42 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

Oh dear, another 3500 cases today.  That's double what it has been in the last few weeks.  It's not going well.

Well, if they perform more testing then quite obviously they will identify more cases.  Just more of the same scaremongering imo.

Was notable too that in his special announcement, Boris expressly told people "only get tested if you have symptoms"

Here are his exact quotes taken from the transcript of his briefing:

2 minutes ago, momofmab said:

I'm not willing to cruise again until I am reassured that I won't be stranded onboard for weeks in a small cabin because someone has tested positive.

Exactly

and reassured in legally binding black and white writing

"When, where and under what conditions will you make another cruise reservation?"

For me personally the conditions are simply that the cruise line puts out a clear an unambiguous statement to passengers, in writing, that explains exactly how they would deal with cases of COVID on-board.

Specifically :

- Whether or not ALL passengers would be quarantined, or whether that would only happen when a certain number of cases arise and if so what is that number of cases?

- Whether those infected will be forcibly taken off the ship and dumped in onshore hospitals or whether they will be allowed to remain on the ship in isolation.

- Whether there exists the possibility that you will be made to fly home rather than cruise home

- Whether the cruise line will pay passengers compensation for any ports missed due to port authorities refusing entry to the ship due to on-board cases of Covid

Until a cruise line is prepared to make such statements instead of hiding behind the smoke screen of increased safety measures like mask wearing, social distancing and hand gel, then the entire cruising proposition for me no longer exists.

It's an absolute certainty that cases of COVID WILL appear on cruises.  Therefore passengers must be told how cruise lines will deal with that and it should form part of the contract between passenger and cruise line.

.

I will echo other's statements that Biscay can be a complete mill pond.   I've done over 35 cruises from Southampton and I'd say really bad crossings are few and far between.   A little swell is expected and then it comes down to various factors as to how that affects you.

Ships

The larger, longer ships will tend to pitch and sway more than smaller ones.   Ventura/Azura are long and so the number of meters they rise up at the front and back can be significant in high swells.  To the extent that I personally wouldn't dream of venturing there in such weather and would stay totally midships, thereby sacrificing any evening shows or any trips to the buffet at the back and so on.   The ships all have stabilisers but their effectiveness various tremendously.  

Oriana, for me, used to sail badly which I think was partly due to her perpetual propeller prop shaft fault.  Thankfully she has now left the fleet.

Aurora sails really well imho and it takes a significant swell for things to be bad on her.   I've been in force 12's on Aurora where cabin windows on deck 5 were smashed in due to the force of the waves crashing against them at 1am in the morning.  Scary stuff when you're a newbie or not yet used to such harsh weather, yet the ship was never in danger and you just hunkered down in your cabin until it abated.

Arcadia too is a decent sail I find though in the current Covid situation she would be the very last ship on my list due to the very well known issues with her overly strong ventilation system.  To the point I just would not sail on her and would pick another cruise line until and unless that air con system was ripped out and replaced.

Can't speak for Britannia or Iona but being even larger ships I would expect them to be worse affected by high winds and swells.

Captains

Believe it or not your captain makes a huge difference.  It is your captain who chooses whether to deploy the stabilisers or not and the temptation to sometimes not do so in order to save fuel (which is very costly) I think is significant.  Some captains have gained a reputation for putting the comfort of passengers first.  Others have not.   At the top of my list of great captains is Neil "Storm Dodger" Turnbull.   He will do whatever it takes to either completely dodge a storm (leaving ports early or late to miss them or speeding up/down accordingly during the trip).  Other posters will probably have contributions in this respect.

There have been many instances on my many cruises when I instinctively feel that the stabilisers have been brought in because ships which I have sailed on many times are swaying and pitching more than they need to.  It comes down to the individual captain.

Medication

Provided you have and take sea sick medication properly, then Biscay need never concern you or adversely affect your cruise.

Be sure to take it BEFORE you set sail otherwise it's efficacy is greatly reduced.   Always listen to captain's announcements to understand whether the conditions are likely to be choppy.  Learn "captain" speak too.  They generally play down bad weather so if there's any remarks about swells and winds then take your tablets.

Cabin Selection

If you are prone to sea sickness then go midships every time.  I'm eternally jealous of those stalwart cruisers who are totally immune and oblivious to significant ship movement and even enjoy it.  Those people can pick cheap cabins and last minute deals without fear.

