Propulsion Damage on the Anthem !!

[jd10367]

I posted in one of the first Anthem threads that I thought we had azipod damage thanks to the pic I took, and I also posted about stabilizer damage and the replies I saw basically accused me of being sensationalist. Even though I said that an OFFICER told me. I didn't make it up on my own. In fact, it went down like this.

 

:::stepped into an elevator with an officer:::

 

"Hi, are you an officer?"

 

"Yes."

 

"I have a question. This is our 19th cruise and it seemed that, during the storm, despite all the tipping the ship actually seemed pretty stable all things considered. Did they make any stabilizer improvements with this class?"

 

"No, and the stabilizers only worked fine half the night and suffered some damage."

 

Now, he could've been talking out his ass. Maybe there was very slight damage, like one of them couldn't extend all the way or didn't have full movement. I'm just saying what I was told.

[Mango Mike]

Bravo!!!!

[Blondynka]

I posted in one of the first Anthem threads that I thought we had azipod damage thanks to the pic I took, and I also posted about stabilizer damage and the replies I saw basically accused me of being sensationalist. Even though I said that an OFFICER told me. I didn't make it up on my own. In fact, it went down like this.

 

:::stepped into an elevator with an officer:::

 

"Hi, are you an officer?"

 

"Yes."

 

"I have a question. This is our 19th cruise and it seemed that, during the storm, despite all the tipping the ship actually seemed pretty stable all things considered. Did they make any stabilizer improvements with this class?"

 

"No, and the stabilizers only worked fine half the night and suffered some damage."

 

Now, he could've been talking out his ass. Maybe there was very slight damage, like one of them couldn't extend all the way or didn't have full movement. I'm just saying what I was told.

 

I was on Anthem on the previous sailing, and apparently one of the stabilizers was already broken at that time (according to an officer we chatted with).

[CRUISEFAN0001]

I'm not sure the Fed investigators will analyze the Anthem debacle as thoroughly as the wide (and sometimes bizarre) range of analysis done in the plethora of threads on this topic at this site.

 

Bad decision to depart

Winter cruises from the NorthEast introduce risk

Problems sustaining control is horrific storm waters

Damage from all those bad decisions

Costly lesson learned and mistakes

 

I think that pretty much sums things up.

[Clarea]

I posted in one of the first Anthem threads that I thought we had azipod damage thanks to the pic I took, and I also posted about stabilizer damage and the replies I saw basically accused me of being sensationalist. Even though I said that an OFFICER told me. I didn't make it up on my own. In fact, it went down like this.

 

:::stepped into an elevator with an officer:::

 

"Hi, are you an officer?"

 

"Yes."

 

"I have a question. This is our 19th cruise and it seemed that, during the storm, despite all the tipping the ship actually seemed pretty stable all things considered. Did they make any stabilizer improvements with this class?"

 

"No, and the stabilizers only worked fine half the night and suffered some damage."

 

Now, he could've been talking out his ass. Maybe there was very slight damage, like one of them couldn't extend all the way or didn't have full movement. I'm just saying what I was told.

Interesting, thanks.

[Kinofdc]

I posted in one of the first Anthem threads that I thought we had azipod damage thanks to the pic I took, and I also posted about stabilizer damage and the replies I saw basically accused me of being sensationalist.

 

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.

[Big_G]

Didn't Allure sail around the Caribbean for months with a down azipod?

[shaun07]

shouldn't passengers have the right to know any and all damages that a ship has before they get on and be given the choice to sail or not. The standards and practices of cruise lines needs serious reevaluations. Imagine flying in a plane missing half its engine power

[jd10367]

I'm not sure the Fed investigators will analyze the Anthem debacle as thoroughly as the wide (and sometimes bizarre) range of analysis done in the plethora of threads on this topic at this site.

 

Bad decision to depart

Winter cruises from the NorthEast introduce risk

Problems sustaining control is horrific storm waters

Damage from all those bad decisions

Costly lesson learned and mistakes

 

I think that pretty much sums things up.

 

1.) I don't think it was a bad decision to depart. The storm at the time of forecast (and at the time the ship sailed into it) was small and supposed to be, at worst, 20 foot seas and 50-70 knots. It exploded into a giant storm in size, with 30 foot seas and 135 knot winds. Despite the armchair meteorologists, NO ONE thought that would occur.

