NCL Star passenger revolt

[VJWcruiser]

14 hours ago, TRLD said:

There are the polar ship certification rules. There are environmental rules such as the ban on heavy diesel starting in June of this year. So there are many rules impacting cruise ships in polar waters.

 

The one that NCL seems to be  talking about is relatively new. It is one aimed at protecting marine life in certain waters. For example the speed reductions in Canadian waters during whale migrations is one part of it. It also applies to polar waters. As I understand it, it is not have a hard start date or end date each year but is more dependent upon actual conditions such as whale migration and feeding patterns. The primary impact is speed reduction in the impacted area, the same as in some Canadian waters that resulted in itinerary changes last year.

 

This is covered in chapter 11 of the Polar Code that requires ships to take into account of local conditions and animal populations to minimize impact. Practices more formalized in Artic waters with tracking programs by US Canada and others but the code also applies to Antarctic waters.

It may be new...but not just 2 weeks new. The cruise before the February 4 cruise had no issue whatsoever. 

[VJWcruiser]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

 

I'm not going to get involved in the discussion of what NCL did, or when they did it, or whether it was right or not, but I have to comment on this statement.

 

The IAATO (International Association of Antarctic Tour Operators), of which NCL is a member, has adopted, for the 2023-2024 season (so recently), a voluntary 10 knot reduced speed zones around Antarctic areas in order to reduce whale strikes.  So, this statement is not an untruth, but may have been not considered by NCL in time, or not passed to customers in a timely fashion.

But the cruise that sailed 2 weeks before was just fine doing Paradise Bay.  And the captain did talk to the woman who did the Tiktok and told her that we could have done it  but Miami said not to. 

[PBM13]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

 

I'm not going to get involved in the discussion of what NCL did, or when they did it, or whether it was right or not, but I have to comment on this statement.

 

The IAATO (International Association of Antarctic Tour Operators), of which NCL is a member, has adopted, for the 2023-2024 season (so recently), a voluntary 10 knot reduced speed zones around Antarctic areas in order to reduce whale strikes.  So, this statement is not an untruth, but may have been not considered by NCL in time, or not passed to customers in a timely fashion.

So they must have know about this for sometime. 

[TRLD]

3 hours ago, VJWcruiser said:

It may be new...but not just 2 weeks new. The cruise before the February 4 cruise had no issue whatsoever. 

Not two weeks new, but it also requires cruise line to adjust speed for conditions at the time they are sailing. It is dependent upon animal presence and patterns. The requirements defined in chapter 11 of the polar code have no set dates. It is all based the data at that given time. Might not apply one month, but might apply the next depending upon migration patterns and animal populations in those waters.

 

 

 

 

[chengkp75]

Again, I'm not going to debate whether they knew about it, or when, but just the fact that there is a regulatory requirement to go slow, so the statement that it was a lie is not correct.

[Mike07]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Again, I'm not going to debate whether they knew about it, or when, but just the fact that there is a regulatory requirement to go slow, so the statement that it was a lie is not correct.

 

 

Regulatory wise, who enforces the territorial waters of Antarctica? Iran?

[Mike07]

6 hours ago, DBrown8939 said:

 

Maybe some people would be interested in suing over this, but I would be happy to simply have an acknowledgement that they messed up. As of now, they seem to think that they did everyone a favor by cutting Antarctica from the itinerary and focusing on the Falklands instead. I've done five NCL cruises in the past 18 months, and had been planning more. Now they need to convince me that I should sail with them again.

 

 

100%.

 

The real question is would the people that booked this tour still have booked it with the revised itinerary that was dropped in the 11th hour.

 

If a country had detonated a nuclear bomb on the Antarctica peninsula, I think all passengers of the Star would appreciate why NCL decided to stay away. Instead, this lame reason was given, no compensation was provided, and you either get on the ship, or forfeit all monies involved. I don't think travel insurance would even cover this "loss".

 

 

[TRLD]

3 hours ago, Mike07 said:

 

 

Regulatory wise, who enforces the territorial waters of Antarctica? Iran?

There are many countries that are signatories to the Antarctic Treaty. A partial list include U.S., U.K., Japan, Norway, Argentina, Chile, New Zealand, Australia for a few.

 

For a cruise line failure to follow the rules could make some countries very unhappy with them.

 

A better question might how the Polar Code is enforced.

Edited February 22 by TRLD

[VJWcruiser]

My email response from NCL.

 

Thank you for writing to Ms. Katty Byrd, Senior Vice President of Guest Services for Norwegian Cruise Line. 

