Serenade having azipod problems?

[Fran Harp]

Just to add my $.02, bow thrusters (by name) are positioned in the bow so that they move water from side to side of the ship, not front to back (or vice-versa). You can't use a bow thruster to "drive" the ship from port to port unless you want to go sideways the whole way. :)

 

 

Got it....thanks:D:D.

 

Fran in Toronto

[sf2]

Bow thrusters

 

with people for proportion . . .

 

 

Azipod (with propeller off)

[Guest LetMeGo]

The Radiance class, the Voyager class, and the Freedom are the only ships with Azipods. The Vision class does not have azipods. Tero said it best when he likened the azipod to an outboard motor. These are positioned at the back of the ship only.

 

The only RCCL ships that is... ;)

 

The azipods don't have to be positioned at the back of the ship. There is a small ferry in Helsinki which has one unit in either end. Traditional ice breakers are travelling aft first when they are breeaking ice, and I think the latest concept for ice breakers is a triangular hull with azipods in two of the corners. :confused:

 

The biggest reason why the azipods are located in the aft of the cruise ship is because it makes design so much easier and economical. You can't place them on the sharp bow and the engines have to be in the widest (middle) part of the hull, so you're left with putting the azipods back. (And it also makes it cheaper to install that square feet of electrical cabling you need for the engines. With the price of copper wire, that would literally cost millions. :p )

[Guest LetMeGo]

Yes, I'm crazy....just love Finland,...rain, food and all.:p

 

This post and the following one were quite helpful. I understand the azipod technology pretty well, but was confused as to which ones did what. For example, on Enchantment of the Seas (if I remember correctly) there was an azipod mid-ships on either side, which did the positioning of the ship. I do know that Brilliance of the Seas does not anchor but is able to maintain position without, so assume it's similar to Mariner. Thanks for the help. I really find the engineering part quite fascinating.

 

FRan in Toronto

 

It must be because it's exotic... Everybody seems to want what they don't have. :p

(It can't be because Finland would be that great. :D )

 

I think the mid-ship equipment must be the stabilisers, because that's the only thing cruise ships could have there... But like the name says, they're just there to stabilise the ship while it's moving.

 

I didn't realise that thrusters were used to position the ship instead of anchors, so I've learned something new myself, in addition to writing my pseudo-technical messages. :o

[Fran Harp]

It must be because it's exotic... Everybody seems to want what they don't have. :p

(It can't be because Finland would be that great. :D )

 

I think the mid-ship equipment must be the stabilisers, because that's the only thing cruise ships could have there... But like the name says, they're just there to stabilise the ship while it's moving.

 

I didn't realise that thrusters were used to position the ship instead of anchors, so I've learned something new myself, in addition to writing my pseudo-technical messages. :o

 

Finland *is* that great....a lot like Canada, actually, which is why there are lots of Finns in Ontario. Reminds them of home:D. I have to say I enjoy the hike from the train station up to the university in Tampere, and downtown over the river and the warehouse district, good food, good hotels, good bakeries, enormous breakfasts.........heavy sigh!

 

I remember leaning over the balcony on Enchantment when they moved away from the dock in Miami - we were directly mid-ship, and there was a pretty incredible wake coming from the exact middle of the ship. I had been reading up on azipods, and assumed (wrongly I guess) that's what was doing it. Perhaps there were thrusters mid-ships, but it was certainly something! I've looked up each of the ships on the website, and while there's technical information it's pretty skimpy. I'd like to know more about each. Maybe someone knows where that could be found, but I'm going looking on Google anyway.

 

Brilliance has three bow thrusters...and obviously there's more information needed on that too!:cool:

 

Fran in Toronto

[Guest LetMeGo]

Finland *is* that great....a lot like Canada, actually, which is why there are lots of Finns in Ontario. Reminds them of home:D. I have to say I enjoy the hike from the train station up to the university in Tampere, and downtown over the river and the warehouse district, good food, good hotels, good bakeries, enormous breakfasts.........heavy sigh!

 

I remember leaning over the balcony on Enchantment when they moved away from the dock in Miami - we were directly mid-ship, and there was a pretty incredible wake coming from the exact middle of the ship. I had been reading up on azipods, and assumed (wrongly I guess) that's what was doing it. Perhaps there were thrusters mid-ships, but it was certainly something! I've looked up each of the ships on the website, and while there's technical information it's pretty skimpy. I'd like to know more about each. Maybe someone knows where that could be found, but I'm going looking on Google anyway.

