Carnival LNG Ship to homeport at Port Canaveral

[AAAAmerican]

With the Contract expected to be signed for the OJ Tanker Fl-to-NYC Port A.D. 08/29/2018 it will herald a new dawn t=for cruising in the US now. LNG is a great cleaner way.

[eroller]

Oasis class ships have a lot of empty volume that is unusable, that is contributing to the GRT. CCL builds ships a bit differently, so I think it will not feel any more crowded than the Oasis class. Time will tell if they change their build design. I for one am really glad to see an entirely new hull. Dream & Vista class just seemed like slightly modified versions of the Destiny/Triumph/Conquest class hulls.

 

 

I'm not sure all that "empty volume" is used in the GT calculation for the Oasis Class? If you are speaking of the solarium, Boardwalk, Central Park, and Aqua Theater none of that is enclosed space, so I don't believe it's used in the GT calculation.

 

Regardless if it is or isn't, having sailed on OASIS, ALLURE, and HARMONY I can say they are extremely well designed and the neighborhood concept works very well to disperse passengers. I've been on far smaller ships that feel much more crowded. Embarkation on HARMONY was 9 minutes drop off to walking on the ship. Amazing. Royal has it down to a science. Having sailed on CARNIVAL BREEZE she was one of the most crowded ships I've ever sailed, and I've sailed on over 120 cruises. These days Carnival is really packing them in. Less public space and more cabins. I don't hold out much hope for these new LNG powered ships. They are even higher density and and IMO Carnival is just not as thoughtful regarding the design concept and pax flow as other lines such at Royal Caribbean. Their main focus seems to be increasing revenue which of course all cruise lines do, but others seem to have a better balance. I'm also not big on Carnival Corp's "one size fits all" mentality when it comes to ship platforms. This LNG design will find it's way to Carnival, P&O, Costa, and Aida. Maybe Princess although details on their new LNG platform ship are scarce right now. Sometimes I wonder why Carnival has so many brands if they are so much alike that they can all operate essentially the same ship.

[jimbo5544]

Harmony of the Seas - 226,963 GRT / 5,479 passengers (double occupancy) = passenger space ratio of 41.42

 

 

 

You mean amusement park of the seas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[eroller]

You mean amusement park of the seas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

 

And Carnival is some kind of traditional ocean liner? Please all these mass market ships are amusement parks at sea. Royal, Carnival, MSC, NCL. Some are just better amusement parks than others, but they all have their gimmicks.

 

If you want an ocean liner with no gimmicks, sail on QM2.

[eroller]

I’m not a marine engineer but I’m guessing the different bow designs might have something to do with the service speeds of the ships. I know the retro flat bow is an optimal design for a relatively slow service speed.

[xDisconnections]

You mean amusement park of the seas.

 

The same can be argued for Carnival, my friend. Remember?

[ProgRockCruiser]

You mean amusement park of the seas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

As long as I can get a drink, I'm alright with my cruise ship being an "Amusement Park"!

[jimbo5544]

As long as I can get a drink, I'm alright with my cruise ship being an "Amusement Park"!

 

 

 

That makes one of us. The point is that the whole space ratio stuff is dog doo.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jimbo5544]

The same can be argued for Carnival, my friend. Remember?

 

 

 

Big fish and little fish. We can count and compare but the cruising world is not better off with the way it is going. Carnival had to follow or become a 2nd tier. All this “junk” was led by Royal. I know I am in the minority in regards to the behemoth’s of the seas, but we will see where it all ends and I am giving odds it will not be better.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[SNJCruisers]

Regarding amusement park attractions....Carnival has a water park and their SportsSquare area on a few ships. Royal has merry go rounds, rock climbing walls, wave simulators, parachuting simulators, ice skating rinks and a promenade that looks like your neighborhood mall.

Which line in general is more amusement park like?

