bad security on voyager?

[Pancho Villa]

I been thinking of taking a cruise on Voyager but I hear from others that there is a security problem there? I read on other website that they let everyone go to the bridge and walk around. they can even take bags and cameras with them and picture everything! Is this true can people just walk on the bridge? they said it called an open bridge and the captain tells everyone they can come in and look round. I even heared that some people even just nock on the bridge and they allow them to come in?I was understanding that people should not be allowed on to the bridge after 9/11 and on Carnival y Princess you cannot do it any more. What about other ships to they let passengers on the bridge? What does you think, do you think this should be allowed, I feel scared that someone might take a gun or bom there or something. I mean it only has to happen one time and everyone is danger!! On Paul Gauguin they had tour but only 10 of poeple and we could not picture anything and we had security watched us. On P & O no one could visit bridge they said it is to dangerus.

[BILLP1]

Is this a joke?

[Iamboatman]

There are a number of ships that have open, or semi-open, bridges. Ships are not the same as aircraft as far as potential problems or consequences. Rest easy.:)

[Pancho Villa]

sorry my english is not so great. but i am no joking, it does make me worry. it could happen, especial if word gets out that you can visit the bridge. their was a ship in the 70s or 80s that was hijacked and a old man was killed. i think he was jewish, the men came on board as passengers and took over the ship, does people remember?

[OrpingtonT]

Worry not. Security is quite tight and passengers and crew are scanned each time on entry to the ship. Entry to the bridge is not free and lax and you are not permitted to simply knock and enter.

 

But, thank goodness, you can make arrangements at reception for an accompanied group of about 8 to visit the bridge and see the procedures at a usually not too busy time.

 

If it really worries you, try the lines which don't permit bridge visitors, but don't attempt to stop these small pleasures.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Voyager and all the Regent ships has very tight security. The security staff are tough looking guys, and they are always there, in force, when there is an opportunity to visit the bridge.

 

It's not an open bridge, it's just that there are times when it's open for visits. This is very controlled, it's made clear to passengers what they can and cannot touch. I'm not sure about cameras, but I'm sure they would prohibit anyone taking detailed photos of equipment.

[larry1365]

As others have stated, on Regent's small ships, the security is very good. There are good embarkation and debarkation policies. Passports are checked and can be scruntinized quite closely.

 

On the 2007 World Cruise the Voyager bridge on sea days was open most mornings and afternoons. During other times, there sometimes were visitors during docking and departing, but you had to be invited by the captain. There were no restrictions on photography from, or on, the bridge. It was surprising how few people took advantage of this great opportunity. I always learned something new on my frequent visits.

 

I would not want to see Regent change this policy. On long voyages such as this, the crew gets to know the passengers quite quickly and I don't see any fear in continuing an open bridge policy.

[Island Cruiser]

On some of the smaller exploration cruise ships, an open bridge is the norm rather than the exception. I spent 18 glorious days on the Hanseatic in the Antarctic a year ago. She is a five star German ship. Holds a maximum of 190 passengers. The bridge was open during daylight hours every day of the cruise. I spent lots of time there as did lots of other passengers. A very interesting experience. All of the ship's manuals were written in English. All commands made in English. It was my understanding this is the norm for the ship even when she is not sailing in the Antarctic where boarding by individuals who pose a security threat is not very likely unless there is something about penguins I haven't discovered. I've got seven Regent cruises behind me with many more to come and I am fully comfortable with their security. They try hard to give passengers a crack at seeing the bridge at least one time on every cruise. I do hope that will not change. Pat

[Pancho Villa]

So you no think there is a risk? why is the a difference with a plane and a ship? most ship now have hundreds of Americans on them why do people not think its a danger? it would be a good target?

[KC_fn]

Nothing is risk-free, and a cruise ship would be a very tempting target for a terrorist. We'd like to believe that there's such a thing as a perfect security system. But don't kid yourself --there's not, not even on a cruise ship.

[wishIweretravelling]

So you no think there is a risk? why is the a difference with a plane and a ship? most ship now have hundreds of Americans on them why do people not think its a danger? it would be a good target?

 

What exactly are the risks of allowing visitors to the bridge in a controlled environment? Attacking the officers/crew and taking over the ship? The officers and crew are all over the ship anyway. I think you referenced the Achille Lauro hijacking. The terrorists there did not access the bridge to take over that ship. Planting a bomb? There's plenty of places to plant a bomb that would destroy a ship that are accessible to anyone on the ship.

 

And if they do take over the ship, there's a big difference between a plane and a ship. You can't fly a ship into a building at full speed. Yes, you could crash a ship into something, but the natural structure of harbors where it could do serious damage is such that you won't get too far, nor will you move too fast.

[KC_fn]

What exactly are the risks of allowing visitors to the bridge in a controlled environment? Attacking the officers/crew and taking over the ship?

 

. . .

 

And if they do take over the ship, there's a big difference between a plane and a ship. You can't fly a ship into a building at full speed. Yes, you could crash a ship into something, but the natural structure of harbors where it could do serious damage is such that you won't get too far, nor will you move too fast.

 

Taking the captain or other crew hostage would be a powerful act on the part of a terrorist, as would taking control of the bridge.

