QM2 Change of Itinerary

[guernseyguy]

Well, here's another cruise line being sued because the ship diverted because of bad weather.....

 

http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/bayonne/index.ssf?/base/news-1/115044983121270.xml&coll=3

 

I make no comment......

 

Peter

[Bramcruiser]

Well, here's another cruise line being sued because the ship diverted because of bad weather.....

 

http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/bayonne/index.ssf?/base/news-1/115044983121270.xml&coll=3

 

I make no comment......

 

Peter

 

Oh I seen that one in the papers actually. What a hoot. I guess if they can prove that RCCL deliberately sabotaged the weather to divert everyone to the ends of the Earth aka Canada then they'll be fined to the teeth for sure.:)

[tabascored]

Anyone who books a cruise to the Caribbean during hurricane season must have some clue of the risk. Why do you think they discount the fares so much?

I'm on a WB TA in August and I'M concerned about a hurricane pushing it's way north, not that any ports would be missed!

RCCL should have done more about compensation and that's probably why there is a suit. I mean, Canada, they could have diverted to New England where the weather would have been a little better at that time of year.

 

Sue

[Bramcruiser]

I mean, Canada, they could have diverted to New England where the weather would have been a little better at that time of year.

 

Sue

 

Watch it Sue, I'm Canadian!:D

 

Actually that part of Canada - the maritime provinces - isn't that much different than parts of New England overall. It could be worse!

[tabascored]

Sorry, Bram, I spoke out of turn. Canada just seem sooo far north from where I live in NY.

We sold our sailboat to a gent from Manatoba (who trailered it up there on the back of a 1970's Ford F150 in the middle of March. Sturdy people, Canadians). He told us that he would only be able to race the boat for two months out of the year. I guess I just associate that to the weather in all of Canada, which I know is not the case.

 

Didn't mean to offend :o

 

Sue

[Bramcruiser]

No problems Sue. Canada is as varied as the US in terms of geography and weather. Here in southern Ontario we are actually milder and drier in winter than our snowy southern neighbour of Buffalo, NY which always gets socked in by the storms off Lake Erie. We make fun of Manitoba too so there! Winnipeg gets branded as "Winterpeg"!

 

I took your comment with a laugh and thus the big grin face I posted. Cheers and happy sailing!

[coy860]

I have traveled on RCCL Mariner of the Seas 5 times, western itinerary. EVERYTIME the port at Grand Cayman has been closed because of bad weather.

We never thought of a lawsuit, because our contract stated that ports could be changed for ANY reason.

What part of that don't people get?

[bplazo]

I have to agree with the "get over it" comment. I have been on several cruises and have had the ports changed and although I wasnt happy about it, I did not expect compensation or think about suing. I always think that in frivoulous lawsuits the loser should pay the winners lawyer.

[Glenndale]

Hi - Fireman,

We were on this cruise and have been corresponding with Cunard.

Have you any update on their response to your concerns?

I would be interested to hear if you can spare the time.

Thanks

[fireman999]

Sorry I have not been on the site for a while - I have been a little busy but thought that an update would be useful.

I know that some readers would like to know about my background, so here is a potted history:

* Over 40 years experience in the fire and safety profession both in the UK and USA.

* Served in the Local Authority Fire Service and NHS.

* Worked in a senior position in a global blue chip company looking after fire and safety in worlwide locations.

* Now manage my own fire and safety consultancy.

 

In respect of my complaint about the QM2 - as some correspondents have rightly pointed out when you have spent that many years in this type of profession you are never on holiday and my complaint would have been made "change of itinerary" or not. The complaint about safety is not made on the basis of compensation, but in the public interest as I belive that passengers and crew have a right to know how safe they are. The problem is that we all think that someone else has taken the responsibility for safety and that it is nothing to do with us - unfortunately, many disasters have occured because of this type of thinking. It would have been very easy for me to think "well I am on holiday why should I bother".

How many people bothered to do anything about the accumulation of rubbish beneath the stand at Bradford City Football Club in which 56 people died and over 260 people were injured, how many people discarded smoking materials at Kings Cross Station which was the probable cause of a fire that killed 27 people - I could go on but I think you can see my concern.

In respect of the article that the Sunday Express printed I cannot give you an explanation why they did not print each individual concern as they were provided with copies of the photographs that I had used in the complaint, as a matter of interest it was only after the Sunday Express had contacted the MCA that I received an acknowledgment which is the only reply I have had to date. I have now asked Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP to see if she can progress the matter a little more quickly.

