K.S.
-
Posts
67 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Store
Blogs
Downloads
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by K.S.
-
-
3 hours ago, dianajo67 said:
I don’t think cruise lines should stop offering excursions. I do think they should emphasize that they are offering tours as a “convenience” only and that all excursion providers are outside agents. Hiding it in the the small print is my issue. I don’t care if RC makes a profit for providing marketing services etc. Just be clear with the guests...taking advantage of the “typical” oblivious guest might be legal but it’s not really an ethical approach.
One of the things about these excursions, and why people take them, is that because you are buying it through the cruise company, they guarantee to you that the ship will not leave without you if the tour is running late. That’s one of the big enticements they use to get people to book these tours through them and not independently through an outside vendor.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, marci22 said:
I think that sums up how people should book excursions. Everyone has different ideas of what is 'adventurous' vs 'crazy'.
Like anything else, people should research things. I remember a thread where the posters were beating up on someone who didn't wear water shoes at a Caribbean island and stepped on a sea urchin. "What, you didn't research the environment you are traveling to?" It's like that. I have been on a private excursion that, once I got on the bus, I realized that I should probably have thought about things a bit more.
I understand Royal not selling any volcano tours just because it is easier in terms of liability. I don't think anyone can predict when any volcano might erupt so better to just rule them all out. Let people book privately. I think consumers would investigate private excursions more, as 'ship excursions' have an aura of implied safety.
But that’s thing. Hawai’i’s Volcanoes National Park *is* safe. They would close the park if it wasn’t. I mean, there’s risk in everything in life. Go drive your car! Go walk outside! See what I mean? On the other hand, this whole White Island business was utter absurdity. The United States NPS would never let visitors walk into an active crater; “Here’s your gas mask”. And I can tell you, you’ve never been able to. Royal Caribbean not offering excursions I think, has more to do with optics at this point.
I have no stake in the matter personally, other than that, although I now live 5,000 miles away, Hawai’i is my “home”, I am a native, and I *knew* people would falsely equate the White Island absurdity with the natural wonder of our beautiful National Parks in Hawai’i. People have even mentioned Haleakalā in the same breath which is doubly absurd. My message is: go to Hawai’i, go to these places, enjoy it’s wonder and natural beauty, do not be afraid. Keep in mind when you visit Yellowstone National Park, *that entire park* is actually on top of the caldera of what is known as a “Super Volcano”! The geysers and hot pools etc. are not happening for no reason. Do people advocate closing down or canceling trips to Yellowstone? Think about that.
Hawai’i is just not the same thing as the situation that happened in New Zealand! The whole White Island story is just pure craziness!
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, npcl said:
just pointing out that even the hawaiian volcanos have explosive events.
Even this last episode had a major ash release that rose several thousand feet on the same day as the 6 plus earthquake. The same quake that damaged the lava tube and resulted in the museum on the rim being closed due to a crack running right through it.
the park did not close until after the quake and ash release so people could have gotten killed there. as I mentioned earlier a tour guide was just about to enter the lava tube with his group.
while they are different type volcanos both the white island event and the explosive events demonstrated in 1924 and 1790 on Kilauea are due to water inteusion.
I think you’re just argumentative and someone who has no first hand knowledge of the islands and can only look things up on the internet. So I repeat: There is no reason to cancel any excursions to Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park, unless the U.S. National Park Service says so. Have there been people who have come close to being injured? A boat the got hit by a fireball? Yes, because of their own stupidity for going too close and overstepping boundries. That is not on the National Park, or even the Volcano. That is on the idiots who nearly got themselves killed for overstepping boundaries.
You are not from Hawai’i. Far from it. In fact I question if you have even been to the islands and the National Parks themselves. Being a native of the 50th State, I can tell you that I *have* been to the Volcanoes National Park, I have been in Thurston Lava Tube, I’ve been to Halema’uma’u, and the Volcano House hotel.
