old nutter

That is probably one of the most inaccurate of the many reports of what happened.  Even the picture is of a canal that couldn't even cope with an NCL lifeboat, let alone the Star.  Have a look at postings here to see more of the story and the reaction since: https://boards.cruisecritic.co.uk/topic/2686345-cruise-ships-banned-from-venice/

Have a great cruise.

Looks like a burst of that reality I spoke about earlier is apparently alive and well...

https://www.thelocal.it/20190810/no-venice-isnt-about-to-ban-cruise-ships-from-its-lagoon

and

https://cruiseradio.net/venice-cruise-ship-port-ban-more-rumor-than-fact/

FDR seems to be fairly relaxed about it anyway.

10 minutes ago, Deeliteful said:

Absolutely necessary in my opinion.

Venice is a beautiful and very old city.  Cruise ships do not belong there.

And to “old nutter”, I think they get many, many tourists who are not on cruise ships, the Venetians will still make money! 😂

You are probably right because they used to get by before the big ships came in.  But in Italy it often depends who has got their hands in whose pockets and the last time they tried to do something like this it got reversed along the way pretty smartly.

22 minutes ago, zqvol said:

Here is another article:

 

https://www.cruisetradenews.com/large-cruise-ships-banned-venice-grand-canal/

Even less accurate slovenly careless reporting.  Cruise ships do not go down the Grand Canal - even the lifeboats are too big to go under the Rialto Bridge on it!  And showing a picture of what is this very historic narrow waterway and hinting that this is where the cruise ships pass is typical of this sort of careless sensasionalist reporting that has invaded our media.

What the industry has been trying to do is still use Santa Croce but use a newly dredged channel to the south to avoid having to use the Giudecca Canal to get to the sea.  The problem with that is that the environmental lobby can't agree where to put the dredging waste without damaging the lagoon.

.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49276730

A somewhat more accurate and certainly less dramatic report from the BBC.

There are substantial dockside mooring places in Fusina, including a RoRo ferry port, but absolutely no other infrastructure or buildings to use for large passenger ships. Fusina is south of the city on the mainland and has good connections with Mestre and a huge car parking area.  It is probable that any cruise passengers wanting to visit Venice would have to use water transport that will need to be substantially enhanced.  Not the sort of change for which the Italians are renowned, so it is highly likely that this latest attempt to move away from Santa Croce may well be "delayed" by those Venetians who make all of their fortunes from  the cruise ships.

41 minutes ago, robins11 said:

Thank you so much to the OP for a 'heads up' on this offer.

Yesterday I was able to secure a £852 saving, against published rates, on a Mediterranean cruise on Getaway for next May 2020.

This also included 20% off the 'free at sea' offer as well. Really pleased. 

First went on 'my NCL', then 'Insider offers' on Latitudes. Clicked on terms and conditions on the Past Guest offer, then 'applicable sailings' to see if our original choices were listed. Some were others were not. Rang NCL in Southampton and away we went. Many thanks and a great offer.

Thanks for that route through the maze😊

If I follow any of the proper routes, the filter doesn't get loaded at all.  Did it your way and got the right list - just not the cruise we wanted ☹️ Thanks.

Glad you got your deal.  Well done.

Thanks Pelican Bill, I thought it should work like that but the UK web site doesn't pick the filter up when it moves on and just goes to the whole database.  IT were a few days late starting this offer on the UK site and it looks like they had problems implementing a chunk of new code yet again -  the offer will probably end before they find out how to show the listed cruises properly.  The  prices of discounted cruises seem to be showing applying the discount  but finding which ones are being offered is like seeking the proverbial "needle-in-a-haystack" - it's a bit like buying a lottery ticket to get discount.

Is there any way to see which cruises are on the  selected list other than going right through a test booking and looking at the price the computer throws up?  It would be nice if the list was available in some sort of table.

