Brilliance o/t Seas passenger suing RCI over death of wife in storm off Alexandria

[jonbgd]

Either way, my heart goes out to her husband. It was an unfortunate accident. Law suit or not. Nothing is going to bring her back. :(

I definatly agree doesnt matter how she died but that he lost his wife on thier vacation(no time is good) exploring the ports on cruise.

I dont know how I would handle it if I was in his shoes.

[Lynnees]

This statement I don't agree with at all. People help other people for various reasons. RCI has the walk for wishes program on their ships. They don't help others in this way out of guilt. Sometimes people or businesses help others out of compassion.

 

An example - if the driver of a car has an accident that was caused by a sudden snow storm and they slid off the road, a passenger died not because of the driver's error but just by circumstance, don't you think the driver might continue to help the family and show compassion?

 

What if a child darts in front of a truck driven by the employee of a company and gets killed? If the company's owner shows compassion and assistance to the family left behind, is this an admission of guilt.

 

Sometimes people care for others just because - no guilt involved.

 

Gina

 

 

Actually I don't agree with you. I believe there are very few companies who will do anything after the fact unless it is a sign of guilt. I don't believe any company RCL included would show compassion this long after the fact. This isn't a family owned company - it's a business with shareholders. No, they are showing signs of guilt not compassion.

[Rancher Dave]

I definatly agree doesnt matter how she died but that he lost his wife on thier vacation(no time is good) exploring the ports on cruise.

I dont know how I would handle it if I was in his shoes.

 

Years ago more than 20 in fact, I volunteered in the ER nearby...and a couple was in from out of the country. He had an AMI and never recovered...very sad event for the family...what sticks with me was wife's comment that she never expected to come part way around the world to lose her spouse. I've always imagined it was a far worse situation for her than if he had died of the same situation at home. She was with family who lived here so they were able to help comfort her.

 

Definitely very sad situation for the husband on the cruise...loss of a spouse is definitely a sad situation.

[mommabean]

Actually I don't agree with you. I believe there are very few companies who will do anything after the fact unless it is a sign of guilt. I don't believe any company RCL included would show compassion this long after the fact. This isn't a family owned company - it's a business with shareholders. No, they are showing signs of guilt not compassion.

 

Then we disagree.

 

Large companies are the ones with the resources in place to help. Family owned companies can't afford to provide what sounds like psychological counseling to me. Large businesses have people in place to respond to the unexpected. Even airlines have people in place to assist in the event of a disaster whether or not it is pilot error. Occasionally a jet is downed by unexpected wind sheer. The airlines do not brush off the need for long term assistance because of natural disaster for fear it will appear to be an admission of guilt.

 

If I had such a negative impression of a large company such as RCI and believed they would only respond out of guilt, I wouldn't cruise. Maybe they should do NOTHING to help so they won't appear guilty. Of course they would be blasted for that, too.

 

Gina

[Lynnees]

Then we disagree.

 

Large companies are the ones with the resources in place to help. Family owned companies can't afford to provide what sounds like psychological counseling to me. Large businesses have people in place to respond to the unexpected. Even airlines have people in place to assist in the event of a disaster whether or not it is pilot error. Occasionally a jet is downed by unexpected wind sheer. The airlines do not brush off the need for long term assistance because of natural disaster for fear it will appear to be an admission of guilt.

 

If I had such a negative impression of a large company such as RCI and believed they would only respond out of guilt, I wouldn't cruise. Maybe they should do NOTHING to help so they won't appear guilty. Of course they would be blasted for that, too.

 

Gina

 

It has nothing to do with cruising. It does have to do with good or bad business practices. Now that a lawsuit has been filed, RCL will back off, if in fact, there really were doing much.

 

I wouldn't expect anything from any company other than immediate needs. Money refunded in a case such as this particular one, transportation or whatever was needed at the time. I'm more than willing to bet RCL did not pay for the transport back to Scotland.

 

I do not defend companies as so many do on CC. It's a business - they have a product that I like therefore I use it. Nothing personal. Why do you make it personal?

[NordicPrince]

It is completely possible that the propulsion units were seen that night.

 

Visualise a ship pitching & rolling to around 30% in 45ft+ seas without stabilisers deployed (as was reported at the time regarding the stabilisers). That ship would have been like a cork in a whirlpool.

 

First, I have sincere sympathy for this gentleman for the loss of his wife in such tragic circumstances.

