Carnival Orders 4 New Ships

[London-Calling]

Don't get your hopes up. It will probably end up looking like CARNIVAL VISTA with some LNG tanks thrown on top! LOL

 

You are probably very right!

 

Mind you, Vista is around 133,000gt so they need to find another 47,000 gt to reach 180,000gt.

[eroller]

You are probably very right!

 

Mind you, Vista is around 133,000gt so they need to find another 47,000 gt to reach 180,000gt.

 

A few more decks of cabins along with the LNG tanks should easily take care of that! Remember if those massive tanks are located inside the ship, they will count towards the overall GT of the ship. Personally I would rather have an atrium!

[cjknox]

Oh I think Micky is still part of the decision making process. He is still Chairman of the Board and a major stockholder. No doubt he still has major influence, but has stepped back to a certain extent. The press release actually states that Micky has been involved with the design of these new ships.

 

One the contrary Ernie, Micky publicly stated during a recent interview that the Arnold has "control of the reins" now, so while I'm sure he has some influence Arnold is the decision maker and even if he didn't agree with the decision it's Micky's job as chairman to support the CEO and that's what he's doing, as evidenced by his ''involvement'' in various parts of the design process.

[Gryffindor55]

One the contrary Ernie, Micky publicly stated during a recent interview that the Arnold has "control of the reins" now, so while I'm sure he has some influence Arnold is the decision maker and even if he didn't agree with the decision it's Micky's job as chairman to support the CEO and that's what he's doing, as evidenced by his ''involvement'' in various parts of the design process.

 

Cameron,

 

{Edited to Delete Content}

 

I'll be sure to send Richard your regards.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Gryffindor55

[cruzn buckeye]

Has any seen the picture of the Harmony of the Seas?Seriously, pure ugly. Looks like a gigantic container ship. And carnivals new builds are even bigger. As for me, these new gigantic ships? no thank... way too many people on board.. too crowded... too big... I prefer smaller... many people ask for more ships the size of the Spirit class.. but none are being built... if it comes to the point that all the smaller ships are gone, and all we have to sail on are behemoths... I won't be cruising anymore... Just think, in an emergency, while i admit they are few and far between, could you imagine trying to get off the ship??? I life rafts?? And the lines of people panicking??? I just wish these cruiselines would stop trying to outdo each other by having the biggest ships. bigger is not always better...

[eroller]

One the contrary Ernie, Micky publicly stated during a recent interview that the Arnold has "control of the reins" now, so while I'm sure he has some influence Arnold is the decision maker and even if he didn't agree with the decision it's Micky's job as chairman to support the CEO and that's what he's doing, as evidenced by his ''involvement'' in various parts of the design process.

 

 

"Control of the reins" doesn't give you free reins so to speak. As a publicly traded company, a massive capital expenditure such as four newbuilds would require consultation and approval of the board. Micky being chairman of the board would certainly have a say in this process and even great influence one way or the other. From the sounds of it he has taken his duties even further getting involved in the design process. Without the boards support and approval these ships would not be built. I would say the board was even more involved since these new ships are taking the company in a new direction. They are the largest the company has ever built, and also incorporate a somewhat contraversial power source being LNG. I'm sure the board weighed the pros and cons of LNG, and the impact that it may have on the company from a PR standpoint. Arnold's job would be to provide the board with a viable business plan that supports building these four ships and the benefits of going with LNG. So while he may be in charge of running Carnival Corp's day to day operation, he would not solely be able to make the decision to build four LNG powered ships.

 

I'll add that I do totally agree with you in that Arnold is running the company and has a very different style than Micky. It's possible that under Arison these ships would have never been proposed, but I do think Arison had involvement and gave his approval being chairman. The biggest change under Arnold is how each brand collaborates with each other. Under Arison there was very little collaboration and the brands were fiercely competitive with each other, rarely sharing best practices and even competing head on in the same markets sometimes. Under Arnold we see brands that are more intent on competing with the outside competition instead of with each other. Lots of collaboration and sharing of best practices and even consulting with each other beforehand regarding itinerary deployment to avoid as much overlap as possible. I think it's too early to tell if the strategy is paying off and honestly I see pros and cons in both Arnold's and Arison's strategies.

Edited June 20, 2015 by eroller

[stevenr597]

What are your thoughts?

 

Bigger, Newer, with more passengers/ship than ever before. Probably at the bottom if you measure passenger/space. Carnival's race to the bottom continues.

