AL3XCruise

Playing around, trying to learn a bit in LR today!  Azura and Royal Clipper in Barbados.

2 hours ago, masterdrago said:

I'll have an external PowerCore 21000 feeding the GP with the rig tethered for safety.

In addition to the power issue, you'll want to verify you have your storage configured properly.  I learned that the hard way when the formatting on my SD card resulted in everything being capped at 4GB!

12 hours ago, grandgeezer said:

We are really low maintenance when it comes to cabin stewards. All we ask of them is to do their jobs correctly and promptly. If they can't because they are spread to thin, that's not my problem, it's between them and their employer. To us it's not an acceptable excuse.

I agree that it is not an acceptable excuse, but I'd stop short of placing the blame on the steward.  They don't have a say in resource allocation, the management does.  Ultimately it comes down to tolerance among passengers; for the cruise line this is a money talks situation.  They will spread their manpower as thin as possible until the reduction in service triggers a loss of revenue.  But I doubt to many folks are interested in changing their plans because of the trash was only removed once per day.

For me, I want the room to be clean (no necessarily on specific schedule, just looking clean), I want to have ice, and I'd like any issues that arise addressed promptly.  I prefer that soap be filled, etc, but if it is rectified quickly I'm not going to complain.

8 hours ago, JamieLogical said:

I was thinking about actually direct booking an Aft Balcony this time for this reason.

That would be a great idea.  If you enjoy time on your balcony, an aft balcony is for you.  I don't recall the prime locations, but I can say they are great.  A big upgrade on any of the BA/BA+, but especially on BA and GA!

I've been on both, and they have a lot more in common than different.  Breakaway was loaded up to capacity when I was on it, Escape was at roughly double occupancy.  Because of this, its hard for me to really compare them as in addition to the BA feeling more crowded, I feel the staff was simply overworked and it showed in service quality.  Thus I had a better experience on Escape, but it isn't an apples to apples comparison.  But I certainly wouldn't call the BA old or run down; it is still a relatively new ship and maintained to the same standard as the Escape!

As someone who recently made the switch from cell phones and point and shoot cameras to DSLRs, I thought my experience might help.  Keep in mind I probably know less than the posters above!

If you just had the phone, I'd suggest an upgrade, but the SX720HS seems like a pretty capable camera based on its specs.  While it is true that a good DSLR is going to be technically more capable, not all of that capability is going to be used all the time.  For example, the large sensor and greater ISO range on a full frame DSLR will help at night, but if you aren't shooting much at night that doesn't matter.  The most important difference is the amount of configuration possible.

Some high-end P and S do have some options, but a DSLR really shines when you are thinking about settings and trying to optimize them.  This takes some research, experimentation, and experience.If that kind of process is something that interests you, an upgrade may be a good idea.  If you like taking pictures on automatic, a good phone or P and S camera can give good results.

Just for reference, I'm attaching two pictures I took from the same balcony.  On the left is a Canon 5D MKIII with a low quality 135mm  lens, the right is a Galaxy Note 8.  The galaxy would need a digital zoom to get in as close, which would lower picture quality.  I've never used the SX720HS would probably get closer to the 5D in terms of what it outputs due to its optical zoom and a sensor that is better than what Samsung uses.

I reduced both images to 40% of their original size because otherwise they are gigantic!  No other editing.  (Note: it looks like CC reduced them some more, but they are still correct relative to each other).

In summary:  I think you'll be happy with what you have, BUT if you want to try and learn more about photography and invest some time into taking some special shots, an upgrade would be worth considering.

Hope that helps!

7 hours ago, Redtravel said:

As a former marketing research analyst, the ad campaign is too directed. Any cruise line that heavily advertises one ship gives the impression that only that ship is the one to book.  Edge, edge, edge.

Very good point.

7 hours ago, Redtravel said:

The other thing that may scare people is the notion of a “Revolution” of the older ships.  It implies that the older ships are not good.  That is not true.  The message is wrong.