Biscay vs Atlantic

Just want to point out here that there is a general fallacy about Biscay.  It has gained a rather unfair notoriety imo as much of the time it is quite calm or has just a mild swell.    In all my trips I can confidently say that in fact it is the 2nd leg of the journey that is by far the more likely to be rough and that's the leg the other side of Biscay running down the coast of North Spain and Portugal.  This stretch can be very fickle and much of the time you will be sailing into the wind at a slight angle.  This tends to induce a "corkscrew" motion in the larger ships like Ventura/Azura which is why a number of posters have highlighted those ships.  It's an unpleasant experience when it happens.

I would also say that if you are on a cruise that is visiting ports actually in Biscay then things will be much better than simply sailing right across her.  I remember quite fondly the short 7-9 nt trips P&O used to do in this respect that called at places like Brest and La Rochelle.  Sadly they seemed to fizzle out.  

So all in all not much to worry about imho.  Get a mid-ships cabin, hope for a sympathetic captain and bring your mediation.

ATB

57 minutes ago, Adawn47 said:

Pessimistic aren't you? You would probably say you were being realistic. I would say  you were being antagonistic.  My personal view is a hope that MSC trial cruises go without a hitch and that the Covid protocols that they WILL have in place will never have to be put into effect. 

I'm being neither of the above.   Once you find yourself in the situation of being on a ship with CV on-board then you find out in black and white what will happen to you and at  that point it will be far too late to start complaining about being quarantined or shipped off to some dodgy hospital in whatever country you happen to find yourself.   Just reading the blogs of the couple from the Diamond Princess tells you this.  The guy was taken off the ship, then moved from one hospital to another and so on.

Some people live their lives somewhat haplessly and thus take whatever is thrown at them,  Each to their own.  

I would consider myself extremely foolish to set foot on a cruise ship again without knowing FULLY in advance what protocols will be followed when there are cases of CV on-board and what that expressly means for myself and my wife.   Comments from a social media board, even from the more respected posters, do not represent legally binding official information I'm afraid.

It behoves the cruise lines to put out clear unambiguous statements to all passengers to explain exactly what WILL happen when there are cases of CV on-board.

Meanwhile, we continue to cancel cruises we had booked in advance and will continue to do so.

.

23 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Sorry KTS I didn't know that the CDC have jurisdiction over UK cruise ships.😝

Did you think the cruise lines had all voluntarily ceased sailing and placed their businesses in financial jeopardy?

Who gives the "No Sail" orders to cruise lines?   And on whose authority/recommendation do they do it?

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/s0716-cruise-ship-no-sail-order.html

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced today the extension of a No Sail Order for cruise ships through September 30, 2020. This order continues to suspend passenger operations on cruise ships with the capacity to carry at least 250 passengers in waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction."

The CDC is relevant to any discussion of a return to cruising because ultimately it is these kind of authoritative bodies that call the shots. 

36 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

That's fine with me if you don't want to cruise that's your decision, but once they get the green light I will be happy to cruise.

But which green light?

It's the CDC etc who will force them to quarantine all passengers when the numbers of CV cases are enough.

57 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I thought that Moleys links to the new protocols had covered this issue KTS. Only passengers with covid or who have been in close contact with them will need to be quarantined, and they will be kept in a separate area of the ship and serviced by specific  hotel staff.

So a repeat of the Diamond Princess situation should not happen.

Hi

I trawled all 14 pages here as a result of your response but could find no actual links anywhere.  I saw "Moley's" comments about how he perceives that things might be handled, but nowhere did I see any written statement from a cruise line or link to such that confirms this.

I'm also skeptical of his statements about what would happen.   He says that the infected person would be quarantined to cabin or placed in a special off-limits cabin area as well as any people they had come into contact with until they pass 2 separate CV tests.   The problem here is that by the time the person presents with symptoms or is tested positive they will have already spread it to lots of other people who likewise will have already spread it to lots of other people.

So no way is the ship going to have the sealed off cabin capacity for all these people and I have no doubts personally that there will (indeed MUST) be some limit of numbers of infected people on the ship before they are forced to quarantine the entire ship.  I suspect that number would be quite small.  Maybe 10-20 infected people.   I also suspect that such numbers would by law have to be reported to every port before docking and that ships would be turned away as a result.

