Is Royal Caribbean building any small ships?

[Hoopster95]

49 minutes ago, compman9 said:

Lots of speculation, and only a couple of facts I am aware of.

 

Bayley said on the President's cruise that from initial conversations to roll-out is about 8 years. For those that have been monitoring [inc. a Covid hold up] that would mean around 2030 (ties in nicely with 2028 Oasis, and flexibility of an extra couple of years if another Icon/Oasis is wanted)

 

It's really amazing to me when I keep in mind that Oasis is 22 years old in 2030!

But what really strikes me is that Voyager is 25 year old this year... 31 years old in 2030.

I wonder what class of ship will "Discovery" in 8 years be "replacing"?

 

Jewel will only be 26 years old in 2030, and I feel perhaps Royal will keep Radiance Class going for as long as possible to keep the Tampa/Baltimore/Vancouver(Alaska) markets satisfied for a while.

[The Fun Researcher]

34 minutes ago, Hoopster95 said:

 

It's really amazing to me when I keep in mind that Oasis is 22 years old in 2030!

But what really strikes me is that Voyager is 25 year old this year... 31 years old in 2030.

I wonder what class of ship will "Discovery" in 8 years be "replacing"?

 

Jewel will only be 26 years old in 2030, and I feel perhaps Royal will keep Radiance Class going for as long as possible to keep the Tampa/Baltimore/Vancouver(Alaska) markets satisfied for a while.

...and just to add, Royal takes such good care of their ships.  I remember multiple times looking at some of the older Carnival ships in port next to use and thinking yikes!, that looks sooooo dated. 

 

Especially with what Royal is doing with "Amping" the Voyager, Freedom and Oasis classes they still all feel pretty dang new.  The only thing we noticed this past month on the Liberty is the old style decor in the staterooms but even that isn't bad.  It's not gaudy or anything, just not the neutral brown, whites and blues they have mow.

 

Having said that I haven't sailed anything older than Voyager class but everything I read shows how well Royal takes care of those as well. (Although the Enchantment seems to have mention of being more rundown than average)

[Rackham]

5 hours ago, Hoopster95 said:

 

You should try a Q Class ship. Quantum Class is Radiance Class on steroids...

 

Two70 is amazing, The Solarium is the best in the fleet, the views from everywhere within the inside of the SeaPlex are great on both levels, Q/Ovation & Anthem have outdoor seating at the back of the WJ. The view from inside the WJ is superb, the views from the hot tubs are excellent (I watched whales from the Solarium hot tub at the front overlooking the bow), and the view from even the indoor pool area is great with glass roof and huge windows all around surrounding the top deck. Quantum Class is much better than Radiance and Voyager/Freedom regarding outwards views from inside.

 

 

 

I'm fully expecting/wishing Discovery class to be a refined and evolved Quantum class in a smaller footprint. There's just so much good stuff from a "don't want to go outdoors" perspective for cruising during lousy weather which works great on northern itineraries. Yet there's plenty of spots to enjoy the scenery throughout the ship. As much as I've enjoyed Radiance class in Alaska, Anthem was fantastic sailing from Cape Liberty during the winter months because of the indoor options it presented which weren't interior views.

[smokeybandit]

Just now, Rackham said:

I'm fully expecting/wishing Discovery class to be a refined and evolved Quantum class in a smaller footprint.

Quantum. Quantum Ultra. Quantum Lite?

[Engineroom Snipe]

20 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Quantum. Quantum Ultra. Quantum Lite?

"Smoke"ybandit, I laugh as I think of cigarette advertising in the late 1960s before it was banned.

 

Virginia Thins Regular, Menthol, or Lite?

 

Well posted.

[Rackham]

1 hour ago, smokeybandit said:

Quantum. Quantum Ultra. Quantum Lite?

 

Quantum Max.

[Engineroom Snipe]

3 minutes ago, Rackham said:

 

Quantum Max.

Definitely sounds like the next generation........which is more...Ultra or Max?

 

Platinum, Titanium, Gold, and maybe some Radioactive isotopes for credit card names have we seen over the years?

 

😁

[Cruising89143]

A small mention of the new Discovery class in the last portion of the below article. No mention of size though. 
 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/hotel-operations-entertainment/utopia-right-product-right-vibe-right-place-bayley

[zebra36]

A UTUBER mentioned that Bailey(sp?) mentioned that the current mega builds will be the last for a while and looking to build a smaller class after the last of the behemoths is completed.