I had an idea that Kilaue’a and even Haleakalā (which is not active) would end up being conflated with this unfortunate event in New Zealand, and sure enough there are ignorant people saying that excursions to Hawai’i’s natural wonders should be canceled. The answer is no, they shouldn’t. And events that happened in 1790 and 1924, 134 years apart, have no bearing. Do you think the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. National Park Service are not aware of this history? And mind you, earthquakes in Hawai’i are not uncommon either, and people have been visiting Thurston Lava Tube since at least the late 19th Century. Nobody at the USGS or the NPS are blind here. On the other hand the sheer idiocy of the situation in New Zealand, by the NZ Government, the people who privately own the Volcano (absurd), the tour companies and Royal Caribbean itself is mind boggling. You absolutely cannot compare the two. Not in the slightest.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, h20skibum said:
I wonder what criteria they will use to determine volcanoes they consider active? I have visited Kilauea, Haleakala, and most recently, Mt. Vesuvius. All would be considered active.
I must admit, that I only associated Mt. Vesuvius with the destruction of Pompeii almost 2,000 years ago. It was only after this event, that I researched how many volcanic events it has experienced since then. It is considered one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world, because of the number of people living in the area that could be impacted by a major eruption. A major event would reach Naples in about 5 minutes.
This video clip is one I took this summer.
I have yet to see any excursion, from any of the cruise lines, highlight any significant risks. Maybe this will prompt us to all look a little deeper into what we do.
The survivors of the eruption at White Island will have a long and painful road to recovery.
Haleakalā is not active.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, npcl said:
Usually yes, but Kilauea has its explosive phase. While not on Mt Saint Helen level of explosive, they are enough that one would not want to be in the park when they happen. For example the eruptions in 1924 and 1790 were explosive. The current situation with the lava having dropped considerably and the presence of water in the crater may signify the potential for a new explosive event
The 1790 explosive eruption is thought to be due to water intrusion from a caldera lake.
Evidence for water influx from a caldera lake during the explosive hydromagmatic eruption of 1790, Kilauea volcano, Hawaii
The volcanoes in Hawai’i are in no way similar to White Island, and there is no need to cancel any visits there unless the National Park Service says so. If you want to fear Hawai’i’s volcanoes, that’s up to you. I don’t.
-
1
-
-
On 12/11/2019 at 5:10 PM, Sunshine3601 said:
This tragedy has me wondering if other active volcanoes such as the one in St. Lucia and Hawaii should cancel their excursions.
The tourists and their families are in my thoughts and prayers. I am a past burn victim and know how painful it is. The survivors will have a long road of recovery.
Hawai’i excursions don’t need to be canceled. Hawai’i volcanoes are quite different. Also, all of Hawai’i’s volcanoes are in U.S. National Parks, are monitored by the U.S. Geological survey, and the National Park Service, and in general, the people of Hawai’i have great respect for the land and the volcanoes. While I never would have taken an excursion to White Island, I wouldn’t hesitate to visit Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park on the Big Island, or Haleakalā National Park on Maui (and she is not active). Again, I am a Hawai’i native, born and raised, now living in NYC. Locals in Hawai’i respect, but do not fear, these mountains.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, squick64 said:
There are an entire cruises (from various lines) that just go around Hawaii and nothing else. Hawaii is a mass of active volcanoes (just not the pyroclastic kind). As you note, ruling out volcanic activity rules out a lot of islands...heck, the entire Pacific Rim is one big mess of earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanoes. You can quickly start to run out of places to go. Or at least excursions to offer. There are risks just about everywhere.
Having said which, I understand their position and their concern. It's not an easy situation.
I am a Hawai’i native, born and raised, now living in NYC.
I want to make sure people understand things correctly.
Only the Big Island (the *island of Hawai’i*) has volcanic activity. All other islands, the volcanoes are extinct, with the exception of Haleakalā on Maui which is technically considered dormant. Also, Volcanoes in Hawai’i are very different from those in the Pacific Northwest, or in Japan or elsewhere in the Pacific. They are not “explosive” in the same way, and they gently (relatively speaking) ooze lava during an eruption. Just want to make all that clear.
