Talk of replacing Grandeur in Baltimore?

[micheecruise]

We sailed out of Baltimore a few years back on Carnival and will be sailing on our upcoming RC cruise out of Baltimore.

 

Like others had said, it is a very easy port to get to, literally right off of the interstate, you pull in, porters take your bag, you park, walk onto ship. Disembarking was just as easy!!

 

Baltimore is only a 3 hour drive for us, so it's a no-brainer leaving from there. It's too bad that the itineraries don't go a bit further south into the Caribbean.

 

Anyone who lives within 5-6 hours would be silly not to take advantage of that port. (If we were to leave out of FL, it's a 2 hour drive to the nearest major airport, then about a 2 hour flight, however usually can't get a direct flight so air travel time is more like five or six hours with a lay-over. Then take into consideration that you have to be at the airport at least an hour prior to your flight leaving....that's a long day of travel!)

[gjkubel]

While the Radiance class does have the gas turbines, I believe they run a diesel in port, but I don't know if they use diesel fuel in it to make a uni-fuel ship, or whether they burn residual fuel, which would require the scrubber.

 

OK, I assumed they could use the cleaner diesel in the engines, but I'm not sure. If they had to, though, they could use the gas turbines while in Baltimore and just run the diesel at the ports it visits.

[gjkubel]

I don't know if this helps you determine the fuel, but I asked one fo the chief engineers once, and he said they had to put in new fuel tanks for the diesel engine.

 

Not really. Radiance was initially built to run only on natural gas turbine engines, however, the turbines weren't very efficient for just the idle power used in port, so they later retrofitted the ships with a diesel engine to be used to generate power while in port, hence the need for new fuel tanks. The question is what kind of diesel the engines can use.

[chengkp75]

Not really. Radiance was initially built to run only on natural gas turbine engines, however, the turbines weren't very efficient for just the idle power used in port, so they later retrofitted the ships with a diesel engine to be used to generate power while in port, hence the need for new fuel tanks. The question is what kind of diesel the engines can use.

 

The gas turbines designed for marine use (as originally developed by the US Navy) are capable of burning diesel fuel, and were never designed for natural gas. LNG fuel is very new to marine applications, and there is no infrastructure for fueling ships to date, and the tankage size necessary for a cruise ship, and the safety requirements for LNG would be prohibitive. From what Bob says, it points me to believe they installed (or more accurately repiped) a tank for residual fuel. But you are correct that the gas turbines were horribly inefficient while in port.

[gjkubel]

The gas turbines designed for marine use (as originally developed by the US Navy) are capable of burning diesel fuel, and were never designed for natural gas. LNG fuel is very new to marine applications, and there is no infrastructure for fueling ships to date, and the tankage size necessary for a cruise ship, and the safety requirements for LNG would be prohibitive. From what Bob says, it points me to believe they installed (or more accurately repiped) a tank for residual fuel. But you are correct that the gas turbines were horribly inefficient while in port.

 

wow, learn something new. That makes sense. Didn't realize they could use diesel on the turbines. So do the turbines require the cleaner diesel fuel? As that would explain the second tank type, to carry the standard fuel

[ClassicalSax]

Vision did three trips to Bermuda last summer from FLL. None have been rescheduled for 2015.

Rick

Yes - i was hoping they would do it again this season, but no luck. On occasion there is an odd reposition or TA that includes Bermuda but unfortunately those are often longer that a week to 10 days and we're not able to do those longer itineraries while still working at this time.

[ClassicalSax]

We sailed out of Baltimore a few years back on Carnival and will be sailing on our upcoming RC cruise out of Baltimore.

 

Like others had said, it is a very easy port to get to, literally right off of the interstate, you pull in, porters take your bag, you park, walk onto ship. Disembarking was just as easy!!

 

Baltimore is only a 3 hour drive for us, so it's a no-brainer leaving from there. It's too bad that the itineraries don't go a bit further south into the Caribbean.

 

Anyone who lives within 5-6 hours would be silly not to take advantage of that port. (If we were to leave out of FL, it's a 2 hour drive to the nearest major airport, then about a 2 hour flight, however usually can't get a direct flight so air travel time is more like five or six hours with a lay-over. Then take into consideration that you have to be at the airport at least an hour prior to your flight leaving....that's a long day of travel!)

Agreed, connections can be problematic these days. We're fortunate to be 30 min from RSW and have access to non-stop Southwest from RSW to BWI, otherwise I also would not consider it.