She's off out again at 13 July - 0015 local time AIS is saying that she is going back to Barca again.  Could be another test or she could be flushing water systems out ready to go to Ciivitavecchia.

The use of the word "accident" or "fell off" to describe someone departing over the side of a cruise ship is plain wrong.

In the UK, we used to have "Road Traffic Accidents"on our roads - not any more.  After years of investigations by police, it turned out that most of them had a cause and were actually "On Purpose" because they could be attributed to some positve action - wrong, but positive by someone.  As a result we now have "Road Traffic Collisions".

Having cruised many times now, I can confirm that in my opinion it is impossible to just accidently fall from a cruise ship.  You can go overboard because of some action by yourself or someone else, like being pushed or dropped or doing something silly, or climbing over to go to do yourself serious damage or death, but never just fall for no reason. The outer decks on cruise ships always have rails or  supports at a height that makes it impossible to just go over "accidently"  I wish the media would stop saying "fell off" as though it just happens without something else causing the departure - it can't.

1 hour ago, NLH Arizona said:

I always purchase non-refundable tickets, but it doesn't mean I can't change them to another flight with a change fee.

I am afraid that is the risk you take for the reduced price.  I always do the same, but I always have that niggle a the back of my mind that one day it might bite me.

I think in circumstances like the first affected cruise I would probably have stayed on the ship in Barcelona until I could find a cheap way of getting across to Rome to match my original timings home.  I would probably tried to get a ferry if possible because that would have taken me to Civitavechia( One goes 6 days a week takes about 20 hours and costs a bit over 100 euros each).  On the second one, I think I would have tried to re-formulate the time to do the same.  Maybe a ferry or two round to the Greek islands making my own cruise up as I went along.

Looking at the small print, anything NCL do is really a customer service bonus!

8 minutes ago, tikruizer said:

 

So true that the Pearl never went into dry dock.  I'm on the 18th sailing and keeping fingers crossed.  As of now, and according to one of the cruise tracking sites, the Pearl is sailing and testing the engine, which is something we were told yesterday in our roll call, that it would happen late last night or today.  I hope the issue has been resolved.

Yes, you are spot-on.  She has been out for almost an hour and is beating up the Med at over 23 knots at the moment.  Hope all goes well and she heads of to Rome for the 18th for you.

5 hours ago, terrydtx said:

The problems was with the propulsion system and the ship had to be dry docked for the necessary repairs.

 

We have friends who were on the cruise that got cancelled on the 5th, They arrived in Rome three days early on the day they were notified that their cruise was cancelled and now they are stranded for two weeks before their return flights. From what I see on their FB postings, other than a refund for the cruise cost, NCL has done nothing more to cover their out of pocket expenses and they will never use NCL again. They also bought cruise interruption insurance from NCL and I guess from what they have said on FB, it is pretty much worthless too. I see a lot of law suits coming NCL's way from this.

The Pearl is not in dry dock, it is still in a standard berth in the Port of Barcelona. NCL have only said she has had propulsion problems.  There is a great deal of the propulsion system inside the hull, not just in the pods, so it is very possible the fault is there, not outside underwater. I would doubt if NCL would just park her there doing nothing, so inside work is highly probable.  Also we have not yet heard from anyone getting the deaded emails if the cruises on 18 or 28 July will also be affected,  so let's hope not.

I have every sympathy for anyone who has lost their holiday, but I cannot see what part of 100% refund of the cost of the cruise would not cover "out-of-pocket expenses". It could well cover a 10 day holiday round Europe for example, so that you would get a great holiday and use the flights you already booked home from Rome on the 18th.

I wonder who would buy holiday travel insurance from anyone that doesn't cover you if the holiday breaks down? - looks like someone might have done.  Not reading the small print when you buy something is rarely successful in legal cases, so I seriously doubt that NCL legals are too concerned at this stage.  Life is too short to hold grudges, so better to look on the bright side - you are still alive and starting your holiday in one of the most beatiful and interesting cities in the world, so better to make the most of the new adventure and roll with it.