I also feel the pushing "revolution" so hard implies that the experience so many people are used to is going to be completely displaced by something else.  It makes long-time cruisers concerned about the product.  They may be able to employ a strategy that attracts new customers at the expense of repeat business on a single ship, but it seems very questionable to try that across the entire fleet!  People know new isn't always better, and change isn't always good.  Overemphasizing it makes them wonder what they are loosing.

7 hours ago, Redtravel said:

 It would be wiser to drop the prices, get the bookings, and wait for good reviews.

Its been a while so my terminology may be off, but I wonder if there is some "aspirational pricing" going on here.  I'd be curious what someone with experience in marketing thinks about that.  It seems that X is trying to make Edge look more premium by inflating the price.  If they have a firesale after final payment it ruins that image.  I know everyone talks about supply and demand, but cruise pricing isn't a perfect system where everyone can be charged their exact willingness to pay.  A slightly less than full ship with everyone paying these very high prices might still look quite good financially.

2 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

The worse the tablemates, the better the stories.  

The best one I have was when they demanded to be reassigned because they were the only people at the table staying in suites.  Apparently dining with the six balcony people at the table was beneath them.

On 4/12/2019 at 3:17 AM, Stateroom_Sailor said:

X could build more S-Class, though it would be seen backpedaling from Edge.  The controversial Quantum of the Seas led to increased focus on Oasis Class, and undoing concepts such as Dynamic Dining, which Oasis was drydocked for.

I don't know a ton about the supply chain for ship construction, but I'd guess there would be some costs associated with sourcing or replacing some older components.  X has also touted efficiency improvements on the Edge which would be at least partially lost by going backwards.  And of course, it would be horribly embarrassing given how Edge has been positioned at the core of X's future.  An Edge+ type ship that eliminates or modifies some of the controversial efforts seems far more likely and is a common strategy.

On 4/12/2019 at 3:17 AM, Stateroom_Sailor said:

I don't automatically trust that any business has run the numbers with Expansion.  It was one of Circuit City's major mistakes, trying to compete with Best Buy.  Just look at all of the Subways that are closing.

I agree there are tons of examples of strategic mistakes.  Some were due to arrogance and hubris, others factors that were totally unpredictable.  With regard to X, I think over-expansion in general is a bigger threat than reliance on Edge class.  Your building billion dollar assets with multi-year lead times assuming the market is going to support them for the next two decades or more.

6 hours ago, ipeeinthepool said:

For Celebrity, I guess the definition of failure will be the financial considerations.  If the Edge can't command premium prices for several years, I think they will call it a failure.

I agree it ultimately comes down to ROI.  I imagine the key indicator would be how does it compare to a theoretical new S-class ship, both in terms of increased revenues (both on fares and onboard sales) and reduced expenses.  In addition, X seems to be using Edge as a brand building tool.  If that works, it certainly adds some intangible value to the Edge.  

6 hours ago, ipeeinthepool said:

Others can disagree and perhaps even like some of these features.  But for me and apparently many others the new features just don't resonate for us and we won't pay the premium prices again.

I haven't been on the Edge, and I'm not in a hurry to go.  At the right price, sure, but cheaper options with better itineraries are still using very nice ships.  But I'm happy that some enjoy it; I just won't be joining them in the immediate future.

19 minutes ago, richsea said:

I realize that Cruise Critic member reviews may not be a complete picture, but in comparing Edge reviews to Equinox there is a definite difference in good or bad reviews.

Throwing out 3 star reviews as just ok, Edge has 320 reviews with 159 4 or 5 stars, & 68 with 1 or 2 stars.

Equinox has 2009 reviews with 1509 with 4 or 5 stars, & 82 with 1 or 2 stars

Its true that it shows issues impacting CC reviewers during the initial months of service.  And to be fair, those issues may be very important to some people.  To be honest, I'm not looking to go on the Edge anytime soon.  But how many of these issues are due to irreparable flaws in the ship?

