Odyssey - Issues with Forward Suites

[chriswat]

We are considering cruising with Odyssey from Singapore to Dubai in March 2013, however can only book a suite quite near forward on deck 7. We have always had midships suites on other ships (not Seabourn) and am wondering if we would experience any issues in relation to the dipping of the ship through the water. My husband is prone to seasickness however has never had any problems on the larger ships.

[Poppy1966]

I haven't sailed this itinerary however I have been in a forward suite on the Odyssey in both calm and choppy water and I didn't have any sickness problems. However, a problem several other passengers in forward suites did have was the docking and anchoring in the mornings as the ship really shudders and is quite noisy. If you're an early bird I doubt it would bother you. If you like a lie in maybe it would. Looks like 50% of this cruise are sea days so maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

[chriswat]

Many thanks for your prompt reply....we have seen another post re the docking and anchoring....we will take this into account. We are thinking we might put off this particular cruise until 2014 and book early for a midship suite.

[sananda]

If your husband is prone to seasickness, Seabourn may not be the line for you. We cruised on the Sojourn this spring. This was the second smallest ship we have ever sailed on. These ships moved a lot more than the modern large ships we normally cruise on. Neither my wife nor myself were strongly affected, but many other passengers were greatly affected. The couple from Chicago that we were bonding with were completely wiped out for days.

 

If you can tolerate larger ships like Regent, Crystal etc. have, they may be a safer bet.

[chriswat]

If your husband is prone to seasickness, Seabourn may not be the line for you. We cruised on the Sojourn this spring. This was the second smallest ship we have ever sailed on. These ships moved a lot more than the modern large ships we normally cruise on. Neither my wife nor myself were strongly affected, but many other passengers were greatly affected. The couple from Chicago that we were bonding with were completely wiped out for days.

 

If you can tolerate larger ships like Regent, Crystal etc. have, they may be a safer bet.

Many thanks for that information....yes we can tolerate the larger ships - Queen Mary 2, Seven Seas Mariner and Oceania, however your post has given us food for thought. It is not much fun paying top dollar and then spending days ill. Think we will definitely have a rethink on the Odyssey and perhaps look at the larger ships. We are grateful for your prompt reply

[JaneBP]

I had the roughest time of my life on the QM2, heading north from Ft Lauderdale to NYC and hitting a nor'easter along the Carolina coast. Deck chairs were flying about, everything that could be was lashed down, and people were crawling in the corridors to get to dinner.

I have bounced around on both the Big and Little Sisters. One TA was so rough the bedside tables were tossed about. So I don't hold the theory that bigger ships are necessarily more stable.

[RobertQM2]

We are considering cruising with Odyssey from Singapore to Dubai in March 2013, however can only book a suite quite near forward ....

Hi, we've been in this area at the same time on the WC with QM2 and no wave in sight for weeks. And when on the Odyssey this spring the rumbling of the bow trusters was not that much on 5 deck, apart from having a free alarm clock for the next port of call.

[wripro]

I am certainly no marine expert but I am given to understand that the size of a vessel does not determine its ability to handle rough seas, within reason, of course. Yes, the QM2 would probably handle rough seas better but I suspect that is due more to its construction as an ocean liner rather than its size. I doubt that Monstrosity of the Seas, pardon, I mean Oasis of the Seas, would handle a storm any better than the Odyssey. If anyone is better informed I invite them to correct me.

[Mr Luxury]

I was on the maiden voyage of the QM2

We had force ten sailing from Southampton to Madeira and Barbados.

Shirley Bassey was the cabaret and she remained in her suite unable to come out let alone belt out a few numbers.

It was so rough that I very nearly spilled a drink at dinner.There were only nine of us that ventured out in the Queens Grill dining room one evening.

Thankfully I have never encountered anything like it on a Seabourn vessel.

[KirkNC]

Forward will always be rougher then mid ships. How much depends on the seas.

[sananda]

I am certainly no marine expert but I am given to understand that the size of a vessel does not determine its ability to handle rough seas, within reason, of course. Yes, the QM2 would probably handle rough seas better but I suspect that is due more to its construction as an ocean liner rather than its size. I doubt that Monstrosity of the Seas, pardon, I mean Oasis of the Seas, would handle a storm any better than the Odyssey. If anyone is better informed I invite them to correct me.

