100 more days

[Jimbo]

9 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Royal is giving away cruises thru the casino beginning July 14. Coincidence🤔

 

Yup just a coincidence, it will be much longer then that before anyone sails.

[PhillyFan33579]

41 minutes ago, ATC cruiser said:

Ok, I’ll change may post. Does anybody really think they were cruising before July 18th?

I have 4 cruises booked between now and October. Although none of them have been officially cancelled by RCI yet, the only one I think has a chance of happening is the one in October. Right now I would be happy if I was able to leave my house without violating some county or state order. 

[Georgia_Peaches]

7 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

Right now I would be happy if I was able to leave my house without violating some county or state order. 

Isn't that the truth!  

[Cruisin_n_Boozin]

A lot of good points... but I think we can all agree on one thing, hopefully we are sailing again in October in time for my Indy sailing 🙃

[parrotfeathers]

1 hour ago, ATC cruiser said:

Does anybody think that they were going on a cruise before July anyway. This really doesn’t change much. 

 

Yes, I believe more than a few posters did believe they would be going on a cruise before July.

[BND]

6 minutes ago, parrotfeathers said:

 

Yes, I believe more than a few posters did believe they would be going on a cruise before July.

Yeah, we never did.  The only reason we didn't cancel our May b2b on AD was we wanted them to cancel so we can get a refund.  We already got one for the first leg because it was impacted by the Canada port closures.  We have a b2b on Harmony scheduled for Nov and we're not completely optimistic about those either.  

[cruiserhal]

4 minutes ago, BND said:

Yeah, we never did.  The only reason we didn't cancel our May b2b on AD was we wanted them to cancel so we can get a refund.  We already got one for the first leg because it was impacted by the Canada port closures.  We have a b2b on Harmony scheduled for Nov and we're not completely optimistic about those either.  

We were scheduled for the same B2B in the AD.  Yesterday we took the FCC on the May 15 cruise so now we are waiting for RCL to cancel the May 21 but now I'm leaning to take the refund rather than more FCC.  Of course, that is subject to change.  I just hope we can take our B2B on the Oasis in September.

[zonacruiser25]

Governments can issue guidelines, countries can keep ports closed or open them up but I do not believe any cruise line will cancel or adjust the schedule much more than 30 days at a time.  Many of us will be faced with decisions to cancel or not at our upcoming final payment dates with not much more than speculation as to whether or not the cruise will sail.  We don't need to make our decision until June and this thread may be hundreds of pages by then.  Interesting to speculate on what will happen.  

[maxsales]

1 hour ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

That's not what chengkp75 was talking about anyway.  He was refuting PP's claim that the government could keep a US citizen from boarding a cruise ship in Spain, Australia, Japan, or any other foreign port.

That's not what I said.  I stated that the US government could issue a no travel order which makes current protections for americans abroad not available and most likely means US travels could not obtain travel insurance (therefore no excess medical coverage).  The US government most likely can't stop US citizens from boarding a cruise ship in a foreign port but can impose conditions making it unlikely that a person would actually chance it.

[John&LaLa]

1 hour ago, ToroAzul said:

 

That's what I booked, fingers crossed.

 

I pushed out till August 23rd Harmony

[John&LaLa]

1 hour ago, Jimbo said:

 

Yup just a coincidence, it will be much longer then that before anyone sails.

 

Probably, but I don't think it's a coincidence. Just in line with first possible break

[datolim]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Let's not get overly dramatic.  First off, this only applies to US waters, since the CDC has no jurisdiction anywhere else.

Reading the updated order from the CDC, it appears, to me at least, to be issued in order to stop sailings until the newly required action plans can be submitted and vetted.  The order can be changed or rescinded at any time by the CDC, as it states, and I believe with the acceptance of action plans, it will be.  When this will happen is uncertain, but may or may not last the full 100 days.  It is interesting to note that the order is specifically described as not a rule, but an emergency action, so I don't foresee that the required action plans, or most of its requirements, as being continued after the current health emergency is over.

 

Secondly, it does not "condemn" people to "die at sea", as it allows for disembarkation of passengers and crew "as approved by USCG".

