Carnival Triumph Passengers Talk of Conditions on Fire-Disabled Cruise Ship

Just read this and saw the pictures posted... feel so bad for everyone and glad they are getting home soon.

Applause to the crew who worked so hard to make passengers as comfortable as possible.

"All alcohol service has been cut off."

OMG :eek: - imagine having to dry out! :D

That must've hit a few people quite hard.

.

How difficult that must have been. I would get sick just from the smell:( The people on board did a fantastic job of taking care of each other and doing the best they could in the situation.

"All alcohol service has been cut off."

OMG :eek: - imagine having to dry out! :D

 

That must've hit a few people quite hard.

.

This was the first thing I thought of...there are so many cruisers with "an issue" imagine all those detoxers on a ship at the same time!!:eek:

Always carry my head lamp, extra meds and my own first aid on every trip!

Aplmac so true!

I'm certianly hearing different stuff. There are some people that were interviewed that really made it sound like a survival thing like they thought they were going to die...waiting 6 hours to get food...then there were some others that I've heard interviews from they said ... "meh ... it was uncomfortable ... if you waited till after the rush you might have waited 20 minutes to get food. People with medical problems were the ones who really were dire. Supposedly there were a few who were medically evacuated one because she fell and broke her hip and another because of some heart problems. Sever"

I think it would totally suck. The stench would probably be an issue for me. "I'd probably get as much out of my cabin as possible and just stay on deck".

I guess I never understand when this sort of thing happens why they can't evacuate most people via some sort of tethering? I don't understand why they don't just hand out MRE's 3-4 per person per day? I don't get why they don't open the bar...obviously they can't provide blended drinks but they should be able to drop enough "ice" for mixed drinks and beer. But there's obviously bigger things at work. Perhaps they should hire me as a "contingency" planner. If I fail fire me.

With this being the second Carnival ship for this to happen too (Splendor)...perhaps they ought to create a "contingincy" plan. Seems like if they can perhaps do something to keep the sewage working people would be happier.

I just don't understand why the lifeboats weren't used. If the ship was sinking, they'd use them, right? If they aren't safe to use, then ...... ????? what's the point of having them at all?

Might I add...in a situation like this you can certianly tell a person you want to be with in the face of adversity verses some others.

Life boats weren't used because they use electric winches??? Maybe???

With this being the second Carnival ship for this to happen too (Splendor)...perhaps they ought to create a "contingincy" plan. Seems like if they can perhaps do something to keep the sewage working people would be happier.

Perhaps the presence of the red poop bags was a realistic contingency plan, courtesy of lessons learned the hard way on Splendor. I don't recall hearing anything about those bags on Splendor. . .?

Might I add...in a situation like this you can certianly tell a person you want to be with in the face of adversity verses some others.

 

Life boats weren't used because they use electric winches??? Maybe???

So, if the ship was sinking, and the power was out ...... then everybody drowns? Even the Titanic used their lifeboats.

I just don't understand why the lifeboats weren't used. If the ship was sinking, they'd use them, right? If they aren't safe to use, then ...... ????? what's the point of having them at all?

exactly my thoughts.

I just don't understand why the lifeboats weren't used. If the ship was sinking, they'd use them, right? If they aren't safe to use, then ...... ????? what's the point of having them at all?

The ship wasn't sinking. It was much -safer- to keep the passengers on the ship than to take them off the ship.

If the ship was sinking the inherrant risks of using a lifeboat are better than the risks of staying on the ship.

I'm certianly hearing different stuff. There are some people that were interviewed that really made it sound like a survival thing like they thought they were going to die...waiting 6 hours to get food...then there were some others that I've heard interviews from they said ... "meh ... it was uncomfortable ... if you waited till after the rush you might have waited 20 minutes to get food. People with medical problems were the ones who really were dire. Supposedly there were a few who were medically evacuated one because she fell and broke her hip and another because of some heart problems. Sever"

 

I think it would totally suck. The stench would probably be an issue for me. "I'd probably get as much out of my cabin as possible and just stay on deck".

 

I guess I never understand when this sort of thing happens why they can't evacuate most people via some sort of tethering? I don't understand why they don't just hand out MRE's 3-4 per person per day? I don't get why they don't open the bar...obviously they can't provide blended drinks but they should be able to drop enough "ice" for mixed drinks and beer. But there's obviously bigger things at work. Perhaps they should hire me as a "contingency" planner. If I fail fire me.

 

With this being the second Carnival ship for this to happen too (Splendor)...perhaps they ought to create a "contingincy" plan. Seems like if they can perhaps do something to keep the sewage working people would be happier.

I can not believe in this day and age there was no way to get these people off the ship.

They said it was difficult to transfer them from one cruise ship to another. But couldn't the US send some kind of naval ship to help. I know the gov't has better things to do but it was over 4,00 people and US citizens on that ship. They must have some kind of rescue operations available. Maybe carnival should of hired them.

And what would of happened it the ship tipped more? and there still was no large ships in the area to help. Don't know how large that coast guard ship was.

And what would of happened it the ship tipped more? and there still was no large ships in the area to help. Don't know how large that coast guard ship was.

If the ship was in danger of sinking, they would have taken an appropriate emergency response. The coast guard was present and monitoring the situation.