Nororvirus has always worked in a similar way but the threshold for serious problems and impact is quite large in that hundreds of people would have to be positive in order that ports would refuse entry to the ship.

Unless and until I see some written statement from a cruise line in regards to all this it remains for me supposition and conjecture.  The devil is in the detail and always will be.  Passengers MUST be told, contractually, how they will be treated if their are cases of CV on-board.

Haven't trawled through the 14 pages here but on the subject of "MSC Resuming Cruising" or indeed any other cruise line I'm going to assume that actually nothing has fundamentally changed and that cruise lines are still trying to hide behind the smoke screen of safety protocols, mask wearing, social distancing and so on. 

So on the single biggest and fundamental show stopping issue, I assume nothing has yet been resolved

That being what happens when THERE IS a case of COVID on-board.

I assume  that when that happens, and let's face it, it WILL, then all passengers will be quarantined to cabins ala Diamond Princess, for up to 2 weeks and/or are dumped at whatever port and shipped home.

If so, I maintain its still Game Over for cruising.

Does anyone here have anything in writing from MSC or any other cruise line that expressly states how they will react when there is a case of COVID on-board?

I'm guessing not

All the safety measures in the world are not going to get us away from the main problem of what happens when someone goes down with COVID, whether passenger or crew.

On 7/22/2020 at 4:10 PM, Firepath said:

So there was a big earthquake in Alaska, 7.8 I believe. No cruise ships this year so it’s a non-issue, but what would happen if an earthquake occurred near a cruise ship?

If it's just an earthquake then no big issues TBH.

I was still in bed one morning when the cruise ship I was on had moored in the bay at Cefalonia (Greece).   There was an earthquake and all I felt was a vibration as if the ships thrusters were being deployed.  I had no idea there had been an earthquake until I went ashore and people told me. 

As others have said, if there is a tsunami then that's a whole different kettle of fish.  

18 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

One story on the news yesterday was a 27 year old lady, no conditions slim etc.  She got Covid, felt like the flu, but it got worse, she spent a week in hospital.  Now a month later, she still feels awful, her breathing is not back to normal.

 

Our friend who cruises with us we are pretty sure had Covid back in January.  She is still having difficulty on a good walk, her breathing is not how it was at all, so she has to sit down and wait to get her breath.

 

That's the nasty difference with this compared to flu or a cold.  With those, you have it, and it gets better.  It doesn't leave lasting damage to your lungs and organs.  (obviously I know people die of flu)

Flu can lead to pneumonia depending on how badly a person tries to treat themselves so it's as much about the person's knowledge as it is about the actual virus.   The flu can also worsen long-term medical conditions, like congestive heart failure, asthma, or diabetes.

I feel certain that a great many people who got COVID-19 made things massively worse for themselves by taking pain-killers to force own their fevers without realising the stupidity of such action.  It is sadly very natural and common for people with cold/flu symptoms to instantly reach for paracetamols or neurofens or ibuprofens or for cold/flu capsules or other pills and potions that contain those ingredients.  These people do not understand how their own bodies work and are actively obstructing the most crucial defense mechanism it has which is a fever.    The fever is absolutely vital because it stops bugs and viruses from being able to replicate.  This in turn gives the body the time it needs to send in the white cell good guys to kill what virus exists at that point.   If you take pain killers and force your fever down then the virus is free to replicate at will and soon the body becomes totally overrun.    Sadly even some doctors don't seem to understand this basic principle.

On a cruise I once contracted Norovirus.  The ship's doctor came to see me and told me to take paracetamols because I had a fever.   I dutifully ignored him, let my fever run, took Grapefruit Seed Extract in water and was right as rain within 12 hours.

Had I taken paracetamol I would undoubtedly have suffered for up to 72 hours.

COVID spreads faster than Flu but they are both dangerous conditions if you don't understand how your body works.  By building and maintaining a strong immune system, eating good foods, rejecting bad foods and getting plenty of essential immune boosting vitamin D from sunlight, one can maximise one's ability to combat these kind of respiratory conditions and a wide range of other ailments.   I appreciate that not all people can do this unfortunately so as always it is a case of each to their own and to do what is right in your personal circumstances.