[ClassicalSax]

The gas turbines designed for marine use (as originally developed by the US Navy) are capable of burning diesel fuel, and were never designed for natural gas. LNG fuel is very new to marine applications, and there is no infrastructure for fueling ships to date, and the tankage size necessary for a cruise ship, and the safety requirements for LNG would be prohibitive. From what Bob says, it points me to believe they installed (or more accurately repiped) a tank for residual fuel. But you are correct that the gas turbines were horribly inefficient while in port.

The last time we were on JOTS, it was burning bio-diesel at sea (leaving Tampa) - the pool deck made you hungry as the exhaust smelled like french fries or Chinese food :D

[chengkp75]

wow, learn something new. That makes sense. Didn't realize they could use diesel on the turbines. So do the turbines require the cleaner diesel fuel? As that would explain the second tank type, to carry the standard fuel

 

The Navy spent quite a lot of money and time developing turbines that gradually could burn fuels progressing from the various grades of jet fuel (these are really just very large aircraft jet engines) to what is called "marine gas oil" (a European term) which is diesel fuel similar to "home heating oil" in the US or "#2 diesel, and for clarity I will refer to this as "diesel fuel". Automotive diesel is #1 diesel. The residual fuel oil burned in marine diesels is the left-over product of the refining process, and is very thick and heavy, and is called "6 oil" when used in power plants in the US. It can have a sulfur content of 3.5% by worldwide standards. For about 2 years, the US ECA required a sulfur content of 1% maximum, and this could be met using a residual fuel that had gone through a sulfur abatement process, or using standard marine diesel fuel (they stayed with the residual fuel as it is half the price). Then, as of 1 Jan this year, the US ECA required a sulfur content of 0.1%, which is not obtainable with residual fuel, mandating the switch to what is called worldwide "low sulfur diesel".

 

The Radiance class ships, probably spend 35-40% of their time in port, so the operation of the added diesel engine became a significant fuel expense. Therefore, as long as the older emissions levels were in place, it made sense for them to operate that engine on residual fuel.

[BillB48]

wow, learn something new. That makes sense. Didn't realize they could use diesel on the turbines. So do the turbines require the cleaner diesel fuel? As that would explain the second tank type, to carry the standard fuel

 

I was on the Brilliance in November returning from Cozumel to Tampa and spoke to one of the second officers. I asked him if the ship would change fuels when they entered the Emissions Control Area (ECA), what fuel would they use and how many turbines they had on line. He said the ship would not switch fuels, they were running one turbine on heavy fuel oil and the diesel generator as well. I don't know if the answer would be the same today since January 1 more stringent rules went into effect.

[chengkp75]

I was on the Brilliance in November returning from Cozumel to Tampa and spoke to one of the second officers. I asked him if the ship would change fuels when they entered the Emissions Control Area (ECA), what fuel would they use and how many turbines they had on line. He said the ship would not switch fuels, they were running one turbine on heavy fuel oil and the diesel generator as well. I don't know if the answer would be the same today since January 1 more stringent rules went into effect.

 

I wasn't aware that any marine gas turbine installations had actually been burning residual fuel. I know that there are many (maybe 4-500 worldwide) gas turbines set up to do it, but due to the increased fuel pre-treatment required, this has mainly been for power plants and refineries. There is also the service life issue with heavy fuel, and the constraints on available power while under repair and size restrictions on getting parts into the ship to consider.

 

If they are burning residual fuel in the turbines, then they will either need the scrubbers or switch to diesel. And last November, they would have been limited to 1% low sulfur heavy fuel oil within the ECA (not sure whether they would have bunkered this exclusively or had 3.5% heavy fuel as well).

[BillB48]

I wasn't aware that any marine gas turbine installations had actually been burning residual fuel. I know that there are many (maybe 4-500 worldwide) gas turbines set up to do it, but due to the increased fuel pre-treatment required, this has mainly been for power plants and refineries. There is also the service life issue with heavy fuel, and the constraints on available power while under repair and size restrictions on getting parts into the ship to consider.

 

If they are burning residual fuel in the turbines, then they will either need the scrubbers or switch to diesel. And last November, they would have been limited to 1% low sulfur heavy fuel oil within the ECA (not sure whether they would have bunkered this exclusively or had 3.5% heavy fuel as well).

 

I was caught off guard because I did not expect that answer and I did not think to ask about scrubbers. Too much to mull over in a short conversation!

[chengkp75]

I was caught off guard because I did not expect that answer and I did not think to ask about scrubbers. Too much to mull over in a short conversation!