 

We deeply regret to learn of your disappointment in your cruise itinerary change. It is always our intention to maintain original itineraries. However, at times, unforeseen circumstances require us to make modifications. We assure you that such decisions are never made lightly, or without regard to the consequential disappointment caused to our much valued guests. We can certainly understand how this can have a diminishing effect on an otherwise enjoyable vacation. While every effort is made to adhere to the published schedule, there are those instances that necessitate change. Regrettably, we are not offering compensation in that regard. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

[JulianB]

12 minutes ago, VJWcruiser said:

My email response from NCL.

 

Thank you for writing to Ms. Katty Byrd, Senior Vice President of Guest Services for Norwegian Cruise Line. 

 

We deeply regret to learn of your disappointment in your cruise itinerary change. It is always our intention to maintain original itineraries. However, at times, unforeseen circumstances require us to make modifications. We assure you that such decisions are never made lightly, or without regard to the consequential disappointment caused to our much valued guests. We can certainly understand how this can have a diminishing effect on an otherwise enjoyable vacation. While every effort is made to adhere to the published schedule, there are those instances that necessitate change. Regrettably, we are not offering compensation in that regard. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

That is what an old boss of mine once refers to as a “content free email”.

 

NCL - you need a better communications department.

[PBM13]

29 minutes ago, VJWcruiser said:

My email response from NCL.

 

Thank you for writing to Ms. Katty Byrd, Senior Vice President of Guest Services for Norwegian Cruise Line. 

 

We deeply regret to learn of your disappointment in your cruise itinerary change. It is always our intention to maintain original itineraries. However, at times, unforeseen circumstances require us to make modifications. We assure you that such decisions are never made lightly, or without regard to the consequential disappointment caused to our much valued guests. We can certainly understand how this can have a diminishing effect on an otherwise enjoyable vacation. While every effort is made to adhere to the published schedule, there are those instances that necessitate change. Regrettably, we are not offering compensation in that regard. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

Send that to the press 

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, VJWcruiser said:

My email response from NCL.

 

Thank you for writing to Ms. Katty Byrd, Senior Vice President of Guest Services for Norwegian Cruise Line. 

 

We deeply regret to learn of your disappointment in your cruise itinerary change. It is always our intention to maintain original itineraries. However, at times, unforeseen circumstances require us to make modifications. We assure you that such decisions are never made lightly, or without regard to the consequential disappointment caused to our much valued guests. We can certainly understand how this can have a diminishing effect on an otherwise enjoyable vacation. While every effort is made to adhere to the published schedule, there are those instances that necessitate change. Regrettably, we are not offering compensation in that regard. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

I wonder if they really REGRET not offering compensation. 🤣 Somehow, I doubt it.

[Mike07]

24 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I wonder if they really REGRET not offering compensation. 🤣 Somehow, I doubt it.

 

 

NCL's legal department likely gave them the okay to tell customers to pound sand.

 

I don't enjoy going down to Buenos Aires or Ushuaia.... It's a lot of hours in the air. Then, to be told the itinerary is changing at the last minute?

[Mike07]

3 hours ago, TRLD said:

There are many countries that are signatories to the Antarctic Treaty. A partial list include U.S., U.K., Japan, Norway, Argentina, Chile, New Zealand, Australia for a few.

 

For a cruise line failure to follow the rules could make some countries very unhappy with them.

 

A better question might how the Polar Code is enforced.

 

 

Without got directly off topic, the world is not nearly as law abiding as you sort of imply it is. Things get messy.... quickly.

[RocketMan275]

18 hours ago, SailorG1 said:

 Crew statements about how common it is for NCL to make changes in Antarctica cruise routes and the frequency of missed stops can easily be verified through business records and guest & crew depositions.

Good luck on the crew depositions.  Anyone have a record of which 'crew' made those statements?  Since 'crew' change ships frequently, what expertise/experience do these 'crew' have.  IOW, this is hearsay and likely unadmissible.

[david_sobe]

3 hours ago, VJWcruiser said:

My email response from NCL.

 

Thank you for writing to Ms. Katty Byrd, Senior Vice President of Guest Services for Norwegian Cruise Line. 