.

Yet another thread asking what would get people back to cruising?   It's as if cruise line operatives are at work doing research ! lol

Nothing has changed.

The single most damning problem facing P&O and  any other cruise line remains the same

That is . . .

What protocols will the cruise line follow IF a passenger or crew member is confirmed (or even suspected) to have COVID-19?

Until cruise lines stop prevaricating on this issue and trying to hide behind cosmetic matters of social distancing and mask wearing and buffet serving, nothing will change and it will remain Game Over for the cruise industry as a whole.

They HAVE to provide a formally stated solution to what will happen when someone on-board gets COVID-19.

If the protocol is still what we all saw on the Diamond Princess then so long and thanks for all the fish.  The industry is dead at that point.

So the wait continues.  7 months since the first UK cases appeared and still I have seen no cruise line put out any kind of statement as to how they propose to deal with on-board cases of COVID-19.

We have no choice therefore but to assume they would still quarantine EVERY passenger to cabins for 1-2 weeks ala Diamond Princess.

That is not a tennable holiday proposition.

Ball remains in their court

Tick tock

.

On 7/3/2020 at 11:41 AM, Balaena said:

 

Like many on this site, as a very regular P&O cruiser with 2 cruises planned for November and December and a long one round Cape Horn Jan/Feb I would be very interested to know from Carnival House what the plans are for social distancing on their ships which are due to commence cruising again from October.

 

Your concerns don't appear to be in the right place imho

Who cares about social distancing?

The most important thing imho you need P&O to be open and honest about is what protocols they will be forced to follow if there is a case of COVID-19 on-board.   If it's still a case of quarantining every passenger to cabins for 2 weeks ala Diamond Princess then I fear it's game over.   Social distancing measures are way down the pecking list imho.

.

On 6/20/2020 at 11:07 PM, RonOhio said:

I assume you’re referring to the MIT physics study of aerosol dispersal. It’s correct but not relevant. Because we don’t care if we receive a speck of an infected person’s DNA, our concern is whether we will infected. A single virus or a tiny mass will don’t be sufficient to Infect the recipient. The U of Minnesota study shows that any ejecta with enough mass and fluid to infect the recipient will be affected by gravity making 2 m (6 ft) a safe distance from an infected person.   
Just because you were close enough to hear a gunshot doesn’t mean that you were hit by the bullet.

I'm struggling to accept the notion that the quantity of virus received means it won't infect you.  Virus is virus, in any quantity.

However small amount you begin with, it will replicate over time exponentially, 1,2,4,8,16,32 etc so the only thing that a larger or smaller starting quantity does is affect how long it takes for it to have replicated enough to cause a person symptoms (i.e. incubation time).

Here's the MIT freeze frame shot of a person sneezing

Forgive me but anyone who voluntarily chooses to stand even 4m away in that cloud of infected material is imho an idiot, let alone standing 2m or 1m !

Social distancing is a nonsense imho.  It's a crowd pleaser.  A way to placate the public.  Always has been.

The wearing of masks, had it been mandated from the outset would have helped lessen cloud sprays like the above.

2 hours ago, jsn55 said:

I'm glad someone mentioned what's been on my mind for months.  What's the point of masks and gloves if they're not changed frequently?  A gloved hand full of virus is the same as a naked hand full of virus.  I do wish "they" would start THINKING and putting in measures that will allow us back our lives while still staying safe as possible.  But a politician lives for nothing more than attention, so I'm sure there's little time to actually think about solving the problems.

There are unfortunately no practical measures to keep people safe.  The 2m social distancing measure is a complete farce, pure kidology to placate the naive masses.   People wearing masks would have been great had it been mandated from the outset but instead governments and the WHO plain lied/mislead the public about the benefits of masks and once that lie was established, with it came the political obstruction to preserve the lie meaning they can never change the story now.   Hence all we now have are recommendations to wear masks rather than a forced mandate and that will never work any more than removing speed limit signs would work on the roads and asking people to drive sensibly voluntarily.

Social distancing is impossible on ships and impractical.  So they must either abolish it or try and maintain yet another outright lie that a 1m distance is enough (which no rational person could ever accept).