The article in the Sunday Express only gave an overview of the problems but I can confirm that some of these incidents would have lead to a prosecution if they had been found in a building and remember a fire at sea has a greater potential for loss of life.Its also worth remembering that Cunard have "a duty of care" for everyones safety and I do not feel that they have adequately discharged this duty.

[lansonlady]

Hello Fireman 999,

 

I hope you will keep us informed of your progress with the MCA and Cunard.

 

lanson lady

[fireman999]

I have now received a reply from the MCA which quite frankly is an insult to my intelligence - it states " One of our most experienced Marine Surveyors inspected the ship and checked all the points raised in your letter. In doing so, he had the full co-operation of Carnival, the ship's operator. He found that the ship is fully complying with the legislation relating to smoke detectors. signage and water mist heads. All operational matters have also been reviewed and he is satisfied that the crew are following the correct procedures".

I have responded saying that I am not satisfied with their reply and that I would like a detailed reply to all of my findings and not just a few meaningless paragraphs that could mean anything. Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP has also written back asking for an explanation.

Anyone that would like to see some of the photographs can go to http://alanfcox.googlepages.co/home

[pepperrn]

Anyone that would like to see some of the photographs can go to http://alanfcox.googlepages.co/home

 

Can I sue 'cause the link don't work for me?

[Dale]

Can I sue 'cause the link don't work for me?

:D

Doesn't work for me either. Do I "smell" a class action?

:D

[fireman999]

Sorry - try http://alanfcox.googlepages.com/home

[guernseyguy]

Alan,

 

Thanks for posting a link to the photographs. As a novice I have a couple of questions.

 

• Does EVERY Fire Exit sign have to be visible from EVERY seat in a theatre?
  
• Where a door is not intended as an 'entrance' - but a point of egress should it be labelled 'Fire Exit' - i.e. looking at the hinges on the door you posted as mis-labelled, it looks as though the door opens outwards - so people will be coming OUT of that door - surely you don't want a big prominant sign inviting people to enter it? Surely Fire exits have to open AWAY from the intended traffic flow - so people are not crushed against them?
  
• Where was the damaged electical wiring?
  
• Is it possible that the other points you raised have been fixed in the course of normal maintenance?
  

 

Thanks for clarifying. BTW how is your case for compensation going?

 

Peter

[tabascored]

Peter,

The outer covering on the extension cord was damaged. The covering on the wires themselves look intact.

 

Sue

[fireman999]

Peter/Sue, I am having problems posting a reply at present - I think that it may be too long but I will deal with the electrical defect. The cable was on the Waffle Maker in the self service restaurant which was moved every day. Whilst it only shows damage to the outer cable - you have to remember that you can only see part of the cable and what this also shows is that the cable will not be secured to the appliance except by the electrical terminals and therefore only slight pressure would be required for the cable to come loose.Alan

[pepperrn]

Peter/Sue, I am having problems posting a reply at present - Alan

 

Alan

 

Many thanks for the answer and description you gave to one of Peter's 5 questions. Most helpful and public spirtited of you.

 

So sorry to hear you are having problems answering the other four of Peter's questions, are the difficulties technical? ie, with your PC? Other? Well, anyway, one down, four to go. I am grateful that you're spending the time and trouble to keep us up to date, when you've the time.

 

I do hope you resolve your problem soon.

 

With very best wishes

[guernseyguy]

So sorry to hear you are having problems answering the other four of Peter's questions, are the difficulties technical?

 

I had problems posting the questions - I think for some reason the board does not like you to use bulleting or numbering - each time I posted I got a 'page cannot be displayed' or 'stack overflow' message. What I found to work was:

- post the post without bulleting or numbering

- edit it to put bulleting/numbering in.

I've had this problem in the past - which went away - but seems to have come back again.

 

Peter

[fireman999]

Peter, I hope the following answers your concerns:

 

Visibility of Exits

Generally all exits should be visible from areas within theatres, cinemas and enclosed public spaces. The signs should be visible, illuminated and of adequate size. If you take, for example, an area that requires 4 separate exits you will usually find that 3 of those exits will cater for evacuating a given number of people within a specified time period. It is usually assumed that one of the exits will not be available due to the emergency eg. fire. If only two exits are visible and an emergency occurs and the occupants try to evacuate the area by those two exits it is very likely that you will have a serious problem on your hands. The other important fact to remember is that perons escaping from an enclosed space in an emeregency will usually try to use the exit they entered by.