 

Brilliance has three bow thrusters...and obviously there's more information needed on that too!:cool:

 

Fran in Toronto

 

If it's that similar why would you need to visit Finland? :D

I have heard of that earlier, but it makes me wonder why would the people have moved to a similar country across the world? :confused:

 

 

There was a side picture of the Freedom at Aker's website. You can see the thrusters at the front, and the azipods in the back... All the moving propellers are marked with a a circled X on the side of the ship (even on the drawing). You can count them from the pier if you like to be sure where they are.

 

If you squint a bit, you can see the small horizontal slits in the widest (brightest) part of the red hull below the waterline. That's where the stabilizers are located. They are literally just small fins with a length of 20-30(?) ft which can be retracted in calm seas. Here's an advertisement video from a manufacturer. Usually shiips only have one pair, but the other was added to Freedom because of its size.

 

Another possibility for the wake is that it was simply excess water pumped out of the ballast tanks. I suppose that might create an even bigger wake than the thrusters, if the ship was still very close to the pier.

[MGoBlue2]

Someone currently on the Serenade posted that they were told when they boarded that the Serenade was having azipod problems and could not have full speed, causing the itineary to be adjusted with shortened port time and glacier viewing time. The Aug.13 sailing schedule was changed along with the Aug. 27th and Sept. 10. (But not the Aug. 20 sailing for some reason.) When I asked RCCL about the change I was told "berthing conflicts" which made no sense.

 

Does anyone know if this is something they can easily fix? Can it get worse? I'm starting to get really worried that we may miss a port all together or something and Alaska is all about the ports, not the ship.

I thought it was "high speed constraints" not "berthing conflicts".

 

Anyway, to answer your question, normally azipod problems are not something easily fixed, it usually requires lifting the ship out of the water so they can work on them.

[Guest LetMeGo]

Anyway, to answer your question, normally azipod problems are not something easily fixed, it usually requires lifting the ship out of the water so they can work on them.

 

The ships aren't actually lifted out of the water, but the water from a docking pool is pumped away.

 

It would be quite a feat to lift the complete ship out of the water, when its hull is built out of some 50 blocks in the first place because of the cranes' weight constraints.:D

[MGoBlue2]

The ships aren't actually lifted out of the water, but the water from a docking pool is pumped away.

 

It would be quite a feat to lift the complete ship out of the water, when its hull is built out of some 50 blocks in the first place because of the cranes' weight constraints.:D

Looks pretty much like it's been lifted out of the water to me (although from underneath not via crane).

 

Cruise ship in drydock:

 

http://www.davidsanger.com/stockimages/2-240-46.drydock

[Guest LetMeGo]

Looks pretty much like it's been lifted out of the water to me (although from underneath not via crane).

 

Cruise ship in drydock:

 

http://www.davidsanger.com/stockimages/2-240-46.drydock

 

It seems like you are a lot closer to the truth than I am. :D

 

At least San Francisco has (according to Wikipedia) floating drydocks which are "lifted" from the water by emptying its ballast water tanks.

 

(The other type of drydock is literally a hole in the ground, and is used by shipyards... And my experience is limited to this type of facilities.)

[Fran Harp]

If you squint a bit, you can see the small horizontal slits in the widest (brightest) part of the red hull below the waterline. That's where the stabilizers are located. They are literally just small fins with a length of 20-30(?) ft which can be retracted in calm seas. Here's an advertisement video from a manufacturer. Usually shiips only have one pair, but the other was added to Freedom because of its size.

 

Thanks to all who found photos of ships, bow thrusters, etc. I appreciate this thread and the time people take to be helpful.

 

Brilliance has one pair of stabilisers - we saw the video at the Ship Talk.....quite amazing how they work. If I recall the ship needs to be travelling at 18 knots or better for them to work, though.

 

Hey, Finland is just more interesting, Tero...scenery is good but somehow it's more interesting all round. Guess it's just because I'm so used to Canada.:cool:

 

Fran in Toronto

[Guest LetMeGo]

To tell the truth, I have no idea how the stabilisers actually work... But since fish have them, they must be useful. :D

 

Well they say that grass is greener on the other side of the fence. It's funny how humans are never happy with what they have.

I hope I don't disappoint you too much when I say that I don't really want to visit Canada as a tourist... I'm not entirely convinced it would be that interesting to see. :eek: (Then agaain, I have a list of about a hundred places I would want to visit, so I guess I don't need any more destinations... :p )

[Fran Harp]

To tell the truth, I have no idea how the stabilisers actually work... But since fish have them, they must be useful. :D

 

Well they say that grass is greener on the other side of the fence. It's funny how humans are never happy with what they have.