Early reviews were very negative, the average has risen since.  Eden and IVs are still divisive, but part of the problem may be how X pitched them and failed to set expectations of current cruisers.  It is really hard to figure out the long-term picture across all the target markets given this.

As long as X feels they can charge enough cash to get the return they want, they will build the ship.  And they have a lot better information than we do.

1 hour ago, Stateroom_Sailor said:

Easily refuted with better data, which I assume you have?

I need to agree with @Oville.  Not having better data doesn't make bad data valid.  Certainly the number of negative reviews raise questions, but its hard to draw any conclusions that would be useful in planning business decisions.

Obviously X has a lot more data than any of us, and they feel that another Edge class ship makes sense.  It could have more to do with adding capacity on a specific schedule than any grand endorsement of the Edge, and it is possible the ship will be heavily modified.  Building another Edge is faster and cheaper than an all-new design, and probably easier than trying to build a new S-class based ship. 

The point is, X sees another Edge class as the best move ROI-wise.  That doesn't mean everyone will like it, just that it will probably make money!

17 hours ago, lisiamc said:

Sometimes, strangers do care.  A few years ago, I had someone ask me, in tones of great (false) concern, if my bags had been lost “because I always see you wearing the same thing.”  I had my bags, and I wore different things.  He was just a nasty so-and-so.  

I would have asked him if he was lost... seems like he inadvertently ended up in your business.

It is one thing if this was a friendly tease by friends or family, but it amazes me someone you don't know would make such a statement!  Normally you need to go on the internet to get treated like that! 😉

Based on whats been reported, it sounds like those on upcoming cruises shouldn't worry.  One benefit of having three pods is that loosing one does not substantially reduce the cruising speed; the schedule adjustments that have been posted seem modest.

3 hours ago, rcclmiami said:

The center “fixapod” was out of service.

Allure has three azipods.  Fixipods were on some older RCI ships.  Though I suppose if the azimuthing broke, it could be operated as one!

3 hours ago, hallux said:

For those suggesting there may be a cancellation for a dry dock repair, that will be a challenge.  Apparently, the only facility in the Western hemisphere that can do any kind of "dry" repair on propulsion pods on a ship the size of Allure is Dry Dock 2 in Freeport. 

Plus, we don't know what is wrong, so it may be an issue that can be done without a dry dock.  But I agree, it is likely they will wait if it requires several days and/or a dry dock.  I imagine both RCI and most passengers would rather see 30 to 60 minute adjustments in port times than a cancellation.

13 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Of course, there may be legitimate foundation, government, NGO et al. university auxiliaries or partners sponsoring a campus research endeavor and, thus, providing survey mechanisms housed in other than an ".EDU" environment.

Nonetheless, the absence of .EDU in a link mentioning a higher ed STUDENT project remains a clear "red flag" indicator that something may be very much AMISS. Add to that a seemingly casual request by a purported graduate student unscientifically posed to CC forum participants only serves to wave that "red flag" more vigorously.

I know your effort here is to protect people, which I support 100%.  However, I think your assumptions may be a bit broad.  I did not see the original post, so there may have been other red flags, but these are my thoughts.

First, many universities use survey websites and statistical packages that reside on the company's domain, not the university.  In addition, depending on the scope of the project and how the university operates, students may choose or be required to use a third party service.  So rather than dismissing a .com or .net address, I'd suggest checking that the domain corresponds to a reputable survey or statistical firm.

Second, depending on the project scope, there are lots of unscientific studies.  For a single class project it is often not practical or cost effective to collect proper data, and in many cases it doesn't matter.  An MBA candidate taking a statistics course is being taught how to manipulate and interpret data; the actual findings don't go beyond the course.  If the purpose of collection is a thesis or a research project with broader applications, your point becomes much more relevant.  But that is less common.

I think we can all agree that 1) awareness is important and everyone should be cautious, 2) people have the right to completely ignore surveys for any reason, and 3) CC has the right to limit solicitation on this website no matter its form or purpose.  I would never encourage someone to take a chance on a potentially harmful link.  But if someone really wants to try and I help, I think your points may be more appropriately termed "yellow flags" worthy of further investigation.