 

Emergency Escape Signs

In respect of the emergency escape signs it is generally accepted for both buildings and maritime use that the signs must contain a pictogram and may be supplemented by text. The use of pictograms is vitally important on an international ship where some of the passengers may not fully understand English. On the QM2 there is a mixture of compliant / non compliant signs, some text only, some the wrong colour and some poorly positioned – it almost looks like they have been provided by someone who clearly does not understand the regulations. In the case that you have raised it is not clear if this is a fire exit that is opening into this room or a way out and I think that this clearly illustrates my point. Obviously you have assumed that it is a fire exit opening into the room because of the direction of opening – this is not always the case as some fire exits can open inwards where it will be used by small numbers of persons eg up to 50 persons.

 

Electrical

I hope that I have answered your query on the electrical item but I would add that I think it totally unacceptable for cables to reach this state without being identified by someone.

 

Routine Maintenance

It is unlikely that the other points will have been rectified by routine maintenance as they are clear design faults. Take the positioning of the smoke detectors below the fans – these will never work while the fans are operational as the smoke will be diluted and moved away from the detector head – this problem is clearly identified in the current British Standard to be avoided. In the cabins, the detector heads are positioned right in front of the ventilation opening and again are unlikely to work. Have a look at the attachment and you can see the effect of the air movement in the cabin on the smoke detector.

 

Concerns

I hope that you can now understand my concerns and whilst in isolation they may be only considered small problems – when you look at serious catastrophes that have occurred in the past, they are inevitably the result of the failure of a number of small items/actions. I can understand why the MCA do not want to admit to these problems because they will have passed the ship as satisfactory and to admit to these faults now will reflect upon their reputation. Regards Alan

[guernseyguy]

Hi Alan,

 

Thanks for clarifying - I certainly agree that while any one problem may not in itself be fatal, its usually a combination that proves so. There is an old 'rule of thumb' that it generally takes three things to crash a plane - any two of which would have been recoverable from.

 

If the ac is blowing air over the smoke detector might that not hasten the alarm? Or is that not how they work?

 

Peter

[fireman999]

Peter, Thanks for tip on removing numbers/bullets - it worked perfectly when I did this.

 

Air flows and smoke detection are complex subjects because untill you carry out smoke tests it is difficult to ascertain exactly how the detector will perform. I have carried out many such tests on various detectors and in numerous situations and in my experience it has never improved the detectors capabilities, in fact the detector does not usually work untill the fire reaches serious proportions - and of course this is not the result that you are looking for. The only way that it may work is if the fire was in the ventilation system and even then the degree of smoke dilution would not guarantee the operation of the detector. This is why they use specialised detectors that are specifically designed to detect fires in this type of equipment where high air flows are experienced. In a cabin situation the fire is more likely to be of an electrical or paper/furnishing nature and sometimes these can be slow to develop and obviously what you are trying to achieve is early detection so that the fire can be contained and the damage limited before the intervention of the fire suppression system.

[travel-to-go]

Alan and Peter,

 

Very thoughful and enlightening posts. Truly, the average person does not think of these things. I tend to think about things related to my profession. I am sure others do the same.

 

Peter, What you said about the plane crashes- Exactly what I was thinking though not as succinct and to the point. Our FAA safety meetings put on by the local branch of the FAA- our Safety officer has stressed this at every meeting. There is never just one causative factor in most crashes, especially catastrophic ones. There is usually a series of small mistakes that build up until you have put yourself into a box canyon (literally or figuratively) and left yourslef no escape route, You are beyond the point of no return. One mmistake al;one, wwould probably not reult in catastrophe. But a series of them often do.

