Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Recommended Posts

On 7/2/2019 at 3:41 PM, the english lady said:

Ok so hows about they raise  the cost of each cruise by £1000 or so. Have a few days set aside every few months so the ships can stay in Southampton and have bits of work done . Everytime they have something like fishing nets caught around azipods that cause more damage than what they originally thought (which i think was the case here) which causes delay or missed ports etc 50% of the cost of the cruise is returned to each passenger. Would that keep everyone happy. Ofcourse pando would not be around for very long then, so hey ho  no cruises from Southampton except in the summer. Not much choice of where to go in the summer either and stupidly high prices. 

We are talking about a business here. Businesses have to turn a profit these days (for all you shareholders). They may have been told we cant get the piece of equipment to you in Southampton and give you time to fit it, but we will be able to get it to you here, so you do not have to cancel the entire cruise (how much moaning would that generate) just spend a few days here (longer than planned but more damage than originally thought)

People want cheap cruises , heavens above that pando puts up any of its prices at all whatsoever.

Nobody likes a cruise that is not what one originally planned, but life happens . You either have to accept it or not. We dont know yet what pando may or may not offer the people on this cruise. 

No cruise line is perfect. I am forever reading on the American boards of cruises either being cancelled at short notice (because its suddenly chartered) or people boarding and finding that possibly worse, there are 1000 people onboard that is a group, that take over various parts of the ship for "their" activities.

Pando usually do come through in someway for cruises that are totally screwed. If you want port fees returned go on a line that returns them (but charges you more for the base price of the cruise and everything onboard)

Just wanted to vent. I shall shut up and go away now.

Enjoyable to read a sensible post for a change as for change of itinerary how about paying 5 grand for a holiday to than have a hurricane come through,insurance company didn’t want to know but saying that got some great pictures of dark clouds and rain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 3:41 PM, the english lady said:

Ok so hows about they raise  the cost of each cruise by £1000 or so. Have a few days set aside every few months so the ships can stay in Southampton and have bits of work done . Everytime they have something like fishing nets caught around azipods that cause more damage than what they originally thought (which i think was the case here) which causes delay or missed ports etc 50% of the cost of the cruise is returned to each passenger. Would that keep everyone happy. Ofcourse pando would not be around for very long then, so hey ho  no cruises from Southampton except in the summer. Not much choice of where to go in the summer either and stupidly high prices. 

We are talking about a business here. Businesses have to turn a profit these days (for all you shareholders). They may have been told we cant get the piece of equipment to you in Southampton and give you time to fit it, but we will be able to get it to you here, so you do not have to cancel the entire cruise (how much moaning would that generate) just spend a few days here (longer than planned but more damage than originally thought)

People want cheap cruises , heavens above that pando puts up any of its prices at all whatsoever.

Nobody likes a cruise that is not what one originally planned, but life happens . You either have to accept it or not. We dont know yet what pando may or may not offer the people on this cruise. 

No cruise line is perfect. I am forever reading on the American boards of cruises either being cancelled at short notice (because its suddenly chartered) or people boarding and finding that possibly worse, there are 1000 people onboard that is a group, that take over various parts of the ship for "their" activities.

Pando usually do come through in someway for cruises that are totally screwed. If you want port fees returned go on a line that returns them (but charges you more for the base price of the cruise and everything onboard)

Just wanted to vent. I shall shut up and go away now.

My friend owns a trucking business and he has a devil oif a job fitting in services to the lorries he is so busy, but he has to take days out refuse work and get them serviced. Or would you want him not to bother because it was not commercially viable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Pentlands said:

My friend owns a trucking business and he has a devil oif a job fitting in services to the lorries he is so busy, but he has to take days out refuse work and get them serviced. Or would you want him not to bother because it was not commercially viable?

Actually I think you will find that if his fleet is leased he must have them serviced at set times,or if purchased they must be serviced at a given time for the guarantees that came with them or was part of the agreement.

you will find ships have certain times when they also must be serviced but occasionally things do go wrong so it’s not the case of not being bothered.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Pentlands said:

My friend owns a trucking business and he has a devil oif a job fitting in services to the lorries he is so busy, but he has to take days out refuse work and get them serviced. Or would you want him not to bother because it was not commercially viable?

