I was on the Statendam when this power failure occurred. I have been waiting to post on this thread until I received a reply to my concerns from HAL. I can summarize their reply in two words - "Stuff happens". I had asked them to explain what happened and what the ramifications would have been had the ship not been in harbor. They chose to totally ignore my questions. That's just pathetic customer service (more on that in a bit).
To those of you who feel this is no big deal, I would respectfully but strongly disagree. I do know a fair bit about power systems and generators from a former career keeping a data center running. A total power failure like this is a very big deal due to the simple fact that everything on that ship is electric. Had we been at sea, there would have been no propulsion. Not a situation I would want to be in while in Alaskan waters. Add in the no running water, toilets, HVAC and after a while you have a bad situation.
As to the handling of the situation......
The announcements made by the captain and cruise director were useless and really provided no information as to the severity of the situation.
There were no elevators running for those guests who needed them. While running on emergency generator, the normal scenario goes like this. The controller in each elevator bank will start one elevator at a time and return it to a home floor and park it there. The system will then leave the last elevator operational, although it requires someone with a key and knowledge of the operating procedures. The crew could have, and should have, done this. I know that the parking occurred, as all of the elevators were on one deck. I saw several people fall on stairs during this incident, and there were no crew members around the stairs to help out.
I cannot comment as to the competance of the engineering staff on the ship. I have not seen the machinery spaces and know nothing of the crew's background. Neither do those of you who state that they have the "best". It's simply an unknown. However, looking at the funtionality of the ship's systems that I observed, there are either some design or maintenance issues. If one fuel pump took down all the generators, that would be a design problem, as a system such as that should not have such an obvious single point of failure. The hot water temperature on the ship was very erratic during the whole cruise. The water temperature in the hot tubs varied between lukewarm and hot enough to cook in. Thermostats are a fairly simple device whose proper function seems to not occur on the Statendam. Along those lines, the HVAC thermostat in our stateroom took an hour to respond to changes in setting. There were also several light switches in our stateroom that were non-functional. In total, this does not lead me to believe that the Statendam is well maintained mechanically and electrically. It's nearly 20 years old, and seems to be showing its age.
Last, HAL's response. I work for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, and last year we had a major incident occur when the main support beam in one of our theatres cracked. I won't go into all the details about how this situation was handled, but there were lots of refunds and free shows while we were in alternate venues. Unlike HAL, however, we were right out there telling our patrons that there was a problem (a big problem) and providing lots of detail. HAL seems to only admit that there was a "technical issue". This leaves me with the very distinct impression that they're trying to hide something. It's simply the wrong way to handle a major failure. Had they been more forthcoming, I might think about sailing with them again. At this point, not gonna happen!
Last, the issue of refunds. That has never been what I was after, but I can understand some folks thinking they should have made a refund in an amount commensurate with the meal those folks didn't get. There have been some comparisons here to a hotel giving a refund due to a power failure. Interesting analogy, but I don't think it works. Here's why. If a hotel loses power that is something that is not within their control as they are getting power from a utility. If a cruise ship loses power, that is within the cruise line's control and responsibility. Although I was extremely disappointed that this cruise had to skip Glacier Bay, the weather is outside of HAL's control and I accept that. But, I can sure understand why people might thing HAL should buy them dinner!
Did something happen on the Statendam?
in Holland America Line
Posted
I was on the Statendam when this power failure occurred. I have been waiting to post on this thread until I received a reply to my concerns from HAL. I can summarize their reply in two words - "Stuff happens". I had asked them to explain what happened and what the ramifications would have been had the ship not been in harbor. They chose to totally ignore my questions. That's just pathetic customer service (more on that in a bit).
To those of you who feel this is no big deal, I would respectfully but strongly disagree. I do know a fair bit about power systems and generators from a former career keeping a data center running. A total power failure like this is a very big deal due to the simple fact that everything on that ship is electric. Had we been at sea, there would have been no propulsion. Not a situation I would want to be in while in Alaskan waters. Add in the no running water, toilets, HVAC and after a while you have a bad situation.
As to the handling of the situation......
The announcements made by the captain and cruise director were useless and really provided no information as to the severity of the situation.
There were no elevators running for those guests who needed them. While running on emergency generator, the normal scenario goes like this. The controller in each elevator bank will start one elevator at a time and return it to a home floor and park it there. The system will then leave the last elevator operational, although it requires someone with a key and knowledge of the operating procedures. The crew could have, and should have, done this. I know that the parking occurred, as all of the elevators were on one deck. I saw several people fall on stairs during this incident, and there were no crew members around the stairs to help out.
I cannot comment as to the competance of the engineering staff on the ship. I have not seen the machinery spaces and know nothing of the crew's background. Neither do those of you who state that they have the "best". It's simply an unknown. However, looking at the funtionality of the ship's systems that I observed, there are either some design or maintenance issues. If one fuel pump took down all the generators, that would be a design problem, as a system such as that should not have such an obvious single point of failure. The hot water temperature on the ship was very erratic during the whole cruise. The water temperature in the hot tubs varied between lukewarm and hot enough to cook in. Thermostats are a fairly simple device whose proper function seems to not occur on the Statendam. Along those lines, the HVAC thermostat in our stateroom took an hour to respond to changes in setting. There were also several light switches in our stateroom that were non-functional. In total, this does not lead me to believe that the Statendam is well maintained mechanically and electrically. It's nearly 20 years old, and seems to be showing its age.
Last, HAL's response. I work for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, and last year we had a major incident occur when the main support beam in one of our theatres cracked. I won't go into all the details about how this situation was handled, but there were lots of refunds and free shows while we were in alternate venues. Unlike HAL, however, we were right out there telling our patrons that there was a problem (a big problem) and providing lots of detail. HAL seems to only admit that there was a "technical issue". This leaves me with the very distinct impression that they're trying to hide something. It's simply the wrong way to handle a major failure. Had they been more forthcoming, I might think about sailing with them again. At this point, not gonna happen!
Last, the issue of refunds. That has never been what I was after, but I can understand some folks thinking they should have made a refund in an amount commensurate with the meal those folks didn't get. There have been some comparisons here to a hotel giving a refund due to a power failure. Interesting analogy, but I don't think it works. Here's why. If a hotel loses power that is something that is not within their control as they are getting power from a utility. If a cruise ship loses power, that is within the cruise line's control and responsibility. Although I was extremely disappointed that this cruise had to skip Glacier Bay, the weather is outside of HAL's control and I accept that. But, I can sure understand why people might thing HAL should buy them dinner!