the QMII was smaller and better contained was due to the training of the crew. EI better then the Splendour.

I never said it was the crew fault. I siad the was poorly handled, EI.just what you pointed out..the spendour mechcanical systems not working and Ididnt know they didn't have the right plans onbroad, but that adds to my problems with Carnival Inc, and that also came from the USCG.

I have been involved on 3 major ship fires and have seen how crews react..........almost all have my respect and admiration that they put their lives on the line for thier vessel and shipmates...I NEVER said a bad word about Carnival INC.crews) except for the some of the officers on the Concordia)

My issue isn't with the crews, it with the way Carnival Line /Carnivail Inc. operates, maintains and the designs of some of thier vessels.

The part of the electrical systems (where the fires were) on a QMII(owned by Carnival Inc.), Spendour were expanded from a system for smaller vessels. The cause of the fire on the QMII was found in the investigtion and correction made to that vessels system and the USCG was asking Carnival Inc., why the corrections were not made to the other Carnival Inc., Spendour class vessels?

According to postings on the Carnival blogs,it seems the truimph has been having problem for a while.

As to the 2nd part of your post regarding the Trmuph. I totally agree with you all ways round.

AKK