6 hours ago, dileep said:

Borrego Springs, CA

 

 

 

What lens are you using for those?  Beautiful close-ups!

12 minutes ago, fsjosh said:

So why go to San Juan? They were less than 100 miles from Florida at Freeport. They could have swung by any of those ports if they needed some theoretical resupply. 

I haven't seen anything credible saying they are going to San Juan, just that they are sailing near San Juan, which may be due to North Atlantic Weather.  A straight shot from San Juan to Spain keeps them south of whats being forecast later this week.

45 minutes ago, OhioCraig said:

She could be taking a southerly route across the Atlantic to avoid possible storms.  I haven't had the chance to look at weather forecasts for the north Atlantic.

That seems the most likely explanation; looks like low pressure moving across the North Atlantic, it may be as simple as they want  to remain south of it.  

18 knots makes it sound like she has at least two working pods, and quite possibly all three.

16 minutes ago, twangster said:

If, and that is a big if, they had to take her out of service for additional bookings then analysts would update their guidance.  

True, but I have a feeling analysts would be waiting for something more concrete than an unusual routing or an unexpected stop before taking action.  I can't speak to the cruise industry, but when I have worked with financial companies in other industries most seemed to avoid extensive analysis of raw operational data as they didn't have the expertise on staff to really understand it and/or they realized there were too many other variables at play to make an accurate determination.  Prompt questions, sure, but I highly doubt you'd see downgrades or sales.

16 hours ago, phissy said:

Since we are sailing, we should go with the jargon. This how I remember.

Left and port both have 4 letter.  Starboard is the “right” side.  Facing forward.

So, Statue of Liberty is on the port side of ship.

Regardless of term you use, the Statue of Liberty is on the right or starboard side of the ship when departing Manhattan.

4 hours ago, CruisingFox27 said:

Thanks for the tips, looking forward to sailing out of NYC in Oct of this year. Based on this information, I think we'll watch from the front.

My favorite option is a view near the stern, so you can see SoL and Manhattan together as you go down the river.

Views from the NCL Escape after leaving Manhattan.

Still playing with astro photos.  This is Bode's Galaxy, about 12 million light years away.  Not the greatest capture or editing job, but its the first galaxy picture I've taken that looks like a galaxy!  About an 18 minute exposure.

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

The fact that they took the ship out of the dock relatively quickly makes me believe there was no major damage, if any, to the pods. 

Are the pods designed to break away to avoiding damaging the hull, or is that not practical given the amount of force they operate under?

4 hours ago, ipeeinthepool said:

The force to support the ship will be the same even if the dry dock is pushed farther under water. 

4 hours ago, ipeeinthepool said:

More force is required to push it farther under water.  If the dry dock went farther under water due  to the weight of the ship, there would be an increased force imparted on the ship.

.

I think you are making two assumptions, first that the drydock was pushed lower but still retained its normal buoyancy, and second that the force remains the same as the dock/ship sink lower into the water.

The drydock was already floating and supporting some of the weight of the ship, with the Oasis's hull picking up the rest.  In order for that balance to be upset something would need to change.  No one has suggested Oasis sprung a leak and rapidly gained weight, so it seems like the fault is with the dock. 

If the buoyancy of the dock decreased, everything would start to settle.  This seems to be what happened, though we don't know why.  So its not an instance of pushing something underwater, its that the thing underwater isn't pushing back hard enough!

Keep in mind the deeper the combo sinks the forces will be reduced; the hull of the Oasis is now deeper in the water and thus has more buoyancy and is less reliant on the dock for support.

Of course, with everything shifting and the ship possibly leaving its blocks it is possible specific parts of the ship and dock came into contact that weren't intended too, and forces at those points could exceed what they were designed for causing damage.  Unfortunately with no real information from RCI or the shipyard, we can only speculate what if anything might have suffered this fate.  

