When is a ship "OLD"?

[TEXASMUNK]

Read a few recent comments that a specific ship was "old"..it was built in 1996.

 

In years past, ships sailed for ten, fifteen, twenty years and they were evaluated based on price, service, amenities, food, etc..

 

Today, it seems if the ship was launched more than 15 minutes ago, it gets labelled as old.

 

The Norway was the favorite of tens of thousands of people and it was built in 1960. Some of today's ships have so much neon they look more like the Las Vegas strip than a ship.

 

What is your definition of an "old" ship????

[Druke I]

My definition of an older ship, very arbitrary, is 20 years.

 

That said, an older ship, that has been well maintained, can sail on much longer.

 

Today's cruisers may be spoiled, with so many newbuilds out the past few years.

 

My favorite ship, the Royal Princess (Artemis), is 21 years old, and still is prettier than many of the new ships. Admittedly, she doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the newer ships, but many of them I don't need.

[RCCLCruiser23]

two years ago i sailed on the sovereign of the seas and she looked almost brand new to me and she was 14 at that time. Has long has the ship is taken care of I wouldn't even consider a 40 year old ship to old

[hdawson]

Some say that Horizon and Zenith are old. Horizon has provided me with two of the best of my 18 cruises. Sorry to see her leaving the fleet.

[trcori]

I'm with Druke. MAYBE at 20, a ship is starting to be "older."

 

FWIW I also think HUMANS are described as "old" too soon ... I am 45 and not planning on allowing myself to be classified as "middle-aged" till PERHAPS 60 ...

 

;)

[hajekfam]

I consider any ship not well maintained old - it doesn't matter about actual age.

[greeneg]

Agree. The Noordam is old.....

[CaptData]

I'm disabled so an older ship is any before 1996. Mainly because of doors, sills and landings. On most ships of the past the Dining Room was one step up from the ground level, Pacific Princess (old one for the Love Boat Years) is an example. One step does not sound like much but it is if you are confined to a wheelchair. In ships prior to 1996 there were no accessible balconies unless they brought a ramp which was very steep and you could catch-up on it. Most doors were very heavy and hard to keep open. so when I talk about somethings, although to most it would be small it is not to those who use chairs, canes or have trouble with steps. I always suggest newer ships which have automatic doors, dedicated H/C washrooms and bulit in disabled suites (as opposed to revamped). So to me old is pre-1996. I agree most ships are not old if well maintained (Pacific Prinecss was 30 years old when she was sent out of Princess fleet) but for purposes of what is available and easy of use the newer is better for the disabled.

[14A04]

It does seem that a lot of people classify ships as old when they are only ten years of age and a lot of that does have to do with how many new ships have been introduced in the past 6-8 years.

 

I prefer to look at how well maintained the ships are, it is sad when a ship that is only 8-10 years old is not well maintained and looks much older than its age.

[chessbriar]

I'll let you know when I sail on one. I sailed on the Fascination which was built in 1994. It was not old due to age, but to what I thought was poor design and poor upkeep.

[canderson]

Today, it seems if the ship was launched more than 15 minutes ago, it gets labelled as old.

Based solely upon my own experience, I'd have to say that ship design and amenities have been changing very quickly over the last 20 years. Many (but granted, not all) of these changes seem to be very popular with the cruising public, and many of these changes have been in response to specific requests and interests from guests.

 

While a 20 year old ship that has been excellently maintained need not look "old" in terms of its condition, layouts and features that have not been updated may give the ship an older feel. If and when its done, it takes a very large refurbishment (often a complete overhaul of the interior layout) to bring such ships "up to date".

 

I think that when you hear people talking about their feelings about the relative age of a ship, they're responding to one of two things ...

 

The first is a ship that shows signs of needing some serious time in dry-dock to deal with the many things that just aren't practical to manage during voyages. The second, however, is what I'm talking about, and no amount of spiffing up is going to change that. Where people have cruised on some of the newer designs and find them to be improvements over older designs, they're going to draw these comparisons even with ships that are only 10 years old, but were built in an older style.

 

Apart from issues of fuel efficiency, there are reasons that older ships, even when well maintained, are sold off and sometimes even put "out to pasture". This is one of them.

[dougnewmanatsea]

To me "old" starts at around 30 years for a ship... Though this is not a hard and fast number. Obviously, some ships look and feel older than others despite being the same age.

 

A 10 year old ship definitely isn't "old". The design life of most passenger ships is 30 years... So calling a 10 year old ship "old" is kind of like calling a 25 or 30 year old person "old" :) .

[canderson]

To me "old" starts at around 30 years for a ship... Though this is not a hard and fast number. Obviously, some ships look and feel older than others despite being the same age.

 

A 10 year old ship definitely isn't "old". The design life of most passenger ships is 30 years... So calling a 10 year old ship "old" is kind of like calling a 25 or 30 year old person "old" :) .

Brings up an interesting comparison. Even with brand new fabric, if I dressed the way I did 25 or 30 years ago -- or even much longer than that, what (other than "retro") would people call it? Spats, even new spats if you could find them, don't reflect "new" when you're looking at someone's shoes.

 

The style and design of these ships have been changing quickly, and I think people respond to this as much as anything else when they "date" a ship.

[dougnewmanatsea]

Brings up an interesting comparison. Even with brand new fabric, if I dressed the way I did 25 or 30 years ago -- or even much longer than that, what (other than "retro") would people call it?