[London-Calling]

I just read that LN Gas takes up more space than traditional maritime fuel.

 

I wonder how Carnival plan to fit all of those souls on-board as well?

 

Carnival have already said “making much more efficient use of the ship’s spaces”.

 

I bet the tanks will be on deck or external somehow, like on-board the ferry 'Viking Grace'.

[chengkp75]

I just read that LN Gas takes up more space than traditional maritime fuel.

 

I wonder how Carnival plan to fit all of those souls on-board as well?

 

Carnival have already said “making much more efficient use of the ship’s spaces”.

 

I bet the tanks will be on deck or external somehow, like on-board the ferry 'Viking Grace'.

 

LNG requires about 6 times the volume of residual fuel or diesel fuel. What they will definitely do is to cut down on the amount of fuel carried, requiring more frequent fueling. I also believe they will not be true LNG fueled ships, but will be "dual fuel", where the engine is capable of burning both gaseous and liquid fuel at the same time. These engines can have a mixing range of between 40/60% diesel to LNG, up to 10/90% diesel to LNG. This will allow the cleaner burning benefits from the LNG, while not requiring that LNG make up the full fuel component (i.e., less storage space). These engines can also be switched to straight liquid fuel when required, so until I see the exact specs for the engine plants, Carnival may be doing a little PR hocus-pocus, and only using the LNG in special emissions areas like the US, and switching back to residual fuel outside of ECA's, while claiming the ships are "LNG powered".

[bruadhin]

LNG requires about 6 times the volume of residual fuel or diesel fuel. What they will definitely do is to cut down on the amount of fuel carried, requiring more frequent fueling. I also believe they will not be true LNG fueled ships, but will be "dual fuel", where the engine is capable of burning both gaseous and liquid fuel at the same time. These engines can have a mixing range of between 40/60% diesel to LNG, up to 10/90% diesel to LNG. This will allow the cleaner burning benefits from the LNG, while not requiring that LNG make up the full fuel component (i.e., less storage space). These engines can also be switched to straight liquid fuel when required, so until I see the exact specs for the engine plants, Carnival may be doing a little PR hocus-pocus, and only using the LNG in special emissions areas like the US, and switching back to residual fuel outside of ECA's, while claiming the ships are "LNG powered".

 

I am curious, what kind of range do cruiseship's have? It seems they are fueled each visit to the home port. I'm sure that is more for convenience and reducing the amount of fuel carried versus necessity. But I'm still curious what kind of range they have between fuelings. Also, at typical speeds, is more power used for the hotel load or for propulsion?

[falkcor]

LNG requires about 6 times the volume of residual fuel or diesel fuel. What they will definitely do is to cut down on the amount of fuel carried, requiring more frequent fueling. I also believe they will not be true LNG fueled ships, but will be "dual fuel", where the engine is capable of burning both gaseous and liquid fuel at the same time. These engines can have a mixing range of between 40/60% diesel to LNG, up to 10/90% diesel to LNG. This will allow the cleaner burning benefits from the LNG, while not requiring that LNG make up the full fuel component (i.e., less storage space). These engines can also be switched to straight liquid fuel when required, so until I see the exact specs for the engine plants, Carnival may be doing a little PR hocus-pocus, and only using the LNG in special emissions areas like the US, and switching back to residual fuel outside of ECA's, while claiming the ships are "LNG powered".

 

yes, i was thinking this as well... i would not be surprised if this were the fact of the matter.

[love my grandkids]

Bottom line is the public spaces will be smaller.

[London-Calling]

I also believe they will not be true LNG fueled ships, but will be "dual fuel", where the engine is capable of burning both gaseous and liquid fuel at the same time.

 

That's an interesting idea.

 

The idea of a totally LNG powered cruise ship which is the second biggest class of ship in the world, seems a little overambitious.

[chengkp75]

I am curious, what kind of range do cruiseship's have? It seems they are fueled each visit to the home port. I'm sure that is more for convenience and reducing the amount of fuel carried versus necessity. But I'm still curious what kind of range they have between fuelings. Also, at typical speeds, is more power used for the hotel load or for propulsion?

 

"Range" is somewhat subjective. As you say, to an extent they will minimize the amount of fuel carried, since it requires burning fuel to move the fuel around. The ships will also have several tanks for fuel, and there can be problems with mixing fuels taken at different places, or at different times, or from different suppliers, so they will tend to load smaller "packets" into one or two tanks, so that they can minimize the mixing of two fuel loads. It also takes time to bunker (load) the fuel, so taking a lot at one time would interfere with the schedule.