 

I think you are wrong on a couple of counts. Size absolutely determines the ride, also the shape and draft. Imagine 20 foot swells (not uncommon) like we experienced experienced this spring in the mediterranean on the Sojourn. If you are in a 5 foot raft, you would rise and fall 4 lengths of your craft with each wave (ignore the fact that you would just be tossed out of the raft). However, if your boat was 100 feet long, your hull would span multiple waves providing a much smoother ride. Also a ship with a sharp keel and larger draft, typical of ocean liners, cut through the waves better and provide a much smoother ride. Most of this is simple physics. Also, you have to account for gross tonnage. A ship like the Sojourn weighs ~32,000 gross tons and when under power, generates a lot more momentum than the little sisters that the waves would have to overcome to create a rough ride. RCCL Oasis class, ~225,000 gross tons, when under power would take a hell of a wave to alter its momentum.

 

Finally, you have to account for the propulsion system on the ships. most people imagine propellers on all ships, but this is simply not the case. On the modern larger ships, just about anything with more than 2000 people these days, traditional propellers are not used. The ships would simply not be maneuverable enough. Instead the employ a series of underwater turbines, that can swivel in any X,Y, Z direction, with at least one at each corner of the ship. That's how these monstrosities can move sideways when docking. They also have sophisticated computer software that constantly monitors both the pitch and yaw of the ship which can then adjust the turbines to maintain a level ride. Trust me, when we were in the Atlantic on this ship, it felt like we were on land. No movement at all.

[conchyjoe]

I think you are wrong on a couple of counts. Size absolutely determines the ride, also the shape and draft. Imagine 20 foot swells (not uncommon) like we experienced experienced this spring in the mediterranean on the Sojourn. If you are in a 5 foot raft, you would rise and fall 4 lengths of your craft with each wave (ignore the fact that you would just be tossed out of the raft). However, if your boat was 100 feet long, your hull would span multiple waves providing a much smoother ride. Also a ship with a sharp keel and larger draft, typical of ocean liners, cut through the waves better and provide a much smoother ride. Most of this is simple physics. Also, you have to account for gross tonnage. A ship like the Sojourn weighs ~32,000 gross tons and when under power, generates a lot more momentum than the little sisters that the waves would have to overcome to create a rough ride. RCCL Oasis class, ~225,000 gross tons, when under power would take a hell of a wave to alter its momentum.

 

Finally, you have to account for the propulsion system on the ships. most people imagine propellers on all ships, but this is simply not the case. On the modern larger ships, just about anything with more than 2000 people these days, traditional propellers are not used. The ships would simply not be maneuverable enough. Instead the employ a series of underwater turbines, that can swivel in any X,Y, Z direction, with at least one at each corner of the ship. That's how these monstrosities can move sideways when docking. They also have sophisticated computer software that constantly monitors both the pitch and yaw of the ship which can then adjust the turbines to maintain a level ride. Trust me, when we were in the Atlantic on this ship, it felt like we were on land. No movement at all.

 

Just a couple of small corrections. Passenger vessels do not normally have the turbines you describe (I will use the brand name Azipods for future reference) at each "corner" of the ship. They are normally configured with two or four Azipods at the stern and two or three thrusters at the bow. Some vessels do have Azipods at each "corner" but this is generally limited to tugs and drill ships. Tugs because they need extreme maneuverability and drill ships because they want to avoid the same.

 

Now we come to size. Yes, size does matter especially in pitching seas, but with seagoing vessels it is an important, but secondary consideration to those parameters known as C.G. (centre of gravity) and Righting Moment. (http://www.marineengineering.org.uk/navarch/navstability.htm if you want a technical explanation). The determining factors in passenger ships for these two parameters are essentially vessel design, since the cargo (you the passenger) is for the most part insignificant in the calculation. Not so on a general cargo vessel where the cargo and loading forms an important part of the equation.