 

2.) Totally agree. I don't know why they sail from the northeast in Jan/Feb. And I said onboard, even to RCCL employees, if they want to make bad-weather sailing a habit they should introduce a new class with a more oceangoing (ocean liner) V-shaped hull. Ocean liners have a rougher ride in calm water, but they also have a more stable ride in bad water.

 

3.) See #2.

 

4.) A post higher up states the stabilizer(s) may have been damaged already. This is something that needs to be investigated by the industry, as I think ships routinely sail with underpar stabilizers and/or engines, and that practice may need to stop. I believe the ship that listed last year (when the novice bridge officer accidentally turned the knob the wrong way) had stabilizer damage as well. Now, some say the stabilizers don't do a whole lot and aren't essential, but when it comes to possible storms I think EVERY aspect of the ship's propulsion better be at 100%. It severely trims your margin of error when you're going into the gunfight with some dud bullets.

 

5.) A very costly lesson. I'd think the refunds/credits will run them $5M-10M, plus they have to fix all the damage, plus the bad press.

[womack214]

Didn't Allure sail around the Caribbean for months with a down azipod?

 

 

We sailed on Allure Thanksgiving 2014 and had propulsion issues. Made us late to a port. Other than that it was fine.

[kbxopowo]

Just got off the phone with RCI- spoke with a manager (ooh!). Still no new information, of course.

 

I asked if they would consider re-booking us onto another cruise departing this weekend, and he didn't say no fully, but basically said that they are sailing at almost full capacity, so it would be unlikely.

 

I asked about canceling a port- he said if the repairs aren't complete, they would likely let us board Saturday and keep us in the "floating hotel" until repairs are complete.

 

I told him how frustrating that is, because it would likely mean us arriving late (or missing) the Port Canaveral stop, and we are scheduled to take the short day in Disney World. Again- non committal but friendly and professional apologies, etc.

 

So I spent my free period from teaching on hold for virtually no new information.

 

Keep checking the website and call and express your frustration please.

[Kinofdc]

shouldn't passengers have the right to know any and all damages that a ship has before they get on and be given the choice to sail or not. The standards and practices of cruise lines needs serious reevaluations. Imagine flying in a plane missing half its engine power

 

Especially when the captain made public declarations of his plan to OUTRUN a major storm.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Kinofdc

[MOcruiserman]

I'm not sure the Fed investigators will analyze the Anthem debacle as thoroughly as the wide (and sometimes bizarre) range of analysis done in the plethora of threads on this topic at this site.

 

Bad decision to depart

Winter cruises from the NorthEast introduce risk

Problems sustaining control is horrific storm waters

Damage from all those bad decisions

Costly lesson learned and mistakes

 

I think that pretty much sums things up.

Don't hold your breath waiting for a comprehensive explanation from Royal. At this point their primary concern is liability issues. I'm sure their attorneys have told them "admit nothing."

[Clarea]

Didn't Allure sail around the Caribbean for months with a down azipod?

I believe so. Indy also had a prop removed from the fixipod and ran like that for months, including transatlantic.

[cruisinfanatic]

Explorer sailed for months with 1 pod down. Made port times a little different is all. Certainly was not a safety problem

[Thetrail]

I a staunch Royal follower, this really upsets me. Their lack of communication is not right! If the coast guard is saying something is wrong with the propulsion and Royal is not commenting, something shady is going on. I wish they would give everyone more information. Whether people like to believe it or not, they are held accountable to the public because they are a public company and we are the shareholders so to speak, regardless of whether you actually own the stock or not.

Sorry not sure what universe you live in but if you don't actually OWN stock your NOT a shareholder, so to speak!.....:rolleyes:

[jd10367]

Especially when the captain made public declarations of his plan to outrun a major storm.

 

It was not a major storm at the time. He was not trying to "outrun" it but was trying to skirt the western edge. Ships routinely sail into stormy weather. They don't routinely sail into 135-knot winds and they certainly don't do it on purpose. If they knew how bad it would get, they would not have risked a billion-dollar asset and so many lives. Planes routinely fly in questionable weather. If the travel industry rerouted/canceled for every cloud, no one would go anywhere.