[TeeRick]

I just can't imagine that RCCL would build a small ship with a lot less revenue opportunity.  Probably 4000+ passengers, but maybe not behemoth size.  We shall see.  But Celebrity seems to be encamped on a business strategy now and in the future of the 3000+ range.  

[goldfish65]

The vlogger mentioned that Discovery ships could be wider…but wouldn’t they want to get through the Panama Canal?

[Airbear232]

On 6/23/2024 at 8:03 PM, PhillyFan33579 said:

I have been on 10 RCI cruises so far this year, ranging from ships as small as Radiance to as large as Icon. Every single ship had a lot of kids on the cruise. I am currently on Independence and there are well over 1,000 kids on this ship per the CD. When I was on Radiance in Alaska two weeks ago, 25 percent of the passengers were under the age of 18 (very surprising to me for an Alaska cruise). There is no doubt in my mind RCI can survive as a family cruise line. If you listen to Michael Bayley talk, he always stresses how RCI is a family cruise line. I cruise on RCI 1-2 months so I feel I have a pretty good feel of the passenger demographic currently cruising on RCI. While you may not like it, RCI doesn’t need older cruisers like me to survive. 

My point is that Royal is not just a family line nor can they thrive as just a family line.  Michael Bayley is the head of the organization.  Duh, what do you think he is going to say!  Royal is a family line but they are not just a family line.

[Charles4515]

6 minutes ago, Airbear232 said:

My point is that Royal is not just a family line nor can they thrive as just a family line.  Michael Bayley is the head of the organization.  Duh, what do you think he is going to say!  Royal is a family line but they are not just a family line.

So you don’t want to believe his public statements that their target demographic is the multigenerational family? By that he means the ships are built for children and their adult parents in the same family. 

[Airbear232]

11 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

So you don’t want to believe his public statements that their target demographic is the multigenerational family? By that he means the ships are built for children and their adult parents in the same family. 

Again, Royal IS a family line but NOT JUST a family line.  I think this is in line (no pun intended) of corporate messaging. 

[FamilyCruiserUK]

I honestly think Royal will be looking at where smaller ships can sail and what ports they can get into. After all i dont see why royal would build small ships with lots of sea days

 The mega ships are the destination with limited port days. More and more countries want ro reduce having multiple mega ships dock everyday, well esp here in Europe and Norway etc. 

So modern, efficient smaller ships prob max 4k passengers. But able to get into the restricted ports. 

Edited July 20 by FamilyCruiserUK

[smokeybandit]

Icon is the perfect example of how you can market to families and couples at the same time.

[Charles4515]

1 hour ago, Airbear232 said:

Again, Royal IS a family line but NOT JUST a family line.  I think this is in line (no pun intended) of corporate messaging. 

Nothing to prevent any demographic from booking, seniors, solos etc. but they are building their ships for the multigenerational family demographic. He also touts the neighborhoods, boardwalk for the kids and central park for the adults. So I think they will mid mid size ships, 130,000 tons, nothing smaller than the 130,000 tons. But they could end up as big as 150,000 tons.  

[Airbear232]

16 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

Nothing to prevent any demographic from booking, seniors, solos etc. but they are building their ships for the multigenerational family demographic. He also touts the neighborhoods, boardwalk for the kids and central park for the adults. So I think they will mid mid size ships, 130,000 tons, nothing smaller than the 130,000 tons. But they could end up as big as 150,000 tons.  

Don’t agree, but time will tell.   Best wishes. 

[RobInMN]

2 hours ago, goldfish65 said:

The vlogger mentioned that Discovery ships could be wider…but wouldn’t they want to get through the Panama Canal?

Radiance is a Panamax ship, which is a designation for the original locks.

Specifications:

950' long, 106' beam (width), 190' air draft (above water line), 39.5' draft (below water line).

The new locks are referred to as "NeoPanamax". That is:

1200' 9" long, 160' 9" beam, 190' air draft, 50' draft.

 

NCL's Bliss is the largest cruise ship to traverse the Panama Canal (new locks).

 

For reference:

Bliss is 168K tons, 1094' long with a 136' beam and carries ~4000 passengers. Air draft might be about 190'?

Radiance is 90K tons, 961' long, 105' beam, 2500 passengers. 172' air draft.

Voyager is 137 tons, 1020', 126' beam, 4000 maximum passengers. 208' air draft.

Freedom is 1111' long, same beam as Voyager.

 

You can go wider (more than 50% wider), as well as longer (another 250'). The only thing you can't do is go much higher (only ~18'). So you could start with a hull about the size of Voyager or Freedom (or even larger), but with a shorter air draft and still be able to traverse the Panama Canal. 

