Would You Be Wiling To Settle For Fewer Cruises?

[prettybrowneyes]

Cruise ships sail, to the best of my knowledge, for months at a time, nonstop. I know they have some form of maintenance when they dock at ports, but I am not sure how extensive it is. Would you be willing to settle for fewer cruises on your favorite ship if it means she could "rest" and get a more through maintenance checkup?

[cheewiee]

Cruise ships sail, to the best of my knowledge, for months at a time, nonstop. I know they have some form of maintenance when they dock at ports, but I am not sure how extensive it is. Would you be willing to settle for fewer cruises on your favorite ship if it means she could "rest" and get a more through maintenance checkup?

 

Fewer cruises mean's less supply.. less supply with same demand means higher prices... so considering that these events are very far and few between, I would say no I don't want fewer cruises.

[T. Advisor King]

Along the lines of the last response, I don't think it is a matter of whether passengers could be content taking fewer cruises. It is just a matter of whether you would be willing to pay more to take the cruises you take.

 

Let's say each ship had to take a week off every two months as part of a "maintenance rotation". The impact of that wouldn't be that every existing passenger would take one fewer cruise out of every 8 or 9 cruises. It just means that the price would go up because demand would stay the same (or increase slightly, since the maintenance should create what the customers would perceive as a "better product") while the supply would decrease.

 

So I think many people would be priced out of the market altogether. Some would be priced out so that they could only take half as many cruises as they do now. Others would continue to take the same number of cruises; they would just pay more.

[Barb C]

yes, absolutely.

 

These ships (any line) should have more regular maintenance. I'm very glad that the Triumph

wasn't in really bad weather. This could have been an even worse event for Triumph.

[chipq]

I think more suitable would be every six months to stagger a cruise by one day to conduct a thorough preventative maintenance to the engines and generators. That is not to suggest that even with such preventative maintenance these incidents would not occur. The generators especially operate 24/7 and the propulsion engines likely are operating 85% of the time on each cruise. A "thermal event" such as on the Triumph can occur in any engine room. There is heat, diesel fuel and lubricants fumes and friction. When the Splendor caught fire the ship was a relatively new ship.

 

http://luv2cruise.blogspot.com

[RikkuCat]

I agree with the first couple of responses - it's not a matter of passengers taking fewer cruises, but of cruise lines rotating each ship out of commission once or twice a year for extensive maintenance, which would result in higher prices.

 

I wouldn't mind slightly higher prices if I was confident that the cruise industry was doing its part to improve safety. And I wouldn't even notice each ship being out of commission for a week or two a year. If my travel dates were tight and no cruises were available on the ship I wanted to sail, I'd just pick another one.

[Hunwolf]

If people prefer low prices in return for low safety standards that's just sad.

[cheewiee]

If people prefer low prices in return for low safety standards that's just sad.

 

What's sad is that the cause of this fire hasn't been determined and everyone is calling on major changes to the industry that would increase the costs of vacations for those of us who only get to go once every couple years...

 

It's just a knee jerk reaction like the gun grabbers... BAH

[fuddrules]

If people prefer low prices in return for low safety standards that's just sad.

 

That latest statistics available is that on average about 90 people die every day in the united states from motor vehicle accidents. 90/day. That's a staggering number.

 

You're at far greater risk of death and/or serious injury while driving to your cruise or driving to the airport to get to your cruise than you are on the ship.

 

Just because a person has irrational emotions towards cruising doesn't mean that cruising has low safety standards.

[The4Cruisers]

What's sad is that the cause of this fire hasn't been determined and everyone is calling on major changes to the industry that would increase the costs of vacations for those of us who only get to go once every couple years...

 

It's just a knee jerk reaction like the gun grabbers... BAH

 

Well said! This thread is almost as bad as the other one where they're calling for a gov't agency overseeing the cruise industry in the US. Yeah, nothing says running things right like having the gov't do it! Doh!

[javamom]

This is not even a valid question.

[coachj]

I think the real question is are the cruise lines willing to earn less money by taking ships off line for longer refits. So far the answer is no. The bean counters won't allow it.

[RWolver672]

I find it hard to believe that there isn't already maintenance performed on these ship's mechanical components daily. It may not be a full scale shut down, tear apart, replace parts, but they are monitored and kept up as best they can be while still underway. And as others have stated, it still hasn't come out officially as to what caused the fire.

[Vitality08]

I'm sure the ships are inspected on a regular basis. Even motorists are SUPPOSED to check their car often to make sure the lights are working and the tire pressure is adequate. I would imagine the ship goes through something similiar.

 

I work at an airport and I see the pilots walking around and visually inspecting their plane before they take off...not to mention the other checks that are done by those more trained in the mechanics of the plane.

 

But to answer the question, I don't think passengers would have to sail less for maintance to be done...it'd just be a matter of sailing on a ship that's available at the time you want to go on a cruise.

[texsun49]

There are at least 100 cruise ships that sail in US and average a cruise a week. That is 5200 cruises a year, now if average occupancy is 3000 per ship that is 15 million cruisers in a year. With that many cruises, and that many people involved, it is somewhat amazing that there is not more news worthy situations arise. It is in the best interest of the cruiselines to keep the ships in good running order, so they are staffed with maintanence personel and engineers and maintanence is ongoing. There is not enough information to know if Triumph was forseable problem, bad corporate practices, or bad management at ship level, or just one of those things.

 

I am not a CCL cheerleader, I am a cruise cheerleader, I love cruising, and with the number of cruises and passengers I think all cruise lines are providing a good value, and considering the number of cruises the amount of problems are very low. Lets go back to debating live music, who has the best food etc, and not lookng for the govt to get involved and ruin it for everyone.

[Firestorm1]

Well said

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2