From what I remember from a few weeks ago when we dragged our feet a bit, the exit area used to hold the off-boarding passengers suitcases looked as though it was used to double for the boarding.  The computer terminals and desks were all pushed back to the walls to make space for the off-loading suitcases, so if that is so, they can't start loading new passengers until the hall has been cleared of outgoing cases and passengers and it has been converted to incoming book-in desks.  We ended up very slowly making our way out, but still ended up on the forecourt just before 10am.  I doubt they would be very sympathetic about anyone lingering about much after 10:30 or so at the latest.

There has not actually been any official comment as far as I can see confirming that she is needing a dry dock.  The only official line is "propulsion issue".  There is a great deal of electrical stuff inside the hull to do with propulsion.  It is quite possible that the problem could be inside.  Parts would need to be ordered and delivered then a good part of the ship would have to be isolated so work can be done safely.  We just don't know if nobody tells us and there ius no reason for NCL  say why it is not cruising!

Does anyone know what is happening to Pearl now?  Thursday the Fourth and he still has not left Barcenlona yet according to Marrine Traffic.

Cannes has got a little road train that runs round the town. It starts and ends at the land end of the dock and cost 12 Euros a couple of weeks ago.  Not the most comfortable ride in the world but gets round the town and it has muli-ligual headphones as well. Quite a good little trip round to see the main sights. Certainly adequate if you aren't heading out on a longer trip out of town.

If it is the itinerary where you have the sea day on your first full day out of Civitavecchia, they will change on your first night and then for the sea day onwards

Venice airport is an absolute zoo during the day, especially when a lot of boats are changing over.  We travelled in late on the day before cruising and arrived at about 11:30 pm and sailed through. The advantage of sailing out of Venice is that the airport, port and city are all close, albeit either expensive or inconvenient to get between them.

4 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

It occurs to me that while wave force may be the sole destructor of shoreline, a Venetian canal has a somewhat different composition. Would this not make a difference?

 

 

Would not the confines be a significant factor? A relatively narrow canal is going to restrict water displacement and result in a higher wave than a wider body of water.

In the case of Venice, the problem is below the water line.  There is massive current turbulence from the movement of the water being displaced by the hull.  The water that was where the hull of the ship was has a few seconds earlier before the ship came along to go somewhere and as the hull moves along, that lump of water from the whole space is squeezed away causing substantial currents and turbulence for the whole depth, not just a bit of stirring at the surface.  As has already been explained, the height of the wave is more dependent on the speed of displacement than size, but the destructive force created by the massive movement of water throughout the depth of the hull is more destructive to the underwater environment than the waves are above it.

37 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

While I won't deny that wake damage from the small boats in Venice is a problem, you must realize that no matter how slow a cruise ship goes, it still displaces 20,000 cubic meters of water, and that water goes somewhere, raising the water level as it goes.  I think it is idiotic to allow any ocean going ship into Venice, given her problems with rising water levels and the limited water under the keel of these ships.  Given that the port of Marghera is so close by, with a completely separate entrance channel that is at minimum 2 meters deeper, that is where all ships should go.

That displacement is the main issue because it creates a deep wash because the water is pushed out of the way as the ship moves and because of the natural way in which water always fights to retain it's level, it does that by moving those huge lumps of water ahead and behind and that creates huge rapid underwater currents. Those waves are beginning to remove the mud coatings on the wooden piles in on the sides of the canal that have stopped the wood rotting.

The other issue  they have is that the alternative southerly channel would need to be dredged before the cruise ships could use it.  The spoil created by the dredging would need to be dumped somewhere and the environmental scientists currently advise that the spoil would create a serious issue  for the any marine life infrastructure, so have advised against it - real Catch-22 problem.

Florence or Pisa is a very subjective view.  It depends what you get from your travelling.