 

Range is also dependent on itinerary. More sea time equals more fuel burned, and greater distances between ports can mean more fuel burned maintaining higher speeds to get to that port the next day. Having said that, every mainline cruise ship out there will carry enough fuel to make a transatlantic crossing, or maybe 1/3-1/2 of a transpacific, with a safety margin. A ship like the Vista will burn about 250mt/day at about 19-20 knots. She will probably carry around 4000-6000mt of fuel, so she could go about 16-24 days at near top speed without running out of fuel, about 7500-11500 miles.

 

The ships are designed to be able to support the hotel load on one engine, and the rest being for propulsion (and maintenance). Vista will have 5 engines, typically they will run 4 to get maximum speed for a planned itinerary, allowing one engine to be out of service without affecting schedule. To get "full speed", you would need all 5 engines. So, the hotel load is one engine's worth of fuel, or about 45-60mt/day, and underway, they will run 1, 2, or 3 more engines to make the required speed. So, hotel load can be between 25-50% of the fuel burned, depending on the speed.

 

In Hawaii, we fueled every other turn-around, but we were not at sea that much on that itinerary.

[falkcor]

Bottom line is the public spaces will be smaller.

 

i don't think you are qualified to categorically say that as a fact.

 

keep it mind it is not clear exactly where these ships are going, except for the 2 apparently going to aida. as far as cruise ship design aida has been somewhat 'innovative' in their uses of space...

 

--

 

but just as an example... maybe the cabins will be smaller than we are used to on carnival corp ships. there's nothing to say that couldn't happen.

 

perhaps they will reduce the amount of the ship which is dedicated to children's spaces (akin to camp carnival/ocean, o2, circle c, suess bookville)...

 

maybe they will change the dining concepts and move away from the large traditional main dining rooms AND lido buffet which sure take up a lot of space...

 

perhaps they will reduce the size of the spa, which has only grown since (meant for costa) splendor...

 

maybe they will reduce the size of the gym as it's not that often used...

 

perhaps they'll use the theater as a multi-use space / nightclub at night like first seen on sunshine...

 

maybe they'll have comedy shows in the theater instead of a dedicated space (where i think it belongs anyway!)...

 

perhaps they won't even bother with shows since so many complain about punchliner productions (yourself included)...

 

maybe they won't bother with a thrill theater or imax (only on vista) - maybe they don't actually work...

 

perhaps they realize they can sell candy from the gift shops instead of a dedicated cherry on top type space...

 

maybe they combine guest services and shore excursions desks - even if they expand the size and staff they can save 50% of the space...

 

perhaps they can save on some of that 'white space' in the middle of every carnival ship for hotel operations / etc. and make more efficient use of the space...

 

maybe they'll cut back the number of suites to up the pax count in the same amount of space...

 

perhaps they'll design more efficiently to eliminate the 'oddball' type rooms like bowling alley balconies or those huge OVs...

 

and we've already seen them cut the multi-story atrium on vista, and fill numerous decks with cabins instead of empty space within the same GRT

 

--

 

enough, i could count TONS of ways they could modify the ships, which 1) would not affect a majority of cruisers, 2) could alternatively accommodate the same activities, 3) could alternatively accommodate the same business / sales, 4) utilize spaces more effectively during the day / night, etc.

 

i'm just saying... don't be so sure, just yet.

Edited June 25, 2015 by falkcor

[love my grandkids]

i don't think you are qualified to categorically say that as a fact.

 

keep it mind it is not clear exactly where these ships are going, except for the 2 apparently going to aida. as far as cruise ship design aida has been somewhat 'innovative' in their uses of space...

 

--

 

but just as an example... maybe the cabins will be smaller than we are used to on carnival corp ships. there's nothing to say that couldn't happen.

 

perhaps they will reduce the amount of the ship which is dedicated to children's spaces (akin to camp carnival/ocean, o2, circle c, suess bookville)...

 

maybe they will change the dining concepts and move away from the large traditional main dining rooms AND lido buffet which sure take up a lot of space...

 

perhaps they will reduce the size of the spa, which has only grown since (meant for costa) splendor...

 

maybe they will reduce the size of the gym as it's not that often used...

 

perhaps they'll use the theater as a multi-use space / nightclub at night like first seen on sunshine...

