Propulsion Damage on the Anthem !!

[BillB48]

IIRC the Q&A are built to the Safe Return to Port standards, there are more redundancies built into each pod enabling more reliability while having only one pod available. I believe what we have seen with the current situation with the Anthem... not using a pod, was to minimize the extent of the repairs to the pod and not that it could not be used if absolutely necessary.

Edited February 12, 2016 by BillB48

[conandrob240]

Could the 2 pods Anthem has vs 3 of other megaships explain why there was so much "movement" on Athem. We had calm seas but I definitely felt the movement of Anthem much more than I had on other ships.

[adjjb12]

I'm happy for the people scheduled for Saturday.

[CI66774]

That was outrageous as you were merely trying to impart solidly confirmed information.

There are far too many fanatic RCL sycophants on these boards who have sub-zero regard for truth and human lives.

 

Your statement about people having "sub-zero" regard for human lives is outrageous and beyond contempt. You may have a differing opinion about the incident but branding "many" as callous human haters is uncalled for. You seem like a very angry, bitter person.

[xxHadleyxx]

Yep--I've been on a flight which landed in DFW instead of continuing to PVR because they lost use of an engine.

It was a problem because we had left several hours late to being with and the crew threw some blankets at us and left us in the terminal with parting words that a new plane and crew would probably be there around 6:00 (it was about midnight) and we overnighted in an otherwise empty terminal with no concessions open, etc----but the plane itself flew just fine for what was apparently about an hour with that engine not working and landed smoothly too.

[Clarea]

Could the 2 pods Anthem has vs 3 of other megaships explain why there was so much "movement" on Athem. We had calm seas but I definitely felt the movement of Anthem much more than I had on other ships.

Maybe our marine experts will chime in, but I don't see a relationship there.

[KarinaGW]

It's On.

 

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2016/02/coast_guard_deems_storm-damaged_cruise_ship_seawor.html

 

Jonathan

 

Except they're reporting it as the Port pod and trying to make it seem like that's what the Coast Guard said (which seems incredibly unlikely). One fact....all I want is one freakin' fact to be reported correctly.

Edited February 12, 2016 by KarinaGW

[njbrandon]

Could the 2 pods Anthem has vs 3 of other megaships explain why there was so much "movement" on Athem. We had calm seas but I definitely felt the movement of Anthem much more than I had on other ships.

 

I noticed that too even on departure day before the storm.

[cot427]

Most of the Voyager /Freedom/ and Oasis class ships have sailed at times with pod issues. However, all of those ships have three pods. I find it odd that Quantum/Anthem have only two pods. With the other ships if they happened to loose another pod they still had one to limp home on. If Anthem were allowed to sail with one pod out and something happened to the other one they would be dead in the water.

 

Why would they build a ship that is bigger than the Freedom class and only have two pods?:confused: And since they know that the pods have been notorious for developing issues it make the decision even more perplexing to me.

 

Good points! I find it odd as well. Are they bigger pods? Can they be bigger? I'm not too familiar with this aspect of the ships but it sounds very strange that Quantum class only has 2 when the rest have 4 or so (if all working!)

[xxHadleyxx]

Except they're reporting it as the Port pod and trying to make it seem like that's what the Coast Guard said (which seems incredibly unlikely). One fact....all I want is one freakin' fact to be reported correctly.

 

It is frustrating-----I wish the news agencies would actually wait to post a story until they had a grasp of the facts and could report reliably.

 

Thank YOU for providing some facts and calm from the ship during the storm--it was by far the best information available.

Edited February 12, 2016 by NHDisneylover

[Setting sail for fun]

It's On.

 

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2016/02/coast_guard_deems_storm-damaged_cruise_ship_seawor.html

 

Jonathan

 

That is very good news!

[Cindy]

Unfortunately, it sometimes takes an incident with high media coverage for a change to be made. Look at Carnival. How long did they cruise around, knowing they had a potentially fatal engine space design with no redundancy? To bad they didn't get the hint with Splendor....it took Triumph before their actual problem was so widely publicized. They're doing what they can to fix it but here we are 3 years later and several of their ships still have those unsightly generators sitting up top.

 

Point is, the big media event forced them to make a change. Not only them, it predicated new mandates in the entire cruise industry. I have a feeling that will be the case here as well. This will force RCI to take a close look at decisions made concerning weather and from what I've read, RCI is already taking these actions in Jersey. If there is a lesson to be learned on the part of RCI, it's in all our benefit.

 

I'm all for new industry-wide protocols that increase safety. I just hope they don't go too far. At any given time, there's a possibility of severe weather someplace a ship is scheduled to sail. How much risk is too much? Possible? Probable? A percentage? The industry can't guarantee perfectly flat seas and clear skies, so what will be an acceptable level of tolerance? Would Anthem ever get to leave port in the winter months when violent storms in the Atlantic are frequent?

 

Weather can change quickly and the sea is a fickle female.;) I clearly remember a hurricane (Rita) that was scheduled to level the city of Houston. Tens of thousands fled in a media-induced frenzy, and were stuck in massive traffic jams that stretched for hundreds of miles north and west. After all that, we got not one drop of rain or hint of a breeze. We did have one heck of a block party with the people who stayed!