The ships do not go out unsafe, they would not be allowed to. Might not be able to go at top speed but never ever sent out unsafe. I am just trying to explain why some repairs etc are done on the go. Would your friends business still be around if although there appeared to be nothing wrong with a truck he took it out of service ever 3/4 months for a week. I feel much much safer on a pando ship than I ever would on a plane , where you dont know what their service history is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The P&O system of sweating the assets works well enough until something goes wrong. Then it can cause serious problems for passengers - much like Ryanair.  

 

Provided that P&O treat the inconvenienced passengers fairly most people can live with that. But if they don’t - also like Ryanair - that’s when people get really hacked off. And P&O are not good at that. Far too often it’s only those who are effective at following through with complaints that get fair redresss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

 

Provided that P&O treat the inconvenienced passengers fairly most people can live with that. But if they don’t - also like Ryanair - that’s when people get really hacked off. And P&O are not good at that. Far too often it’s only those who are effective at following through with complaints that get fair redresss.

 

I agree. Of course there can be unforeseen problems.  It's how it's dealt with which is the issue.  A small gesture goes a long way (and obc doesn't cost them a lot compared with the value to the customer).  It's just that if cruises are going to be impacted by maintenance issues, especially ones determined before sailing, it would be much better PR if the disruption were to be acknowledged.  As someone else has mentioned, at what point does the cruise have to change to have little similarity to what you booked?  If that's acceptable to customers, the cruise lines have carte blanche to make changes at will.

 

I'm just having problems understanding why, with a similar issue on Arcadia which developed during the cruise - not even known about in advance - we were given obc.  Incidentally I'm not one who seeks compensation, I've only ever had it twice and in neither case had we complained. Both were on cruises for mechanical issues which resulted in lost ports, two in one case and three in the other.  I'm sure this cruise has lost two ports, and possibly three. It could be that it's to do with booking berths, but last night Arcadia was en route to Dubrovnik travelling in the opposite direction to Venice.  I have my fingers crossed they will double back and  head for Venice tonight.  And of course P&O may yet make a gesture of goodwill. 

Edited by kruzseeka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kruzseeka said:

 

I agree. Of course there can be unforeseen problems.  It's how it's dealt with which is the issue.  A small gesture goes a long way (and obc doesn't cost them a lot compared with the value to the customer).  It's just that if cruises are going to be impacted by maintenance issues, especially ones determined before sailing, it would be much better PR if the disruption were to be acknowledged.  As someone else has mentioned, at what point does the cruise have to change to have little similarity to what you booked?  If that's acceptable to customers, the cruise lines have carte blanche to make changes at will.

 

I'm just having problems understanding why, with a similar issue on Arcadia which developed during the cruise - not even known about in advance - we were given obc.  Incidentally I'm not one who seeks compensation, I've only ever had it twice and in neither case had we complained. Both were on cruises for mechanical issues which resulted in lost ports, two in one case and three in the other.  I'm sure this cruise has lost two ports, and possibly three. It could be that it's to do with booking berths, but last night Arcadia was en route to Dubrovnik travelling in the opposite direction to Venice.  I have my fingers crossed they will double back and  head for Venice tonight.  And of course P&O may yet make a gesture of goodwill. 

 

she was in Venice on 4th and Split on 5th left Split at 2009 UTC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, sogne said:

 

she was in Venice on 4th and Split on 5th left Split at 2009 UTC

 

Thanks for that - I knew that was the plan.  I've been following on AIS but must have missed a day! 😊  I thought it was odd to follow that route but I'm happy for our friends as they would have been so disappointed to miss Venice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope Arcadia will be fixed and 100% before the 'Worldie' in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 7:10 AM, the english lady said:

The ships do not go out unsafe, they would not be allowed to. Might not be able to go at top speed but never ever sent out unsafe. I am just trying to explain why some repairs etc are done on the go. Would your friends business still be around if although there appeared to be nothing wrong with a truck he took it out of service ever 3/4 months for a week. I feel much much safer on a pando ship than I ever would on a plane , where you dont know what their service history is.

 

Aircraft have set service schedules.  They have A checks and B checks.  B checks can usually be done on turnaround, but an A check means it has to go in the hangar for a total check.  It's every so many hours flight, so don't know what you mean by "not knowing what their service history is"?  It's extremely strict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

 

Aircraft have set service schedules.  They have A checks and B checks.  B checks can usually be done on turnaround, but an A check means it has to go in the hangar for a total check.  It's every so many hours flight, so don't know what you mean by "not knowing what their service history is"?  It's extremely strict.

