Star cruise, end of March, engine problems cancelling port?

[mugtech]

54 minutes ago, Sam Ting said:

How about they stop selling things they know they are not going to deliver?  If they knew something was wrong with the ship, why did they sell the itinerary to begin with?  What changed from the day before the cut off period to get their money back to the day after?  Did something else break?

Doubt it, the contract says they can do that, so expect it on the Star until further notice.

[luvavacation]

At this moment, the cruise is still being sold with the original ports.  The room for my family is now going for over $7,000.  I would be a very upset client if I booked this cruise, paid it in full (as it has to be for a Haven room at this stage), and then found out in a couple days that NCL "made this difficult decision with my safety and well-being in mind".  

 

I would expect a cruise line to update its information as soon as it makes the decision to change the itinerary.  

 

You all may not find this deceptive, but I do.  I also find the handling of this to be rather inept on the part of NCL, and not getting the parts is no excuse for selling an itinerary and then providing no means for the consumer to change to a different ship when "my safety and well-being" is in mind.  I intensely dislike when companies are inept.

 

The vast majority of you may be perfectly fine with playing the odds and have no qualms about being on a ship with known issues that will not be repaired 4 months in advance (and many people do not read discussion boards before choosing a trip, and thus would not know there were issues with any ships).  I do not wish to be stuck at sea, bobbing around.  If others wish to be, then go, and enjoy yourselves, it might be fun.  But for me, and my family, we need to get back home, and while missing a much desired port can be dealt with,  the possibility of a problem with the ship at sea, that is too much of a gamble for me.

 

I am kicking myself for not purchasing Cancel for Any Reason insurance.  I always purchase it!  But my husband said it's his birthday, we would not cancel this cruise, why bother, save the money and do some nice excursions.  I am never listening to him again!

 

 

 

[Gershep]

We were supposed to be on this cruise until my friend's husband got real sick. I would have been upset if they changed the itinerary but I would be real mad if it was done right after final payment. NCL knew if they made these changes they would have had a lot of cancellations. Shame on them for doing this after final payment.

[smplybcause]

2 hours ago, luvavacation said:

I do not wish to be stuck at sea, bobbing around. 

 

NCL doesn't want their ship to do that either. Beyond the huge cost if that happens there's the years of bad publicity from it. Carnival is still regularly associated with fires and poop cruises. 

 

Ships are designed to be able to run even if not all 4 of their generators are running. They just can't cruise at top speed, which is why itinerary changes are needed. 

 

Royals Allure has been limping along for almost 9 months and still have over 4 to go before she's repaired. Someone else mentioned another cruiseline that had a ship limping along for over a year. 

[pghflyer]

I don't have safety concerns, they aren't crazy. I do feel like it is dishonest for them to hold known itinerary changes until after final payment.  For our Santiago-Buenos Aires route, they made relatively minor changes that I can live with that they probably didn't have fully calculated until they told us (November 21)....but clearly they knew at that time what the issues were and their likely repair (if any) windows and should have told everyone and not piecemealed it out as final payments came in (if that is what is really happening).

[kitkat343]

"What do you propose they do - anchor it off the coast, cancel all cruises on the ship and abandon it until repairs can be made?  As has been stated in other threads regarding this ship - parts can't just be pulled from a shelf and shipped, they need to be produced in many cases.  Yes, some may be relatively standard parts but when you're talking about major engine components they don't just have them lying around."

 

It is completely understandable if they cannot fix the ship immediately.  But they should announce all itinerary changes prior to final payment, so the affected passengers can decide if they want to continue with their new voyage or cancel.    I don't believe passengers deserve compensation for missed ports due to weather, dangerous local conditions or even an unforeseen ship emergency.  But NCL had a lot of notice about this, and needed to be more transparent with their customers.

[luv2kroooz]

22 hours ago, hallux said:

What do you propose they do - anchor it off the coast, cancel all cruises on the ship and abandon it until repairs can be made?  As has been stated in other threads regarding this ship - parts can't just be pulled from a shelf and shipped, they need to be produced in many cases.  Yes, some may be relatively standard parts but when you're talking about major engine components they don't just have them lying around.

What they should do and what they will do are two different things. They should:

 

1. Be transparent about the problem when it is known and communicate that to passengers. If they know about it before final payment is due, announce it before final payment is due and offer nothing since passengers can cancel for a full refund. If they learn about it after final payment, announce it and offer a $50 per port OBC as a gesture of goodwill for the inconvenience and missed port. What they shouldn't do is back their passengers into a corner by intentionally withholdding information until a time when there are economic costs to passengers for cancelling.

 

2. Adjust the itinerary on the website for upcoming impacted cruises, so what they are selling mirrors what they intend to deliver.