I hope I don't disappoint you too much when I say that I don't really want to visit Canada as a tourist... I'm not entirely convinced it would be that interesting to see. :eek: (Then agaain, I have a list of about a hundred places I would want to visit, so I guess I don't need any more destinations... :p )

 

Visiting Canada depends on what you really like to do. Eastern Canada is maritime country, heavily Irish and Scottish-Celtic settlers, but Newfoundland had a large Norse colony about 1000 years ago. Ontario and Quebec are more forest and low mountainous areas - former glacial beds, and of course the Great lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway. Northern Manitoba, Saskatchewand and Alberta will remind you very much of Finland, southern parts of the provinces are flatter prairie, and into Alberta, grassland, range and foothills. That takes you into the Rocky Mountains which also feature the northern tip of the great north american desert - complete with sage and tumbleweed - and table-grasslands high int he mountains. Coming down into Vancouver and Victoria you're into coastal maritime again. If you like the outdoors and like to camp, there's lots to see and do. If you like cities - Halifax, Montreal or Quebec, Toronto, Vancouver will be worth it. In Alberta I served a congregation in the town of New Norway. Guess where those folks came from?:D Thunder Bay, Ontario boasts the largest Finnish population, and Gimli, Manitoba the largest Icelandic population...it's worth a trip, Tero - you'd be surprised. Bear in mind it takes ten days of solid driving to go coast to coast.:eek:

 

Fran in Toronto

[MGoBlue2]

It seems like you are a lot closer to the truth than I am. :D

 

At least San Francisco has (according to Wikipedia) floating drydocks which are "lifted" from the water by emptying its ballast water tanks.

 

(The other type of drydock is literally a hole in the ground, and is used by shipyards... And my experience is limited to this type of facilities.)

Cruise ships actually weigh very little compared to their volume, think about how little is below the water line, it doesn't take that much air to lift them.

[robert3556]

Very funny postings! On your next cruise try spending some time with the CHENG's, they will help and explain the workings of a ship.

[Guest LetMeGo]

[quote name='MGoBlue2']Cruise ships actually weigh very little compared to their volume, think about how little is below the water line, it doesn't take that much air to lift them.[/quote]

"Little" is a relative term... The water displacement of a 1000' ship is still in the range of 40,000 cubic metres.

[QTMichele]

I know very little about ships and their inner workings, but found this thread to be very interesting. I can honestly say that I've learned something new today! THANKS!

[MGoBlue2]

[quote name='Tero']"Little" is a relative term... The water displacement of a 1000' ship is still in the range of 40,000 cubic metres.[/quote]Yes, little is a relative term, which is why I said compared to their volume.

Also, a 1000' cruise ship displaces nowhere near 40,000 cubic meters. Using Radiance as an example (962'), its gross displacement (which is really a measure of volume) is 90,000 tons or a little over 80,000 cubic meters. If it displaced 40,000 cubic meters, the water line would be somewhere around deck 5 or 6.

[Guest LetMeGo]

[quote name='MGoBlue2']Also, a 1000' cruise ship displaces nowhere near 40,000 cubic meters. Using Radiance as an example (962'), its gross displacement (which is really a measure of volume) is 90,000 tons or a little over 80,000 cubic meters. If it displaced 40,000 cubic meters, the water line would be somewhere around deck 5 or 6.[/quote]

Actually it does displace about that amount of water, which you can calculate yourself.

300m long x 30x wide 8m deep equals to 72,000 cubic metres... The ship isn't box-shaped, so I would estimate it only actually fills 1/2 - 2/3 of that space (hence the 40,000 cubic metres.)


The volume of the whole ship by that same calculation would be
300m x 30m x 45m equalling to 405,000 cubic metres (of which 2/3 or around 270,000 can be estimated to be in use.)

The advertised GRT is only 90,000, because one GRT equals to 2,83 cubic metres (100 cubic ft) of space.

[MGoBlue2]

[quote name='Tero']Actually it does displace about that amount of water, which you can calculate yourself.

300m long x 30x wide 8m deep equals to 72,000 cubic metres... The ship isn't box-shaped, so I would estimate it only actually fills 1/2 - 2/3 of that space (hence the 40,000 cubic metres.)


The volume of the whole ship by that same calculation would be
300m x 30m x 45m equalling to 405,000 cubic metres (of which 2/3 or around 270,000 can be estimated to be in use.)

The advertised GRT is only 90,000, because one GRT equals to 2,83 cubic metres (100 cubic ft) of space.[/quote]I guess we've both learned something new, I always thought a ton was a ton was a ton, now I find out some tons are almost three.