Anyway, visit Hawai’i (including the Big Island), don’t worry, and just don’t piss Pele off when you’re visiting the Big Island. It’s her land, she can do what she wants. Respect her and stay out of her way. Enjoy.
-
10
-
-
Carnival is both a blessing and a curse. Yes, without Carnival money, QM2 wouldn’t have been built etc., and all are happy about that. But it doesn’t give Carnival a free lifetime pass, either.
-
Briefly chatted via text with the acquaintance who disembarked from QM2 this morning. I asked him how the filming went. Dining scenes were shot in the Queens Grill. I asked him if areas of the ship had been closed off to passengers. His short response: “They sure did, and it was annoying”. He said a lot of the bars were closed off at one time or another: Commodore Club, Chart Room, Sir Samuels. Also portions “of the deck” by which he meant Boat Deck (“Promenade Deck”). That was his response.
-
1 hour ago, commodoredave said:
Yes, they were beautiful ocean liners, and I was lucky enough to sail on several of them. I think the QM2 has captured some of the best attributes of the Normandie and the Queen Mary, as I wrote in my blog a few years ago: https://gentlemansportion.com/2017/12/11/last-of-the-great-liners/
And let's enjoy her while we can -- the QM2 may be the last true ocean liner ever built.
Really nice blog post. Enjoyed reading.
-
Just now, exlondoner said:
Absolutely. But I avoid such emotive pejorative terms as 'disgusting' and 'eyesore'.
I think they are an eyesore. I think they are disgusting. Opinions.
-
1 minute ago, exlondoner said:
Well, I find them infinitely tackier with those flashing lights. And, on leaving the theatre on Deck 2, it is really pretty hard to avoid them. Nonetheless, I have survived unscathed and unruffled.
Okay. Doesn’t change my opinion on sales tables. Doesn’t change your apparent opinion on slot machines. That’s all anyone is doing here. Stating their opinions.
-
3 minutes ago, Host Hattie said:
Nothing, but you seemed to be complaining about sales tables outside the Queens Room on QM2, that's not happening. There are sales tables outside the shops some of the time but on QM2 that's nowhere near the Queens Room. They are easy to avoid. I agree with exlondoner gambling machines are much more visually offensive but others seem to enjoy them so I have no problem avoiding them.
Slot machines certainly aren’t as tacky as sales tables. And they aren’t out in the halls. That’s my opinion. And what about the table with the spread of M&M’s and Pringles? That’s ultra tacky too. In my opinion.
-
1 minute ago, exlondoner said:
Well, I feel much the same about slot machines in the casino, but they are clearly enjoyed by some and raise revenue (which helps keep fares down), so I ignore them and don't let them worry me.
I don’t have a problem with a casino. It’s another public room. Although, I don’t like that it’s not fully enclosed.
-
8 minutes ago, Host Hattie said:
Only on QE & QV because that's where the shops are ! Unless you have experience to the contrary ?
I’m going on what another poster has reported.
EDIT: Going back, I see this was reported on QE. So, yes, the shops are there. But it doesn’t change my opinion on sales tables in general. I don’t like them, I think they are really tacky. What’s wrong with that?
-
3 minutes ago, exlondoner said:
Rereading the original post, I think it may be the shops that are being described as outside the QR, though, a fortiori, that means that is where the tables are, though in my experience some way along. I don't like them, but they don't impinge unless I'm leaving a lecture in the theatre. Why bother about them, if you don't like them? In any case, they can hardly be the result of Carnivalisation, as they seem to predate Carnival ownership.
Even if you don’t patronize them, they are still an eyesore. On *any* line. That’s my opinion.
-
1 hour ago, deck chair said:
HI
There have never been sales tables outside the Queens Room at least not the many times I have sailed on her.
Thank you.
Deck Chair
Apparently, there have been now!
-
20 minutes ago, Underwatr said:
When the MDR waiters dress up like gondoliers on Italian Night you gotta roll your eyes.
I forget whether Process waiters sing as well or was that only on Carnival...?