Two fairly recent catastrophic fires (well, recent enough for me to remember both vividly) come to mind. The first, and most recent, was the night club fire in Warwick Rhode Island, noit too far from us in Connecticut (CT people were killed in this one) The band was using pyrotechnics- some sort of shooting stars I believe, a cone that fires bright sparks that do not leave the canister. (The sparks do, but nothing is "launched" I am sure there is a proper term for this type of firework) Anyway, it was too close to some soundproofing, which turned out to be woefully not fireproof (as required by code) Someone cut corners when it was installed, the people selling it claimed not to know its purpose, therfore didn't assure it was fireproof. the band didn't know the venue was unsuited and had done their normal routine permit request, which one way or another, people made mistakes. I don't think any of it was deliberately negligent, or knowingly neglegent. But the end result was that around 100 people were killed. (I think I remember that right) It went up in seconds and created an inferno. Most of the people killed werer killed because they ALL RAN TO THE DOOR THEY CAME IN THROUGH! There was a fire exit behind the stage that people could have escaped through. People who knew the layout grabbed others and pulled them with them to safety. Most people died, as usual, piled up at that one overstressed exit. People panic in a fire. They don't look around, and they don't think. And they trample or get trampled. Remember, in such a situation, you often cannot see even a LIGHTD fire sign through smoke, and power is often altered- cut off, or even sparking and blinding people to nearby egress also.

 

The second was the tragic Dupont Plaza Hotel fire. I have read fire expert's analysis after the fact of the materials, the air plenum ceiling, the glass enclosure that did not go all the way to the top of the atrium creating a chimney and feeding air to the fire. This being a casino, on the ground floor, and secuirty staff worried about grab and run theft, they had the fire exits locked. Escape was nearly impossible. People tried to throw charis through tempered glass windows to no avail. Many bodies were found piled up at the exit doors. That report contains several days heavy reading for even an expert, never mind a layman. I don't purport to undertand all of it, but what I read shocked and scared the living daylights out of me. I was there for that fire. We were in a bar down the street when it broke out. It was one of many small "nuisance fires" started that week during some labor unrest, in a basement in some furniture stored in boxes. No doubt those who set them though it, like the others, would quickly die or be extinguished. Unfortunately, there were not many fire laws in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico then. And furniture standards were not what they are now. There are a plethora of small corrections that could have made the outcome very different. 103 people died that New Year's Eve, many of them from Connecticut. If maybe ONE thing had been different, the fire might have been survivable by more people. (aside from there not being a fire to begin with, of course)

 

People tend to yawn and ignore the airline safety "leccture" No matter how often I fly, I try to take out the card, note where the exits are IN BOTH DIRECTIONS- Your exit could be blocked in one direction due to fire or debris. I often sit in an exit row. I mentally rehearse opening the door in a dark, smoky environment where I might even be upside down or disoriented. (Believe me, I know what it is like to hang upside down from a seat belt in an airplane. I had sense enough to put my arm over my head to brace myself when I opened the seatbelt. My passenger. who was an experienced pilot, did not. He simply unbuckled the lasp and fell on his head! Fortunately it was a short fall!)

 

BTW, in the hopefully unlikely event that any of you is ever in an accident where you are upside down in water- I will never forget the wise words I read from, believe it or not, Jimmy Buffett, when his floatplane ended upside down in the water at Martha's Vineyard. He was lucky enough to have had live navy escape training so he could fly one of their jets. They taught him this one important thing when you are trapped in an overturned object (such as, even a small pleasure boat, capsized- It happens!) BUBBLES UP! Meaning that bubbles of air always rise. If remembring that easy thought saves a life, it's worth the being a downer and being scary here tonight.

 

Anyway, it's easy to think someone is a complainer or attention getter and know-it-all when they complain in such a situation as Alan has described. However, 99 times, it might be overkill. If it was the 100th time, and you were the one affected, wouldn't you wish you (or Cunard) had listened, righted the "minor" wrong, and maybe made that 1 in a 100 (or a thousand- the only one that matters is the one time things DO go wrong!) wouldn't have happened?

 

Always notice TWO excape routesand remember in the event of an emergency you MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SEE!

 

Karie,

Who loves fun, but also llikes to live to tell the tale. So far she's been pretty lucky...and observant!

[fireman999]

:) My case for compensation against Cunard and xxxxxx Travel Agent was heard today at Birmingham County Court and I am pleased to say that I was awarded compensation for the changes. Whilst I took both Cunard and xxxxxx Travel Agent to Court the Agent did not turn up and I can now see why.

If you recall I was informed that under the Package Travel Regulations I was entitled to either a full refund or an alternative cruise but both the agent and Cunard did not respond to my various communications so I took the cruise and had to resort to legal means for compensation.

It transpires that Cunard authorised the agent to make a full refund but the agent never passed that information on to me, so all of this arises because of the poor performance of the agent - there is a lesson there somewhere.