Finally The Truth on Crown Missing Bonaire -Jan 23rd

[atbull]

I can't believe what I am reading here. Consumers siding with a corporation makes me think I am in the twilight zone(although I have been there since jan 2001). I am set to sail the Crown on Apr. 26. I also inquired about missing Bonaire and was given three separate stories by Princess reps one of which was a supervisor. I totally understand the OP about the deception. Since everyone here seems to be an expert on cruise line excuses please explain to me why I was told by a Princess supervisor that Margarita was now permanently on the itinerary. If that was not enough I was also told the official reason was the weather. Maybe one of you Princess employees, sorry, cruise critic members can explain that. Bringing in one's illnesses and far fetched cruise stories is no way, in my mind, to respond to a fellow member.

[nrdsb4]

I can't believe what I am reading here. Consumers siding with a corporation makes me think I am in the twilight zone(although I have been there since jan 2001). I am set to sail the Crown on Apr. 26. I also inquired about missing Bonaire and was given three separate stories by Princess reps one of which was a supervisor. I totally understand the OP about the deception. Since everyone here seems to be an expert on cruise line excuses please explain to me why I was told by a Princess supervisor that Margarita was now permanently on the itinerary. If that was not enough I was also told the official reason was the weather. Maybe one of you Princess employees, sorry, cruise critic members can explain that. Bringing in one's illnesses and far fetched cruise stories is no way, in my mind, to respond to a fellow member.

 

Welcome to cruise critic!

 

I don't think everyone here is "siding with the corporation." Although you may be one of those who believes that malarky that the customer is always right, which is NO better than being a rabid cruise line cheerleader. I think most people are saying "Lighten up - life is too short to obsess about the small stuff."

 

Might be worth considering that yourself!

[zacc]

I can't believe what I am reading here. Consumers siding with a corporation makes me think I am in the twilight zone(although I have been there since jan 2001). I am set to sail the Crown on Apr. 26. I also inquired about missing Bonaire and was given three separate stories by Princess reps one of which was a supervisor. I totally understand the OP about the deception. Since everyone here seems to be an expert on cruise line excuses please explain to me why I was told by a Princess supervisor that Margarita was now permanently on the itinerary. If that was not enough I was also told the official reason was the weather. Maybe one of you Princess employees, sorry, cruise critic members can explain that. Bringing in one's illnesses and far fetched cruise stories is no way, in my mind, to respond to a fellow member.

Promised myself I was done posting in this thread but can't resist. The question here was never who was right :the corp. or the passengers. The question was lack of info given to the passengers on board that particular cruise and should they have been given more. I see no reason to believe that anyone should expect Princess, or any Corp., to pass all details of every decision made to their entire staff. However, this certainly opens the door for employee interpretation whether fact or fiction. I am sure that the owner or Pres. of any of the employers of RC members does not sit with their employees and discuss his or her reasons for company decisions. The Crown ported in Bonaire this past week.....not Isle Margarite. By the way you should check out the RC for the 26th.....great group of people. See you on the Crown on the 26th!

[B40 Tha Cruisa]

I can't believe what I am reading here. Consumers siding with a corporation makes me think I am in the twilight zone(although I have been there since jan 2001). I am set to sail the Crown on Apr. 26. I also inquired about missing Bonaire and was given three separate stories by Princess reps one of which was a supervisor. I totally understand the OP about the deception. Since everyone here seems to be an expert on cruise line excuses please explain to me why I was told by a Princess supervisor that Margarita was now permanently on the itinerary. If that was not enough I was also told the official reason was the weather. Maybe one of you Princess employees, sorry, cruise critic members can explain that. Bringing in one's illnesses and far fetched cruise stories is no way, in my mind, to respond to a fellow member.

 

"Deception" seems to be quite wordy in this instance. We have gone over this time and time again on this thread. Port Congestion, although it may be vague is all that is needed for an explanation.

As we all know, talking to Princess on the phone does you no good. This is true with most cruise line telephone reps. Many of them have never cruised and arent fully informed so they just let words roll off of their tounge. If you call 3-4 times and get the SAME answer you might be doing alright, but I still wouldn't count on it.