Edited December 11, 2019 by blcruising

[njkate]

16 hours ago, luvavacation said:

At this moment, the cruise is still being sold with the original ports.  The room for my family is now going for over $7,000.  I would be a very upset client if I booked this cruise, paid it in full (as it has to be for a Haven room at this stage), and then found out in a couple days that NCL "made this difficult decision with my safety and well-being in mind".  

There is no Haven on the Star, suites yes but no Haven

[luvavacation]

2 hours ago, njkate said:

There is no Haven on the Star, suites yes but no Haven

Oops!  Sorry, I knew that, I guess it was wishful thinking in the subconscious!  Thanks for making sure that I was aware of this, I do appreciate it.

 

[don't-use-real-name]

8 hours ago, luvavacation said:

Oops!  Sorry, I knew that, I guess it was wishful thinking in the subconscious!  Thanks for making sure that I was aware of this, I do appreciate it.

 

The best the STAR has to offer is the 2 Garden Villa Suites on deck 14 - as close to a HAVEN as you are going to get !

[mugtech]

On 12/10/2019 at 8:58 PM, smplybcause said:

Royals Allure has been limping along for almost 9 months and still have over 4 to go before she's repaired. Someone else mentioned another cruiseline that had a ship limping along for over a year. 

But mommy, the other kids did it

[smplybcause]

2 minutes ago, mugtech said:

But mommy, the other kids did it

 

Yup. Rather proves that it's 1) not NCL specific and 2) industry standard. It always amazes me how many people are downright incensed when things that are part and parcel to the cruise industry actually happens. 

 

It reminds me of a total sh*t article I read recently. I'm pretty sure the author has never been on a cruise before because their #4 complaint of how bad NCL is was saying they need to bring in a backup ship when something happens to one of their ships. That's not how cruising works. 

[mugtech]

8 minutes ago, smplybcause said:

It always amazes me how many people are downright incensed when things that are part and parcel to the cruise industry actually happens. 

 

Knowing you are going to change the itinerary but waiting until after final payment to announce it is not part and parcel to the entire cruise industry.

[smplybcause]

11 minutes ago, mugtech said:

Knowing you are going to change the itinerary but waiting until after final payment to announce it is not part and parcel to the entire cruise industry.

 

Royal did it with several of the Allure itineraries. Almost three months of cruises were past final when they announced the changes for Nov-Apr cruises. And those changes were announced about 5 months after the first set were. Even though they knew they'd need a dry dock in Europe to fix it. 

 

There's a lot of logistics that goes into figuring out what's wrong with the ship, the timeline of the repair, and then figuring out what changes need to be made to the itineraries. They can't just decide to change ports on a whim - they're booked up 12+ months in advance and few actually have an abundance of berths (namely Nassau and Cozumel). So they have to take the restrictions on the ship plus availability of berths and figure out which combination works. Plus people are going to be mad if itinerary changes are made and excursions aren't immediately available so that's another step in the logistics. 

 

I'm not saying they're A+ perfect, but this is not a simplistic thing. 

[andy1fsufan]

I also booked this cruise back in March for the internary wanting to see the ABC islands since we have never been there. We have seen Nassau toooo many times. (This is our 15th NCL cruise). Call me a sinick, but I usually don’t believe the first excuse any large corporation uses as an excuse. There has got to be some sort of issue with the port charges and fees.  So NCL is saying that the Star can not make it from Bonaire to Port Canaveral in three days (leaving Bonaire on Sat. 1pm, at sea Sun, at sea Mon then arrive in Port Canaveral Tues. morning? ) but there is plenty of time to get us to Nassau for a few hours (7:30am-1:30pm). Nassau is about 250 miles from Port Canaveral which is less then 10 hours away.  Give me a break.  I smell something fishy!

 

I called NCL since they so conviently informed us after final payment and asked for a refund on the port charges to Nassau. (I also wanted to know when they knew the boat was too slow) Of course they said no to the refund. I asked politely for any kind of compensation and the operator (who was very nice and apologetic with me) stated they are receiving numerous calls about the intenarry change and so far no compensation has been approved.  I suppose I might have to steal a beach towel to make me feel better!  I also have the drink package so I probably won’t know where I am anyway!

[Sam Ting]

6 hours ago, andy1fsufan said:

I also booked this cruise back in March for the internary wanting to see the ABC islands since we have never been there. We have seen Nassau toooo many times. (This is our 15th NCL cruise). Call me a sinick, but I usually don’t believe the first excuse any large corporation uses as an excuse. There has got to be some sort of issue with the port charges and fees.  So NCL is saying that the Star can not make it from Bonaire to Port Canaveral in three days (leaving Bonaire on Sat. 1pm, at sea Sun, at sea Mon then arrive in Port Canaveral Tues. morning? ) but there is plenty of time to get us to Nassau for a few hours (7:30am-1:30pm). Nassau is about 250 miles from Port Canaveral which is less then 10 hours away.  Give me a break.  I smell something fishy!