 

maybe they'll have comedy shows in the theater instead of a dedicated space (where i think it belongs anyway!)...

 

perhaps they won't even bother with shows since so many complain about punchliner productions (yourself included)...

 

maybe they won't bother with a thrill theater or imax (only on vista) - maybe they don't actually work...

 

perhaps they realize they can sell candy from the gift shops instead of a dedicated cherry on top type space...

 

maybe they combine guest services and shore excursions desks - even if they expand the size and staff they can save 50% of the space...

 

perhaps they can save on some of that 'white space' in the middle of every carnival ship for hotel operations / etc. and make more efficient use of the space...

 

maybe they'll cut back the number of suites to up the pax count in the same amount of space...

 

perhaps they'll design more efficiently to eliminate the 'oddball' type rooms like bowling alley balconies or those huge OVs...

 

and we've already seen them cut the multi-story atrium on vista, and fill numerous decks with cabins instead of empty space within the same GRT

 

--

 

enough, i could count TONS of ways they could modify the ships, which 1) would not affect a majority of cruisers, 2) could alternatively accommodate the same activities, 3) could alternatively accommodate the same business / sales, 4) utilize spaces more effectively during the day / night, etc.

 

i'm just saying... don't be so sure, just yet.

 

Not sure of nothing but if the ship has more passengers than oasis and has a lower tonnage doesnt that translate into crowded?

 

From what I hear of Vista comedy club will handle perhaps 10% of passengers so it does appear Carnival is cramming more passengers into their ships.

 

However sure hope I am wrong..

[London-Calling]

Not sure of nothing but if the ship has more passengers than oasis and has a lower tonnage doesnt that translate into crowded?

 

Yes, no doubt!

 

Gross tonnage is a measurement of internal space (volume) not weight. Oasis is around 225,000gt and the Carnival newbuild 180,000gt. Carnival's ship is 45,000gt smaller, yet will carry more passengers.

 

Some of the spaces on regular ships, such as Spas/gyms and Casino's which are not used by all passengers actually generate a small fortune in revenue so are unlikely to be axed. Retail spaces often take up a lot of space for the same reason.

 

If you take away the kids spaces the ship becomes less to families, another big source of income.

 

The idea of a mega-ship is that they offer MORE facilities, not less. I don't want to see my cabin and all the public rooms shrink and get more crowded.

 

I think it was just media-speak when Carnival said: “making much more efficient use of the ship’s spaces”. They decide that if they are going to spend a fortune on 4x 180,000gt ships, they are going to fit as many people on-board as possible and generate the maximum amount of revenue possible - disregarding passenger comfort!

 

I may be wrong?

Edited June 26, 2015 by London-Calling

[love my grandkids]

Yes, no doubt!

 

Gross tonnage is a measurement of internal space (volume) not weight. Oasis is around 225,000gt and the Carnival newbuild 180,000gt. Carnival's ship is 45,000gt smaller, yet will carry more passengers.

 

Some of the spaces on regular ships, such as Spas/gyms and Casino's which are not used by all passengers actually generate a small fortune in revenue so are unlikely to be axed. Retail spaces often take up a lot of space for the same reason.

 

If you take away the kids spaces the ship becomes less to families, another big source of income.

 

The idea of a mega-ship is that they offer MORE facilities, not less. I don't want to see my cabin and all the public rooms shrink and get more crowded.

 

I think it was just media-speak when Carnival said: “making much more efficient use of the ship’s spaces”. They decide that if they are going to spend a fortune on 4x 180,000gt ships, they are going to fit as many people on-board as possible and generate the maximum amount of revenue possible - disregarding passenger comfort!

 

I may be wrong?

 

I do believe you have hit the nail on the head. Hope this will not be the case though.

[repo-cruiser]

True although not quite like they used to. Carnival used to be the golden boy of the cruise industry. Everything they touched turned to gold. Now I would rather have my money invested in Royal Caribbean. Much better return on your investment over the past couple years compared to Carnival. Times have changed and one thing is for sure, bigger is not always better. Just look at McDonalds and Walmart. They are the biggest, but both are mediocre companies at best.