[Guest LetMeGo]

[quote name='MGoBlue2']I guess we've both learned something new, I always thought a ton was a ton was a ton, now I find out some tons are almost three.[/quote]

Indeed. There's no better way to learn than to discuss things. :)

(To confuse things even more, I have no idea how much of the ship is actually included in the total registered volume. By some definition (parts of) the crew and engine areas are excluded from the calculations. :rolleyes:

[Annie555]

Am I right to be a bit nervous that the Serenade of the Seas' upcoming Alaskan cruises could be in danger of being cancelled?

Below is a news item about the cancellation of a Celbrity cruise. The problem on the Infinity sounds suspiciously similar to what is going on with the azipod on the Serenade. Of course, I know absolutely nothing about ships and would love it if someone out there could tell me, "Oh, no! That's not at all the same type of problem! No need to worry!"

This is from the Celebrity website (emphasis mine):


[COLOR=blue]Celebrity Cruises is canceling the September 13 sailing on Infinity to replace one of the ship's two propulsion pods. Guests booked on the cruise will receive a full refund and a certificate good toward a future cruise. Travel agents will receive full commissions for the cancelled sailing and a $50 rebooking bonus per stateroom when their clients reschedule their cruise.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue][U][B]The affected pod's electrical system is failing to provide the ship's maximum cruising speed, essentially reducing it from 22 to 19 knots, making it difficult to maintain the ship's future itineraries as scheduled.[/B][/U] The repairs will be made at drydock facilities in Victoria, British Columbia. Meanwhile, Infinity continues to sail safely and has received clearance from all appropriate authorities.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]"We sincerely regret the disruption and disappointment this will cause our guests scheduled on this cruise," said Celebrity Cruises President Dan Hanrahan. "There is never a good time to cancel a cruise, but we have tried very hard to offer the most advanced notice and affect the least number of guests possible. We will do everything we can to assist the affected guests."[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Following drydock, Infinity will return to service on September 24 to sail its scheduled transcanal cruise from San Francisco to Fort Lauderdale. Normally a 15-day transit, this cruise now will be a 14-day trip. The ship will depart San Francisco one day later than scheduled, and will miss Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Guests booked on this cruise will receive a $500-per-stateroom onboard credit and a $200 future cruise certificate. They also will receive overnight accommodations in San Francisco on September 23.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Celebrity has established a special help desk to assist guests and travel agents with bookings on the affected sailings. That toll-free number is 1-800-852-8175.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]The cancelled cruise is expected to have a negative impact on the earnings of Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. of approximately $0.05 per share.[/COLOR]

[Guest LetMeGo]

[quote name='Annie555']Am I right to be a bit nervous that the Serenade of the Seas' upcoming Alaskan cruises could be in danger of being cancelled?

Below is a news item about the cancellation of a Celbrity cruise. The problem on the Infinity sounds suspiciously similar to what is going on with the azipod on the Serenade. Of course, I know absolutely nothing about ships and would love it if someone out there could tell me, "Oh, no! That's not at all the same type of problem! No need to worry!"[/quote]

It might not be the same type of problem... :p

Earlier in this thread there were reports of "berthing conflicts" and the schedules being altered on only some of the cruises. If either of those is true, it would suggest there is no problem with the propulsion. :confused:

I have no more information on the matter to base my assumptions on, than what I've read in this thread. ;)

[wrp96]

[quote name='Annie555']Am I right to be a bit nervous that the Serenade of the Seas' upcoming Alaskan cruises could be in danger of being cancelled?

Below is a news item about the cancellation of a Celbrity cruise. The problem on the Infinity sounds suspiciously similar to what is going on with the azipod on the Serenade. Of course, I know absolutely nothing about ships and would love it if someone out there could tell me, "Oh, no! That's not at all the same type of problem! No need to worry!"

[/quote]

The azipods on the Serenade and other RCCL ships are a different type than those on Celebrity's ships. Celebrity's pods are defective and are the subject of lawsuits by Celebrity against the manufacturer. For obvious reasons, they haven't been put on any other ship. The ones on RCCL's ships, including the Serenade are much more reliable.

[Ocean Boy]

[quote name='wrp96']The azipods on the Serenade and other RCCL ships are a different type than those on Celebrity's ships. Celebrity's pods are defective and are the subject of lawsuits by Celebrity against the manufacturer. For obvious reasons, they haven't been put on any other ship. The ones on RCCL's ships, including the Serenade are much more reliable.[/QUOTE]
If, in fact, Serenade is having a problem with one of her pods then the overall reliablity of the RCI pods compared to Celebrity is a rather moot point. It doesn't matter how reliable they have been in the past. The isssue is that there is present problem and what effect will it have on upcoming cruises.