 

We deeply regret to learn of your disappointment in your cruise itinerary change. It is always our intention to maintain original itineraries. However, at times, unforeseen circumstances require us to make modifications. We assure you that such decisions are never made lightly, or without regard to the consequential disappointment caused to our much valued guests. We can certainly understand how this can have a diminishing effect on an otherwise enjoyable vacation. While every effort is made to adhere to the published schedule, there are those instances that necessitate change. Regrettably, we are not offering compensation in that regard. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

Thank you for sharing that.  I would not expect anything else to be said.  Their lack of honesty here tells me (IMHO) that something in the ship changed.  While still safe to sail, it cant make the longer itineraries in that time frame. Other ships from other lines continue to go there and the go slow order existed for 3 years yet NCL still booked cruises there.  The process of elimination tells you what the issue may be.  IMHO this is part of cruising.  I may be in the minority but I would be defending NCL all the way on this thread if they honestly explained the change.  We all realize a cruise can change any itinerary or ports.  But there is always an explanation for good reason.  When the highlight of the trip is cancelled to "enhance the guest experience" tells you everything you need to know.  NCL's defense would be if they offered compensation to your cruise then all the other cruises would be entitled to the same.  I suppose its the sad reality in the cruise business.  We all have different opinions on this.  I may not be for offering compensation to guests.  But a little truth goes a long way to the customers.  But sadly I think I am in the minority on that and NCL is in a defensive posture.   They can still do 80% of the trip and give a few hours more in ports.  It works.  I hate being lied to no matter how small.  That is my only issue with this.  

Edited February 22 by david_sobe

[TRLD]

4 hours ago, david_sobe said:

Thank you for sharing that.  I would not expect anything else to be said.  Their lack of honesty here tells me (IMHO) that something in the ship changed.  While still safe to sail, it cant make the longer itineraries in that time frame. Other ships from other lines continue to go there and the go slow order existed for 3 years yet NCL still booked cruises there.  The process of elimination tells you what the issue may be.  IMHO this is part of cruising.  I may be in the minority but I would be defending NCL all the way on this thread if they honestly explained the change.  We all realize a cruise can change any itinerary or ports.  But there is always an explanation for good reason.  When the highlight of the trip is cancelled to "enhance the guest experience" tells you everything you need to know.  NCL's defense would be if they offered compensation to your cruise then all the other cruises would be entitled to the same.  I suppose its the sad reality in the cruise business.  We all have different opinions on this.  I may not be for offering compensation to guests.  But a little truth goes a long way to the customers.  But sadly I think I am in the minority on that and NCL is in a defensive posture.   They can still do 80% of the trip and give a few hours more in ports.  It works.  I hate being lied to no matter how small.  That is my only issue with this.  

They gave a reason that they had to reduce speed in some areas, yet many choose to not believe them. Even though there are regulations that require such in polar waters near Antarctica.

[VJWcruiser]

3 minutes ago, TRLD said:

They gave a reason that they had to reduce speed in some areas, yet many choose to not believe them. Even though there are regulations that require such in polar waters near Antarctica.

Those regulations have been in place since 2021 and yet the cruise that sailed 2 weeks before could do the full cruise. That reason was one of the many reasons that were given. The first one they told the media was to enhance the guest experience in the Falklands. Of course everyone has a dream bucket list to the Falklands

 

Edited February 23 by VJWcruiser

[TRLD]

3 hours ago, VJWcruiser said:

Those regulations have been in place since 2021 and yet the cruise that sailed 2 weeks before could do the full cruise. That reason was one of the many reasons that were given. The first one they told the media was to enhance the guest experience in the Falklands. Of course everyone has a dream bucket list to the Falklands

 

As explained earlier in the stream there have been many changes in less that the last two years. The voluntary agreement mentioned by the Chief for the 23/24 Antarctic season to reduce speed in some Antarctic waters. The Polar Code restrictions on speed in some polar areas based upon the presence of marine animals at the time the cruise is occurring where the restrictions may vary from 1 month or even week to the next depending upon migration patterns, especially whales.

 

Also applies to areas around Canada and Arctic waters. 

 

Easy to find via Google searches.

 

As far as my read of the letter the portion about enhance guest experience applied to the extension of the Falklands stop, not the change in the Antarctic sail by. Once they decided to change the sail by they could have left the stop in Stanley unchanged, but they used the time freed up to enhance that stop and extend it.

[milolii]

@VJWcruiseryes, there are groups of passengers who take this cruise specifically to visit the Falklands.  Evidently on NCL they represent a large guest base. 
 

There are many reports from passengers on the roll calls from the February 2 and February 18 cruises on another social media site.  Many of these reports(over 30) are long, detailed and thoughtful. Some include conversations with the Captain, stating the orders came from Miami.  Many believe the changes were aimed at avoiding (as best as possible) missing the Falklands Islands stop in the future and a repeat of the “gathering” in the Atrium on the January 21 sailing. I think that was the evening of January 30th.  