[eroller]

Big fish and little fish. We can count and compare but the cruising world is not better off with the way it is going. Carnival had to follow or become a 2nd tier. All this “junk” was led by Royal. I know I am in the minority in regards to the behemoth’s of the seas, but we will see where it all ends and I am giving odds it will not be better.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

 

There are more choices today for cruising than ever before. All cruise lines evolve. They have to in order to survive. If you don’t like the floating amusement parks that Royal, Carnival, NCL, and MSC offer than sail on something like Celebrity, HAL, or Princess. Want something a bit nicer? Oceania, Azamara, or Viking. Even more luxurious? Crystal, Regent, Silversea, etc. There are also sail ships, expedition ships, mega yachts, even modern classic ships sailing with lines like Fred Olsen, CMV, and Celestyal.

 

Honestly there is something for everyone. Regarding the mass market lines, no one is to “blame” for whatever direction they took. It’s an evolution and they had to adapt to a changing world and demographic. It’s cruising for the masses. Of course it’s not going to be the same product offered 30 years ago. Others have picked up where they left off to offer a more refined and traditional product if that is what you’re seeking.

 

Now we even have Virgin Voyages coming along which promises no gimmicks (forget the water slides and jumbo screens) and will be adult only. Talk about heaven. Can’t wait for that.

[jimbo5544]

There are more choices today for cruising than ever before. All cruise lines evolve. They have to in order to survive. If you don’t like the floating amusement parks that Royal, Carnival, NCL, and MSC offer than sail on something like Celebrity, HAL, or Princess. Want something a bit nicer? Oceania, Azamara, or Viking. Even more luxurious? Crystal, Regent, Silversea, etc. There are also sail ships, expedition ships, mega yachts, even modern classic ships sailing with lines like Fred Olsen, CMV, and Celestyal.

 

Honestly there is something for everyone. Regarding the mass market lines, no one is to “blame” for whatever direction they took. It’s an evolution and they had to adapt to a changing world and demographic. It’s cruising for the masses. Of course it’s not going to be the same product offered 30 years ago. Others have picked up where they left off to offer a more refined and traditional product if that is what you’re seeking.

 

Now we even have Virgin Voyages coming along which promises no gimmicks (forget the water slides and jumbo screens) and will be adult only. Talk about heaven. Can’t wait for that.

 

 

 

I do get the options are a good thing argument and that cruising is evolving. Where I disagree is whether it is good. Saturation, especially in the holy grail Caribbean helps no-one long term. The order list (and I don’t think it even includes China) is at record levels that keep kept broken every quarter. It will become unsustainable. Making ships the destination will turn off the ports

 

Soon enough the major lines will have 30% of their fleet that cannot go to many ports due to size or having to tender (which is impossible). Will the only option be a five star cruise line t get to these places.

 

Just got off an Azamara cruise, great cruise on a ship that works in terms of size. Sadly the big boys have abandoned “real” cruising (I know Royal owns Azamara).

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jimbo5544]

Regarding amusement park attractions....Carnival has a water park and their SportsSquare area on a few ships. Royal has merry go rounds, rock climbing walls, wave simulators, parachuting simulators, ice skating rinks and a promenade that looks like your neighborhood mall.

 

Which line in general is more amusement park like?

 

 

 

 

You forgot bumper cars and the ejector pods. Adding shops does zero for me, malls rank a hair above amusement parks in my book. We will not even get into turning a caribbean island into an amusement park.....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[chengkp75]

I’m not a marine engineer but I’m guessing the different bow designs might have something to do with the service speeds of the ships. I know the retro flat bow is an optimal design for a relatively slow service speed.

 

Actually, the plumb bow, and even the newer inverted bow (I think Virgin's ships will have these), provide the greatest waterline length for a given length overall. The greater the waterline length, the higher the natural hull speed (the optimum speed the hull shape can be pushed through the water). Pushing a hull faster than hull speed requires exponentially more and more horsepower, so obtaining the highest possible hull speed in design gives you better fuel efficiency at a higher speed.

[eroller]

Actually, the plumb bow, and even the newer inverted bow (I think Virgin's ships will have these), provide the greatest waterline length for a given length overall. The greater the waterline length, the higher the natural hull speed (the optimum speed the hull shape can be pushed through the water). Pushing a hull faster than hull speed requires exponentially more and more horsepower, so obtaining the highest possible hull speed in design gives you better fuel efficiency at a higher speed.