On 4/3/2019 at 7:18 PM, loyalGTfan said:

Any comments would be appreciated! We have both cruised once before years ago. Right now we like the entertainment options better on the Bliss, but like the spa package on the Solstice in aquaclass. We are early thirties, like to enjoy fine dining, piano style cocktail bars, and look forward to seeing some great shows!

NCL is known for entertainment, and they have a lot of options from big main theater shows to dinner shows and plenty of live entertainment around the ship.  Celebrity entertainment is less varied, and the main theater shows will probably not be as impressive.  Celebrity does have entertainment around the ship, but probably fewer options on a given night.  Both will have some kind of a piano bar, though Celebrity will probably be a bit more subdued and classy.

I don't know what your budget is, but Bliss does have a very nice Spa you can purchase passes to.

On 4/3/2019 at 7:51 PM, SantaFeFan said:

Dining on Celebrity is superior to NCL, which has a reputation for having some of the worst food in the industry. Even the food in Celebrity's main dining rooms, included in the base fare, is usually better than NCL's extra cost specialty restaurants.

Both the Celebrity and NCL boards frequently complain of declining food quality.  My most recent NCL cruise had surprisingly good food, and the specialty restaurants were better than anything I've had on Celebrity in the MDR.  However, I think NCL suffers from some variations, whereas Celebrity tends to deliver more consistently.

12 hours ago, dkjretired said:

A big difference for us is the smoking policy,   Celebrity does not allow any indoor smoking including casino, veranda's or staterooms.  Every NCL ship I have been on was like a chimney including the casino.

The earlier Breakaway class ships were pretty bad because the casino opened to a three story atrium in the center of the ship.  I believe bliss has enclosed indoor smoking areas and reduced exterior ones.  Neither Celebrity nor NCL allow smoking on veranda or in staterooms.

I would agree that all things being equal, Bliss will feel more crowded.  In addition, if you want to relax by a pool, Solstice has an indoor Solarium.  Bliss has an indoor pool in both the Haven and Spa, but both of those will cost you extra.

Given the general vibe on Celebrity, I'd lean towards Solstice, but it isn't as cut and dry as people make it sound.  Celebrity is probably my go to line, but there are positives with NCL.  I think you'd find something enjoyable on both ships, just different.  Have fun!

On 4/2/2019 at 11:00 AM, Peachypooh said:

So I understand...

On 4/2/2019 at 11:45 AM, don't-use-real-name said:

Yes it is ever so difficult to understand the rules protocol of what is all inclusive and what is left outside

like a hanging dangling particle as extra such as tips.

I understand as well.  Of course, I see two types of posts on CC.  The first is people who post about their DSC/tip confusion to try and help others.  I respect these people because 1) they accept responsibility and 2) they try to turn their problem into a positive by helping future cruisers avoid the confusion and frustration they faced

The second is people who post to complain.  These people effectively abdicate their responsibility to understand what they are buying, then refuse to admit that fact when they ultimately discover the truth.  They insist that the marketing is duplicitous, even illegal.

In a perfect world, I would like to see the DSC included or, at least, listed as an item like port taxes when you book.  But anytime I'm spending the kind of money a cruise costs I make sure to read the fine print and do some additional research.  There are a lot of industries that get creative in terms of what the advertised vs out the door price is.  I once looked at a car that was advertised at a price that already included five different rebates on it.  Some were mutually exclusive (new customer rebate and loyalty rebate, for instance).  A little asterisk led to the "not all rebates may apply."  It is annoying, but it is reality, and people need to keep their eyes open!

I'm a bit more sympathetic when folks work through TAs.  I think every TA should make it clear what the DSC is and how it works; after all, they are supposed to be working for you.  Of course, accusing a cruise line of nefarious practices when your TA knew but didn't disclose them doesn't make sense.

7 hours ago, villauk said:

Viking are used to this design in their river cruise ships and so are very familiar with the concept, yet didn’t apply it to any of their new builds over the last few years (when they diversified into ocean cruising). Does that not say something?