Passengers from that sailing knew the reason for missing the port was not weather related as they were told.  How?  Folks had communication with passengers on the Sapphire Princess, on island tour operators; and even port staff in Stanley. The Sapphire Princess and the Azamara  Quest both successfully called at the port in what was described as a beautiful calm day.  
 

The changes came a few days later on the Feb 2 sailing, with the Falkland stop being moved up by one day from the second Friday to Thursday.

 

So, I do think it is possible this had more to do with port congestion at the Falklands than speeds in Antarctic Waters. 

[Mike07]

32 minutes ago, TRLD said:

Easy to find via Google searches.

 

 

 

You know what else is easy to find on Google? People that booked NCL and the Viking Star to see Antarctica.

 

 

[Mike07]

What would actually be pretty epic is if NCL's competition --- CCL or RCL -- provided a nice discount for the affected Viking Star Antarctica passengers with one of the ships in their brand portfolio.

 

[AceDoc]

I was on the Star on the Feb 4th cruise, and will chime in with a few observations. I enjoyed the cruise, and cruising (for the most part) is what you make of it. The weather was beyond fortunate, so we were able to make and enjoy all ports, and also get some clear viewing of the few hours in some Antarctic islands. The ship was fine, I sailed on her in Alaska, many years ago, and knew that it was a unique and smaller layout. I found the food to be mostly good, with a few misses-- pretty typical for most cruises. Staff were always courteous and  generally helpful, but you could tell that many were in training and struggled at times. Shows were small time productions, for the most part, and were fine. Music in the various bars and lounges was very good. Activities were also sufficient. 

 

As to observations regarding this topic:

1. We had only 4 hours instead of 2 days in Antarctica. 

2. Every single one of the other port times were also significantly changed. 

3. There was a failure to notify passengers of these changes except by a paper handed to us as we boarded. This also caused us to have to scramble to reschedule or change every private tour (all of the ports, in our case) after boarding. This was difficult to do once onboard, because of...

4. ...Horrible, dysfunctional internet. The internet cafe manager told me that they were aware of the problem and had technicians working on it,  but it never improved. I was unable to receive a single outlook email during the entire cruise. WhatsApp was spotty, at best, and usually not working. This created  problems for the tours, as well as for general comms. 

5. There was a failure to provide clear information to the passengers regarding the rationale for the significant changes. 

6. Staff made many errors and didn't seem to be well trained, and there did not seem to be any supervision or correction for those errors. Wrong information, wrong meals given, lack of follow-up and often getting things "almost" right was far more common than in my previous cruise experiences. They were generally small things, but just at a high frequency.  

 

Generally,  I have had good experiences with NCL, and they had previously been my first place to look when planning a cruise. But NCL has not met their usual standards, IMO. The best description is that it came across as somewhat "unprofessional." 

 

All that said, it was still a very enjoyable vacation, and I will fill out a review, including all the good stuff, once I get around to getting some pics downloaded. Those annoyances were taken with a shrug and a margarita. I will likely cruise NCL again, but they probably will not be the first place that I look anymore. 

 

 

Edited February 23 by AceDoc

[CptJLMcCrea]

10 minutes ago, AceDoc said:

I was on the Star on the Feb 4th cruise,

 

Thank you. Some wish to focus only on the negative, as opposed to a proper perspective. Cruising is what it is. If you don't approach it from that perspective, you shouldn't be cruising. 

 

[JulianB]

Interestingly the NCL website list 4 departures for next winter (2024/25) and 5 for the following season (2025/26). All of which have the same advertised itinerary as this year along with the following description:

 

Calling all penguin and nature enthusiasts-come aboard Norwegian Star for a once-in-a-lifetime cruise to Antarctica. Outside of Ushuaia, experience unparalleled landscapes few are fortunate enough to see as you explore Tierra del Fuego National Park - the world's southernmost national park that features soaring mountain peaks, glistening glaciers, ancient forests and a rich array of wildlife. Cruise through Paradise Bay in Antarctica and witness a pristine frozen wonderland of glacial mountains and azure icebergs that a colony of adorable Gentoo penguins call home. Then head over to the remote destination Elephant Island where legions of tuxedoed-looking penguins waddle across the rocky terrain whilst giant elephant seals lounge on its shores. In Stanley, lace up your hiking shoes for a guided Falkland nature trek through scenic terrain to see possibly of upwards of 30 species of birds.

 

🤐