 

 

 

I read just the opposite in either Cruise Business Review or Cruise Industry News Quarterly. There was a piece about these new straight bows and how they are more efficient at slower service speeds, which have become the norm as cruise lines revamp itineraries to reduce speed and save fuel.

[Mikew0805]

Carnival Corp has a long history of developing a single ship design and using it across multiple brands. It saves a lot of money. Their new LNG ships currently slated for Aida, Costa, P&O, and Carnival share many, many features. But there are some differences.

 

For example, while the basic hull designs are the same the bows and sterns of the Aida and Costa ships appear identical, as do the bows and sterns of the Carnival and P&O ships. The upper decks (pool areas, domes, etc.) have been adapted to each brand. Carnival will likely deploy this ship in warm climates like the Caribbean so no dome is needed, while P&O and Aida will have more Northern European itineraries where weather is an issue.

 

Overall, I’d expect many interior arrangments like stairwell/elevator locations, restaurants, showrooms, etc to be the same across all the ships with only decor being changed for each brand.

 

 

 

Here you see the difference between the stern design on the P&O/Carnvial ships and the Aida/Costa ships.

 

My opinion... I like the Costa/AIDA design better. Oh well.

[Mikew0805]

You forgot bumper cars and the ejector pods. Adding shops does zero for me, malls rank a hair above amusement parks in my book. We will not even get into turning a caribbean island into an amusement park.....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

This I am concerned about. Coco is without a doubt my favorite place... and I do not cruise for the ports. I want a quiet beach, where all I hear is the surf... with turquoise water. We will see if I can still have that there.

[chengkp75]

I read just the opposite in either Cruise Business Review or Cruise Industry News Quarterly. There was a piece about these new straight bows and how they are more efficient at slower service speeds, which have become the norm as cruise lines revamp itineraries to reduce speed and save fuel.

 

Well, as I said, increasing the waterline length, for a given displacement, will reduce the power required to drive the hull at all speeds, up to the new, higher, design hull speed. So, yes, they are more efficient at lower speeds, but also at higher speeds as well.

[eroller]

Well, as I said, increasing the waterline length, for a given displacement, will reduce the power required to drive the hull at all speeds, up to the new, higher, design hull speed. So, yes, they are more efficient at lower speeds, but also at higher speeds as well.

 

 

 

If they are so efficient at all speeds, I don’t understand why they haven’t been used the past several decades?

[jimbo5544]

This I am concerned about. Coco is without a doubt my favorite place... and I do not cruise for the ports. I want a quiet beach, where all I hear is the surf... with turquoise water. We will see if I can still have that there.

 

 

 

The rendering they had posted turned my stomach, like you, I hope they do not ruin the essence of the island.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Palmetto Pilot]

If they are so efficient at all speeds, I don’t understand why they haven’t been used the past several decades?

The inverted bow was very common on early 20th century military ships, don't know why it fell out of favor.

[jsglow]

Bring'em on! The future of mass market cruises is not new small ships folks, even if some people wish it were so.

 

Entirely true. And that helps to expand the cruise market relative to other forms of vacation because bigger means more efficient and cheaper relatively speaking. It also opens the door for the smaller speciality lines who do give you that experience at a higher price point.

[chengkp75]

If they are so efficient at all speeds, I don’t understand why they haven’t been used the past several decades?

 

Because the flared bow has its own advantages, like additional buoyancy to reduce pitching, keeping water off decks (remember 95% of ships, particularly over the last century have been cargo ships, so protecting the cargo is important), and improve stability by raising the center of buoyancy. It also provides structure ahead of the collision bulkhead to be like a car's "crumple zone" in damage cases. Increasing waterline length to increase hull speed (making a longer, and at least from a beam/length ratio standpoint, a narrower hull for a given displacement) has been known for quite some time. You'll note that while container ships have slowed considerably over recent years (20+ knots used to be the norm, now they are down in the 14-16 knot range) due to fuel costs, they continue to design these ships with flared bows and bulbs. The other advantages of the flared bow over the plumb bow are more important to the cargo ship operator than a small increase in hull speed and increase in economy.