[woodmaster]

"Deception" seems to be quite wordy in this instance. We have gone over this time and time again on this thread. Port Congestion, although it may be vague is all that is needed for an explanation.

As we all know, talking to Princess on the phone does you no good. This is true with most cruise line telephone reps. Many of them have never cruised and arent fully informed so they just let words roll off of their tounge. If you call 3-4 times and get the SAME answer you might be doing alright, but I still wouldn't count on it.

 

Could that be the reason that some people would have liked a little more complete answer? The problem was, this wasn't a menu substitution, this was a port change. If you have no faith in the service reps giving you a straight answer, then how can you blindly just believe that there was port congestion.

The issue isn't just that they missed a port as much as it was a matter of little communication. The easy answer was port congestion, but was that the correct answer. There are only a few that truly know the answer and they are not required to say. A little respect and communication lends a lot to passenger relations.

[woodmaster]

"Deception" seems to be quite wordy in this instance. We have gone over this time and time again on this thread. Port Congestion, although it may be vague is all that is needed for an explanation.

As we all know, talking to Princess on the phone does you no good. This is true with most cruise line telephone reps. Many of them have never cruised and arent fully informed so they just let words roll off of their tounge. If you call 3-4 times and get the SAME answer you might be doing alright, but I still wouldn't count on it.

 

Could that be the reason that some people would have liked a little more complete answer? The problem was, this wasn't a menu substitution, this was a port change. If you have no faith in the service reps giving you a straight answer, then how can you blindly just believe that there was port congestion.

The issue isn't just that they missed a port as much as it was a matter of little communication. The easy answer was port congestion, but was that the correct answer. There are only a few that truly know the answer and they are not required to say. A little respect and communication lends a lot to passenger relations.

[B40 Tha Cruisa]

Could that be the reason that some people would have liked a little more complete answer? The problem was, this wasn't a menu substitution, this was a port change. If you have no faith in the service reps giving you a straight answer, then how can you blindly just believe that there was port congestion.

The issue isn't just that they missed a port as much as it was a matter of little communication. The easy answer was port congestion, but was that the correct answer. There are only a few that truly know the answer and they are not required to say. A little respect and communication lends a lot to passenger relations.

 

Did you even read the thread? The dock was not big enough for a ship the Crown's size. If there is not a dock for the ship then, well, the port IS CONGESTED!

[woodmaster]

Yes I did read the thread. I really didn't hold a lot of faith in the stats provided by heartofamerica due to the fact that it was stated that the south pier was rated at Max. DWT: 100,000, and the north pier was rated at Max. DWT: 50,000, yet the ship was rated at DWT of 114,000. That would imply that the Crown couldn't dock at either pier safely. Yes I do question others, as well as I would expect them to question me.

[woodmaster]

Mostly good points. I would like to point out though, that while her "displacement" is 114,000, the "deadweight" is only about 15,000 tons

 

Biggest problem I see here is the draft. If the max draft at the pier is only 33 ft, and the ship drafts 27, that's pretty tight. Especially if the Bonaire folks (like many Caribbean ports) are less than diligent about dredging regularly, especially if it is a lesser used pier.

 

Also both docks are rated at 33' depth, so if the Bonaire folks are not diligent about dredging the north dock, then whats to say that they are diligent about the south pier?

[daveco58]

I think what people need to keep in mind is that the Captain doesn't make these decisions to change itineraries on his own-it comes from the home office.

 

I am sorry, but that is one of the silliest comments I have ever heard. The Captain is the Master of the Ship. NO ONE can tell him where to go or not go. They can fire him once he gets back to land, if he makes a bad decision, but when the ship is under way he outranks God.

[daveco58]

Also both docks are rated at 33' depth, so if the Bonaire folks are not diligent about dredging the north dock, then whats to say that they are diligent about the south pier?

 

simply because the South Pier is used more, by ships with that much draft.