River and ocean cruising are different markets, and the ships serving them are very different designs.  The fact Viking didn't choose to use an IV concept may simply be that they didn't want to take on the technical risk.  Celebrity has repeatedly said that the IVs required substantial innovation in structural design when compared to other cruise ships, and there were both financial and time costs associated with this.  With Viking trying to start up an entirely new business, they had enough risks to mitigate and learning curves to climb.  Thus, the decision may have been as simple as not wanting to add complexity.  

4 hours ago, hcat said:

I think the structure of the ship may have dictated the balcony  and IV situation...

What I've read suggests the ships structure was dictated by the desire to incorporate the IVs.  Major structural components were moved deeper into the superstructure.  This is the reason given as to why M and S class ships cannot be retrofitted to include IVs (at least not on a large scale).  I would surmise going the other way is more likely: with the structural components deep inside the ship, modifications to the outer walls to incorporate a more traditional balcony might be possible.  I have a feeling the Apex will be all but identical to the Edge, but the next two hulls might see changes.  I wouldn't want to bet on it though!

Given what I've seen on CC, IVs seem popular enough to justify their existence.  I wonder, however, if it was unwise to build a ship with so many IVs, especially with it intended primarily for tropical destinations.  I guess booking statistics and guest surveys will determine how many IVs will be on post Edge-class ships (as well as RCI ships).

4 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

Too few recognize that 'included' isn't the same as 'free'.  I had a poster here who was very insistent that her drinks were 'free' because the cruise line was paying for them.

I'm always entertained by the number of folks that think that way.  Though, I suppose, if the total value of drinks consumed exceeds the total profit the line is making from your fair and onboard spending, you might be able to claim that.  You also might need to be rolled off the ship...

34 minutes ago, willde said:

This might already be known, and reflected in the current cancellations.  Of course, many projects of that scope entail logistics for which delays are practically expected yet unknown.  For the vast majority of us here, knowing exactly what the damage is would be fairly useless in predicting how long repairs will take, and RCL will probably not disclose that publicly.  But I do understand the interest to know more, and am hopeful the Jun 9 sailing isn't affected.  

Figuring what workflow will minimized downtime is definitely complex on a project that large!  I'm sure folks are trying to asses what needs to be done now, what will be done in Spain, what can be deferred until later drydockings, if anything unrelated should be added because they will have the resources to knock it out, etc.  Any drydocking must amazing to view from the management side, with hundreds, if not thousands of individual tasks being done on something bigger than a city block, some interrelated and some not... and then add in some unfortunate new variables...

I imagine the schedule could be in flux for several days at least.  Hopefully additional disruption is minimized and a maximum amount of notice is provided if changes become necessary.  I am glad there were no life threatening injuries reported.  I can't imagine being in a cofferdam when things started shifting!

10 hours ago, azalea4va said:

Let me re-word the narrative, as in my limited cruise experience I have met many hard working staff that I do not want to hurt.  But I am a consumer advocate and there are many businesses out there that have practices that are very consumer unfriendly.  In general, the cruise industry falls into this category. Almost any cruise line will promote that "customer satisfaction" is our utmost priority, yet certain bean-counters in the company will resort to any trick in the books to maximize profits.  Sometimes the bean counters win.

I understand that you were looking for suggestions and may not have been familiar with how the DSC impacts the staff; there are plenty of threads discussing how it is calculated, how cash tips may or may not be better, etc.  Its an active discussion.  I personally don't decrease it, but I think even those folks who consider it would agree it should only be done for on-board issues.

As far as unfriendly marketing?  It is growing.  When making an expensive purchase it pays to thoroughly research.  I have joked  NCL's corporate logo should be an asterisk, because you need to be on alert for them when reading their promotions.  But the information is out there and not too hard to find.  And for some people, the promotions work out very well, asterisk and all!  You just need to carefully look at what is best for you.