 

There's another thing people don't take into account: when they talk about skipping ports or rerouting around weather, that's easy to say when you're floating around the Caribbean with 50 possible targets. When you're sailing from Bayonne to Canaveral, you pretty much have one path: south. It's south or nothing. It's not like they had a lot of options. "Hey, guess what? You're all visiting Nova Scotia in February!" This is why I think sailing from the northeast in Jan/Feb is a bad idea in the first place. IMO the last cruise from Bayonne, Boston, or Baltimore should be Christmas and they should start them up again in mid-March.

[Paul65]

I posted in one of the first Anthem threads that I thought we had azipod damage thanks to the pic I took, and I also posted about stabilizer damage and the replies I saw basically accused me of being sensationalist.

 

I was disappointed read this, as I am usually defending the forum as being not as bad as people try to portray it. So, I went and looked up what you had said before. Found it, but I couldn't find a single post accusing you of being sensationalist.

 

In fact, the closest I found was a post later in the same thread by you, accusing the press of only reporting the sensationalist comments from the cruise.

 

So, I'm back to thinking that this forum is not as bad as people try to make it out to be.

[grandgeezer]

Don't remember where I read, but the weather guessers were calling for 65-75 MPH winds which is pretty much nothing. If you cruised more than a few times, you've encountered this or worse. By the time the ship was into the storm it blew up into a really bad one with winds far exceeding the original forecast.

If the ship was in the middle of it when this occurred, how is it the captain's fault? At the time, the captain may have decided that going back then would be worse than continuing.

Those of us in the northeast know how way off weather forecasts are sometimes

. Expecting 2 inches of snow overnight and when you wake up there is a foot.

 

Exactly. Forecasts are strictly educated guesses, not exact. The snow example is a good one and the same thing could happen with wind speed and waves. Why wouldn't you plan for the worst and hope for the best? Blaming the inaccurate forecast as the sole cause of this mess is a cop out. Whoever made the decision to sail chose profits over safety and that's inexcusable.

The crew and captain did a great job of recovery but they should have never been put in that position, unless the captain was the one who decided to sail.

[cot427]

Explorer sailed for months with 1 pod down. Made port times a little different is all. Certainly was not a safety problem

 

I was just going to mention that!

 

Sorry not sure what universe you live in but if you don't actually OWN stock your NOT a shareholder, so to speak!.....:rolleyes:

 

Maybe the wrong word to use but nonetheless, we all have a common interest in the company.

[ryano]

unless the captain was the one who decided to sail.

 

I read somewhere yesterday in one of these threads that an RC rep has already told CNN the decision to sail was ultimately the Captains. If that is in fact true, its not looking real good for Captain Claus. Im guessing this will be real similar to the Brilliance incident several years ago where the Captain left the ship to aid in the investigation and never returned.

 

That is just my guess and opinion.

Edited February 12, 2016 by ryano

[setsail]

shouldn't passengers have the right to know any and all damages that a ship has before they get on and be given the choice to sail or not. The standards and practices of cruise lines needs serious reevaluations. Imagine flying in a plane missing half its engine power

 

Makes you wonder, why they don't build planes like cruise ships, with extra engines. Some have 6, so 2 can be held for backup. :rolleyes:

[Paul65]

Imagine flying in a plane missing half its engine power

 

Well, that's exactly what happens, if a plane loses and engine mid-flight. Of course, nobody wants that to happen mid-flight, but the planes are designed to handle that contingency and still be able to fly.

 

(I do know of one exception to the above. I saw a documentary on the development of the Boeing 747, and they were having trouble with engines flaming out when they tried to push them to full power. They intentionally caused on of these flame-outs when an executive of the engine company (I think it was GE) was on a test flight to drive home the point that they needed the problem to be fixed.)

[Aquahound]

Didn't Allure sail around the Caribbean for months with a down azipod?

 

Yes, she did. I remember port times were altered for several months because Allure had to cruise at a slower speed. I was on one of the Allure cruises shortly after the problem was discovered. It had something to do with a bearing in one of the azipods.

[Aquahound]

(I do know of one exception to the above. I saw a documentary on the development of the Boeing 747, and they were having trouble with engines flaming out when they tried to push them to full power. They intentionally caused on of these flame-outs when an executive of the engine company (I think it was GE) was on a test flight to drive home the point that they needed the problem to be fixed.)

 

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.