If the ship was in danger of sinking, they would have taken an appropriate emergency response. The coast guard was present and monitoring the situation.

I'm still not sure that answer will ever satisfy the "Armchair Admirals" on this board. It's so easy to dream up some hairbrained scheme that seems to work on paper (and in some harbor with absolutely no breeze or currents) and in their minds. Seeing how most people here have never been more than a passenger on a ship, I tend to defer to the more experienced staff of the USCG and certified cruise ship officers.

Maybe they've never done the math and figured that the motor launches will only hold about 35% of the entire ships manifest, and the rest would be left bobbing on the open ocean in those circular, covered rafts?

I'd also be interested in hearing why Carnival did not charter an ocean-going ferry or the like to move passengers off. We all know from experience that lifeboats are regularly used as passenger tenders when ships are anchored off the port, and the drill is completely routine for the crew. News reports said that other Carnival liners came alongside to transfer things to the Triumph, but I suppose transfer of passengers at that time would be opposed by the CG due to the fact that the second vessel would then have inadequate lifeboats for the expanded manifest. But it doesn't explain why another chartered ship was not dispatched.

I guess we will find out what happened in the fullness of time. Carnival's management will not be able to BS a maritime inquiry board as easily as they do CNN.

BTW, wife and I are scheduled for a Carnival transatlantic cruise in April. If this were to happen in the middle of the ocean....

I just don't understand why the lifeboats weren't used. If the ship was sinking, they'd use them, right? If they aren't safe to use, then ...... ????? what's the point of having them at all?

And have the passengers floating around on the open sea for several days in open boats? Yea, right! This is supposed to be better than being on a 100,000 ton ship with a galley and plenty of food, albeit smelly corridors? Get a grip!

I'd also be interested in hearing why Carnival did not charter an ocean-going ferry or the like to move passengers off. We all know from experience that lifeboats are regularly used as passenger tenders when ships are anchored off the port, and the drill is completely routine for the crew. News reports said that other Carnival liners came alongside to transfer things to the Triumph, but I suppose transfer of passengers at that time would be opposed by the CG due to the fact that the second vessel would then have inadequate lifeboats for the expanded manifest. But it doesn't explain why another chartered ship was not dispatched.

 

I guess we will find out what happened in the fullness of time. Carnival's management will not be able to BS a maritime inquiry board as easily as they do CNN.

 

BTW, wife and I are scheduled for a Carnival transatlantic cruise in April. If this were to happen in the middle of the ocean....

Ocean-going ferries carry hundreds of people, not thousands. By the time they had chartered half a dozen of the world's largest ferries and gotten them to the spot where the ship was stranded, the towed ship would have been in Mobile.

It might have been better to charter helicopters to airlift the passengers off; or maybe send an aircraft carrier to pick them up?

The ship wasn't sinking!

What Carnival did do was entirely appropriate and the safest and most expedient course of action available. And this is what the enquiries will show.

I can not believe in this day and age there was no way to get these people off the ship.

 

They said it was difficult to transfer them from one cruise ship to another. But couldn't the US send some kind of naval ship to help. I know the gov't has better things to do but it was over 4,00 people and US citizens on that ship. They must have some kind of rescue operations available. Maybe carnival should of hired them.

 

And what would of happened it the ship tipped more? and there still was no large ships in the area to help. Don't know how large that coast guard ship was.

The ship was never in danger of capsizing or sinking. Have you never seen a sailboat under sail and heeling over? The ship was heeling over at 5 degrees due to the effect of the wind on the 14-story vessel. It would never have capsized because of a normal wind. Why would the passengers be removed from the ship? They wouldn't have gotten home any faster and it would have been more perilous to remove them from Triumph than leaving them aboard.

We all know from experience that lifeboats are regularly used as passenger tenders when ships are anchored off the port, and the drill is completely routine for the crew.

These are done in calm harbors, not open waters. We see frequent complaints about tender ports being skipped due to rough waters. Even in calm waters, I've heard many reports of people tripping and falling. People with mobility issues often skip tender ports entirely due to hassle.

It would be more dangerous to put people on tenders than to keep them on the ship. That is without the issue of there being nowhere to put people who were then put onto tenders.

I just don't understand why the lifeboats weren't used. If the ship was sinking, they'd use them, right? If they aren't safe to use, then ...... ????? what's the point of having them at all?

Get in the lifeboat and then what? 150 people crammed into a enclosed unairconditioned boat with no running water. Lifeboats are not for transportation, they are to save you from a sinking ship....not a stinking ship.

These people had a very unfortunate trip. It wasn't the end of the world however-everyone came home, unlike on past ships.

A previous US Coastguard inspection showed an electrical short in the engine room on Triumph, according to Wiki. I hate to think its all about money and earnings per share. Should the cruise lines sailing from American ports be regulated more to ensure safety ?

The ship wasn't sinking. It was much -safer- to keep the passengers on the ship than to take them off the ship.

 

If the ship was sinking the inherrant risks of using a lifeboat are better than the risks of staying on the ship.

Finally someone who speaks common sense and has some brains. Lifeboats can be risky but they are better than going down with a sinking ship. But the Triumph was not sinking.