chengkp75

The only fines are for violations of US or Canadian cabotage laws. The US fine is $769, the Canadian fine can be up to $5000 Cdn. However, Canada is not on the itinerary, and since the person would be getting on in a US port, but getting off in a foreign port, the US cabotage law does not apply. The ship cannot stop anyone from disembarking, but the person would be liable for illegal entry into Mexico, since he was only cleared for an "in transit" visa for the cruise ship, not a tourist entry into Mexico. They can, however, delay and argue with the passenger while they notify the local immigration officials. If there is unpaid amount on the onboard account, they can place an "innkeeper's lien", which would prevent the person from taking any belongings (baggage, carry-on) off the ship until the bill was paid in full.

While you are correct that a new passenger manifest would be needed, there would be no fine involved, since the person is leaving at a foreign port.

But you must treat this movie as totally unrealistic, and totally inaccurate.

So, what were the "protocols" that needed to be put into place to ban smoking on balconies, that took Princess 6 years to implement? Their ship, their rules. As far as I know, there are no laws in Bermuda that restricts a business owner from designating non-smoking areas. In the aftermath of the report, the International Council of Cruise Lines, the MAIB, and the IMO all issued safety notices or notices of amendments to requirements, none of which recommended banning smoking on balconies, which if they thought it was a root cause of the fire, they would have said something about it. Instead, they are all focused on the structural fire protection of balconies, and the flammability of balcony furnishings. And, Princess, in addition to complying with the above safety requirements and recommendations, implemented additional operational and training actions regarding fires on balconies, but not one mention of smoking being the root cause is mentioned. Because smoking was not proved to be the cause, no action was taken against it. There is still no "rule" (i.e. any legal requirement that would require lengthy implementation) against smoking on balconies, it is a cruise line policy.

From the MAIB report (the horse's mouth) on the Star Princess: From the Synopsis: "It was probably caused by a discarded cigarette" From the Analysis: "it is considered that the most likely source of ignition was a discarded cigarette end." "the ignition of towelling material from Star Princess by a lighted cigarette end was not reproduced during the BRE tests" From the Conclusions: "probably ignited by a cigarette end" So, don't know what you've seen published, but the official report of the incident, as assisted by, and in concurrence with the USCG and US NTSB, uses very conditional language. Their findings were that in the absence of any other cause being detected, that a cigarette was likely the cause. That's like saying, "we know you're guilty, but there is no evidence at all to prove it".

And, upon what personal experience do you know that the crowd management would be significantly different in an emergency? Is this based on experience, knowledge of past emergencies, or merely a "feeling" ? Because I've stated a few examples up thread of real emergencies where the muster went much as the drill did. Why do your local firefighters train on a weekly basis (sometimes daily)? Why does the Navy train at damage control, and firefighting on a weekly basis? Why does the crew do a fire and boat drill weekly? Muscle memory. The more realistic training is, and the more it is repeated, the more the proper response becomes second nature and doesn't require conscious thought to do the right thing. How else do you train someone to run into a fire? How else do you train someone to disregard their own safety to help another person get to safety (what the crew do during a muster)? You question why the crew train so often, but then want the best trained crew possible, in case there is a real emergency. I did over 2000 drills over my career, and I was still learning on the last one.

This is moot, since the safety briefing does not have to be part of the in person muster. Actually, if you read SOLAS, it does not say that passengers are required to find their muster stations, it says they are to be mustered at their stations. Yes, it fulfills the legal requirement under the conditional approval of the e-muster. There is no data to show it provides superior training.

It is the passengers' responsibility to learn to work with, and obey the orders of the crew. Cause when there is an emergency, there will be orders, and some folks' feelings will obviously be hurt, based on the comments here.

To simulate what would happen in a real emergency. Remember a concept called "realistic training"? How can I answer that since I don't know the credentials of the person saying it, or the metrics on which they based it. From the article, it seems that they are also focused on the safety briefing being more "understood" in the e-muster format, and it improves the "passenger experience" (read this to be: more comfortable).

I'm sorry, little confused here. What farcical training are you talking about? The safety briefing you feel is so important? If you can do the safety briefing via video, your main complaint about the in person muster goes away. It reverts to realistic training for mustering, and you can stand there during the drill and listen to nothing.

It isn't that important, but you seem to think that it is the main training involved with the muster drill, and also the main complaint that it was not able to be seen/heard, so I pointed out that it is allowed to be done outside of the muster drill.

I hope the crew feel differently about spending their valuable time both training, and actually saving your entitled life. If I were a crew member who heard this attitude, I wouldn't lift a finger to save you.

Perhaps you've missed reading the various posts I've made about the safety briefing, including the one two posts above the one you quote:

This is one of the problems with desalination, it removes required minerals like magnesium, which can lead to water retention.

The reason they complain is because they feel entitled, and don't feel they should be ordered to do anything they don't like.

