Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Globaliser

Members
  • Content Count

    24,143
  • Joined

About Globaliser

  • Rank
    20,000+ Club

About Me

  • Location
    London

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. And these days, it doesn't take long - which is why they are much more ready to do it.
  2. It did make me laugh, though: Someone who hasn't been to Edinburgh for so long that they don't know that there are three bridges not two; who knows the area so little that they'd never heard of Rosyth and its history; and who had no idea what size ships the bridges can accommodate and why; comes here not only to re-post information they randomly dredged up from an inaccurate site somewhere on the internet, but to ridicule those who scheduled a docking at Rosyth. Some wise person once suggested that it's better to remain silent ...
  3. In your shoes, I would now definitely be looking to change that inbound journey. On the basis purely of the times and flights, it seems to make more sense. You still end up at CVG at the same time and on the same flight as the original booking.
  4. Don't 100% count on this. If you get stuck at passport control and fail to show up at the gate, there will come a point when they will leave you behind, probably together with your luggage.
  5. Yes, outbound passport control. This can sometimes be pretty fast. For what it's worth, about six months ago I "connected" at Oslo. I had to disembark the aircraft, clear inbound passport control, clear security, clear outbound passport control, and then walk back to the same gate. It took me 9 minutes. If you're on one ticket for the entire trip, which is what this sounds like, then I would expect your bags to be checked through.
  6. The multi-city approach is unlikely to be fruitful because these aren't routes that naturally lend themselves to open-jaw pricing. I agree. Picking up the car at CDG (which is likely to be the better airport to fly to Chicago from, if a direct flight is preferred) would have the advantage of not having to drive through Paris just to get out, if the OP is not planning to spend time in Paris at all. Airport surcharges would have to be looked at, though - sometimes renting a car from an airport is significantly more expensive than renting from a non-airport location, although equally renting from a non-airport location and dropping off at an airport might incur some one-way or drop-off fee.
  7. If the options are to anchor and tender to the south side, or to dock just over the bridge on the north side, it is not hard to see some good reasons for choosing to dock. Anyway, the basic fallacy is that it's a "new port". It isn't, even if it is relatively little used by cruise ships.
  8. Have the flight numbers changed, even if the times haven't? On some airlines, that can cause a "flight change" alert. Other things can happen, too, that are less visible. But it is possible, then, that this is visible preparatory work in case WN has to take the MAX out of the schedules for another month or two. Nevertheless, as you don't know what schedule changes might actually happen if WN does that, then making any change now on that basis is simply flying blind. I can't see that any of your flights is scheduled to be operated by a MAX, although this may be a limitation of the coding that WN uses and if schedules do change, non-MAX flights are likely be cancelled as well as MAX flights as it will be an overall adjustment of the flying plan. Having a look at your flights, though, I wonder whether this might be an opportunity to improve your flight selection. For example, on your inbound you're on:- WN5106 SJU-FLL 1155-1445 WN2749 FLL-MCO 1550-1655 WN2749 MCO-CVG 1735-1950 You could in theory change to:- WN5130 SJU-MCO 1245-1545 WN2749 MCO-CVG 1735-1950 This would cut out one stop, allow you more margin for getting to the airport after disembarkation, and give you more margin for connecting (1:50 at MCO rather than 1:05 at FLL). I don't know why the latter wasn't an option when you first booked; but if it's more appealing to you now, I wonder whether the current alert would allow you to make this change. On the outbound, you probably know that WN4047 is the only flight of the day from MDW to SJU. You only have 1:10 to connect to it, so if you miss it then you're in for a one-stop re-route. It may be that there are no better alternatives for a primary booking, given your time constraints, but again it's something worth thinking about.
  9. More like scare-mongering, IMHO. What's going on is evidently very precisely targeted, for reasons (as I said) that are not difficult to understand. If a general shooting war were going on, with anti-ship missiles flying around indiscriminately, there would be genuine cause for concern. But that's not what's happening.
  10. It's possible, but earlier today Southwest announced MAX-related cancellations only up to 2 September 2019 - so it would seem unlikely. How different are these times from your original times?
  11. Isn't it a bit like the private wing of an NHS hospital? And I'm only actually half being facetious - there are some real parallels.
  12. If a full-size aircraft carrier can be built at Rosyth and get under those three bridges to get out, I'm pretty confident that a relatively small cruise ship like Pacific Princess must be able to. And if the ship was going to tender, why would it tender to Rosyth?
  13. The train isn't non-stop. It is direct, but not non-stop. In fact, there are 15 intermediate stops, which is one reason why the journey will take so long. In comparison, the 0935 from London Waterloo to Southampton Central takes a shorter route, has only three intermediate stops, takes only 1 hour 14 minutes, and costs £9 (if booked today). So the Waterloo train arrives at 1049 and the Victoria train arrives at 1202. The big question really is: Where are you starting from?
  14. Try hovering over their avatar next to a post. You may see a pop-up. At the bottom, there are options for Message, Ignore User and Find Content. If you click the middle one, you'll get a confirmation page. That might be a faster way of getting them on the list.
  15. There are clear and obvious reasons why oil tankers - not any old cargo ships, of which there are plenty in the area - are being targeted. And the news report last week shows that these were not random attacks. For what rational reason might any of this extrapolate to cruise ships, other than they also float in water?
×
×
  • Create New...