AL3XCruise

4 hours ago, Paphillyguy said:

I did not say anything about you not knowing how to best use the snow room.  Just stating my observations from trip.  

No worries, that was in reference to the other post I quoted.  Sorry if it was confusing, and glad you enjoyed the snow room!

8 minutes ago, Paphillyguy said:

I loved the snow room and found it to be heavily used.  The salt room for me did nothing but it seemed to be in use a lot. 

6 minutes ago, BNBR said:

This is the experience I had as well. Snow room got plenty of use.

I can only report my personal preferences and observations from a few hours a day on a single cruise.  If people are enjoying the snow room, that is great.  I just didn't appreciate the implication I was wrong because I "didn't know" how to use it; I'm glad others find it useful.

4 hours ago, BNBR said:

It's too bad you and OP didn't know what the snow room was for. They really should have instructions. 

 

In Norway, it's popular to step out of the sauna and either jump in the freezing water or walk outside in the snow. Just for a short time. Then back in to the sauna. 

Just sharing my impressions, there is no need to assume we are ignorant.  I'm well aware of the intended use, but it didn't do anything for me.  The fact is I didn't have a use for it, and judging by how few people ever entered, not many others did either.  That doesn't mean people won't appreciate it.

45 minutes ago, Jessieasanders said:

The other rooms felt more like a novelty ... we spent a few mins in the salt room and the snow room, but once we checked it out once we didn’t use them again.

 I agree; the pool and the quiet lounging area was the attraction.  The sauna and steam room seemed to have some activity, but virtually everything else seemed empty whenever I looked in.  The snow room was interesting, but it felt more like a nicely decorated freezer with a thin layer of compacted snow.  I didn't really enjoy the odor in the salt room.

46 minutes ago, Jessieasanders said:

The lounge chairs were hard to come by a few times we were there.  This was a disappointment. 

Do you mean the heated loungers?  Those were definitely at a premium!  Regular loungers seemed available all the time, though you might not get the location you want or be able to sit together if you had a group.

41 minutes ago, Jessieasanders said:

Much of our evening time was spent in The District.  My husband loves beer, so this was right up his alley.  I love live music, and JR the piano player did not disappoint.

We had many fun afternoons/evenings with JR in The District!

31 minutes ago, Jessieasanders said:

Unfortunatly the comedians weren’t all that great.  I wondered if it was due to the fact that we went to the early shows and there were a lot of young kids at those shows so the comedians had to keep it very G rated.

That's unfortunate.  Definitely noticed variations among the comedians on our cruise, but I felt they ranged from average to very good.  

32 minutes ago, Jessieasanders said:

The highlight of the entertainment was Choir of Man.  That was a fantastic show!

Liking COM may be the only thing CC board members don't argue about ;).

Thanks for the review.  Sounds like you had a great trip and brought back some fun memories!

45 minutes ago, slugg said:

Well the big one was the changes to the drink prices. This has since been “fixed,” except now the selection for sparkling wine is down to literally ONE, and it does not look good. The next step up is a price gouge. It’s mostly a non issue now, but my point is that NCL did this to begin with.

I doubt anyone is happy with the change, but to be fair I don't expect restaurants to maintain their pricing because I purchased a gift card.  I realize the issue is a bit different if it moves the price outside of the beverage package perk; I'll admit if I wanted a specific wine that I expected to be free was now going to cost something I'd be irritated, but I'd just try something else or pay extra.  If I felt NCL was making changes to often and to egregiously, I'd look elsewhere for a cruise.

48 minutes ago, slugg said:

The absolute first bait and switch was the price for the cruise itself. As someone new to NCL, I expected to pay taxes and a daily surcharge, but I didn’t expect to pay gratuity on “free” perks. Still, the actual dollar amount worked out for me, but I felt like the practice was dishonest and intentionally advertised one thing, but charged another.

I guess I've worked in a situations where legalese and fine print matters enough I immediately go looking for it on virtually any big purpose.  Still, I do understand why the policy upsets people.  I think its safe to say there is never going to be a consensus on this board about the practice, so discussing if it is ethical or not isn't a can of worms worth opening.  However, as I said before using an inflammatory term like bait and switch tends to bring out unsympathetic responses.  It also is kind of ironic to make an technically incorrect statement in an attempt to influence people because you are unhappy with a technically correct statement made by a company in an effort to influence people.  I'm not saying I don't respect your frustration or that you disagree with their marketing efforts, but when terms have potentially libelous connotations it is best to stay away from them.