 

However, removing ourselves from the human element of the situation which is indeed tragic, some might examine parts of his story as to its attention to detail and its accuracy.

 

The gentleman states that he was in a superior ocean view cabin on Deck 10. These cabins have balconies and balcony dividers. IMHO it would be physically difficult to see to the back end of the ship from the interior of these cabins. One would assume you would have to out on the balcony in order to see to the stern of the ship. The probability is low that the gentleman would go out on his balcony in the middle of a raging storm to look. Most people would tend to agree with this.

 

In addition the ship was in the middle of a raging storm at night making visibility extremely poor.

 

The ship is Radiance class and is driven by azipods. Azipods do not work like traditional propellers in that they pull the ship forward and do not push the ship in that direction. When the ship goes forward the propellers face the front of the ship. The propellers thus are located more centrally and under the ship. Unless the ship was attempting to go backwards. in which case the propellers might be in a better position to be seen. This seems like an unlikely situation in view of the ship being in a storm.

 

Now the gentlemen states that he booked a dream trip of a lifetime. One might ask how much experience such a gentleman might possess

of being on a cruise ship and of having the ability of judge a 30% list on his own. One could assume that such a statement might be the result of hearsay and not of experience. Can you say that the ship had an extreme list? That seems to be a more accurate statement of the situation.

 

In no way am I minimizing the fear these people must have felt being put into such dangerous conditions. But studies have shown that people put in stressful situations are not in the best position to make accurate judgements and observations.

 

IMHO the solicitor has coached the gentleman to make a more favorable interpretation of the events of that night in order to present his

case in a public forum and gain public sympathy. Which is why you hire a solicitor in the first place: to present your case in a manner which gives your story the best credence. If it was me I'd be doing the same thing.

 

I am just analyzing the facts on the surface as presented IMHO. I would hope never to be put in a similar situation myself and as stated I extend my sincerest sympathies to the gentleman on his loss.

 

As far as assigning blame that is a separate issue.

[foxesden1]

That is the big question surrounding this whole incident....why did RCI send Brilliance to Alexandria that night when other cruise lines either stayed in port or diverted elsewhere to avoid the weather.

 

The captain on Brilliance claims that the weather was worse than what actually forecast, yet that weather forecast would have been recieved by other captains on other ships (IIRC MSC Splendida was one) and the other captains did not proceed to Alexandria.

 

The only cruise ship to proceed as normal was Brilliance. I am not one to apportion blame or to encourage lawsuits against a cruise line very often (as most are somewhat spurious) but in this case, I really do feel that RCI not only dropped the ball but kicked it way off field too.

 

The last paragraph of the newspaper piece speaks volumes...how RCI are continuing to do everything they can to assist this family. Ordinarily a cruise line would issue a standard apology plus refund or compensation and leave it at that...but this time, almost a month after the storm, they are still active with this family. Call me cynical but that smells of guilt just a tiny bit.

 

This poor husband and their family have lost what sounds like a wonderful woman through no fault of their own...rough seas are something that we cruisers know can happen and usually a captain will move heaven and earth to skirt around or avoid it......this time a major error of judgement was made and someone has to be held accountable, its just sad that it has taken a death to gain that accountability.

 

Well said

[Mary Ellen]

Thank you for letting us know.

[Goldryder]

First, I have sincere sympathy for this gentleman for the loss of his wife in such tragic circumstances.

 

However, removing ourselves from the human element of the situation which is indeed tragic, some might examine parts of his story as to its attention to detail and its accuracy.

 

The gentleman states that he was in a superior ocean view cabin on Deck 10. These cabins have balconies and balcony dividers. IMHO it would be physically difficult to see to the back end of the ship from the interior of these cabins. One would assume you would have to out on the balcony in order to see to the stern of the ship. The probability is low that the gentleman would go out on his balcony in the middle of a raging storm to look. Most people would tend to agree with this.

 

In addition the ship was in the middle of a raging storm at night making visibility extremely poor.

 

The ship is Radiance class and is driven by azipods. Azipods do not work like traditional propellers in that they pull the ship forward and do not push the ship in that direction. When the ship goes forward the propellers face the front of the ship. The propellers thus are located more centrally and under the ship. Unless the ship was attempting to go backwards. in which case the propellers might be in a better position to be seen. This seems like an unlikely situation in view of the ship being in a storm.

