MAVIP Posted March 8, 2020 #501 Share Posted March 8, 2020 12 minutes ago, USN59-79 said: That is true at the moment. What we experienced on the Westerdam was that doesn't matter if the perception is that you could have an infected person on board. We were refused entry in a number of countries because we had no way of proving that no one was infected. But you certainly read in USA that tests were flown out to the Princess ship on the Californian coast? And I understand that worldwide there will be a lack of certain parts of the test instruments because of the more or less stand still of the Chinese production facilities? And how many personnel at a laboratory will be needed to test the samples from all passengers and personnel on ONE cruiseship? The right thing to do IMO is: controll embarking passengers. I read the HAL "rules" and it seems to me that is the best thing to do with the knowledge of today. But, of course, we follow the news and rules of our health authorities, both nearing our eighties and with light health issues (like almost everybody our age). I understand your concern and wish you wisdom with your decision. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 8, 2020 #502 Share Posted March 8, 2020 58 minutes ago, USN59-79 said: That is true at the moment. What we experienced on the Westerdam was that doesn't matter if the perception is that you could have an infected person on board. We were refused entry in a number of countries because we had no way of proving that no one was infected. All true, but Holland America also made the decision to dock in Hong Kong and board 800 new passengers when some other lines had already stopped, and the city was already in a state of emergency. Granted, all of this was in its early stages, but I wouldn’t describe these actions as “an over abundance of caution.” 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAVIP Posted March 8, 2020 #503 Share Posted March 8, 2020 23 minutes ago, BarbarianPaul said: All true, but Holland America also made the decision to dock in Hong Kong and board 800 new passengers when some other lines had already stopped, and the city was already in a state of emergency. Granted, all of this was in its early stages, but I wouldn’t describe these actions as “an over abundance of caution.” Quite a few were not allowed to board depending on passport and countries visited, if I remember well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 8, 2020 #504 Share Posted March 8, 2020 2 hours ago, MAVIP said: Quite a few were not allowed to board depending on passport and countries visited, if I remember well. I just don't think they should have docked in Hong Kong at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN59-79 Posted March 8, 2020 Author #505 Share Posted March 8, 2020 18 minutes ago, BarbarianPaul said: I just don't think they should have docked in Hong Kong at all. I am not so sure about that. Hong Kong is a city of about 7 million. While there were some cases of the virus there at the time, I suspect that there are more in the Seattle area now than were there on 1 February. Should Seattle be shut down as a port for the upcoming Alaska cruise season? One thing I thought was strange was when we arrived in Cambodia the ship arranged my flight home. The ticket was from Phnom Penh to Kuala Lumper to Hong Kong to Seattle. I asked at the front desk if they thought is was smart to route me through Hong Kong, when Hong Kong seemed to be the cause of our problems. They replied "Not to worry, the airport is a secure area." Eventually Malaysia refused to let that plane fly to Kuala Lumper, so it became a moot point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare kazu Posted March 9, 2020 #506 Share Posted March 9, 2020 3 hours ago, BarbarianPaul said: I just don't think they should have docked in Hong Kong at all. Hind sight is wonderful, isn’t it? There were lots of precautions taken. And while you are criticizing HAL and their decisions, feel free to pick on the air lines too - Air Canada was flying to Hong Kong despite barring China generally. Most were. Hong Kong was considered low risk at the time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 9, 2020 #507 Share Posted March 9, 2020 25 minutes ago, kazu said: Hind sight is wonderful, isn’t it? There were lots of precautions taken. And while you are criticizing HAL and their decisions, feel free to pick on the air lines too - Air Canada was flying to Hong Kong despite barring China generally. Most were. Hong Kong was considered low risk at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 9, 2020 #508 Share Posted March 9, 2020 26 minutes ago, kazu said: Hind sight is wonderful, isn’t it? There were lots of precautions taken. And while you are criticizing HAL and their decisions, feel free to pick on the air lines too - Air Canada was flying to Hong Kong despite barring China generally. Most were. Hong Kong was considered low risk at the time. Kazu... My wife and I I were on the Westerdam from Jan. 16 to Feb. 1 and disembarked in Hong Kong. It felt weird and we didn’t feel either safe or comfortable. It’s not 20/20 hindsight because I was there and experienced it and the city didn’t feel “low risk” at all. All the unique tourist spots were closed and the entire population was in masks, as you’d expect during a state of emergency. The Hong Kong Art Museum, which had reopened after a multi year remodel, which we were excited to see, was of course closed, along with every other museum in the city. Several fellow cruisers who were traveling on for the next few weeks were afraid to get off. But we had to. We had booked a post cruise hotel stay, so were forced to stay the night. I’ve had many wonderful cruises on HA, and hopefully will in the future, but, like Shanghai and Beijing, I think they should have bypassed Hong Kong. I know many airlines were still flying to Hong Kong. Who knows, if they weren’t, my wife and I might still be there! Our experience was obviously nothing in comparison to what our fellow passengers who continued on endured. But it’s still not a pleasant memory. Regarding the Hong Kong debarkation, I didn’t experience any precautions taken. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN59-79 Posted March 9, 2020 Author #509 Share Posted March 9, 2020 We felt the city was very low risk, despite the fact that about 90% of the population was wearing masks. The crew of our Cathay Pacific flight also wore masks throughout the flight. We brought masks with us and wore them in Hong Kong. We got in early and went directly to the ship to drop off our bags. Then took the shuttle to Plaza Hollywood and the Metro to downtown Kowloon. Found a restaurant that served roast goose and had a great lunch, did a little shopping, then went back to the ship to be on board for the lifeboat drill. No one on the ship wore a mask, so we put them away. With 800 new passengers boarding in Hong Kong, I don't know how they could have substituted a new port in just a day or two. My complaint was that they insisted that they were still going to China at that late date. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAVIP Posted March 9, 2020 #510 Share Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, BarbarianPaul said: I just don't think they should have docked in Hong Kong at all. Easy to say. What about the (number mentioned by you) 800 (extra!) passengers left in Hongkong in that case? Edited March 9, 2020 by MAVIP in that case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Level six Posted March 9, 2020 #511 Share Posted March 9, 2020 8 hours ago, USN59-79 said: My complaint was that they insisted that they were still going to China at that late date. I think they had already changed the itinerary for the FEB 1 cruise. I was supposed to be on that cruise and the itinerary change came the day we were to leave to HK, about Jan 28 if I recall. Of course, I did not go. I am glad I made that decision. I would have hated the sail to no where cruise, some enjoyed it, I wouldn't have. Plus, passengers were only tested once in Cambodia? I think two tests are needed to prove no virus. Please correct me if I am wrong about passengers being tested only once. Anyway, I know no one tested positive, but I would have hated feeling like I may be a carrier of the virus and spread to others in my family or community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 9, 2020 #512 Share Posted March 9, 2020 9 hours ago, USN59-79 said: We felt the city was very low risk, despite the fact that about 90% of the population was wearing masks. The crew of our Cathay Pacific flight also wore masks throughout the flight. We brought masks with us and wore them in Hong Kong. We got in early and went directly to the ship to drop off our bags. Then took the shuttle to Plaza Hollywood and the Metro to downtown Kowloon. Found a restaurant that served roast goose and had a great lunch, did a little shopping, then went back to the ship to be on board for the lifeboat drill. No one on the ship wore a mask, so we put them away. With 800 new passengers boarding in Hong Kong, I don't know how they could have substituted a new port in just a day or two. My complaint was that they insisted that they were still going to China at that late date. The captain had announced prior to our arrival in Hong Kong that Shanghai had been cancelled and the next cruise would conclude in Yokohama. Pointless now to argue the wisdom of the stop in Hong Kong. Why don’t we move on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbarianPaul Posted March 9, 2020 #513 Share Posted March 9, 2020 5 hours ago, MAVIP said: Easy to say. What about the (number mentioned by you) 800 (extra!) passengers left in Hongkong in that case? I know, it is easy to say, and it would have been a logistical nightmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Level six Posted March 9, 2020 #514 Share Posted March 9, 2020 True, doesn't matter now, but maybe it will help in future similar situations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilboman Posted March 9, 2020 #515 Share Posted March 9, 2020 15 hours ago, kazu said: Hind sight is wonderful, isn’t it? There were lots of precautions taken. And while you are criticizing HAL and their decisions, feel free to pick on the air lines too - Air Canada was flying to Hong Kong despite barring China generally. Most were. Hong Kong was considered low risk at the time. Hong Kong is still low risk. much lower than the US at this point and all of Europe really. But lots of cruises still departing from the US Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Level six Posted March 9, 2020 #516 Share Posted March 9, 2020 2 hours ago, gilboman said: Hong Kong is still low risk. much lower than the US at this point and all of Europe really. But lots of cruises still departing from the US But at the time, when Wuhan was being shut down, and over 500,000 people from Wuhan took trains to HK the week before, it seemed pretty high risk. And flights were cancelled from US to HK the day the ship left HK on FEB 1, so someone thought it was high risk. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sail7seas Posted March 12, 2020 #517 Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) On 2/6/2020 at 3:26 PM, npcl said: I don't expect so. The cruise lines choices now are either try an keep sailing where they can. Maybe being a little more proactive on canceling and relocating ships. Or start figuring out if they can pay their bills including loan costs on their ships without using bankruptcy protection. I expect that there is any more spread out of China that you might see new builds orders being canceled or delayed. On the other hand if this does turn into a pandemic with the current numbers then things will go back to normal fairly quickly because no reason for a government to quarantine if the virus is already wide spread in their country. In any case I expect a hard time for the cruise industry and some very very cheap fares next year. WHO, yesterday, declared corona virus a Pandemic, I t has and is spreading word-wide. Are you sure all (most) of the cruise lines will be sailing next year? Viking's announcement today, (and Princess's do not bode well) IMO Edited March 12, 2020 by sail7seas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancal Posted March 12, 2020 #518 Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) A number of HAL’s post Hong. Kong statements/ press releases were simply not factual. Claiming that there were no positive c virus passengers on board because of testing might be acceptable if you consider checking someone’s temperature a check. In actual fact at that point in time they had no medically acceptable way of testing for the virus. HAL’s statements were, to be generous, misleading in the extreme. Edited March 12, 2020 by iancal 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI66774 Posted March 12, 2020 #519 Share Posted March 12, 2020 On 3/9/2020 at 10:21 AM, gilboman said: Hong Kong is still low risk. much lower than the US at this point and all of Europe really. But lots of cruises still departing from the US Not true. Per million (in population), HK has a much higher infection rate than the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awhcruiser Posted March 12, 2020 #520 Share Posted March 12, 2020 Holland America Line stands by the difficult decision of our sister-brand Princess Cruises to suspend their cruise operations. However, our cruises remain fully operational. We want to assure our guests that we are closely monitoring the global updates and changes. If and when changes need to be made, we will communicate with all affected guests. We also appreciate your patience as we experience an exceptional volume of calls. We continue to prioritize guests who are currently sailing or due to depart in the next week. Thank you for your continued loyalty and support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentwood Bay Posted March 12, 2020 #521 Share Posted March 12, 2020 The "low" infection rate in the US is almost certainly due to the woeful lack of testing. South Korea tests 10000 people per day. The US still hasn't tested that many to date. Time to wake up and get serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancal Posted March 12, 2020 #522 Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) My understanding is it that the test actually requires 2 tests from each person. So when an organization or state claims they have done X number of tests it is for the media. Divide that number by two to determine how many people have been tested. China appears to be making great progress. Italy appears to be on the front side of the curve. Not so sure about the US....still early days. Edited March 12, 2020 by iancal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN59-79 Posted March 12, 2020 Author #523 Share Posted March 12, 2020 1 hour ago, iancal said: My understanding is it that the test actually requires 2 tests from each person. So when an organization or state claims they have done X number of tests it is for the media. Divide that number by two to determine how many people have been tested. China appears to be making great progress. Italy appears to be on the front side of the curve. Not so sure about the US....still early days. I don't believe that two tests per person is the protocol. When we were tested in Cambodia, our temperature was taken, then a swab was inserted deep in the nasal passage and another swab inserted in the throat. The end of the swab was cut off and it was inserted in a test tube, sealed, labeled, and sent to the Pasteur Institute Lab in Phnom Penh. Within 24 hours the results were returned. I think that a second test would only be done if the first test had come back positive. The way the Chinese Government controls all information in their country, I would be skeptical of any information that they publish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie0075 Posted March 12, 2020 #524 Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Brentwood Bay said: The "low" infection rate in the US is almost certainly due to the woeful lack of testing. South Korea tests 10000 people per day. The US still hasn't tested that many to date. Time to wake up and get serious. Agree the US was woefully unprepared for this outbreak and is going to pay for for a while. The last 24hrs has been insane with all of the closures. Hopefully Hal decides to put passengers health before profits like some other lines have already done. Sometimes you need to protect people from themselves. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancal Posted March 13, 2020 #525 Share Posted March 13, 2020 This is a dynamic situation. Give HAL some time. Don’t forget, HAL is very much a follower, not a leader. My guess is that they will eventually do the right thing. It simply takes them more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now