 

I called NCL since they so conviently informed us after final payment and asked for a refund on the port charges to Nassau. (I also wanted to know when they knew the boat was too slow) Of course they said no to the refund. I asked politely for any kind of compensation and the operator (who was very nice and apologetic with me) stated they are receiving numerous calls about the intenarry change and so far no compensation has been approved.  I suppose I might have to steal a beach towel to make me feel better!  I also have the drink package so I probably won’t know where I am anyway!

Seems to me that if a company advertises and sells one thing with no intention of providing it would constitute fraud. 
 

Of course there is nothing you can really do about it as the legal system is corrupt and stacked against us.   Nobody has the wherewithal to hold them to task, so they do whatever they want. 
 

The only thing you can really do at this point is go on the cruise and not spend one penny. That’s right, don’t even give them your credit card.   Enjoy the free restaurants, the free shows and other free activities and still have a wonderful time!  

I also heard some people set up VPN accounts and accuse companies of all sorts of things on various websites just to mess with them but I’m not sure how that works. 
 

in any event have a lovely time!

 

[jmaker]

So has anyone been updated?  I was just told by NCL that they would make an announcement on Thursday 12/26 in regards to the status of our sailing on April 19th 14 day transatlantic trip.  Made final payment on 21st.  Wasn’t able to get a confirmation of payment through travel agent site.  Today all excursions are now not there.  I called and the guy before I could get anything out said are you sailing in April?  There was a ship change.  Then when I asked what he meant the then said he couldn’t comment.  Then he transferred me to the reservation group and I shared what he just shared by mistake I believe. She said they couldn’t comment until everything is finalized.. She said that would be Thursday 12/26.  

[ECCruise]

OK.

Some advice for those on the Star with these problems from someone who had problems on the same ship when it was in Australia in January 2017.

 

We were notified of exactly the same sort of "propulsion issues" that started affecting ports, and virtually one by one, ports were eliminated.  The biggest issue was they eliminated the New Zealand fjords, which is the Number 1 reason for taking an Oz to NZ sailing.  They gave us a minimum ($500) OBC and kept saying there were "no safety issues."  Since we were in Hawaii and already on our way to Sydney for the sailing, we planned to take the cruise.

 

We left from Sydney and made the 1st port in Melbourne.  Slow sailing but we made it there.  One day in Melbourne and then on our way to cross the Tasman Sea (one of the worst areas for potential sea state in the world).  Next morning woke up and wondered why the ship was dead in the water.  No movement whatsoever.  Eventually the Captain came on the PA and announced that we had lost all propulsion and although we were drifting toward shore, they had dispatched a "seagoing tug" to tow us back to Melbourne.

Tug made it to the ship about 18 hours later.  Towing back to Melbourne took 36 more  hours where we sat for 4 days while they repaired the vessel.  Sailed across the Tasman and arrived in Auckland on the scheduled day of arrival but no other ports.

Their compensation for this was fair, but many people, who had booked this sailing strictly for Oz and NZ were quite obviously disappointed.

 

My advice?  Keep on them for any and all information. Do not let them put you off.  Do not simply assume that they would never sail if there is a problem.  Our sailing proved that not to be the case.

[ECCruise]

On 12/10/2019 at 8:58 PM, smplybcause said:

 

NCL doesn't want their ship to do that either. Beyond the huge cost if that happens there's the years of bad publicity from it. Carnival is still regularly associated with fires and poop cruises. 

On 12/10/2019 at 9:35 PM, pghflyer said:

I don't have safety concerns, they aren't crazy. I do feel like it is dishonest for them to hold known itinerary changes until after final payment.  For our Santiago-Buenos Aires route, they made relatively minor changes that I can live with that they probably didn't have fully calculated until they told us (November 21)....but clearly they knew at that time what the issues were and their likely repair (if any) windows and should have told everyone and not piecemealed it out as final payments came in (if that is what is really happening).

Please read my post directly above this one.

[smplybcause]

6 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

Please read my post directly above this one.

 

While I realize it was the same ship, the problem then was propulsion issues directly with the azipods. The current issue is a generator is down so therefore they can't go as fast. Quite different than having your means of propulsion down. Though plenty of ships have sailed no problem with being down one azipod. I'm unfamiliar with the specific azipods issue Star had as to whether it was bad luck it happened to go completely dead in the water or some other failure. She has also since been to dry dock so the azipod issue was fixed then if not before. And, like I've said, the current issue is a completely different one. 