 

Then again, you were talking to a bridge officer, and their lack of understanding of what actually goes on in the hamster wheel is monumental. :eek:

[MADflyer]

The Grandeur of the Seas will undergo a 3 week dry dock from April 24th to May 15th, 2017 and is currently scheduled to return to Baltimore following the revitalization in May of 2017.

[balboa2151]

I called RCI and the person on the phone said that the grandeur was being replaced by a new ship being built right now after 2016. Sorry......I don remember the name of the ship that's replacing the grandeur

[gjkubel]

I called RCI and the person on the phone said that the grandeur was being replaced by a new ship being built right now after 2016. Sorry......I don remember the name of the ship that's replacing the grandeur

 

LoL. Would be nice - but I highly doubt the person on the phone has any clue, unless you called their C-suite executives. None of the ships we currently know about under construction for RCI can go to Baltimore.

[chengkp75]

LoL. Would be nice - but I highly doubt the person on the phone has any clue, unless you called their C-suite executives. None of the ships we currently know about under construction for RCI can go to Baltimore.

 

Beat me to it. Now, Liberty has had scrubbers for 2-3 years now, and Freedom is getting them now, so either of those two could go to Baltimore, as I believe Freedom class fits under the bridge.

[MADflyer]

They are scheduling dry docks now for all of the 13 ships getting the refit to meet future environmental restrictions.

 

Grandeur's has been scheduled along with her return to Baltimore.

 

Grandeur Of The Seas Depart: 12:00 PM 04/24/2017 Baltimore, Maryland

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/25/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/26/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/27/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/28/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/29/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 04/30/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/01/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/02/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/03/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/04/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/05/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/06/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/07/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/08/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/09/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/10/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/11/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/12/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/13/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas 05/14/2017 Dry Dock

Grandeur Of The Seas Arrive: 09:00 AM 05/15/2017 Baltimore, Maryland

[gjkubel]

Beat me to it. Now, Liberty has had scrubbers for 2-3 years now, and Freedom is getting them now, so either of those two could go to Baltimore, as I believe Freedom class fits under the bridge.

 

I don't think anything larger than the Radiance class can clear the Francis Scott Key bridge, which has, I believe, only 185 ft clearance. Voyager air draft is 208 ft from what I can find online.

[chengkp75]

They are scheduling dry docks now for all of the 13 ships getting the refit to meet future environmental restrictions.

 

Grandeur's has been scheduled along with her return to Baltimore.

 

 

Yes, all of the ships will get them. Liberty's were actually installed in service. The Yara Green Tech scrubbers can actually be built so the pieces will fit into existing hatches on the ships and assembled in the machinery casing. As long as the ship's itinerary allows for one engine out of service at a time (as for engine overhauls), they can replace the existing silencer with a scrubber. Apparently Freedom's installation is ongoing while in service.

[chengkp75]

I don't think anything larger than the Radiance class can clear the Francis Scott Key bridge, which has, I believe, only 185 ft clearance. Voyager air draft is 208 ft from what I can find online.

 

Yeah, I wasn't sure, but thought I'd heard they could fit.

[Angelsea57]

I bet if Royal Caribbean would bring a newer ship to Baltimore,

they would have more people cruising from there.

I know we would..

Edited March 26, 2015 by Angelsea57

[Thetrail]

Beat me to it. Now, Liberty has had scrubbers for 2-3 years now, and Freedom is getting them now, so either of those two could go to Baltimore, as I believe Freedom class fits under the bridge.

It's only Radiance Class.

[Tony O]

Beat me to it. Now, Liberty has had scrubbers for 2-3 years now, and Freedom is getting them now, so either of those two could go to Baltimore, as I believe Freedom class fits under the bridge.

 

Only Radiance class ships will fit under the Key and Bay Bridge since air draft is 185 ft for Bay Bridge and 186 ft for Key Bridge.

Edited March 26, 2015 by Tony O

[Lmack]

We just completed 28nts (3 B2B's) on the Grandeur. Not only is it our favorite ship (we prefer small ships having sailed on every class), but in our opinion, Baltimore is the most efficient port having sailed out of most ports in the US and abroad, the worst being the Miami and FT Lauderdale ports. Not only is the staff at the Baltimore port the most friendly and accommodating, but they are very professional making everyone feel welcomed. The same goes for the staff on the Grandeur. They can't do enough for you. Thus the reason most of the Baltimore sailings are sold out. It would be great if RCCL considered adding a second ship to the Baltimore port with longer sailings.