There are no "other" generators onboard that "handle non-propulsion" load. All generators connect to a common bus, and any generator will normally be supplying both propulsion and hotel load at the same time. Take Oasis for example. She has a maximum propulsion load of 60Mw. She has generating capacity of 97Mw. Typical hotel load for a ship that size is 11-12Mw (being generous here) so even at full speed, and full hotel load, you are only reaching 75% of capacity. The ship has automation that starts another generator when total load reaches 85% (thanks for pointing out the optimum efficiency point of marine diesels, only spent 46 years working on them), and will shut down a generator when it calculates that the load minus the one generator's capacity is below 60%. So, the ship's engines operate in the 60-85% range, usually closer to 80%, so there is adequate reserve capacity for all the hair dryers being turned on. And, again, I will say that it is a safety concern, not a wattage concern. The largest source of failures with appliances of any type that have heating elements is not with the cord, but with the "overtemperature" or "auto-off" switch, which leads to melting of the appliance, and fire. The ship's hair dryers, and coffee pots if supplied, are routinely tested for operation of the "auto-off" feature, and I've had one melt down while in the electrical shop for testing. They are all the same. But, I'll let this go. There are plenty of lines that allow passengers to bring their hair dryers onboard.

As I've said before, to these guys in this and other threads, the safety briefing has been allowed to be shown on the ship's TVs, and not at the muster drill, for many years, even before the e-muster was thought of. They seem to conveniently miss that point, and think the only thing the muster drill is about is the safety briefing. Fine with me to have a video safety briefing, and then the passengers can stand like dummies for the entire muster drill. And, I have to laugh at the complaints about being "ordered into lines, and being shouted at for talking", when that is exactly what would be happening in a real emergency.

So, RCI ships are built differently than Carnival and NCL ships, which do allow people to bring hair dryers onboard? I believe you were the one who mentioned "source" capacity. Does this not refer to the generator capacity? Not sure what this has to do with it, as no shipboard bathroom that I've ever seen has anything other than a razor outlet in it, which is on a different circuit (lighting) than the cabin outlets, and also is limited to about 40 milliamps.

Shipboard cabin outlet circuits are 20 amp circuits, but they service 2-3 cabins. So, the weight of hte wiring is already there. The design maximum generating capacity is always more than the ship needs. Have never heard of a specific outlet being recommended, they are all on a common circuit. They can handle 1800 watt hair dryers, provided the ladies in the adjacent cabins do not all plug in at once. The reason the cruise lines supply hair dryers is because then they can take them out of service for routine inspection for faults, and replace as needed. Many consumer hair dryers in the US are 1800 watts, so this will overload a 15 amp circuit. Your house has, by code, a 20 amp circuit dedicated to a single bathroom's outlets (though if baths are directly above each other, you can do one circuit for two baths), just for this reason.

This is a common misconception. Water produced onboard comes from two sources. The first, evaporation, produces water with a sodium content less than 10ppm (most commonly 1-2ppm). The second, Reverse Osmosis, is set to produce water with less than 20ppm (both systems will dump the water produced if above this limit). Your water quality for Ann Arbor, for 2021, showed an average sodium content of 65ppm, with a range of results from 46-91. Even a place like Miami, that does not use salt on roads in winter, has a sodium level of 36ppm.

Yeah, lots of overpaid USCG officers out there. And who does the USCG invite to be a part of the "Cruise Ship National Center of Experience", to study cruise ship safety and operations? Cruise line executives. Now, they may be overpaid, but you seem to think they are not invested in the status quo.

Again, unless the damage would have to be caused across multiple compartments (i.e. several explosive devices), most likely nearly 75% of the number of compartments the ship has (and a medium sized ship like the Norwegian Sky has 14 watertight compartments) in order to get the ship to sink in under an hour. Even ships that break in two, like the SS Pendleton in 1952, where both halves of the ship remained floating for days. Ships sinking in minutes are generally limited to warships that have their magazines explode.

Yes, 46 years at sea, 38 as Chief Engineer, had all my license examinations, all STCW required training (advanced firefighting, crowd and crisis management, designated security duties, engine room team management, tankerman engineer (DL), MARPOL) SOLAS training (basic firefighting, advanced firefighting, lifesaving appliances)

Looking up the visa requirements, you would need an ETA from Sri Lanka, just for the cruise. Then, when you cleared ashore at your first port, they would give you a tourist visa (based on the ETA)(so requiring a face to face with immigration), and you would have to show proof of sufficient funds for the travel time in Sri Lanka, and proof of onward travel (written authorization from the cruise lines to reboard at the second port).

So, Underwriters Labs are just wrong? How about the IIHS? Consumer Products Safety Administration? National Fire Safety Council? Which experts do you believe and which don't you? Is it that those who make your life "uncomfortable" are not believable? You'll notice I said the vast majority, not all. Question for you, was the drill better, the same, or worse than the in person drills pre-covid? Did you do an outdoor in person muster before covid?