 

If you have read te

 

[Jobeth66]

Here's the link to the actual order for anyone who wants to read it.  https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/pdf/No-Sail-Order-Cruise-Ships_Extension_4-9-20-encrypted.pdf

 

Below is some of the most pertinent of what the order itself says the cruise industry must do (I bolded g.  I'm not sure the cruise lines are going to want to maintain ventilators and medical staff trained to use them on all their ships)  I also bolded part of j - the way I read that is that the cruise lines will have to work with shoreside hospitals  to have a plan in place with a facility that will agree in advance to take these patients.  Do you see any shoreside hospitals agreeing to take COVID-19 patients in advance of EVERY cruise, especially ports that have multiple ships in port at a time?:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Training of all crew on COVID-19 prevention, mitigation, and response activities;
e. Protocols for any COVID-19 testing, including details relating to the shore-side transport, administration, and operationalization of laboratory work if onboard laboratory work is not feasible;
f. Onboard isolation, quarantine, and social distancing protocols to minimize the risk of transmission and spread of COVID-19;
g. Onboard medical staffing, including number and type of staff, and equipment in sufficient quantity to provide a hospital level of care ( e.g., ventilators, facemasks, personal protective equipment) for the infected without the need for hospitalization onshore;
h. An outbreak management and response plan to provision and assist an affected cruise ship that relies on industry resources, e.g., mobilization of additional cruise ships or other vessels to act as ''hospital" ship for the infected, "quarantine" ship for the exposed, and "residential" ship for those providing care and treatment,
including the ability to transport individuals between ships as needed;
               1. Categorization of affected individuals into risk categories with clear stepwise approaches for care and management of each category;
J. A medical care plan addressing onboard care versus evacuation to on-shore hospitals for critically ill individuals, specifying how availability of beds for critically ill at local hospitals will be determined in advance and how the cruise ship operator will ensure acceptance at local medical facilities to treat the critically ill in a manner that limits the burden on Federal, State, and local resources and avoids, to the greatest extent possible, medivac situations. If medical evacuation is necessary arrangements for evacuation must be made with
commercial resources (e.g., ship tender, chartered standby vessel, chartered airlift) and arrangements made with a designated medical facility that has agreed to accept such evacuees. All medical evacuation plans must be coordinated with the US Coast Guard.

[Petroplex]

I note with interest that Royal is still selling cruises out of U.S. waters in May. I just did a search for cruises out of Galveston, and everything scheduled after May 11 is still there. I'm obviously not booking that, but as of about 2 minutes ago RCCL is clearly not understanding this as an order to quit selling cruises out of U.S. waters for 100 days.

 

I expressly make no finding about whether this is right, wrong, or indifferent. I simply provide a data point about what the cruise line is (not) doing in response to the order.

[chengkp75]

19 minutes ago, datolim said:

If you have read te

 

Whatever you were referencing to here, I probably have read it, and more than most here on CC.

[datolim]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Let's not get overly dramatic.  First off, this only applies to US waters, since the CDC has no jurisdiction anywhere else.

Reading the updated order from the CDC, it appears, to me at least, to be issued in order to stop sailings until the newly required action plans can be submitted and vetted.  The order can be changed or rescinded at any time by the CDC, as it states, and I believe with the acceptance of action plans, it will be.  When this will happen is uncertain, but may or may not last the full 100 days.  It is interesting to note that the order is specifically described as not a rule, but an emergency action, so I don't foresee that the required action plans, or most of its requirements, as being continued after the current health emergency is over.

 

Secondly, it does not "condemn" people to "die at sea", as it allows for disembarkation of passengers and crew "as approved by USCG".

 

If passengers are allowed to disembark then why does the article says this

 

Until then, the about 100 cruise ships in the Atlantic, Pacific or Gulf of Mexico must remain idle, either in port or wallowing at anchor, the CDC said. Those ships currently have nearly 80,000 crew aboard

 

Condemn people to die at sea is in the article

 

Cruise ships, with their confined environments, have been hit particularly hard by the coronavirus pandemic. The CDC notes that in recent weeks, crew members or passengers have developed either flu-like symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19 on at least 10 cruise ships.

On some of the vessels, passengers or crew members died either on the ship or after being moved ashore to hospitals.