Or “Pirates” that come through the dining room to hold fake knives to your neck, so a company photographer can snap a photo and try to sell you a copy later. Good grief, I had forgotten about that!
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, deck chair said:
Hi
These have been sales tables on the QM2 for years and they draw big crowds and I guess sales otherwise they would be gone. Mainly on deck three outside the various shops.
I don't believe they are a detriment.
Deck Chair
They may have been there for years. That doesn’t mean they are appropriate. And at the very least, not outside the Queens Room.
-
2 hours ago, Gazroberts80 said:
I personally miss the old Verandah restaurant and it’s classical French style menu. However I would say that at $39 per person additional cost it’s very much seen as being a restaurant that offers a premium food experience to the Main dining experience. I think you would be hard pressed to suggest that the majority of dishes on offer here would not be seen as classic traditional dining room dishes that have dominated Cunard menus for years.As for calling Princess tacky I think that’s a rather naive comment. I have never seen a “B.B King” or “Rolling Stones” venue. I’ve seen first class service and food that has often far surpassed the quality of Cunard food. The P&O (Another Carnival line) Epicurean restaurant is the equal of the old Verandah. Yet on this perceived less exclusive line this fine dining restaurant continues to prosper. On Princess I’ve witnessed extremely talented musicians in excellent cocktail bars, who are of equal calibre to those on Cunard. On a number of occasions they have actually surpassed the equivalent performers on Cunard, especially in the Cocktail bar. May I add that Lisa Harman on my recent QV cruise was exceptional also.
I prefer the decor of Cunard ships on the whole, although there are elements of beautiful contemporary design on Royal Class Princess ships and on some of the P&O fleet that is just as luxurious but in a more contemporary way than is seen in the Art Deco/Victoriana Queens. But remember that the QE2 was highly contemporary in its design in the late 60’s/70’s, so it should not be seen that Victoriana or Art Deco equate to Cunard ship design.
I’m expecting the 4th ship to have more of a contemporary design based on the furnishings of the newly installed Britannia Club on QV (which many see as a trial to assess Cunard guests opinion) and due to the design team Cunard have selected for her interiors.
QM2/QE and QV have done a brilliant job of replicating the QE/QM 1930’s era in the modern day but I’d love to see Cunard be brave and try and give us a modern day interpretation on the QE2 decor this time round. Personally I doubt they will go that far as I think the consistency in the brand between ships is something that Carnival will go for. I feel however it will have some similar decor to P&O’s Britannia. That is if the Britannia Club restaurant offers any clues as walking along that corridor and into that restaurant I could easily forget I wasn’t on Britannia. I know many have been very positive in their comments on the quality of the design of this refurbishment, the only criticism is that it doesn’t seem to flow with the rest of QV’s decor.
Cunard is overall my favourite cruise line but there are areas in which others are superior. It’s complete arrogance and snobbishness to suggest that they are not surpassed.
I thought what I was conveying was getting across, but it’s obvious that it hasn’t, so let me clarify.
I do not have a problem with the food on Princess. I’ve not said that Cunard are not surpassed. I have a problem with the interior design and decor, and the things they do, and feel that not just of Princess, but of other mass market cruise lines in general: Holland America, NCL, *Carnival*, Royal Caribbean etc. Another member here posted that Mac & Cheese was an “abomination”. I stated that I love a good gourmet Mac & Cheese and have prepared a really good version at home. However, I just don’t believe Mac & Cheese (or burgers) belong on the dinner menu. Lunch, yes. Dinner, no. If I ran the restaurants, they wouldn’t be (on the dinner menu). It’s just a matter of personal style. I also have not criticized the menu of the Verandah. Do I think a burger should be on the dinner menu? No. Do I have a problem with the rest? No. It’s a *grill*. Steaks and chops are what *should* be on the menu. In fact, the original Verandah restaurant on the 1936 QUEEN MARY, was the “Verandah Grill”. On the NORMANDIE, the extra tariff restaurant was simply known as the “Grill Room”. That’s what those restaurants were. So the “Steakhouse at the Verandah” is, no matter what they call it, a Grill. And the current menu is as it should be. I have no problem with it. I never said I did.