Wearing masks on ships is also largely pointless.   If you have infected people on the ship then the CDC protocols are going to kick in requiring all passengers to go under "cabin arrest" confined to quarters for the duration.   A cruise simply can not function if there are infected people on board under such a regime and thus wearing a mask is really a moot point.   If people are not infected then they don't need to wear a mask simple as.   If they are infected then wearing masks is frankly the least of your problems.

So I come back to the same conclusion which is that there is little choice but to just let things go back to normal and let people take their chances whilst properly testing people before embarkation and barring anyone with the virus from boarding.

In any event, given the appalling way that the government has handled the crisis from the outset, we have all effectively been forced into their original "herd immunity" approach.

The government:

- delayed the closure of schools at the outset

- delayed the closure of pubs, clubs, restaurants and cafes

- delayed the lockdown, which didn't happen until a full 53 days had passed since the first UK cases appeared

- lied to the public about the benefits of wearing masks

- relaxed lockdown measures way before it was really safe to do so

- supported Cummings disgraceful breaking of his 7 day quarantine when he left the house whilst infected

- Kept UK airports open throughout and allowed some 15,000 people a day to walk into the country from hot spot countries like China, Spain and Italy without a single health check or any mandated quarantining.

It's been such a farce that in fact it can only have all been entirely deliberate.   They initially stated that they were aiming for a herd immunity strategy and though they later announced that they had changed their mind, every action they have taken actually suggests they have kept on with that strategy.

With that background the rest of us have little choice but to accept the reality of that situation.  Whether we personally choose to wear masks or not (and pat ourselves morally on the back for doing so) it makes no difference because your government has simply continued with the string of actions it has taken which effectively ensure the continual spread of the virus.

What is the point  of people social distancing and wearing masks if the government welcome in 15,000 people a day at airports without a single health check or quarantining?    As jsn55 said, it's all just political appeasement.   They say one thing in their broadcasts every day but their actual actions do the opposite.

Being realistic we have to accept that the powers that be ARE still running a herd immunity strategy.

They need to get at least 60% of people infected and through the virus successfully so we have that herd immunity.

Once you see and realise this then actually your mind set changes, or should.   If we are going for immunity then actually we need as many people as possible to get out there, mingle and spread the virus between them and to save lives those people need to be the healthiest and strongest in society.  Those that are young who eat well, don't have compromised immune systems, aren't obese and so on.   Everyone else needs to stay at home whilst that spreading goes on.   The hospitals have capacity to look after the tiny few that will need hospital treatment.

What other way forward is there?   There is no viable safe vaccine and won't be for years.   We have a drug that can help treat infected people and other treatments so the best route is just to get that herd immunity whilst the vulnerable stay at home.  That will get the dangers dealt with in the shortest possible time and will mean the vulnerable don't have to stay isolated for months and months more.     Maintaining any kind of lockdown strategy just prolongs the whole debacle which destroys people's lives and the economy with it.

Herd immunity is now the only way to go and it's what the government have been pursuing all along imho.  The cruise industry might as well accept that reality too.

3 hours ago, wowzz said:

Unless gloves are changed regularly, they can easily be a greater source of contamination than washed hands. Wearing the same gloves for an entire shift is bad practice. Washing your hands or changing gloves every 20  minutes or so would be far better.

In the UK, when restaurants are allowed to reopen, wait staff will be expected to wash their hands every time they have served a table. Much more hygienic than wearing gloves. 

Gloves won't solve anything on ships. 

Take the MDR

Your table waiters routinely clear up the plates and cutlery from one table and then serve other tables. Their hands or gloves are instantly contaminated by handling plates and cutlery from people.  They would have to literally clear a table.  Then go back to the kitchen to wash hands.  They would be in and out so many times as for it to be impractical.

There's no way out of all this.   We have to just go back to normal and take our chances.

.

On 6/18/2020 at 7:44 PM, vaughnrobin said:

Why do so many cruise ships arrive in the same port on the same day?..

Greed

Berthing fees are huge esp in key ports.   A day in Venice from one ship nets them about £100,000 or more I believe

It's a practice that HAS to stop imho because it is that total mismanagement of ships at ports that has lead to local inhabitants having their lives and towns/cities so badly disrupted.  We are at the point now where Venice has had to refuse entry to large ships and where the locals don't want the ships at all but where the government and port authorities want the berthing fees.