[Coral]

With competition comes choice. I have not been treated ny Princess as the Op was, therefore I will sail with them in April. But we all still have rights, the right to chose.

 

You are correct. Though I can tell you that I have missed ports on other lines with no explanation given whats-so-ever. And this includes lines that rank higher (and lower) than Princess.

[caribill]

Last year, I did my dream cruise to Tahiti. The islands that I most looked forward to seeing were the Marquesas and especially Hiva Oa where Gaugain (whose paintings I love) lived and was buried. We made it very close to island and the sea looked calm to me, however, because of currents, etc., the Captain decided that an attempt to stop there was not in the our best interest.

 

 

We also had to skip Hiva Oa last December under similar conditions. However,

a) As soon as it looked like we could not go ashore, the Captain annoucned the reason but said he was waiting for a weather update before making a final decision;

b) When the weather update came through, he announced that it would only get windier, and thus in the interest of safety, Hiva Ova would be skipped;

c) He then held a meeting near the Purser's desk with any passengers that wanted to discuss it with him.

 

A class act. Yes, many people were disappointed. But the Captain was more than forthcoming about it.

[zacc]

Total boredom has brought me back to this thread. A decision was made and one has to believe it was made for some reason. You don't have to know the reason or agree with the reason ...it was made. There was no reason for any passenger to be part of the decision making process nor was there a need to explain to the passengers why the decision was made. This is not to say it won't have been nice, just not required. It truly is time to move on.

[chasetf]

We also had to skip Hiva Oa last December under similar conditions. However,

a) As soon as it looked like we could not go ashore, the Captain annoucned the reason but said he was waiting for a weather update before making a final decision;

b) When the weather update came through, he announced that it would only get windier, and thus in the interest of safety, Hiva Ova would be skipped;

c) He then held a meeting near the Purser's desk with any passengers that wanted to discuss it with him.

 

A class act. Yes, many people were disappointed. But the Captain was more than forthcoming about it.

So what is your point. :confused: Every Captain should hold court to explain and defend each of his decisions to skip a port or go to an alternate. :confused:

 

Your captain chose to but I would not expect every captain to be held to making a similar decision.

 

We were on the Tahitian Princess when the Captain announced we were not going to the Cook Islands because a cyclone was in the area. Nobody expected the captain to come out with his weather analysis and give us the nitty gritty about winds and sea state.

 

We should not expect a public discussion every time a captain makes a decision for our safety's sake.

[chasetf]

Could that be the reason that some people would have liked a little more complete answer?

Problem is, and experienced captains probably know it, for some people who are disappointed and unwilling to hear it, no answer would be complete enough. ;)

[wa.mama]

I have to agree on this. WHAT is the OP trying to get from all this? To actually write to Bonaire to find out the exact reason for not docking there is a bit excessive IMHO. To call the Captain and cruise line liars is also over the top. I also find it hard to believe that crew members would tell a passenger that they didn't believe the Captain either!

 

It's time for the OP to cut his losses and move on.

 

I think he has moved on -- to another cruise line. Good luck, Salty Dawg!

[B40 Tha Cruisa]

Also both docks are rated at 33' depth, so if the Bonaire folks are not diligent about dredging the north dock, then whats to say that they are diligent about the south pier?

 

It is clear that they are more concerned about the south pier. This pier brings bigger ships, with more passengers, with more tourists. Also the North Pier generally holds smaller ships, which dont need a 33 foot draft. Lets be realistic- the captain likely had good reason to miss this port. I think he gave as much of an explanation as he needed to. Even with a detailed explanation, some passengers will still complain.

[pablo222]

Yes I did read the thread. I really didn't hold a lot of faith in the stats provided by heartofamerica due to the fact that it was stated that the south pier was rated at Max. DWT: 100,000, and the north pier was rated at Max. DWT: 50,000, yet the ship was rated at DWT of 114,000. That would imply that the Crown couldn't dock at either pier safely. Yes I do question others, as well as I would expect them to question me.

 

OK -- here's my question for you....

 

Do you realize that Dead Weight Tons are a different measurement

that Gross Registered Tons?

 

You have mixed and matched when you wrote that the crown

princess has a DWT of 114000. It doesn't.

[Ethel5]

I am sorry, but that is one of the silliest comments I have ever heard. The Captain is the Master of the Ship. NO ONE can tell him where to go or not go. They can fire him once he gets back to land, if he makes a bad decision, but when the ship is under way he outranks God.

 

You are sadly misinformed. The truth is that there is a lot of communication between the bridge and the home office. The Captain is the Master of the ship and makes emergency decisions for which he is held accountable. But in non-emergency situations, the decisions are made with the home office having more input than you might think.

 

This whole thing is ridiculous - a port was missed and ports will continue to be missed for various reasons. It's disappointing but not the end of the world.

[Charles4515]

You are sadly misinformed. The truth is that there is a lot of communication between the bridge and the home office. The Captain is the Master of the ship and makes emergency decisions for which he is held accountable. But in non-emergency situations, the decisions are made with the home office having more input than you might think.

 

This whole thing is ridiculous - a port was missed and ports will continue to be missed for various reasons. It's disappointing but not the end of the world.

 

Yes, the whole thing is ridiculous.

 

And I agree with you about the home office. In this case I am sure the home office made the final decision. Certainly the Captain can decide to skip a port at the last minute due to weather conditions but skipping Bonaire and substituting the other port. That was done by the home office. The Captain does not call up Isla Marguarita or any other port and make arrangements to dock there!!! That was done by the home office.

[heartofamerica]

Yes I did read the thread. I really didn't hold a lot of faith in the stats provided by heartofamerica due to the fact that it was stated that the south pier was rated at Max. DWT: 100,000, and the north pier was rated at Max. DWT: 50,000, yet the ship was rated at DWT of 114,000. That would imply that the Crown couldn't dock at either pier safely. Yes I do question others, as well as I would expect them to question me.

 

I was corrected about the weights later in the thread. However...reread the stats, then take a look at how long the Crown is, then look on page 5 of this thread (I believe it's page 5) and the comments of the captain of the HAL Veendam (which is shorter than the Crown)...he indicated that the LENGTH of the ship made docking at the north pier a challenge. The Crown is longer...almost 200 feet longer than what is stated as the maximum length at that pier.

 

North pier

 

 

 

Max. DWT: 50,000

 

Max. draft: 33'

 

Max. width: 50'

 

Max. LOA: 738'

 

The HAL Veendam is 750 long and the captain considered that pier to be too short for it. The Crown is almost 200 feet longer than the Veendam.

[woodmaster]

Docking any boat or ship can and probably is a challenge. That's probably why they are Captains, that have been trained to dock ships there. I would have to guess that the port of Bonaire would not have offered the pier if the ship would not fit. I would guess that if all you were able to offer was inadequate then ships would entirely stop docking there.

[Pam in CA]

And I agree with you about the home office. In this case I am sure the home office made the final decision. Certainly the Captain can decide to skip a port at the last minute due to weather conditions but skipping Bonaire and substituting the other port. That was done by the home office. The Captain does not call up Isla Marguarita or any other port and make arrangements to dock there!!! That was done by the home office.

We're making educated guesses here but my guess is that it was a joint decision with the final say being left to the Captain. He's the one on the spot and has the most up-to-date weather, tide, wind and local conditions. The home office would coordinate the other details.

[heartofamerica]

Docking any boat or ship can and probably is a challenge. That's probably why they are Captains, that have been trained to dock ships there. I would have to guess that the port of Bonaire would not have offered the pier if the ship would not fit. I would guess that if all you were able to offer was inadequate then ships would entirely stop docking there.

 

The South Pier would easily accommodate a ship of the Crown's size. The harbor master offered them the north pier. The stats are the stats - doesn't mean that you can't try to dock there. But if something were to happen, it would be the captain's fault - not the harbor master. According to the captain of the Veendam, the bow or stern could swing out - this could pose a hazard to any other craft that might be in the area, or it could cause damage to the ship itself. Given that tight of a fit - it's congestion.