 

See my post:

 

[TeeRick]

2 hours ago, goldfish65 said:

The vlogger mentioned that Discovery ships could be wider…but wouldn’t they want to get through the Panama Canal?

New locks on the Panama Canal, not the older ones.  The key issue with transporting the canal is ship height and fitting under bridges.

[TeeRick]

2 minutes ago, RobInMN said:

Radiance is a Panamax ship, which is a designation for the original locks.

Specifications:

950' long, 106' beam (width), 190' air draft (above water line), 39.5' draft (below water line).

The new locks are referred to as "NeoPanamax". That is:

1200' 9" long, 160' 9" beam, 190' air draft, 50' draft.

 

NCL's Bliss is the largest cruise ship to traverse the Panama Canal (new locks).

 

For reference:

Bliss is 168K tons, 1094' long with a 136' beam and carries ~4000 passengers. Air draft might be about 190'?

Radiance is 90K tons, 961' long, 105' beam, 2500 passengers. 172' air draft.

Voyager is 137 tons, 1020', 126' beam, 4000 maximum passengers. 208' air draft.

Freedom is 1111' long, same beam as Voyager.

 

You can go wider (more than 50% wider), as well as longer (another 250'). The only thing you can't do is go much higher (only ~18'). So you could start with a hull about the size of Voyager or Freedom (or even larger), but with a shorter air draft and still be able to traverse the Panama Canal. 

 

See my post:

 

you beat me to it!

[latebuyer]

What size do you need to go through inside passage? I know some people say you don’t need it but my understanding is some people go to vancouver specifically to see inside passage. I think there is only one celebrity ship that leaves from vancouver. To add, i’m not sure celebrity ship goes through inside passage.

Edited July 20 by latebuyer

[RobInMN]

1 minute ago, latebuyer said:

What size do you need to go through inside passage? I know some people say you don’t need it but my understanding is some people go to vancouver specifically to see inside passage. I think there is only one celebrity ship that leaves from vancouver.

 

The Inside Passage itself? or access to Vancouver? I have not heard/read of any size limitations with the Inside Passage itself.

 

For Vancouver, access is limited by the Lion's Gate Bridge, which has a clearance of 200'. 

Other bridges of note:

Francis Scott Key bridge (Baltimore) was 185'. Chesapeake Bay Bridge is 186'. (so a new FSK bridge having more clearance doesn't help).

Sunshine Skyway Bridge (Tampa) is 180' (can be higher based on tide??)

I would image that these 3 bridges (plus the Bridge of the Americas) will be the factors that limit the height of a Discovery Class.  

 

[Hoopster95]

53 minutes ago, latebuyer said:

What size do you need to go through inside passage?

 

34 minutes ago, RobInMN said:

I have not heard/read of any size limitations with the Inside Passage itself.

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2870571-deployment-2024-25-booking-season-begins/page/66/#comment-65378616

 

Seymour Narrows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Narrows#:~:text=The narrows were named for,it remains a challenging route.

 

"Seymour Narrows was described by Captain George Vancouver as "one of the vilest stretches of water in the world." Even after Ripple Rock was removed,^[3] it remains a challenging route. In March 1981, the freighter Star Philippine ran aground in the narrows."

[blt23]

1 hour ago, RobInMN said:

 

The Inside Passage itself? or access to Vancouver? I have not heard/read of any size limitations with the Inside Passage itself.

 

For Vancouver, access is limited by the Lion's Gate Bridge, which has a clearance of 200'. 

Other bridges of note:

Francis Scott Key bridge (Baltimore) was 185'. Chesapeake Bay Bridge is 186'. (so a new FSK bridge having more clearance doesn't help).

Sunshine Skyway Bridge (Tampa) is 180' (can be higher based on tide??)

I would image that these 3 bridges (plus the Bridge of the Americas) will be the factors that limit the height of a Discovery Class.  

 

Clearance numbers aren't very useful without corresponding tidal information.

 

My understanding is that Quantum class and Norwegian's Breakaway Plus class are both right around 200 ft tall. That height allows them to pass under the Bridge of the America's and the Lion's Gate Bridge at low tide, but only low tide, which works okay for the occasional repositioning cruises they do under those bridges because they can build schedules around waiting for tides.

 

But for ships doing weekly cruises where they need consistent departure and arrival times irrespective of tides, they have to design around the worst case high tide.

 

Once you account for that and a reasonable safety margin, I believe the max height for ships doing consistent Vancouver sailings ends up being in the high 180s. And for Tampa and Baltimore it's only a few feet taller than the Radiance class is today (mid 170s).