As far as the mention of “B.B. King” or “Rolling Stone”, those are venues found on Holland America ships (this was discussed earlier in the thread, before I commented). I was criticizing, once again, mass market cruise lines in general, not just Princess. Don’t get me started on NCL or Carnival (and then there is the terrible, ugly design and silhouette of “ships” these days. Sorry, but the “Royal Class” design externally is just hideous. I mean, it’s just a floating apartment block. Come on!)
What I *am* saying is that Cunard has an image, style and tradition to uphold. It appeals to a certain customer, a certain audience. They need to maintain that. The dress codes, the menu selections, the interior design, all of it. Tacky tchotchke tables outside the Queens Room is a big, hard NO. Not appropriate for Cunard (and really, in my opinion, not appropriate anywhere (except maybe NCL and Carnival. It’s not like they are the epitome of class and style to begin with).
By the way. It’s not really Art Deco and Victorian. Some of the decorative touches you are referring to as “Victorian” are actually more *Edwardian*, if you want to go there. They echo more the style of MAURETANIA, AQUITANIA, or LUSITANIA, or the White Star Line ships OLYMPIC, BRITANNIC, etc. Queen Victoria died January, 1901. Cunard isn’t going back to the style of late 19th century ships. Also, Art Deco doesn’t equate to “Cunard” ship design. What it *does* equate to is the design prevalent at the apex of the age of the great ocean liners, the 1930’s, and *that* is what people want to be able to experience: that bygone era of style, beauty and grace of the original QM, NORMANDIE, ILE DE FRANCE, etc. Like I said I do like the design of the new Britannia Club on QV. But it’s really not that “contemporary”. Make no mistake. It’s still very much a Deco inspired design (except for the chandeliers).
There is one line that used to have really great contemporary interior design: Celebrity. I’m talking back when the Celebrity SUMMIT and her three sisters were sailing. Those ships had contemporary interior design and yet, still felt, somehow like “modern classic” (the squared off, container ship rear ends externally, were another matter). A contemporary take on classic. Elegant. Stylish. Sadly they’ve now lost their way and given themselves over to gigantism (ECLIPSE ships I’m looking at you. And SOLSTICE et al.) and ugly interiors too.
Part of the problem with mass market cruise ships today, is that they are well, “mass market”. That means appealing to the lowest common denominator. You get all kinds of passengers on cruises these days. *All kinds*. Also, another problem (as someone else put it either here or elsewhere, I can’t remember) is that they really aren’t run by shipping lines. They are run by what are essentially *entertainment travel companies*. Hence the Royal Caribbean monstrosities, and others. That, however, is for another discussion.
-
42 minutes ago, Gazroberts80 said:
One of the things I find most strange is that people are offended by one of 8 choices of main course. It may not be the dish you choose to order but there are many traditional mains you can choose.
Would it spoil your experience if someone at your table chose to order the Lobster macoroni? Does that mean any pasta main is unacceptable on a menu for a gala evening? Or is it just the “Mac and Cheese” name. A lobster macaroni can be a far more complex dish to cook than a Steak, Sauce, Potatoes and two vegetables. If for example a Pasta dish of Chicken, Wild Mushroom, truffle shavings, white wine sauce and fettuccine pasta would that pass the Cunard test?
Where do you stop with what is appropriate to allow one to order on a dining table on a ship as not to offend fellow guests. Is it now offensive to a Vegan table companion for a fellow guest to order a Lamb Shank?
I find these negative comments about the “tacky” Princess line laughable. I’ve enjoyed food on that line that has blown most offerings from Cunard out of the window. I have never sailed on Carnival, therefore I can’t comment on their offering.
In my opinion if a menu has dishes that appeal to the range of palates and addresses dietary requirements it’s on the way to being a good menu. If each dish delivers satisfaction to the customer who orders it when it arrives then it’s a winner.