 

Now the gentlemen states that he booked a dream trip of a lifetime. One might ask how much experience such a gentleman might possess

of being on a cruise ship and of having the ability of judge a 30% list on his own. One could assume that such a statement might be the result of hearsay and not of experience. Can you say that the ship had an extreme list? That seems to be a more accurate statement of the situation.

 

In no way am I minimizing the fear these people must have felt being put into such dangerous conditions. But studies have shown that people put in stressful situations are not in the best position to make accurate judgements and observations.

 

IMHO the solicitor has coached the gentleman to make a more favorable interpretation of the events of that night in order to present his

case in a public forum and gain public sympathy. Which is why you hire a solicitor in the first place: to present your case in a manner which gives your story the best credence. If it was me I'd be doing the same thing.

 

I am just analyzing the facts on the surface as presented IMHO. I would hope never to be put in a similar situation myself and as stated I extend my sincerest sympathies to the gentleman on his loss.

 

As far as assigning blame that is a separate issue.

 

The way I see this, and despite not being on the ship at the time I have sailed in bad weather a few times and wondered what the wotsit are we doing here...

 

Had this been a single couple or a single passenger who just happened to be hurt and then died of their injuries, it would more often than not be chalked up as cest la vie...these things happen etc.

 

What happened here was a fully loaded ship with a supposedly experienced captain at the helm who for reasons only known to himself decided to continue sailing towards Alexandria in the full knowledge that a storm was blowing.

 

This storm had been deemed severe enough for other cruise ship captains to change plans and not proceed to Alexandria for fear of damage or injury.

 

The captain aboard Brilliance may or may not have conferred with head office before striking out and heading into that storm...he even went as far as to tell people to stay in their cabins cos it would be a rough night, so he knew full well what he was doing.

 

Once the storm had hit, over 100 people were reporting injuries, some serious others more minor.

 

One of those injured passengers was this gentleman's wife.

 

Now...slightly hypothetical but quite possible.. when he asked for help for his wife, was he told to give her a paracetamol and go lay down...or did they go to the cabin and give her a thorough check to make sure that she was OK?

 

Given that the gentleman has decided to take this to court, I personally feel it was the former and that he was assured that her headache would be fine and that she was probably just seasick.....not in any danger but just keep an eye on her and come back to us if she doesn't improve.

 

So here you have a couple who are on a trip of a lifetime, visiting ports that most have never dreampt of visiting...the captain warns everyone that it'll be a bit rough overnight....and what follows is something close to hell on high water.

 

The ship is damaged, there are injured passengers & crew all over the ship. They put into Valletta and take off those requiring medical treatment...including this lady who, by this time, is pretty much out of it.

 

Time ticks by...Christmas comes and goes, the new year starts and the devoted husband has to take the worst decision in his life...to switch off his wife's life support system.

 

What started out as an amazing cruise ends over a month later in a funeral....and all because a captain continued into a storm that other captains said 'no way' to.

 

So the questions to be asked are more than relevant...

 

Why did the captain continue knowing the weather was bad?

 

Why did the triage not pick up that this lady had a potentially life threatening head injury and at least place her under observation with medical personnel withing shouting distance (if not in the cabin) incase she deteriorated further?

 

The captain was taken off the ship shortly after the incident 'to assist in the investigation' which is corporate speak for covering the company's stern from finger pointing.

 

As I said initially I do not encourage lawsuits against cruise lines (or anyone) since most are spurious at best...but in this case, questions need answering and someone needs to be accountable for what should have been a preventable death. And anyone else injured should also look at legal action too cos not only is the statement that RCI has been looking after this couple since the incident downright guiltridden but so is the full refund given to everyone on board.

 

That is admitting they stuffed up, plain and simple. Had they not felt at fault in any way not only would they have not refunded all the fares since bad weather is a natural phenomenon, but they would not have continued to look after this couple several weeks after it all occurred.

[dirtgirl]

Well, I was on the ship when it listed.:rolleyes: We had all been ordered to not go out on our balconies and to keep the doors shut. When the listing occurred, we were too busy bracing ourselves (my friend), and flying back and forth in the room (myself) to open the balcony door (ARE YOU KIDDING ME - LAST THING IN THE WORLD ANYONE WOULD DO???!!), grab onto the railing, lean out and watch for propellers rising up out of the water.:rolleyes:

 

The ship was reported to have done at most a 15 degree list, over and over again. That was reported by the Captain.