 

At any rate, I think a contributor to sailing decisions (not just in this case) is the reaction of passengers when there's any delay/change/missed port. The comments from many on the delayed and altered "Jonas" sailing were filled with angry diatribe and demands for compensation. I've read CC in amazement when a Cape Liberty sailing has had to head north instead of south because of a hurricane...the cries of not fair and I want to cancel far outnumbered the people who took it in stride. Maybe the cruise lines need to find a way to better educate the passengers about what could happen to their cruise in the case of a weather problem. I know it's in the contract, but that seems to go out the window along with manners when a cruise is affected.

 

Just my opinion...your mileage may vary.:)

[beachnative]

I just listened to the interview posted on a newly created thread:

 

Exclusive Interview with Anthem Passenger (co-worker)

 

It is well worth hearing.

[Cuizer2]

Ouch!

 

The cruise ship that cut its voyage short after getting battered by rough seas and powerful winds during a storm in the Atlantic Ocean sustained damage to a key part of its propulsion system and officials are ordering it be fixed before the ship returns to sea for its next cruise this weekend, authorities say.

 

This is going to mean a few missed voyages.

[ryano]

I'm all for new industry-wide protocols that increase safety. I just hope they don't go too far. At any given time, there's a possibility of severe weather someplace a ship is scheduled to sail. How much risk is too much? Possible? Probable? A percentage? The industry can't guarantee perfectly flat seas and clear skies, so what will be an acceptable level of tolerance? Would Anthem ever get to leave port in the winter months when violent storms in the Atlantic are frequent?

 

Weather can change quickly and the sea is a fickle female.;) I clearly remember a hurricane (Rita) that was scheduled to level the city of Houston. Tens of thousands fled in a media-induced frenzy, and were stuck in massive traffic jams that stretched for hundreds of miles north and west. After all that, we got not one drop of rain or hint of a breeze. We did have one heck of a block party with the people who stayed!

 

At any rate, I think a contributor to sailing decisions (not just in this case) is the reaction of passengers when there's any delay/change/missed port. The comments from many on the delayed and altered "Jonas" sailing were filled with angry diatribe and demands for compensation. I've read CC in amazement when a Cape Liberty sailing has had to head north instead of south because of a hurricane...the cries of not fair and I want to cancel far outnumbered the people who took it in stride. Maybe the cruise lines need to find a way to better educate the passengers about what could happen to their cruise in the case of a weather problem. I know it's in the contract, but that seems to go out the window along with manners when a cruise is affected.

 

Just my opinion...your mileage may vary.:)

 

Well said on all accounts! The problem is, I bet 99% of all cruisers have never even read the first sentence of said contract :rolleyes: Hence the bitching and moaning when they feel that compensation wasnt enough when truly, the cruise line owed them nothing.

[Clarea]

Good points! I find it odd as well. Are they bigger pods? Can they be bigger? I'm not too familiar with this aspect of the ships but it sounds very strange that Quantum class only has 2 when the rest have 4 or so (if all working!)

Hard to find info, but the two azipods on Quantum are rated at 20MW each, while Freedom's three azipods are rated at 14MW each.

[Ocean Boy]

Hard to find info, but the two azipods on Quantum are rated at 20MW each, while Freedom's three azipods are rated at 14MW each.

 

That may take care of propulsion needs but that doesn't address the issue that if something goes wrong with one pod, which is far from uncommon, you run on the one remaining with no backup. Are they going to have to cancel cruises everytime a pod on this class of ships has an issue?

[Clarea]

That may take care of propulsion needs but that doesn't address the issue that if something goes wrong with one pod, which is far from uncommon, you run on the one remaining with no backup. Are they going to have to cancel cruises everytime a pod on this class of ships has an issue?

I agree with what you posted earlier, seems with so much pod trouble, why would they cut back to two?

[Ocean Boy]

I just directed chengkp75 to this thread. Hopefully, we will get some help on this issue.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Ocean Boy

[Cuizer2]

I agree with what you posted earlier, seems with so much pod trouble, why would they cut back to two?

 

For the same reasons the airlines have cut back from four engines to three engines to two engines - costs.

[Clarea]

For the same reasons the airlines have cut back from four engines to three engines to two engines - costs.

Sure, I understand the cost factor. But my gut feel is that the pods have more frequent issues with various failures (such as the bearings replaced on Allure) than airplane engines.

[robmtx]

I'm no technical expert on this whole Azipod thing, but if the port side pod was broken, would it mean no water trail from that side of the ship? I took a picture of the back on Tuesday at around 1:35pm and it appeared both of those water trails were the same. Attempting to attach the pic.

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by robmtx

[robmtx]

I'm no technical expert on this whole Azipod thing, but if the port side pod was broken, would it mean no water trail from that side of the ship? I took a picture of the back on Tuesday at around 1:35pm and it appeared both of those water trails were the same. Attempting to attach the pic.

 

Ok I can't attach pic because it needs to be 19.5k in size? Trying something else.

[Big_G]

Sure, I understand the cost factor. But my gut feel is that the pods have more frequent issues with various failures (such as the bearings replaced on Allure) than airplane engines.

 

They have 4,000 extra rowers in reserve when the crew wears out. Where's the problem? :D

[A&L_Ont]

That may take care of propulsion needs but that doesn't address the issue that if something goes wrong with one pod, which is far from uncommon, you run on the one remaining with no backup. Are they going to have to cancel cruises everytime a pod on this class of ships has an issue?

 

They could just use the bow thrusters and do slow 360s for a week long holiday, just outside of the port. It would be like ground hog day for a week at a time, which would not be much of a holiday.

 

Joking a side I think I'd prefer 3 pods over 2 just for that reason. It won't stop me from sailing on her but it would make me feel confident that there is extra back-up if needed.