[molly361]

SS CENTER

ate.com

 

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by molly361

[chengkp75]

13 minutes ago, datolim said:

If passengers are allowed to disembark then why does the article says this

 

Until then, the about 100 cruise ships in the Atlantic, Pacific or Gulf of Mexico must remain idle, either in port or wallowing at anchor, the CDC said. Those ships currently have nearly 80,000 crew aboard

 

Condemn people to die at sea is in the article

 

Cruise ships, with their confined environments, have been hit particularly hard by the coronavirus pandemic. The CDC notes that in recent weeks, crew members or passengers have developed either flu-like symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19 on at least 10 cruise ships.

On some of the vessels, passengers or crew members died either on the ship or after being moved ashore to hospitals.

Because nowhere in the article does it say that the crew, or even passengers, cannot be disembarked, if medically required.  It says "ships are idle" and "there are 80,000 crew onboard".  I, however, read the actual order from the CDC, which states (can't copy and paste, so I'll type it out):

 

"1.  Cruise ship operators shall not be allowed to disembark passengers and crew members at ports and stations, except as directed by the USCG, in consultation with HHS/CDC personnel, and, as appropriate, as coordinated with Federal, state and local authorities"

 

So, anyone on the ship that is in critical medical need can be disembarked if the USCG is satisfied with the cruise line's plans for ground transportation and hospitalization as per the MSIB issued a few days ago.

 

Just because MSN says it, doesn't make it true.  And, having read the article at least 4 times, I don't see "condemned to die" anywhere.  But maybe I need better glasses.

Edited April 10, 2020 by chengkp75

[Pratique]

The order has been withdrawn.

 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/10/2020-07677/no-sail-order-and-suspension-of-further-embarkation-notice-of-modification-and-extension-and-other

[suzyluvs2cruise]

21 minutes ago, Petroplex said:

I note with interest that Royal is still selling cruises out of U.S. waters in May. I just did a search for cruises out of Galveston, and everything scheduled after May 11 is still there. I'm obviously not booking that, but as of about 2 minutes ago RCCL is clearly not understanding this as an order to quit selling cruises out of U.S. waters for 100 days.

 

I expressly make no finding about whether this is right, wrong, or indifferent. I simply provide a data point about what the cruise line is (not) doing in response to the order.

 

Please read the order and understand that it's the first of any the following 3 statements that is being talked about. No where does say that a cruise line is to quit selling cruises for 100 days.  

 

This Order is effective upon publication in the Federal Register and shall continue in operation until the earliest of

(1) the expiration of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ declaration that COVID-19 constitutes a public health emergency;

OR (2) the CDC Director rescinds or modifies the order based on specific public health or other considerations;

OR (3) 100 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

[reallyitsmema]

13 minutes ago, molly361 said:

SS CENTER

ate.com

 

 

 

Well, that clears up a lot.🤔😷

[SarahD112]

7 minutes ago, Pratique said:

The order has been withdrawn.

 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/10/2020-07677/no-sail-order-and-suspension-of-further-embarkation-notice-of-modification-and-extension-and-other

So what does that mean?! Trying to get info while scrolling past the arguments. 😂 

[Pratique]

6 minutes ago, SarahD112 said:

So what does that mean?! Trying to get info while scrolling past the arguments. 😂 

I do not know. It is possible that they are revising it and it will be republished, but as of now it is not published.

 

P.S. I saved the copy from the CDC website to compare with whatever gets published in the Federal Register.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Pratique

[firefox247]

9 minutes ago, SarahD112 said:

So what does that mean?! Trying to get info while scrolling past the arguments. 😂 

 

The CDC has made a few different versions of the document.  Even yesterday, they had the date as April 8 (as well as the PDF), and then they updated both to be April 9, and they changed the dates from 120 to 100.  It's possible that the document they withdrew was the old one I suppose.  All speculation at this point until we know.

 

If the CDC really requested that the final version was withdrawn, I have to imagine they would have removed it from their website first.

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by firefox247

[suzyluvs2cruise]

16 minutes ago, Pratique said:

The order has been withdrawn.

 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/10/2020-07677/no-sail-order-and-suspension-of-further-embarkation-notice-of-modification-and-extension-and-other

 

Wondering what that now means?? 

No Sail Order and Suspension of Further Embarkation; Notice of Modification and Extension and Other Measures Related to Operations

by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Editorial Note: The agency has requested this document be withdrawn from publication after placement on public inspection. The document will remain on file through close of business on April 13, 2020. A copy of the agency's withdrawal letter is available for inspection at the Office of the Federal Register.