chengkp75

Not sure what you'd like me to comment on. While I don't do social media, or John Heald, I saw an article that he was getting some rather xenophobic posts about this rescue, with passengers complaining that it happened, or saying "leave them be, it was their choice". Americans, as a nation of immigrants (nearly everyone's family started out somewhere else, mine came to the colonies in the early 1600's), really amaze me with their intolerance of others.

For most cruise lines the "big 5" (Captain, Staff Captain, Chief Engineer, Staff Chief, Hotel Director) have a zero alcohol policy, as well as the bridge and engine room watchstanders. And, that means the entire time they are signed on to the vessel (no drinking on shore or off duty).

Karin Stahre-Janson was named to command an RCI ship in 2007, she was the first. Currently there are 9 female cruise ship Captains, including one Black woman. No one makes any fuss over these women, mainly because they are not from the US.

Innocent passage also has defined actions that are not allowed, and anchoring is one of them. So, if the ship anchors within territorial waters, it is no longer on "innocent passage".

This really gets me, when people think that Captain McCue is such a pioneer, no disrespect to Captain McCue. I know one of the first women to get a USCG Masters license (and I was a training officer while she was at the academy), and it was 39 years ago, that the first US woman took command of a civilian ship. While it doesn't have the visibility of a cruise ship Captain, and certainly not the PR effort that Celebrity and Captain McCue put into it, if it were not for Lynn Korwatch and Nancy Wagner nearly 4 decades ago, Captain McCue would not be where she is. While women only make up slightly above 1% of the 1.8 million seafarers worldwide, in the US they make up over 11% of the almost 10,000 US mariners.

Well, I mean do you want to see a website that says 25 ships entered the US this week, and 23 reported no cases of GI illness, and one had 1 case, and one had 30 cases, or just show the one ship that had 30 cases. The USPH's mandate is to prevent the introduction of infectious disease into the US, not reporting, or even protecting, the health of passengers on cruise ships. We all know that noro is already in the US, and one or two cases out of a couple thousand people entering the US isn't much call for alarm, but if a hundred out of those couple thousand are ill, then you have a possible "super spreader" scenario where those people can go home and spread this far and wide. They set a threshold limit for where they feel that remediation measures need to be increased to prevent that large number of people getting ill and re-entering the US, and those limits are where the reporting is. As long as a ship is following the VSP program, they are free from health inspection every cruise, which is what happens to cargo ships, etc, that don't have the VSP to follow. Imagine the headaches if USPH came aboard every week to inspect the ship and conduct health interviews with a hundred passengers before allowing passengers to disembark.

Nothing, never said there was. It is just that a MI flag ship (like Pearl Mist) has significant operating cost and tax benefits doing a Canadian and US itinerary over a US flag ship. Just as a US flag ship could do a Caribbean cruise itinerary, but would have competitive drawbacks compared to their foreign flag rivals. I expect that ACL will use US flag vessels on the Great Lakes, simply because it will give them flexibility in itineraries.

Never. If the number of cases changes from the initial report before arrival in US, if the numbers are below the threshold limits, those reports are not published either. The only reports that become public knowledge are the update reports at the 2% and 3% thresholds. These most commonly lag about a week behind.

Because your trip starts in a foreign country (Canada), and ends in the US, it is a foreign voyage, and not subject to the PVSA. PVSA is only concerned with domestic voyages, ones that start and end in a US port. Yes, your cruise would be legal for a US flag ship, again because it is a foreign voyage. The advantage that a US flag ship would have is to be able to sail a cruise that only includes US ports (no Canadian ports), or one that started in one US port and ended in another US port, whether or not it included a Canadian port. It is far more costly to operate a US flag vessel than a Marshall Island flag vessel, which is why Pearl Cruises has flagged the Mist there. Because she was built in Canada, that gives the ship an advantage in becoming Canadian flag, which is also much more expensive than MI flag, but would allow the ship to cruise exclusively Canadian ports, just like the PVSA allows US flag ships to cruise exclusively US ports.

Actually, the ship has to report even if there are zero cases onboard. The initial report, whether reporting any cases or not, has to be made 24 hours prior to returning to a US port. This is the "routine report". The "special reports" need to be made when the cumulative cases reaches 2% or 3% of passengers or crew (not combined). E. coli, botulism, salmonella, shigella, to name a few.

Which cruise lines are you referring to as "american"? None of the major cruise lines are US companies. Again, what are you basing your "better condition" on? Rust? Really? Where did you meet these crew members from the engineering department? Because loss of one main generator will not stop the ship. As I've said, I was a Chief Engineer with NCL.

this information came from whom?

If that is the case, it is very risky for RCI, as past illness data is reviewed whenever the USPH inspects a ship, and if the report doesn't correspond with other data the CDC may have (reports from individuals), then the ship can fail the inspection and be barred from boarding passengers.

Whether or not there is any noro onboard a cruise ship, it must make a report to the CDC at least 24 hours prior to entering US waters reporting the number of GI cases (even if zero, so every voyage).The ship then needs to report again when the number of cases reaches 2% of passengers or crew, and then again when it reaches 3%. The only time anything is shown on the CDC website (which is for GI outbreak updates is when the 3% threshold is reached. So, there could be 70 cases of noro onboard, and there would be no report on the CDC website.

As the Pearl Mist is a newer ship, and Canadian built, I'm sure ACL will retain the ship, as reflagging to Canadian would avail them of the ability to meet the Canadian Coastal Shipping Act (analogous to PVSA), and sail exclusively to Canadian ports. Or, maintaining the Marshall Island flag would give them significant tax advantage. I have no doubt that ACL, with its ambitious building program, will target the Great Lakes market, using US flag vessels where appropriate, and Canadian vessels where appropriate. The AQV ocean ships were too old for economical usage (IMHO), and the river boats were bought at near scrap prices to keep them from competitors, while ACL powers over Viking in the US river market.