What I was getting at was a plane flies here there and everywhere. People don't know when the plane they are sat in was last serviced but all the armchair captains/chief engineers seem to know that a problem is soley down to mtce or lack of. Which I doubt very much if true..but as they say why let the truth get in the way of a good story. I really really hope when we next cruise I don't end up anywhere near an armchair captain/chief engineer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, the english lady said:

What I was getting at was a plane flies here there and everywhere. People don't know when the plane they are sat in was last serviced but all the armchair captains/chief engineers seem to know that a problem is soley down to mtce or lack of. Which I doubt very much if true..but as they say why let the truth get in the way of a good story. I really really hope when we next cruise I don't end up anywhere near an armchair captain/chief engineer.

Both planes and cruise ships have a rigorous maintenance schedule which has to be adhered to, however a cruise ship can, and does, fulfil most of this whilst in operation, it's a bit difficult to strip an engine down whilst a plane is in service.

So whilst you do know when a Ship had its last refit, you will not know when one its engines was last stripped down for a major overhaul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, the english lady said:

What I was getting at was a plane flies here there and everywhere. People don't know when the plane they are sat in was last serviced but all the armchair captains/chief engineers seem to know that a problem is soley down to mtce or lack of. Which I doubt very much if true..but as they say why let the truth get in the way of a good story. I really really hope when we next cruise I don't end up anywhere near an armchair captain/chief engineer.

 

Ah now I see what you mean!!  LOL  Agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2019 at 4:32 AM, NSWP said:

I hope Arcadia will be fixed and 100% before the 'Worldie' in January.

 

Never mind the 'worldie', we are doing the round-trip transatlantic on her in September!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 7:10 AM, the english lady said:

The ships do not go out unsafe, they would not be allowed to. Might not be able to go at top speed but never ever sent out unsafe. I am just trying to explain why some repairs etc are done on the go. Would your friends business still be around if although there appeared to be nothing wrong with a truck he took it out of service ever 3/4 months for a week. I feel much much safer on a pando ship than I ever would on a plane , where you dont know what their service history is.

Is that why a ship recently ceased up and stopped because it did not have enough oil to keep the engines going and they were taking passengers off in dreadful conditions? Just a bad fluke I suppose? Cruiuse ships get away with things that much other travel does not.

 

And you know the service history of a ship? Bet the passengers on that ship wished they had known its service history.

 

He has to take it out of service to do regular maintainance, even if it all looks fine and dandy. It's called having a good business plan that takes in the required servicing schedules as part of the use of the vehicles. He even has to have a piece of paper every year that shows that the vehicle is OK for the roads. Do ships have to have those checks done every year, especially with the age of the PO fleet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pentlands said:

Is that why a ship recently ceased up and stopped because it did not have enough oil to keep the engines going and they were taking passengers off in dreadful conditions? Just a bad fluke I suppose? Cruiuse ships get away with things that much other travel does not.

 

And you know the service history of a ship? Bet the passengers on that ship wished they had known its service history.

 

He has to take it out of service to do regular maintainance, even if it all looks fine and dandy. It's called having a good business plan that takes in the required servicing schedules as part of the use of the vehicles. He even has to have a piece of paper every year that shows that the vehicle is OK for the roads. Do ships have to have those checks done every year, especially with the age of the PO fleet.

 

If I remember correctly , you are talking about the Viking ship. Dont think there is cost cutting there with their prices. However no report come out yet, but I vaguely remember reading just afterwards that it was something giving a false reading,not  that there was not enough oil but it was not sending it to where it should . We will see when and if the report came out (if it is made public)Viking ships are all new so about 3 or 4 years old.

No we dont all know the service history of planes etc. My point was the people who are all saying when something goes wrong it is down to poor mtce. I think this started off with old fishing nets getting caught around an azipod (which taking a ship out of service every few months wouldn't stop) They later discovered it had caused more damage than originally thought. The easiest way to repair was to get the item needing replacing/ship/people who could do the repair all together in europe.(for all anyone knows the parts may have come from there anyway) 

Cunard ships have problems as well, as do other lines..we just dont really hear of them because its not Pando and this is a pando board. A lot lot more to do with the corrosive area they work in (the sea) than mtce.

I would imagine ships have more checks done more regularly than most people do on their own cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Slugsta said:

 

Never mind the 'worldie', we are doing the round-trip transatlantic on her in September!