57 minutes ago, slugg said:

I actually never lost any of my perks and I’ve been very happy with my travel agency. Zero issues there. Quite the contrary; they’ve been able to squeeze in extra value for me! I’ll definitely be using them again!

It sounds like they have done a lot of good, though I would have hoped they'd made you aware of the gratuities issue.  Regardless of your view on perks, they are what they are and I'd want a travel agent to make certain I know all applicable costs up front.

16 minutes ago, slugg said:

 

I honestly don’t understand why people defend NCL so much. 

I don't understand either sometimes.  There are plenty of issues where NCL is hardly blameless.  I appreciate you taking the time to expand on the issues you had.  It lets me (and others) understand which part of your experiences would impact  future decision making.

It sounds like regardless of these issues you have an exciting trip coming up, and I hope you have an opportunity to focus on the positives and enjoy the cruise fully!

20 hours ago, slugg said:

Since I booked my first ever NCL cruise, I’ve been bait-and-switched four times. Meaning, what I signed up and paid for is not what I’m getting due to policy changes, with no reasonable recourse. This has never happened to me with any other company, cruise line or otherwise.

Could you please provide some details?  I've seen some other posts from you that seemed positive, so I was surprised to see this.

As mentioned by others, bait and switch has a very narrow definition and it tends to be viewed negatively by a lot of people when it is used to broadly describe something you feel is unfair.  Not saying that something shady didn't happen or that you didn't experience bad service (I simply don't know at this point), just explaining this thread is drifting to a more negative tone.

If I remember correctly, you did upgrade and/or bid for this cruise, and as I understand that such changes can sometimes result in modification or loss of perks and deals.  Navigating that maze is probably one of the best arguments for a good TA.

There are also changes that just happen, some fair and others not so much.  If a safety review means the height requirement for go-carts changes, I totally get that.  Some kids may be disappointed, but if new information led to a new policy, that's all there is to it. 

Some other changes though can seriously impact the value of something you thought you were getting, and have no apparent rational other than profit maximization.  Regardless of what the cruise contract states, that sucks when it happens.

4 hours ago, Nic6318 said:

I agree that most of the people who complain do so because they haven't done their research. If they know something is going to be a certain way, then they have no reason to complain. It is when they "think" something is going to be a certain way and it isn't, that's when they feel they have been wronged. 

Indeed.  I think the most common cause of negative reviews are failure to research and exceptionally high expectations.  Either of those issues can cause an otherwise good experience to seem bad to certain people.

I also think that people need to recognize inconsistency plays a role.  Whatever the reason, sometimes things just feel off.  I had an NCL cruise with poor MDR service, marginal bar service, and one particular interaction with a crew member that was far outside the norm on any cruise line.  But that was one cruise... not one I look back on fondly.  After that experience I realized I could analyze, hypothesize, and complain, or I could go in with a positive attitude and try again.  The next NCL cruise was great!

10 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

No need, ever, to pay any Nicole’s or dimes. 

Personally, I never skip the gratuities, even when some of it is going to Nicole.  🙂

6 hours ago, MicCanberra said:

Well this conversation is getting interesting.

It seems like CC has chronic issue with someone making a post that is worded in a way that is open to interpretation, followed by someone assuming that said post is intended in the most hostile possible way.  It happens so much, I've run out of popcorn.

3 hours ago, ShillyShally said:

Exactly, though I likely wouldn't have read all that - I was certain it was a more egregious slight but I know we all have our own lines to be crossed!

The fact a brief thesis on quality management was written without discussion of the incident leads me to believe that the OP realized they wouldn't get much sympathy for the actual issue. 

17 hours ago, kennicott said:

including energy-saving hybrid engines (diesel generators and gas turbines

I have never heard of a gas turbine described as energy saving.  Emissions reducing, sure, but in what sense is it more efficient than a diesel?  Unless they mean some kind of turbine to recover energy from the exhaust?

1 hour ago, orville99 said:

I often chuckle at posters who throw six sigma terms around expecting that there is some mystical superiority that is achieved by companies that chase the six sigma mantra.