Florence is beautiful and is full of artistic treasures and is probably one of the finest places to see the best of historical European art. 

Pisa has massive significance in the world of science as the birthplace of Galileo. Sitting inside the Cathedral you can be where one of the most significant events in science occurred. You can sit where Galileo watched the great lamp swinging in the wind from the roof and counting his pulse was able to discover the pendulum and so was ultimately the father of clock making and even time itself. He apparently also used the tower to drop two articles of different size and proved that they fall at the same rate.  He also experimented with lenses and after building one of the first telescopes, he studied the stars and the universe.

Which you visit first is very much a choice between art and science. Standing in the steps of such greatness is a huge privilege and it depends what you want to experience first.

I recall that 9:30 is the cut-off, so yes. With the one hour travelling that will give you the 3 hours they recommend for international flights.

1 hour ago, Sailing12Away said:

When the cruise company is advertising the ability to be able to stream music and movies, that implies that the speeds are fast enough for more 'basic' and rudimentary tasks such as texting and basic email functions. When it fails to deliver on that expectation, that is where you have the issue that myself and others experienced with the service not meeting it's advertised functions.

 

For those that it works fine with, great, congrats to you. But that fact that it seems to be nearly a 50% success rate is concerning for those who truly need access. If they posted anticipated connection speeds similar to how your local cable/internet providers do, that may better help people guide what they realistically can/cannot do on board. However, I doubt they would ever meet those speeds and then there would be 500 complaints a day about that. They just can't win I guess.

You are absolutely correct about the assumption that texting and basic email functions should be available.  However, the tech industry seems to make the most of the general increases in speed of the net to make their products look and behave better when we are on either cable or in reach of a radio mast.  Some email systems show attachments like graphic images and photos inside the email rather than as separate downloads. That can up the load/speed requirement by several orders.   The result can be disastrous if you are on a thin link.  These issues can make email reception far from "basic".

By the way, music and low-res video from the likes as YouTube are extremely compressed and we accept that the movies will splutter at times.  However we have been conditioned by the likes of modern broadband and the likes of 4G mobile data to expect high speed data to be the norm when we use the Internet. 

When I began using the net in anger less than 25 years ago, we were talking about high-speed being 64 Kbps and were amazed how fast that was, and if our computers had over 10Gb hard discs, they were considered huge!  That  shows just how far the industry has come on land.  Unfortunately, that other 70% of this earth of ours and 20-30 miles of the horizon is a very different matter.

The main problem with the Internet is that it is that the word covers a system that now has massive differences in both performance and application capability.  It is a bit like referring to a using a vehicle to get somewhere.  If your journey is several thousand miles and you only have a small car it is unrealistic to expect to do it in a couple of hours.  You might be able to do it in a private jet though.  You are travelling in a "vehicle" but that does not mean you will be able to do what you need in the time you have.  Understanding what tools you need to work and how they do your work is vital before you make sweeping comments about their performance.

Just one example - A reasonable modern phone photo could take up to 25 seconds to download on a 400 Kilobits per second 400Kbps) link.  Each pixel on the image needs a byte that on average needs about 10 bits to define it for transmission so the speed is now down to 40 Kilobytes per second (40KBps).  Thus a million of those bytes end up taking 25 seconds if all goes well with the link. My home Internet is normally downloading at 300 Mbps so the same photo would take only 3 hundredths of a second.  If my business needs me to move significant amounts of data such as photos to work for me I would clearly be screwed on board any ship.  However, if I am getting text, even long emails will come down and go back in fractions of a second at sea.

Different email systems also use different amounts of data.  Web mail systems have to download very much more data to read them on the screen.  Even client-based  email systems can need very different data rates depending on the actual network protocol being used before you can even see the headlines on the mails.

The moral of this is that if you need to do something in a certain time, understand your tools.  If this involves modern IT, talk to your IT pro before you even book a trip to see it what you need is realistic.