If the menu doesn’t offer anything you desire then I can understand that it’s natural to criticise the presence of other choices on the menu. There is always multiple choices of Meat, potato and vegetable choices, along with an excellent choice of seafood dishes. If they account for 6 dishes is it so wrong to add a couple of alternatives such as pasta’s or risotto that can also make excellent vegetarian options?
The idea that a Cunard customer is above certain dishes is simply ridiculous. The premium Verandah restaurant proudly promotes its Burger for example. Clearly people paying the additional €30 plus extra charge are not too offended. Likewise Cunard charge and extra €19 for Indian (curry), Italian (including pasta) dishes. Would they be charging extra if they thought the discerning Cunard customer would be offended by such dishes, that they would never eat in a formal restaurant environment. The Britannia (MDR) is the free option not the premium extra cost offering, yet dishes served in these additional charge restaurants are inappropriate in the Main (complimentary offering).
Cunard would not be offering such dishes in additional cost restaurants if they were perceived as “dumbed down” offerings. They are not stupid these dishes attract customers, who pay additional sums for Burgers, pasta and curry. If there dishes were not ordered they would not be on these menus.
But Princess IS tacky (not as much as others, but still). Let’s face it. Modern mass-market cruise ships are super tack fests. All chrome and branded venues like “B.B. King” and “Rolling Stone”, for example. And don’t get me started on Royal Caribbean, those aren’t even ships (and I dare say, unsafe).
P.S. The Verandah on QM2 is now a grill, so a burger makes sense. Is it available at dinner though? Or just lunch?
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:
I don't know if "enjoy" is the right word, but people buy things off the tables. So if it's making money, it will continue.
Sadly.
-
On 8/21/2019 at 2:22 PM, Gazroberts80 said:
Interestingly however the Britannia Club restaurant installed on QV reminds me so much of the more modern British contemporary design of P&O’s Britannia, a ship just as good in many parts as the Queens. I’m expecting we will see this same contemporary design flow through onto Queen Anne. It should never be forgotten that QE2 was a child of the 60’s it was the complete opposite of Victoriana or Art Deco. It pushed Cunard into the modern era and became the greatest ship on the planet. Sometimes it’s forgotten that Cunard did “Cool Britannia” and cutting edge. I have found G32 on QM2 to be one of the craziest places on any ship, I’ve had the craziest of nights there. Cunard has tradition and a legacy but it’s never ever been boring and it better never become so 😀 I love Cunard, I love the ships and the history so much but it’s not about being a time capsule as QE2 would never existed if it was.
Is it settled that the new Cunarder will be named “Queen Anne”?
I think, today, Cunard IS about being a “time capsule” as you say. It’s what people want. People want to be able to experience the heyday of the ocean liner, the apex of which was the 1930’s before the Second World War brought everything crashing down and played a part in accelerating air travel. The QM2, for the most part, delivers on that desire. In time, even QE2’s “cool Britannia” design changed to become more traditional (except for, in my opinion, the Queens Room, with it’s really ugly “2001: A Space Odyssey” ceiling and support columns).
I do think that the style of the Britannia Club on QV is really elegant and is contemporary and yet still reminds of the great Deco style of bygone liners like ILE DE FRANCE, NORMANDIE, and the original QUEEN MARY at the same time.
P.S. I have to quibble with you about QE2 becoming the “greatest ship on the planet”. It’s just that somehow, it managed to keep going transatlantic, after ships like the S.S. FRANCE, and the Italian Line ships LEONARDO DA VINCI, MICHELANGELO and RAFFAELLO were pulled from service in the 1970’s. At least FRANCE lived on long as the S.S. NORWAY (and S.S. ROTTERDAM continued a successful long life as a cruise ship).
-
15 minutes ago, Host Hattie said:
OK, I'm looking forward to hearing about the experience from those on board.
I actually know someone who is in fact, onboard now. I’ll be finding out when they return. I’ll let you know what he has to say about it.
Ovation of the Seas Pax Possibly Injured in Volcanic Eruption
in Royal Caribbean International
Posted
Truth.