Has anyone ever missed their ship at a port?

[MicCanberra]

Easy enough to cater for, when you allow at least an hour prior to departure for any delays.

[SRF]

Except, arrival and departure times change.  

 

So I just look at the daily sheet for that day, it will have updated times.

[navybankerteacher]

18 hours ago, broberts said:

 

That is my point. On the website only departure times are shown. Once aboard one hopefully pays attention and learns that departure time is pretty meaningless, all aboard time is the important datum.

 

 

I don't expect anything. Nor have I at any point suggested that once aboard there is not a clear indication of the need to be aboard well before departure times.

 

I simply made the suggestion that cruise lines might help prevent a few missed departures by posting all aboard times on website itineraries rather than departure times. 

 

Personally I think your idea of requiring signed acknowledgements upon leaving the ship ridiculous. But I guess some people really do want a nanny state. 

 

Sounds to me that you are the one desiring a nanny state by insisting that cruise lines’

web sites list all aboard times rather than departure times  - on what are really advertisements and not information sources.

 

I have never experienced a port call where all aboard time was not made clear at the time of the port call.  How many cruise passengers do you think go to the web site just before going ashore — and then ignore the posted all aboard time as they do go ashore.

 

Give it up.

[broberts]

Unbelievable to me that a simple suggestion that might save a few people some grief generates so much negative feedback.

 

I say again, I am not insisting on anything. I simply made a suggestion for a minor improvement. How difficult would it be for cruise lines to put a clear note at the top/bottom of web itineraries indicating that passengers have to be aboard well before the listed departure time? And why do some consider this such a horrible idea?

 

I'm sure the critics are not interested. (Unless they also want to rag on the first time cruiser.) The suggestion came about through an experience I had with a new passenger that didn't feel a need to read the daily cruise compass, (and why should they if they are not interested in the minutia of the day?), and had based plans for their first day ashore on the website itinerary never realizing that he would have to be back aboard at least 30 minutes prior to departure.

[sparks1093]

34 minutes ago, broberts said:

Unbelievable to me that a simple suggestion that might save a few people some grief generates so much negative feedback.

 

I say again, I am not insisting on anything. I simply made a suggestion for a minor improvement. How difficult would it be for cruise lines to put a clear note at the top/bottom of web itineraries indicating that passengers have to be aboard well before the listed departure time? And why do some consider this such a horrible idea?

 

I'm sure the critics are not interested. (Unless they also want to rag on the first time cruiser.) The suggestion came about through an experience I had with a new passenger that didn't feel a need to read the daily cruise compass, (and why should they if they are not interested in the minutia of the day?), and had based plans for their first day ashore on the website itinerary never realizing that he would have to be back aboard at least 30 minutes prior to departure.

I feel the cruise lines do enough- it's in the cruise paper, on a sign at the gangway and announced over the loud speaker several times. If someone doesn't get any of that I'm not sure anything else would sink in. 

[donaldsc]

20 hours ago, broberts said:

 

That is my point. On the website only departure times are shown. Once aboard one hopefully pays attention and learns that departure time is pretty meaningless, all aboard time is the important datum.

 

 

I don't expect anything. Nor have I at any point suggested that once aboard there is not a clear indication of the need to be aboard well before departure times.

 

I simply made the suggestion that cruise lines might help prevent a few missed departures by posting all aboard times on website itineraries rather than departure times. 

 

Personally I think your idea of requiring signed acknowledgements upon leaving the ship ridiculous. But I guess some people really do want a nanny state. 

 

I was being facetious.

 

DON

[davekathy]

Never. 

[navybankerteacher]

       

5 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

I feel the cruise lines do enough- it's in the cruise paper, on a sign at the gangway and announced over the loud speaker several times. If someone doesn't get any of that I'm not sure anything else would sink in. 

 

There is the possibility (not so rare) that weather to other conditions can change sailing - and therefore - all aboard time.   Posting a supposedly firm all aboard time, presumably years before actual sailing date, could actually make it more likely that the kind of person not sensible enough to make certain as he went ashore more, not less, to miss the ship.

[sparks1093]

10 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

       

 

There is the possibility (not so rare) that weather to other conditions can change sailing - and therefore - all aboard time.   Posting a supposedly firm all aboard time, presumably years before actual sailing date, could actually make it more likely that the kind of person not sensible enough to make certain as he went ashore more, not less, to miss the ship.

Another valid consideration.

[broberts]

11 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

       

 

There is the possibility (not so rare) that weather to other conditions can change sailing - and therefore - all aboard time.   Posting a supposedly firm all aboard time, presumably years before actual sailing date, could actually make it more likely that the kind of person not sensible enough to make certain as he went ashore more, not less, to miss the ship.

 

By that argument website itineraries should not list any times.

 

I agree times can be difficult, but surely a note above or below the itinerary to the effect that passengers must be aboard at least a half hour before departure would not be that difficult to add?

[MicCanberra]

Websites tend to be outdated very soon in so many areas, and itineraries do change. I would always be checking what the ship is doing on the day and not rely on any outdated information.

[sparks1093]

47 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

By that argument website itineraries should not list any times.

 

I agree times can be difficult, but surely a note above or below the itinerary to the effect that passengers must be aboard at least a half hour before departure would not be that difficult to add?

Some ports may require longer due to local conditions and it's one more thing for the cruise line corporate staff to keep track of. Seems much easier to let each ship have control of this. The cruise lines know how many people miss the ship each year and probably have a good idea why they miss the ship. I would expect few miss the ship because they saw the departure time and said "oh, that's the time I have to be back onboard" and since it's an isolated cause they see no reason to change how they do things. 

[sparks1093]

I wondered if the cruise contract addressed this issue and sure enough, found this in Royal's version:

Carrier shall not be required to refund any portion of the Cruise or CruiseTour Fare paid by any Passenger who fails for any reason to be onboard the Vessel or Transport by the embarkation cut-off time applicable to the specific Cruise or CruiseTour or the boarding cut-off time applicable at any port of call or destination or point of departure as the case may be, and shall not be responsible for lodging, meals, transportation or other expenses incurred by Passenger as a result thereof. Embarkation cut-off times for cruises are available at www.RoyalCaribbean.com. Boarding cut-off times for any port of call or destination or point of departure are as announced on the applicable Cruise or CruiseTour. Carrier shall have no obligation to any Passenger to deviate from any scheduled sailing or port of call or destination.

So if someone actually reads the contract they should be alerted that there is a boarding cut-off time in each port and to look for that info onboard.

[MicCanberra]

As we all know, everyone should read the cruise contracts but  hardly anyone does until their are issues.

[sparks1093]

4 hours ago, MicCanberra said:

As we all know, everyone should read the cruise contracts but  hardly anyone does until their are issues.

If they don't read the contract, they don't read the ship's paper, they don't read the sign at the gangway and they don't listen to the announcements then I would have a hard time feeling sorry for them.

[MicCanberra]

21 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

If they don't read the contract, they don't read the ship's paper, they don't read the sign at the gangway and they don't listen to the announcements then I would have a hard time feeling sorry for them.

true, I generally don't feel sorry for anyone who pleads ignorance when they are blatantly missing all the signs / clues which would provide some insight.

[SRF]

Worse, is those who want someone else to take the blame, when it is squarely on their shoulders.  NO ONE else.

[MicCanberra]

2 hours ago, SRF said:

Worse, is those who want someone else to take the blame, when it is squarely on their shoulders.  NO ONE else.

Agreed.