[njkate]

The biggest issue to me is NCL is not transparent to their customers until after final payment, they know exactly what is going on and what they plan to do about it but again don’t tell their customers until after final payment in my book that’s fraudulent 

[ECCruise]

14 minutes ago, smplybcause said:

 

While I realize it was the same ship, the problem then was propulsion issues directly with the azipods. The current issue is a generator is down so therefore they can't go as fast. Quite different than having your means of propulsion down. Though plenty of ships have sailed no problem with being down one azipod. I'm unfamiliar with the specific azipods issue Star had as to whether it was bad luck it happened to go completely dead in the water or some other failure. She has also since been to dry dock so the azipod issue was fixed then if not before. And, like I've said, the current issue is a completely different one. 

The ship sailed for weeks with only a single operative azipod.  We had been through this before, with Celebrity M class ships, and each time they pulled the ship out of service immediately.  NCL continued to sail with one azipod which is an invitation for trouble (viz: our sailing dead in the water).

Don't understand the power generation issue.  Ships routinely (meaning most of the time) sail with 3 of 4 generators in operation in 4 generator set ships or say 4 of 6 in 6 generator set ships.  Not sure why the loss of one would cause the ship to need to slow appreciably, but then I am not a marine engineer.  Just someone once shy and twice burned.

[smplybcause]

54 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

The ship sailed for weeks with only a single operative azipod.  We had been through this before, with Celebrity M class ships, and each time they pulled the ship out of service immediately.  NCL continued to sail with one azipod which is an invitation for trouble (viz: our sailing dead in the water).

Don't understand the power generation issue.  Ships routinely (meaning most of the time) sail with 3 of 4 generators in operation in 4 generator set ships or say 4 of 6 in 6 generator set ships.  Not sure why the loss of one would cause the ship to need to slow appreciably, but then I am not a marine engineer.  Just someone once shy and twice burned.

 

From what I've gathered one was down for maintenance and a separate one failed. 

 

I honestly don't follow celebrity, but from what I can see from googling they didn't "take ships out of service" and rather cancelled or changed sailings for repairs and then continued on once repairs were done. 

 

If NCL hasn't been able to get the parts needed (can't just buy them off the shelf) or need a dry dock for repairs to be done, they alter itineraries until that can be done. There's examples of all cruise lines doing exactly that. I can't think of a time when a cruise line just anchored a ship to await a repair for weeks, but I could be wrong. 

[ECCruise]

11 minutes ago, smplybcause said:

 

From what I've gathered one was down for maintenance and a separate one failed. 

 

I honestly don't follow celebrity, but from what I can see from googling they didn't "take ships out of service" and rather cancelled or changed sailings for repairs and then continued on once repairs were done. 

 

If NCL hasn't been able to get the parts needed (can't just buy them off the shelf) or need a dry dock for repairs to be done, they alter itineraries until that can be done. There's examples of all cruise lines doing exactly that. I can't think of a time when a cruise line just anchored a ship to await a repair for weeks, but I could be wrong. 

On the Star, one of the Azipods had failed weeks before and they kept the ship sailing.  When the other Azipod failed, we had zero propulsion.

 

Celebrity definitely put several ships out of service when one of the azipods failed.  I know because we were on a cruise that was cancelled for the repairs.  As I recall, they took that ship from the west coast, through the Panama Canal and up to Norfolk for the repairs.  As I recall, the repairs and getting the ship back to the west coast took something on the order of 3-4 weeks.  All of the M class ships had azipod failures in their early years (and sometimes later) and all of them were pulled out of service and put into drydock.  

[smplybcause]

11 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

On the Star, one of the Azipods had failed weeks before and they kept the ship sailing.  When the other Azipod failed, we had zero propulsion.

 

Celebrity definitely put several ships out of service when one of the azipods failed.  I know because we were on a cruise that was cancelled for the repairs.  As I recall, they took that ship from the west coast, through the Panama Canal and up to Norfolk for the repairs.  As I recall, the repairs and getting the ship back to the west coast took something on the order of 3-4 weeks.  All of the M class ships had azipod failures in their early years (and sometimes later) and all of them were pulled out of service and put into drydock.  

 

Couldn't find anything that showed all the M class ships were pulled out if service for weeks at a time as soon as they had a problem. Stuff about repairs, but not weeks of canceled cruises. Just the obvious Google search as I don't know more specifics about it. 

 

Also want to point out those issues were known manufacturing defects that they eventually sued the manufacturer for and recovered lost revenue. From all I've seen on it the star issue is not a manufacturer defect, it's a things break sometimes issue.