I see your point - but fashion changes much more quickly than ship design. Really, it does! I mean, I don't think the average dress is designed to last between 25 and 40 years, but a cruise ship is.

 

And of course not everyone subscribes to "newer is better" when it comes to ships (I definitely don't). You'd be surprised how many people like old ships - and I don't mean 10 years old when I say "old", either. They do have something that is missing in new ships.

 

Similarly, it's pretty hard to argue that cars today aren't better than they were 40 years ago but that doesn't bother classic car enthusiasts!

 

So vintage ships have their charms too. And there are more of them around than you might think! You can see a list of all existing overnight passenger ships over 1,000 GT over 40 years old (i.e. built 1965 or earlier) here. The oldest entry on the list is from 1843 (!) but she is a museum... However it is still possible to take a cruise in some rather old vessels, e.g. the riverboat DELTA QUEEN, built in 1926, the tall ship SEA CLOUD of 1931 (originally the world's largest private yacht, built as a wedding gift from E.F. Hutton to his bride-to-be Marjorie Merriwether Post), and on it goes.

[canderson]

I see your point - but fashion changes much more quickly than ship design. Really, it does! I mean, I don't think the average dress is designed to last between 25 and 40 years, but a cruise ship is.

 

And of course not everyone subscribes to "newer is better" when it comes to ships (I definitely don't). You'd be surprised how many people like old ships - and I don't mean 10 years old when I say "old", either. They do have something that is missing in new ships.

 

Similarly, it's pretty hard to argue that cars today aren't better than they were 40 years ago but that doesn't bother classic car enthusiasts!

 

You're now dealing not in "old" or "retro", but in the concept of "classic". It's possible to offer modern amenities in a "classic" ship or even a "neo-classic" design ship, but doing it right -- with sufficient detail to make it believable -- can be prohibitively expensive. Many that have tried to do so in this and other areas have managed to break the bank trying. I was just recently in the El San Juan after my April cruise, and had one owner not gone bust and the property offered for fire sale prices, it's unlikely that anyone could have afforded to keep it open, and that amazing hotel would be crumbling as have others in that area. As to cruise ships, there's a reason that few classics are still afloat, largely due to enormous restoration and retrofit costs. Heck, they can't even find a buyer for the France that will put it back to rights -- even as a floating hotel.

 

I don't think that Celebrity believes (and they're probably right) that they have a business model that would make buying and maintaining a ship like that profitable. Successful examples really are rare because a premium charge is required to make the cash flow work.

[Tatka]

With 100000 newbuilds people are getting spoiled.

 

My first cruise (I was 14) in 1986 was on "Admiral Nachimov" (originally Berlin) built in 1925! I wasn't even thinking I was sailing on "OLD" ship.

 

I was really surprised when I read these boards in 2003 before sailing on Century (first cruise in North America) and somebody called her older ship!

 

I wonder why people are usually concerned about an age of the ships but not hotels or resorts? :confused:

[mahdnc]

The rule is simple: the ship is old if it is older than me!

[canderson]

 

I wonder why people are usually concerned about an age of the ships but not hotels or resorts? :confused:

They are. It seems that these days, if a hotel doesn't offer some kind of gym equipment and more than dial-up internet service, their business declines. Hotel management groups are not installing all of that stuff in existing properties just to spend the money! Their customers insist on it because newer hotels all come equipped that way, and the older hotels are following suit. Exceptions seem to be those that cater to people who prefer a more "rustic" experience.

[Joe1690]

It really depends. My mom who has been cruising since the 60s and having gone on the SSUS never liked to go on older ships which she terms ships that are small and don't offer alot of amenities. For instance, when I was younger we traveled almost exclusively on Carnival because they were building the new ships Holiday, Jubilee, Celebration etc. and wouldn't consider princess for that reason. Now, she considers ships more than about 6 years old as being old and won't travel on them without significant cajoling on my part. It is ironic that this question was asked today because my family is considering a cruise to alaska in June and I was looking at the Sun Princess, Island Princess, and Coral Princess, and when I mentioned that the Sun Princess was built in 1995 my mom responded I don't want to go on old ship. I want the latest amenities. Yet, at the same time she would not hesistate to go on the Galaxy or Grandeur of the Seas.

 

On the other hand, I view ships as being old when they lack amenities that are important to me like staterooms at least 130 square feet, at least one alternative dining restaurant, a pool area that is small for the number of passengers, and show lounges that can only stage low quality shows. For instance, I consider the Norwegian Crown and Dream old ships and would not step foot on the Crown again unless it was a bargain basement price because the casino was woefully small, the pool area was pathetic (IMHO) and there just was not enough to do and the ship was not well maintained. The Dream is an adequate ship but once again the pool areas are not great but the ship is still satisifactory for my tastes and can be enjoyed for many years to come. I don't consider ships under 70,000 tons old because they offer the amenities that I like and usually have nice pool areas. In fact, I prefer the 70,000 - 90,000 ton ships over the 100,000+ ton ships because they offer the right combination of amenties and size. In fact, I was hoping to go on the Norway for a second time several years ago to bring back nostalgia and feel that the ship is not old in my book since it offers enough amenities and choices as long as you don't book one of the broomcloset staterooms (ie. 96 square feet ones).

 

I do agree with everyone though that cruisers are becoming spoiled and since many have sailed on ships built in the last 7 years, anything older than that becomes hard to go on since they many cruisers feel that the amenities are not up there.

 

I think as time goes on and fewer new ships come out each year the age at which a typical cruiser will consider a ship old will increase.

 

Sincerely,

 

JC