As a cruising enthusiast I don't want any part in the increasing destruction of beautiful towns and cities nor do I want locals to hate us.   I want cruise lines and port authorities to have some responsibility in what they do instead of just trying to make $millions in profits.

.

3 hours ago, clo said:

They're not required/requested once you're seated. Enter with a mask on, remove once seated, put it back on before leaving. All staff will have on masks and gloves.

This is utter nonsense sorry.

People are still bamboozled about the whole mask wearing issue and most of it is because people have been totally lied to by their governments and by the WHO.

The science has ALWAYS said and known that the aerosol droplets coughs and sneezes travel 8m or more and can float and linger in the air for a substantial amount of time.    The entire 2m social distancing notion was a complete lie and nonsense from the outset.  It has protected no-one.   It has served only to make the public think they are doing something worthwhile but the reality is anyone who went out in public, to the grocery store etc, was putting themselves at risk.

Consequently wearing a mask to a restaurant but then taking it off once seated would be an utter nonsense.   As soon as anyone coughs or sneezes in the room lots of other people will be at risk.

Mask wearing was the only tangible way to slow the spread of the virus from the outset but the WHO and governments lied to everyone about their benefits because there was a scandalous shortage of PPE and/or because they actually wanted to follow a "herd immunity" strategy.  Probably both.

Unless masks are mandated the whole thing is a nonsense.  Making it voluntary is like taking down all the road speed limit signs and asking drivers to use their common sense when driving.   An obviously futile strategy.  

We are now way beyond the point at which mandating mask wearing would make a difference.  They deliberately gave everyone a bum steer on the issue from the very outset and consequently the virus spread far and wide and thousands of people have died.   Had everyone been mandated to wear a mask in public 6 months ago, things would be very  different.

What you have instead is a massive Campaign Of Fear perpetrated which is designed to frighten weak minded people senseless so that when a vaccine comes along everyone will go flocking to get their shots.   It's been appalling from start to finish.

Wearing masks on a cruise ship would just make for a horrible holiday experience.  Visually, and in terms of personal comfort.  I can't see it being a viable prospect TBH.  

We simply have to get to the point where we allow people to take their chances just as they do with Flu and Norovirus and the like.   Social distancing isn't going to do anything and mask wearing simply isn't feasible when you want to eat and drink.

Let people sign disclaimers that they are happy to take the risk on a cruise without masks, without social distancing and let people get on with it.   Those that don't want to take that risk can find an alternative vacation but in truth at some point everyone is going to have to come out of their hermit shells and face the world again.

.

1 hour ago, terrierjohn said:

I rather think that the cruise lines know just how damaging another Diamond Princess outbreak would be, consequently I hope they are looking at alternative ways to handle a covid case(s) which does not restrict all passengers to their cabins.

Unfortunately TJ it's not in their power to determine the solution.  As we have plainly seen,  the world is not in fact run by elected Governments it is run by the various (cough) "authorities" such as the WHO and CDC who controlled the whole show.  They shut down the cruise lines.   They will determine whether cruising ever goes ahead again and if so on what basis.  Funny but I don't ever remember voting for the WHO or CDC or for that matter the so-called "experts" that Boris & Co devolved all responsibility to in the UK.

These authorities are the real powers and they are imho beholden to the Pharmaceutical industries and other untouchable groups.

Cruise lines can do absolutely nothing until and unless the WHO/CDC decide to let them.   So cruise lines are sat in a waiting game desperately putting out chirpy news releases to placate the stock markets to try and keep their share prices from collapsing further but the reality is they have no answers. 

Not a single cruise line that I know of has any solution as to how to deal with on-board cases of COVID-19.   That is extremely worrying on many levels.   Worrying for cruising but more worrying in terms of the power these groups have to stop the cogs of the world's industries.

1 hour ago, terrierjohn said:

What that will be, how they will manage to continue the cruise, and how ports will react, will probably be a major exercise facing all cruise lines at present. However the desire to get the vacation and hospitality industries functioning again, will in the end, be the major driving force that overcomes  current fears.