 

Obviously a terrorist isn't going to use the ship to do damage to a structure. The reason that a ship would be attractive to a terrorist is: the sheer number of people in an enclosed area. Essentially they could hold up to 5000 people hostage. You think they wouldn't like to do that?

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Maybe we should just let this thread die a natural death. How about it?

[larry1365]

Agree with Wendy...time to end the discussion...serves no useful travel pupose....you can find vulnerbilities in any situation where people gather.

[Iamboatman]

If one is that concerned, the answer is simple: Don't' go on the ship or line that concerns you. The end.

[Travelcat2]

Thread really needs to disappear -- thanks!

[KC_fn]

Thread really needs to disappear -- thanks!

 

Why? Do you think this idea has never occurred to the bad guys? Or that they can get information here that they can't anywhere else?

 

Our govt is constantly telling us we must be afraid, very afraid. Yet several posters in this thread have said that it can't happen on cruise ships, that cruiseline security is essentially foolproof, or that they wouldn't be interested. I disagree; am I not allowed to say so? Burying our collective heads in the sand isn't going to make it go away.

 

Or maybe the real problem is that it's bad PR for the industry. ;)

[OrpingtonT]

Why? Do you think this idea has never occurred to the bad guys? Or that they can get information here that they can't anywhere else?

 

Our govt is constantly telling us we must be afraid, very afraid. Yet several posters in this thread have said that it can't happen on cruise ships, that cruiseline security is essentially foolproof, or that they wouldn't be interested. I disagree; am I not allowed to say so? Burying our collective heads in the sand isn't going to make it go away.

 

Or maybe the real problem is that it's bad PR for the industry. ;)

 

I hadn't read anywhere that "it can't happen" or that security is "foolproof" but having lived through 1939-1945 and through post-war threats of bombing I do believe that we should have a sense of balance about all of this. No ridiculous risks, be vigilant but live a full life. This is not burying our heads in the sand.

 

I hope that Regent do not change their policy on bridge visits. Perhaps a greater danger is in over-eating and subsequent heart attacks?:)

[wishIweretravelling]

Totally agree. I'm not saying it can't happen. I'm just saying that opening the bridge the way they do it does not add risk. So leave the policy in place.

[Iamboatman]

Everyone has there personal beliefs and risk-reward levels and fear levels. In the end none of us will tell Regent or any other line how to operate its ships.

 

The bad guys can take over the dining room (trapping hundreds) and have equal or more leverage then if the bridge was compromised. While I am confident I do not have the answers, I am also confident that it is more dangerous stepping into a bathtub and millions do it without thought every day.

 

The concept of terrorism is to create terror or fear. If these things make your level of fear unacceptable, I respect it but choose not to live by it - or have my life compromised by that fear. I do not think anyone has the right to impose that upon me or anyone else.

 

So if the policy raises your fear level too high, don't go. But please don't insist that your fear needs to be an infringement on my enjoyment of the cruise (or my shower!;) ) as it now exists.

 

In the end neither your fear or my comfort is going to cause Regent to change its security policies. (Marketing maybe, but not security!):)

[Travelcat2]

The threat factor is always around us. Being on an airplane or cruise ship is, in many ways, safer than walking or driving. If a terrorist wanted to bomb a ship, it makes sense that it would be one that would affect the most people -- not a 500-700 passenger ship.

 

Most people on this thread have cruised in the past and will do so in the future. Regent meets/exceeds safety and security regulations. Discussing "what if......." could cause more concern than is necessary. Just my opinon.

[Pancho Villa]

I no understand how opening the door on the bridge is not an unnecisary risk? I also read they no even have guards there when the bridge is open! I know the bigger ships dont have open bridges so the risk is not their. and if they take over the bridge the could crash the ship in to another ship maybe? Killing 1000 people wouldnt be good for them?i not try to scared people i just try to ask why risk the problem with this, insteay lok the door and everyone is safer.

an also if terrorists did took over the ship everyone would say 'how did they get on the bridge?'

[Pancho Villa]

I no understand how opening the door on the bridge is not an unnecisary risk? I also read they no even have guards there when the bridge is open! I know the bigger ships dont have open bridges so the risk is not their. and if they take over the bridge the could crash the ship in to another ship maybe? Killing 1000 people wouldnt be good for them?i not try to scared people i just try to ask why risk the problem with this, insteay lok the door and everyone is safer.

[Travelcat2]

I no understand how opening the door on the bridge is not an unnecisary risk? I also read they no even have guards there when the bridge is open! I know the bigger ships dont have open bridges so the risk is not their. and if they take over the bridge the could crash the ship in to another ship maybe? Killing 1000 people wouldnt be good for them?i not try to scared people i just try to ask why risk the problem with this, insteay lok the door and everyone is safer.

 

First, the bridge is not open. Second, there is security to even board a Regent ship. Killing 1000 people is not possible since these ships do not even hold that many people. Last, the door to the bridge is locked.

[Iamboatman]

Oh, if the engines weren't subject to being shut down in the engine room, engineer's office, etc. - totally independent of the bridge - these comments might actually be relevant.:rolleyes:

 

Sorry for the facts getting in the way of this educational moment.:mad: