chengkp75

I would say, as I have on another thread, on NCL, about resuming Baltimore cruises, that the timeline to open the channel is a good one, in my opinion, but could be delayed at any time by weather, so that will be end of May. At that time, most of the salvage operation will be complete, the areas of bridge collapse outside the main channel will be cleared with less urgency, the investigations will have moved to the analysis stage, so the agencies will return to their offices, and the cruise terminal will return to cruise operations. I don't think anyone who knows about maritime salvage and dredging operations would have considered that cruising would return before the end of May, so my prediction is not any "later than thought". As someone said on the NCL thread, the channel would need to be dredged for cruise ships, and I pointed out that even the largest cruise ships that can get under the various bridges to get to Baltimore would have a draft of about 24', while the Dali, which caused the problem in the first place draws 49'. So, even with some debris still on the bottom of the channel, cruise ships could start using the channel long before other ships do.

The pavement pieces are a much larger worry with regards to clearing the channel bottom, and for future dredging.

If the channel is open to general marine traffic, which is the hope by end of May, it will be deep enough for cruise ships, which have far less draft than cargo ships. For instance, NCL's largest ships, which couldn't fit under the bridges anyway, have a draft of 28 feet, 7 inches. The Dali, which caused this problem, has a draft of 49 feet, 4 inches. By the time the main channel is completely cleared, end of May, much of the remainder of the bridge damaged sections will also have been removed, so salvage operations will be winding down (less urgency), and the investigations will have moved to the analysis stage, so the incident command center will no longer be needed, and the city/state can find other accommodations for any headquarters still needed.

Some eat kosher all year long, so RCI is very used to providing kosher meals, upon prior notification, just like any other dietary restriction. They are frozen, and double wrapped, where the inner wrapping is removed by the diner. If I remember correctly, RCI does 2 or 3 cruises a year where one venue is cleaned and certified as kosher for large groups.

Unless they are planning a major renovation including new venues and such, no, they won't make a big deal of a dry docking. They are statutory, and deal mainly with ship's technical systems, and any refurbishment of the hotel side is secondary to the technical work. Given the cruise lines' current fiscal situation, I doubt that much beyond renewing worn carpeting, some reupholstery, and cabinetry repairs will happen. The 12th to the 26th is two weeks, which is pretty much a minimum time frame for a dry docking, so this would also point to no major changes being made.

No, this would be a complete redesign of the vessel. That would be new rudders to start with. Then, to double/triple the power of the thrusters would require gutting and renewing everything from the motors to the size of the tunnels for the thruster propellers (and getting space inside for the larger motors and ancillary equipment). Getting room for an additional diesel generator to power these more powerful thrusters would be nearly impossible. I would say that changing to variable pitch propellers, and high lift rudders, instead of up-powering the thrusters would be far more doable and have the same, or better effect. I've been on ships that converted from fixed pitch to variable pitch, and the space requirements for the new equipment are minor, and don't require cutting into or modifying the hull.

That is not what Andy said. He stated that the two ships are designed differently. There is no "overhaul" that can change the Neptune from shafted propellers to azipods. You will notice that he did mention that Neptune did not have variable pitch propellers nor "high lift" rudders. I've been on ships with shafted propellers, that were variable pitch, and did have high lift rudders, and these were very nearly as maneuverable as azipod propelled ships. What the design decisions to have the current propulsion/maneuvering system on the Viking ships, is something only discussed in Viking's boardroom. Secondly, he said nothing at all about the Viking ship being less "ocean worthy" than the Cunard ships. He stated that they had different handling characteristics while maneuvering at low speeds (docking/undocking), but they also have differing handling in high winds due to the relative sizes of the two ships. 98% of the ships in the world are not as maneuverable as the Cunard ships when docking, and rely on tugs to make up for it. Whether or not the harbormaster would have allowed the Viking ship to depart with tug assist is something none of us know, nor will know. Whether the decision to not depart with tugs was a financial decision or a safety decision (the company's SMS, as Andy points out), is also something none of us will ever know.

Just understand that @Ferry_Watcher deals only with cruises to Alaska, so Canada is the only foreign nation's requirements she would be familiar with.

Another main reason given for not requiring documentation is that those who are disabled do not want to have to disclose their disability. People who get handicap placards have to disclose their disability to their doctor, but then HIPAA means that no one else needs to know why the placard was granted. I have also heard of cases where a family pet learns to alert for diabetes or seizures, and then is considered as a service animal, but has no formal training or documentation.

And, while that may be great PR for the pet owners, I can guarantee that those pets, or service animals will not be evacuated in the same lifeboat as the owner, and will be loaded dead last in one or two liferafts, after it has been determined that all humans have evacuated, and providing that the surplus 25% of lifesaving equipment onboard is not required for humans.

As I've stated before, the ADA says that a service dog is to be treated just like any other medical device, like a wheelchair. What happens to a wheelchair in a lifeboat?

I don't believe I've ever said that ship's water has more sodium than bottled water, though it may. Typical bottled water has 5ppm sodium. Water produced onboard by evaporators has less than 1ppm, while RO produced water has under 20ppm, typically 10ppm or less. Water loaded in ports can be much higher, Miami is well over 20ppm, for instance. What I believe the biggest problem with ship's water is the lack of potassium and magnesium, that are removed by the desalination process.

My experience working for NCL was that when a fire was reported, there were code announcements made (code bravo), sometimes in crew areas only, sometimes in all areas, depending on what time of day it was. There was no "fire alarm" sounded through passenger areas, and only those passengers who knew what a "code bravo" was would know there was a fire anywhere. Once the On-Scene Commander (me) reported to the Captain that the fire was of such a nature that he/she felt the passengers needed to be mustered, would the passenger muster alarm be sounded. In many cases, the fire never got above the "code bravo" level, and 80% of the crew, and all of the passengers had never deviated from activities or daily routines. I don't know of any cruise line that would automatically announce a fire throughout the passenger areas without it first being investigated for source and size, and being attacked initially by a fire team and then reporting to On Scene Command. The announcement through the passenger areas in this case, may have been because an odor of smoke was noticed in passenger areas, and the Captain was announcing it to alleviate some passengers' worries.

What, you think Congress would carve out a special section of the ADA that says they can do things that other businesses in the US cannot? I did not say that the cruise line cannot charge a fee for actual damages done by the animal, it just cannot be "simply as a precaution, or just because it is a dog". They already charge fees for damages that the human occupants make, so charging for damages caused by the occupant's dog would be legal. You just can't discriminate against the service dog. DOJ specifically states that just cleaning up after a dog has been in the room (hair, dander) is not allowed for a service animal, any more than if they had to clean up after a wheelchair.

Its not that HAL, or any cruise line, wants to "appeal to the pet dog sector", but that they want to avoid litigation over confrontation with a "service" dog owner. And, I don't know if you want the cleaning fee to be charged to service animal owners as well, but that is not legal either.