 

I am so sorry that this man's wife died.:( I can see how she could have hit her head during the incident - I'm still recovering from my injury myself. I have total sympathy for the husband on this account. But I highly doubt he was watching propellers come up out of the water.

[Lynnees]

The way I see this, and despite not being on the ship at the time I have sailed in bad weather a few times and wondered what the wotsit are we doing here...

 

Had this been a single couple or a single passenger who just happened to be hurt and then died of their injuries, it would more often than not be chalked up as cest la vie...these things happen etc.

 

What happened here was a fully loaded ship with a supposedly experienced captain at the helm who for reasons only known to himself decided to continue sailing towards Alexandria in the full knowledge that a storm was blowing.

 

This storm had been deemed severe enough for other cruise ship captains to change plans and not proceed to Alexandria for fear of damage or injury.

 

The captain aboard Brilliance may or may not have conferred with head office before striking out and heading into that storm...he even went as far as to tell people to stay in their cabins cos it would be a rough night, so he knew full well what he was doing.

 

Once the storm had hit, over 100 people were reporting injuries, some serious others more minor.

 

One of those injured passengers was this gentleman's wife.

 

Now...slightly hypothetical but quite possible.. when he asked for help for his wife, was he told to give her a paracetamol and go lay down...or did they go to the cabin and give her a thorough check to make sure that she was OK?

 

Given that the gentleman has decided to take this to court, I personally feel it was the former and that he was assured that her headache would be fine and that she was probably just seasick.....not in any danger but just keep an eye on her and come back to us if she doesn't improve.

 

So here you have a couple who are on a trip of a lifetime, visiting ports that most have never dreampt of visiting...the captain warns everyone that it'll be a bit rough overnight....and what follows is something close to hell on high water.

 

The ship is damaged, there are injured passengers & crew all over the ship. They put into Valletta and take off those requiring medical treatment...including this lady who, by this time, is pretty much out of it.

 

Time ticks by...Christmas comes and goes, the new year starts and the devoted husband has to take the worst decision in his life...to switch off his wife's life support system.

 

What started out as an amazing cruise ends over a month later in a funeral....and all because a captain continued into a storm that other captains said 'no way' to.

 

So the questions to be asked are more than relevant...

 

Why did the captain continue knowing the weather was bad?

 

Why did the triage not pick up that this lady had a potentially life threatening head injury and at least place her under observation with medical personnel withing shouting distance (if not in the cabin) incase she deteriorated further?

 

The captain was taken off the ship shortly after the incident 'to assist in the investigation' which is corporate speak for covering the company's stern from finger pointing.

 

As I said initially I do not encourage lawsuits against cruise lines (or anyone) since most are spurious at best...but in this case, questions need answering and someone needs to be accountable for what should have been a preventable death. And anyone else injured should also look at legal action too cos not only is the statement that RCI has been looking after this couple since the incident downright guiltridden but so is the full refund given to everyone on board.

 

That is admitting they stuffed up, plain and simple. Had they not felt at fault in any way not only would they have not refunded all the fares since bad weather is a natural phenomenon, but they would not have continued to look after this couple several weeks after it all occurred.

 

Extremely well put. It's just such a shame that the defenders of the cruiseline just can't accept that an error was made (most likely - the courts will certainly determine that) and the captain was wrong. There is no excuses - he did the wrong thing from all reports.

[wg6530]

It doesn't look that way. It looks like they went ashore to walk around, not to find medical assistance. :( But maybe he didn't know the signs of a brain injury? Its very possible.

 

Around here, hitting your head, then throwing up would send warning bells and flashing lights. But that's in my house. We look out for stuff like that. We have had enough medical emergencies to look out for head injuries (which we have had).

 

Very sad. :(

 

Very sad indeed.

the article is interesting and may or may not be medically accurate or complete. It discusses strokes more than head injury. "John says doctors believe the incident caused Barbara to suffer a series of strokes. On December 28, she was airlifted back to Scotland and admitted to the Western General hospital in Edinburgh."

[Goldryder]

Extremely well put. It's just such a shame that the defenders of the cruiseline just can't accept that an error was made (most likely - the courts will certainly determine that) and the captain was wrong. There is no excuses - he did the wrong thing from all reports.

 

Tell you what will be interesting....if Royal Caribbean settle out of court with an undisclosed sum and have a gag order attached to it.