There are examples of good and bad implementations for sure, and six sigma at the expense of common sense is a big problem in some companies.  Data without understanding how it really relates to a business is useless. 

I'm sure we could trade examples of success and failures, but I think we'd both agree that customer service is one area where true six sigma falls flat.  You can't appease anyone with a process, and what it takes to make a customer happy sometimes isn't in the best interest of the company. 

I'm pretty sure RCI is well aware that mistakes such as the OP experienced happen.  However, the vast majority of cruisers are happy with the standard restitution.  The cost to eliminate those mistakes would dramatically exceed the cost of free vouchers, extra OBC, and the occasional lost customer.  Lets face it, just as you can use data to improve customer service, you can use it to determine the point of maximum efficiency. 

3 hours ago, TTraub1250 said:

This higher level of culture & training does cost a little more ( investment ), yet the payback is almost immediate with the ROI at 5X-10X the investment $. Most world class companies will have a written marketing strategy. 

So because you haven't seen internal documents, you are assuming they don't exist?  And what is your basis on ROI other than observations made in other industries (and likely by individuals motivated to make TQM efforts look good).  I'm not saying the concepts are bad, but improvement that doesn't provide a return is a waste of resources.  Unless someone here has access to detailed customer data from RCI, I think they are in a better position than we are to determine what is best long term. 

Long term, if they are wrong, well... then they will need to deal with that.  And if they are right, we need to deal with it or find some other place to spend our vacation dollars.

There is a marginal cost, but it is probably negligible in most cases.  Regardless, I'm sure it is computed and a bid in that range (if even permitted) would not be accepted.  Remember it isn't like the crew is reduced or part of the spa is shut down for one undersold cruise.  NCL is paying the spa staff, haven staff, etc.  The maintenance and upkeep of those facilities goes on.

The bidding process is the method NCL has determined is best to extract the maximum amount of cash from the customer.  A lot of statistical analysis has been conducted to determine what bids are accepted when.  The exact methods are not disclosed.

13 hours ago, spookwife said:

they are marketing it.  to CHINA.  

12 hours ago, CruisingNole said:

As a marketing professional, I would market the ship to the market that will actually be buying tickets

I agree.  Why spend money touting a ship in a region it won't sail in for several years, if ever?  I'm sure that RCI evaluated the number of US/European travelers it expects to get and determined there wasn't a good ROI on a marketing campaign.

If/when the ship moves to a western targeted route, its is likely it will undergo major modifications at that time (see NCL's Joy refurbishment) in order to make sure it is competitive.  I'm sure they will bombard the target market with news of the upgrades and improvements should that come to pass.

6 hours ago, smilz said:

Balcony looks large in pics. View...meh. I'm wondering about noise/vibrations from aft engines. Thoughts?

Keep in mind vibration that far aft is likely due to the props, not the engines.  As @Host Clarea said, it will be most prominent during maneuvering.  It is possible that if the ship needs to make frequent steering corrections (such as in inclement weather) more vibrations may be apparent than usual when out to sea.  One of the negatives of azipods.  Seeing as none of the other posters have mentioned a vibration issue, the Freedom Class may handle this problem better than some other ships.

I doubt you'd hear any propulsion-related noise other than the wake.  Noise from other venues around the cabin can always be an issue.

Given the choice, I almost always pick an aft balcony.  Great view, normally a larger balcony, and I don't mind the walk.

Everyone has there opinion on the right mix of seas versus port days; however, I think most people could find fun things to do to fill several days in Bermuda.  I personally have been several times and expect I will choose an itinerary that maximizes time in port when I go again.

Hamilton is probably the most centrally located dock, but your options are going to be more limited (and likely pricier) if you want to go there.  I haven't found Dockyard to be an issue, though you'll eat up a little extra time on buses and ferries.

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

He has decided to speak out to stop the public shaming of the Captain by people who have no knowledge of the law, the profession, or the details of the incident at hand.

I applaud him for taking that action.  It seems to me that several officials have made statements which include something along the lines of "we will look into the weather conditions and the decisions related to routing through the forecast storm".  Obviously, this will be part of any investigation; it has to be.  Sadly, this has been picked up by pundits as "We are concerned that ship shouldn't have been where it was" or "the Captain proceeded knowingly into bad weather."  