Save some booze for us, although we do not embark until 14 March in Singapore.

 

Enjoy your cruise, we have been on Arcadia twice, inc 49 days, Sydney to Soton in 2012.

Edited by NSWP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pentlands said:

Is that why a ship recently ceased up and stopped because it did not have enough oil to keep the engines going and they were taking passengers off in dreadful conditions? Just a bad fluke I suppose? Cruiuse ships get away with things that much other travel does not.

 

And you know the service history of a ship? Bet the passengers on that ship wished they had known its service history.

 

He has to take it out of service to do regular maintainance, even if it all looks fine and dandy. It's called having a good business plan that takes in the required servicing schedules as part of the use of the vehicles. He even has to have a piece of paper every year that shows that the vehicle is OK for the roads. Do ships have to have those checks done every year, especially with the age of the PO fleet.

 

Not strictly true, see below

https://insurancemarinenews.com/insurance-marine-news/viking-sky-lost-engine-power-because-of-low-levels-of-lubricating-oil/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Pentlands said:

Is that why a ship recently ceased up and stopped because it did not have enough oil to keep the engines going and they were taking passengers off in dreadful conditions? Just a bad fluke I suppose? Cruiuse ships get away with things that much other travel does not.

 

And you know the service history of a ship? Bet the passengers on that ship wished they had known its service history.

 

He has to take it out of service to do regular maintainance, even if it all looks fine and dandy. It's called having a good business plan that takes in the required servicing schedules as part of the use of the vehicles. He even has to have a piece of paper every year that shows that the vehicle is OK for the roads. Do ships have to have those checks done every year, especially with the age of the PO fleet.

 

Very wide of the facts of what really happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, majortom10 said:

Very wide of the facts of what really happened.

Which bit was that?

 

" Our conclusion is that the engine failure was directly caused by low oil pressure,” the Norwegian Maritime Authority said, adding that “the level of lubricating oil in the tanks was within set limits, however relatively low, when the vessel started to cross Hustadvika”.

 

NOTE RELATIVELY LOW, ALSO NOTE CAUSED BY LOW OIL PRESSURE. What I said, they commented that the pressure was relatively low. Sounds like maintainance or observance to me, but a writer above is correct will have to wait for full report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Pentlands said:

Which bit was that?

 

" Our conclusion is that the engine failure was directly caused by low oil pressure,” the Norwegian Maritime Authority said, adding that “the level of lubricating oil in the tanks was within set limits, however relatively low, when the vessel started to cross Hustadvika”.

 

NOTE RELATIVELY LOW, ALSO NOTE CAUSED BY LOW OIL PRESSURE. What I said, they commented that the pressure was relatively low. Sounds like maintainance or observance to me, but a writer above is correct will have to wait for full report.

I agree that the engines failed because of low oil pressure but you post insinuated that this was due to lack of maintenance which I very much doubt on a ship that was less than 2 years old at the time of the incident. There could have been an oil leak which caused the problem but that is different than saying it was sent out to sea full of passengers with low oil levels due to lack of maintenance and you are totally wrong to suggest this without any evidence whatsoever.

Edited by majortom10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 6:39 AM, NSWP said:

Save some booze for us, although we do not embark until 14 March in Singapore.

 

Enjoy your cruise, we have been on Arcadia twice, inc 49 days, Sydney to Soton in 2012.

 

I think they will have had time to re-stock by the time you board 🍸

 

Arcadia was our first PandO ship - and 2nd cruise - in 2009. It will be interesting to see how she has changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine that in horrendous seas and the wild rolling of the ship could cause a drop in oil pressure.  The ship should not have sailed.  Forget about the maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

I would imagine that in horrendous seas and the wild rolling of the ship could cause a drop in oil pressure.  The ship should not have sailed.  Forget about the maintenance.

Based on what?

The Captain and 2 Norwegian pilots on board believed it was safe to sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

I would imagine that in horrendous seas and the wild rolling of the ship could cause a drop in oil pressure.  The ship should not have sailed.  Forget about the maintenance.

Viking Sky had enough oil in tanks to satisfy regulation but due to the rolling at times the sensors were above the oil level as it moved in the tanks, I believe sensors have been placed lower in the tanks . Anyone remember a British Leyland car with a computer many years  ago  Allegro? when parked up or downhill or braking sharply the helpful voice said "low oil pressure"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...