 

Any settlement is an admission that Royal are in the wrong, but one done out of court with a gag order etc is definitely the actions of a company with a guilty conscience.

[wg6530]

Tell you what will be interesting....if Royal Caribbean settle out of court with an undisclosed sum and have a gag order attached to it.

 

Any settlement is an admission that Royal are in the wrong, but one done out of court with a gag order etc is definitely the actions of a company with a guilty conscience.

 

I disagree. At least in the US, settling a case may be easier, faster, and less expensive than going through a trial. Some companies will settle even if they are not likely to be found culpable. A gag order just keeps the matter out of the rags and may keep trouble makers from running their mouths. As you are in the UK, YMMV.

[mommabean]

It has nothing to do with cruising. It does have to do with good or bad business practices. Now that a lawsuit has been filed, RCL will back off, if in fact, there really were doing much.

 

I wouldn't expect anything from any company other than immediate needs. Money refunded in a case such as this particular one, transportation or whatever was needed at the time. I'm more than willing to bet RCL did not pay for the transport back to Scotland.

 

I do not defend companies as so many do on CC. It's a business - they have a product that I like therefore I use it. Nothing personal. Why do you make it personal?

 

I didn't make it personal.

 

I said a company helping someone in need with the resources available is not an admission of guilt. And no matter what they had done, they'd have been blasted. Maybe they are simply attempting to do the right thing. How is that making it personal by me?

 

Also, ship's captains, pilots, and doctors are all human...not gods. I am more inclined to look at a person's intent when they make a decision.

 

I also look back on how Capt. Erik responded when the Park West auctioneer jumped off of Radiance last March. He did an amazing job that night although the man died.

 

I would trust RCI more than I'd trust a newspaper......a business inclined to do what they can to sell newspapers.

 

And I'm not defending RCI...I'm just not placing guilt on them for a compassionate response. None of us knows enough about the circumstances to make a judgment of guilt. How is that personal?

 

Gina

[jonbgd]

I volunteered in the ER nearby

Interesting......What brought you to volunteer In an ER....

I have many stories from over the years..... I was part of the Triage team for the earthquake in '89'..... A family was driving thru the cypress structure when it collapsed killing a young boys mom and dad in the front seat as he sat in the back seat. I still remember the look in his eyes asking where his parents were and if they were OK. I think he was 8-9 y/o

[wrp96]

Any settlement is an admission that Royal are in the wrong, but one done out of court with a gag order etc is definitely the actions of a company with a guilty conscience.

 

 

This is incorrect. A settlement does not mean that the company is in the wrong. In fact many settlement agreements contain explicit language that the defendant does not admit to any wrong doing.

 

There are many reasons for settling out of court, one of the most common being that it would cost less to settle than to defend litigation in court (even if they are certain they would eventually be successful in court).

[mommabean]

I disagree. At least in the US, settling a case may be easier, faster, and less expensive than going through a trial. Some companies will settle even if they are not likely to be found culpable. A gag order just keeps the matter out of the rags and may keep trouble makers from running their mouths. As you are in the UK, YMMV.

 

You've got that right. Settling out of court can and does save a lot of money. As a publicly traded company they have to think about the shareholders and profits. Settling is not an admission of guilt.

 

If getting money makes those who are suffering happy again....well, I question THEIR motives, too.

 

Gina

[kassimer1]

My questions would be was there a triage set up to assess injuries? If they did who did the assessments MD or RN? She was complainig of headaches and N/V.... a patient that had blunt head trauma should have been on concusion watch and those are classic symptoms of a concussion..

So it isnt just the Captain that made an error.... the medical staff is liable for the loss of his wife as well

I was wondering if they even took her to be checked out by medical personel?? it didnt say they that had or had not. If she was injured and didnt seek help how where they to know?

[xpcdoojk]

One could have probably been able to see the propulsion pods, but not from the same ship. They would have had to lean pretty far over the railing to be able to see something that's under the ship.

 

Good luck trying to use logic in this forum with some folks. Your logic is sublime, but the audience....

 

jc

[xpcdoojk]

This is incorrect. A settlement does not mean that the company is in the wrong. In fact many settlement agreements contain explicit language that the defendant does not admit to any wrong doing.

 

There are many reasons for settling out of court, one of the most common being that it would cost less to settle than to defend litigation in court (even if they are certain they would eventually be successful in court).