I've worked in safety and risk management, so while I don't have the depth of ship specific knowledge several posters do, I do have some understanding of the processes involved.  The Master would have gathered and evaluated information, including the forecast, and compared that information with the established guidelines of the company and other relevant organizations.  If his actions show that he did this properly (and while no one knows for sure, I'm not aware of one any evidence that he failed in this responsibility), then the question becomes do the guidelines need to be reevaluated, not what did the Master do wrong.

There may be significant outcomes to the investigation.  New maintenance procedures, weather criteria, ship design requirements, etc. can all reduce the risks for millions of travelers.  The fact that changes could be made does not suggest that anyone was negligent.  Simply put, improving the system used to make decisions going forward is far more important than assigning blame

6 minutes ago, Hanoj said:

Passengers comfort is salient to this discussion. As a consumer I will never be acquainted enough with the demands and expertise sailing in stormy seas entails or of the attendant risks . Of necessity, I’m vulnerable and must trust the judgment of others. To me, the question of whether the Sky was capable of handling the conditions that contributed to, or perhaps caused if I understood correctly, its perils misses the point. From a business and customer service standpoint, let alone safety, did it make sense to sail in those conditions at that time? Perhaps this is why there are increasingly vocal demands for new safety standards in the media. The    $100+ billion cruise industry has been growing rapidly the past decade and incidents like the Sky’s on Saturday, no matter the cause or whether someone is culpable, are not good for business. 

Passenger comfort is important, and would probably have been within company acceptable levels had the power not failed.  Stabilizers, rudders, engines, etc. are all used by the crew to reduce the impact of outside conditions, without these tools ship motion increases significantly.

I'm sure one of the Captains or the Chief can explain in far more detail, but having traversed similar conditions to those reported as a passenger I never once questioned the safety of the ship, the decision making of the Master, or the impact it was having on my vacation.  Certainly the motion had an impact when walking around, but we didn't deal with tumbling furniture; I'd surmise the biggest reason for this was a skilled bridge and engineering crew with access to a lot of resources.  

As far as business, I doubt a non-fatal accident will have a long term impact.  Historically companies have taken a short term hit even for far worse situations than this.  If something is ultimately uncovered about Viking's maintenance, for instance, I'm sure that could dog the company for several years, but at this point there is no credible evidence that something like that occurred.  

Also, I'd be curious what your source is for the $100 billion number... Most estimates seem to peg revenue at around $30 to $40 billion.

3 hours ago, foneguy said:

funny i realized after i typed so here is the 22 lol

That looks right ;).  Still, the sharpness of the first picture makes it the winner IMHO.

A friend of mine was in the Wing the F-35 you posted belongs to, though he was flying the F-16.

On 3/23/2019 at 12:46 PM, mnocket said:

On the Edge, Celebrity took a big risk with the Infinite Veranda design.  They marketed it as making you feel more connected to the ocean - "bringing you to the edge".  There was a lot of up front marketing hype, but once people experienced the IV many felt it was just an ocean view cabin with a large window that could be opened halfway. There was actually less of a connection to the ocean than a traditional balcony. 

I think it definitely qualifies as a "divisive" concept: some love it, some hate it.  The concept art looked more appealing to me than photos I've seen, but I'll admit the idea has its place.  On a colder weather cruise I'd jump at the option of having a quasi-balcony that can become an extension of interior space, all with a big window.  In the Caribbean, not so much.  The marketing push behind IVs didn't help either.  Along with Eden and some other features, it all combined to give people an experience different than what they were used to and expected.

In addition to marketing, I think a mistake was going almost all-in on IVs with the Edge, especially considering the ship was intended to sail the Caribbean market!  It think a mixture of IV and traditional balconies, with the ratio determined by the ships intended market would make sense.  A bit like comparing RCI's Quantum and Oasis class.  The former has a lot more interior attractions for comfort in cooler climates, the latter has massive outdoor areas.  

5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

And, any ship, even the QM2, if not operated at the proper speed for those exact weather conditions at that exact time will experience seas slapping into the h

Given this risk, I'm curious if variable pitch propellers would be valuable in certain situations?  Adjusting blade pitch would provide an additional method to change RPM and torque as required, but I don't know if they are responsive enough to matter in these conditions.