The desire to get cruising going again will have been there since last March, yet it remains essentially a dead horse.  The likelihood of any significant cruising in 2020 is imho nil.  The sailing embargoes will just keep getting extended.

24 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I used to give regular reviews on CC but once you are repeating ships and itineraries you lose that desire, whereas a bad experience will give you the momentum to complain, even though you know that rough seas, bad weather, annoying passengers, the poorest head chef in the fleet ,and other one off issues, were the main cause of your poor experience.

In truth, it's reasonable for any passenger paying £1000s for a vacation to expect a decent experience with good quality and service.   So cruise reviews of 4-5 stars ought to be the norm especially for what used to call itself a 4-star cruise line.  When you start getting a lot of 1 star and 2 star reviews then something is clearly wrong to my mind, and no, I don't think that can be attributed simply to bad weather and rough seas.  Nor to problems with other passengers, a situation which in part has been caused by Carnival/P&Os relentless drive to try and be all things to all men/women at both ends of the spectrum, by which short sighted strategy they simply diluted the P&O brand to an almost totally meaningless level imho.  

Any read thru of the reviews highlights the real problems passengers are facing and they are imho genuine concerns that need to be dealt with.   These were problems predating COVID-19 too so with the virus to contend with as well they have their work cut out I would think.

On 6/14/2020 at 10:18 PM, adam7392 said:

 was wondering if P&O would just be too English/British.

P&O is a British focused cruise line.  95% of pax will be Brits simple as.   They have traditionally always had "Great British Sailaways" at certain ports with lots of plastic union flags handed out to passengers for waving with accompanying music like the theme to Dambusters and so on but in recent times that has now been altered.

On 6/14/2020 at 10:18 PM, adam7392 said:

So far the comments on the Carnival board are more positive for Legend than the comments I am getting for the same post on the P&O board for Ventura.

As posted on that other board I recommend you take time out to read the various cruise reviews of Ventura from the past 3/4 year.   The last 11 reviews going back to Dec are all 1-3 stars out of 5 with just a single 5 star review among them.   Declining quality of food in the MDR is a running theme.

https://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/memberreviews/getreviews.cfm?action=ship&ShipID=383

The reviews of the Legend are somewhat higher but still reflect comments about gradual declines in quality and service.

Last 11 Ventura review star marks:   1,2,5,3,2,1,2,3,2,1,2

Last 11 Legend review star marks:   3,4,5,5,5,2,3,4,1,1,3

I simply post my opinions as all do.   That a tiny collective here are desperate to oppose any such critiques (and readers would do well to ask why that would be) does not remotely deter me.

OP asked for views of Ventura.  People should therefore post their views.  They should be free to do so without self-appointed forum police making pithy comments and personal remarks

Ports may gradually start welcoming cruise ships again, ostensibly because they need the money from the berthing fees and tourism however the very moment that any passenger or crew member presents with COVID-19 on-board all that will immediately change again.   Ports require ships to inform them of any COVID cases and in the case of some ports they aso mandate that ships inform them of anyone with cold/flu like symptoms (which may be COVID-19).

As soon as you get a case on-board the ports are going to refuse the ship entry or at the least refuse permissions for anyone to disembark.   Even if they wanted to allow it the local citizens would be in uproar now that everyone understands COVID-19 and the risks to them.   So such a cruise ship would still end up just cruising around at sea for the duration or would find a port that would accept them and dump passengers there and fly them home.

This remains the biggest issue facing the cruise industry and is still a show stopper.

Until they face up to it and come up with some way of allowing a cruise to continue normally despite on-board cases of COVID-19, it is pretty much game over for the industry imho.

Anyway you slice it there WILL be cases of COVID-19 on-board ships when they start up again.  Unavoidable.   It will come from passengers or crew, it may be picked up in port or before embarkation.   Swab testing isn't reliable enough to prevent it happening.

.

Always make me chuckle when the same posters jump straight in to defend P&O when anyone makes any critique of it.

This whole site is dedicated to critiques of cruise lines and cruise reviews.  Those who post their views don't have agendas, they are posting their opinions.  Very poor show chaps.

OP asked if people find the specialty restaurants worth the cost

So just saying it like it is from my personal perspective  

Sindhu used to be top of my list for alternative dining that was well worth the extra cost.  Now it isn't.

.