 

Modern passenger ships are for the most part a compromise between the accountant and the naval architect. The former wants to generate the most revenue and like a building on land, this means building high, because the land cost is only on the ground floor. The naval architect has to temper the accountant because there is a physical limit to how high you can build the cabins without busting the C.G rules. In the mid 1990's the rules for C.G of passenger vessels were changed and for older vessels this often meant having to load more fuel (stored in the very bottom of the ship) to compensate.

 

To mitigate the uncomfortable ride that high C.G. vessels were subjected to, the passenger shipping industry invested in stabilizer technology. The first ones came on transatlantic liners in the 1930's and were mechanical units with huge gyroscopes weighing many tons. Today the stabilizers (essentially wings that fold out from the ship under the water) are highly technical and computer controlled and can adjust the ships motion constantly with vast improvements being achieved over the past fifteen years due to the advance in computer processing speed and sensor technology. Their effectiveness is mostly to correct roll but modern systems can also have a significant dampening effect on pitch.

 

Bottom line .. each ship is different in it's sea keeping abilities but there is no physical straight line correlation between size and it's safety, comfort or stability. That said, longer and low is generally better.

 

A long time ago, at age 17, I asked one of the senior Able Seaman on the ship if there was a way to avoid being seasick ... his reply ..... "sure there is .....sit under an oak tree".

[sananda]

conchyjoe - thanks for the in depth discussion. I have been on a number of cruise ships that use Azipods. NCL claims to have the most modern fleet in the world and I believe most, if not all of their ships employ Azipods. I believe the Ruby Princess used Azipods as well. I am 100% certain about the RCCL Oasis because they are quite proud of their technological accomplishment and during a ships tour, they clearly showed the Azipods and described their function.

 

The point I was trying to make for chriswat was that in comparison to the larger ships I have been on, the Sojourn had a very rough ride. Of course weather plays a big role in things, but this spring on the Sojourn in what I would describe as a steady rain with some wind, the ride was quite rough. I have been in the Caribbean a couple of times on the behemoths when we were just trying to skirt hurricanes. The ride was much more stable in worse weather than what we experienced on the Sojourn.

[wripro]

I guess all I was trying to say (in my uneducated way) is that I have had rough rides on every size ship including the QM2. It all depended on the weather and seas. Personally, I would never discard a specific cruise because of ship size other than perhaps sailing Windstar across the Tasman Sea or the Drake Passage.

[sananda]

I guess all I was trying to say (in my uneducated way) is that I have had rough rides on every size ship including the QM2. It all depended on the weather and seas. Personally, I would never discard a specific cruise because of ship size other than perhaps sailing Windstar across the Tasman Sea or the Drake Passage.

 

I am guessing that you don't get seasick at all. For those that are prone to seasickness, the choice of vacation is more of a risk. All other things being equal, the larger and more modern ships provide a smoother ride. If seasickness is a concern for you, avoiding Silversea, Seabourn and the other small ship lines seems prudent. In fact, if your propensity for seasickness is high, why go on a cruise at all?

[wripro]

You are right. Knock wood (I am doing so right now) I have never been seasick. Yet!!!!

[JPH814]

How is the Sojourn in the Baltic? Does the Baltic (in the summertime) typically have rougher seas or calmer seas? I have read a lot of reviews of this cruise and I have never heard anyone mention the seas as a problem.

[white oak]

We are considering cruising with Odyssey from Singapore to Dubai in March 2013, however can only book a suite quite near forward on deck 7. We have always had midships suites on other ships (not Seabourn) and am wondering if we would experience any issues in relation to the dipping of the ship through the water. My husband is prone to seasickness however has never had any problems on the larger ships.

 

I was forward on deck 6 on Odyssey, for a crossing - March 2011. There is quite a bit of movement in these cabins but I enjoy it and I'm not prone to seasickness. What may be an additional issue is the constant, loud creaking of the cabin module from the ship's bow movement. I woke up many a night due to the excessive creaking/squeaking of the cabin.

[wripro]

I have sailed the Baltic several times and it has always been calm as a bathtub.

[marchanxiety]

I've done 2 Baltic cruises, one on the Pride and One on the Soujourn. Great weather both times (July and early August).