22 hours ago, foneguy said:

F22 Lightning

notice the afterburner in action, i love this photo

Nice picture, but its an F-35.

6 hours ago, skeeter195 said:

The motion in the aft is almost calm.  Actually when there are very rough seas it is the calmest part of the ship.  Think like this , if a big wave is at the front the front will rise up the most and the aft the least due to the fact that props must remain in the water to stabilize the ship.  If there is a strong cross wind it does not matter where you are, you will rock side to side.  

This is not correct.  Ships rotate around a given axis the further you are from that axis the more the apparent rotation.  In pitch, that means anyone fore or aft experiences more motion.  For roll, generally higher decks are more impacted.  The ship can also move in other ways.  A naval architect could give you more details and specifics for the Escape, but the center of rotation is not the aft end of the ship.  It is possible aft cabins will be better in motion than forward cabins depending on how far they are from center of rotation, but none will be as good as cabin nearer to that point.

The props move with the rest of the ship; the crew will adjust speed and heading based on conditions to try and limit pitching in order to keep the props where they should be.  The props themselves don't "hold" the stern in the water.  Some interesting notes over in the Viking board as discussion on how the relationship of wave conditions, pitching, and props nearing the surface may have contributed to the loss of power.

Despite that, I'm willing to bet that on most cruises the difference perceived by a passenger is slight.  If the OP hasn't had issues with motion on ships before, I think it is unlikely the aft cabin would make enough a difference to be a problem.Personally it doesn't bother me at all, but I'm pretty tolerant.  As noted, there can be some vibration though in my experience its only been noticeable while the ship is maneuvering into a port or weather conditions require frequent power and steering corrections.

15 minutes ago, spanishguy1970 said:

We have only had an aft Balcony once, and that was on the GEM in 2010, it was perfect. We had heard so many positive things about  it that at the time, our TA called us and offered us a FREE upgrade to a Mini Suite and we said no, and we were glad we did.

I would make the same choice on the Escape, even versus the M6's.  An aft balcony may not have the big bathroom, but if chosen carefully you can find one with a comparably sized outdoor area.  Personally I like the larger overhang compared to the M6, both for privacy and shade.  In fact, it may be more private than an angled balcony; not only can adjacent balconies see in, but they are pretty easy to see from down on the Waterfront.  I would probably aim for one at least a couple decks below the buffet and Spice on Escape.  You might still hear some "party" noise down there, but it isn't really bothersome and mostly drowned out by the wake.

35 minutes ago, cruises42 said:

Thanks for the information. I don't think I'll ever  doing editing like that. I'm using a Tamron 18-400mm now. I don't like to change lenses so this gives me a good range (although I would like to be able to zoom more).

Astrophotography is probably the most complex editing there is, at least short of certain industrial and scientific applications.  Do you like the Tamron?  I'm seriously considering a 150-600 lens, and both Tamron and Sigma have options in my price range.

4 hours ago, kochleffel said:

The labyrinth, although modeled on the famous one in Chartres cathedral, is just small stepping stones set into the lawn.

I thought it was a corn maze for ants ;).

6 minutes ago, Captain_Morgan said:

none of the viking ships have 'pods'....they're all fitted with fixed pitch propellers

You are correct... the source I read mistakenly described the Promas system as a pod; I think they made an assumption because it is described as "combined propulsion and steering".  Its more of a  a traditional system with a large hydrodynamic fairing built into the hull and an integrated rudder.  Corrected that using info from some other sources.

Regardless, I don't think it two independent failures would result in this issue, but stranger things have happened.

22 minutes ago, AAAAmerican said:

Is it propelled by those IMHO, horrible brerakdown Azi Pods? Why not go back to a Triple Screw now?

I can't be sure, but I doubt that is the issue.  Not only are modern azipods far more reliable than older models, they are largely independent of each other.  Viking sky appears to have the Promas system, which is an integrated steering system but not a traditional "pod design"

Someone with ship handling experience can correct me, but I believe even in rough conditions one propulsion unit would be able to maintain control of the ship.  Two are required for high speed cruise, but a single unit is fairly capable on its own.

Regardless of the cause, I hope for a swift resolution that enables the safest outcome for the passengers and crew!