 

Wrona, just because you are a lawyer doesn't mean you know anything about the law especially compared to some folks who love sensationalized internet cruising dramas.

 

jc;)<---- everything about this thread is so predictable. I am feeling deja vu all over again! :eek:

[gbcruise]

I feel for this family. Truly a tragedy. We encountered our own starting in 1997. My parents were on a cruise while traveling with a large group of Shriners to celebrate a change in yearly leadership. While in Cozumel they were on a large bus headed on a excursion & a large truck pulled in front of the bus. The bus ended up flipped on its side in a ravine filled with stagnent water. My mom ended up flying forward with 3 males on top of her. She was evacuated a few days later by helicopter to the Texas border, then flown to a nearby hospital closest to our hometown.

My dad was still in the hospital in Cozumel as were several others. It took months for my mom to get out of the hospital. Mom first had lung surgery which wasnt diagnosed in Cozumel, only found when they tried to fly her back & she had breathing problems. After she stablized we transferred her for spine surgery. She remained in ICU in a drug induced coma as right after surgery it was discovered she had a unknown infection. A specialist found that stagnent water was inhaled causing havic & when breathing issues came about a trach was inserted as well as feeding tube. The hospital after weeks said their was nothing they could do to get her off the vent. Mom was transferred to KC to a hospital that specialized in weaning people off vents. Thank goodness, eventually she was weaned off the vent and weeks later she was transferred to a rehab center to learn how to walk, talk and write again. At the rehab center she was fitted with what we called a turtle shell, rehabbed and set home. For the next two years she wore the shell and lived life as well as possible, now disabled & in pain at all times. Now each time she would become sick and run a fever the infection from the stagnent water would expose itself, often causing breathing issues. Over Christmas 2001 a family member hugged her, and because she was so fragile it cracked her rib (we never told this family member this happened). She ended up in the hospital with pnemonia, infection came back and after a month on a vent she lost her fight this time.

This group of travelers thought about putting together a group suit. The result? The laws in Cozumel allowed for a mazimum of 5K per person in compensation for this accident. Didnt even cover expenses before my mom got on the helicopter. We paid almost 10K just to get her lifted out of Cozumel.

My families experience is one of thousands that happen every year when people travel. I feel for this family that has lost their wife and family member, it seems more could of been done here & will be exposed over time. Hopefully, this experience will show others that even on vacation tradegy happens. The captain saying a mistake had happened wasnt wise in my opinion, probably honest but comes with enormous liabilty & tragedy for passengers for a decision he made. Being removed from the ship ads the idea that RCI didnt want him at the helm anymore plus he needed to be available to address those legal issues. We shall see this play out in the future....

[Cruising89143]

This is incorrect. A settlement does not mean that the company is in the wrong. In fact many settlement agreements contain explicit language that the defendant does not admit to any wrong doing.

 

There are many reasons for settling out of court, one of the most common being that it would cost less to settle than to defend litigation in court (even if they are certain they would eventually be successful in court).

 

That person onlhy shows up on the RCI board when they have something negative to post. Don't waste your time trying to explain.:rolleyes:

[Cruising89143]

Wrona, just because you are a lawyer doesn't mean you know anything about the law especially compared to some folks who love sensationalized internet cruising dramas.

 

jc;)<---- everything about this thread is so predictable. I am feeling deja vu all over again! :eek:

 

Welcome home JC.How was the trip? Did you like Princess?

[xpcdoojk]

Welcome home JC.How was the trip? Did you like Princess?

 

The trip was magnificent. New Zealand and Australia are home to nicest people on the planet. Both are beautiful and fascinating, where you really don't feel out of place. My wife and I both enjoyed the Diamond Princess. There are some things that they do really well. The fitness facilities were pretty inadequate, so my wife still prefers RCI, I miss the flowrider, but all in all a very good product. I loved being able to go wine shopping in port and bringing my finds on board and even having them at dinner. Australia is crazy expensive right now, with the dollar being so weak. Our 3 days at Heron Island on the Great Barrier reef was fantastic and fantastically expensive. Had some great dives with sharks and turtles always present. I have never seen so many fish, especially big fish as I saw there. We dove one day with two giant Manta Rays. I described them to my wife as a kingsized bed with wings. A mouth that was 2 yards wide and a foot tall. Amazing.

 

Unfortunately, even leaning out of my aft cabin balcony, I couldn't see the props on the Diamond Princess. :D

 

jc