 

"Walmart is without question the most successful retailer in the history of the United States, and in the history of the entire world by almost any measure (number of stores, sales revenue, number of employees, market share, etc.)"-Forbes

 

 

"Today, Walmart and the Walmart Foundation announced that over the last fiscal year they gave more than $1 billion in cash and in-kind contributions, making it the first time Walmart or any U.S. retailer has achieved that level of giving. The growth in global giving was largely due to increased in-kind donations in the U.S. to local food banks and families impacted by disasters."-NYTimes

 

Yea sure they are mediocre.

[repo-cruiser]

Princess and HAL have not always been world market delivery choices for Carnival. In fact until fairly recently, both lines were very North American market-centric. HAL still is. Yes both lines sail on world wide itineraries and have for a long time, but those itineraries have always catered to North America. As I mentioned that is still the case with HAL, but Princess has only recently branched out to make a name for itself in other markets such as Australia, Japan, and now China.

 

So I would certainly not say "always".

 

Also Carnival the brand is certainly not immune from this strategy. Just take one look at Australia. Ships are being sent there (unfortunately the best in the fleet) and adapted for the Australian market. These cruises are not even marketed in the US. As for Galveston, well more power to Carnival. You couldn't pay me to sail out of there.

 

What is wrong with Galveston? You don't like friendly people? Probably better yoiu don't cruise from Galveston, Texans are friendly and don't complain, so you would stick out like a sore thumb.:)

[jimbo5544]

Yes, no doubt!

 

Gross tonnage is a measurement of internal space (volume) not weight. Oasis is around 225,000gt and the Carnival newbuild 180,000gt. Carnival's ship is 45,000gt smaller, yet will carry more passengers.

 

Some of the spaces on regular ships, such as Spas/gyms and Casino's which are not used by all passengers actually generate a small fortune in revenue so are unlikely to be axed. Retail spaces often take up a lot of space for the same reason.

 

If you take away the kids spaces the ship becomes less to families, another big source of income.

 

The idea of a mega-ship is that they offer MORE facilities, not less. I don't want to see my cabin and all the public rooms shrink and get more crowded.

 

I think it was just media-speak when Carnival said: “making much more efficient use of the ship’s spaces”. They decide that if they are going to spend a fortune on 4x 180,000gt ships, they are going to fit as many people on-board as possible and generate the maximum amount of revenue possible - disregarding passenger comfort!

 

I may be wrong?

 

The last one was a rhetorical question,....right?:confused:

[jimbo5544]

It appears much of the "discussion" here about Carnival Cruise Line jamming people into the "dangerous" ships was all for naught. Posted today is an article which says two are for Aida (as previously noted) and the other two for a Costa group (not sure what that means, but not destined for CCL) as LNG appears much easier to get and deployment ready in Europe.

 

http://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/news-headlines/costa-groups-lng-cruise-ships-forecast-as-40-more-efficient.html

[chengkp75]

It appears much of the "discussion" here about Carnival Cruise Line jamming people into the "dangerous" ships was all for naught. Posted today is an article which says two are for Aida (as previously noted) and the other two for a Costa group (not sure what that means, but not destined for CCL) as LNG appears much easier to get and deployment ready in Europe.

 

http://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/news-headlines/costa-groups-lng-cruise-ships-forecast-as-40-more-efficient.html

 

Well, not exactly. "Concerning LNG availability, Carnival expects supply in northern Europe and the Mediterranean to follow demand, Dow said. Fueling could be carried out at the dock, by pipeline or LNG barge." So, there is not much more available LNG facilities, but Carnival is hoping it will become available.

 

Also, a bit conflicting in the article. The engines are dual-fuel, yet they intimate that LNG will be used for 100% of power at sea. Dual fuel engines burn both liquid fuel (diesel or residual) and LNG at the same time, so LNG would most likely not provide 100% of power, particularly at sea.

[jimbo5544]

Well, not exactly. "Concerning LNG availability, Carnival expects supply in northern Europe and the Mediterranean to follow demand, Dow said. Fueling could be carried out at the dock, by pipeline or LNG barge." So, there is not much more available LNG facilities, but Carnival is hoping it will become available.

 

 

 

Also, a bit conflicting in the article. The engines are dual-fuel, yet they intimate that LNG will be used for 100% of power at sea. Dual fuel engines burn both liquid fuel (diesel or residual) and LNG at the same time, so LNG would most likely not provide 100% of power, particularly at sea.

 

 

Your wealth of knowledge always amazes me, thanks for the info.

[chengkp75]

Your wealth of knowledge always amazes me, thanks for the info.

 

Hey, if we were posting about what you do for a living, you'd be the one amazing everyone. ;)