The new Mega Cruise ships

[Teros]

I have been in rough water in a cruise ship with stabilizers. I found them bizarre. The shudder as they engage was more unpleasant than rolling. I too was a tin can sailor in the North Atlantic, on ships capable of rolling 45 degrees to the side, and coming back up. These cruise ships look so damned top heavy, I am amazed they stay upright.

If the stabilizers failed in heavy seas, I would not give them ten minutes.

[cruisemom42]

Fortunately have only been aboard during one real storm. It was on QM2 (2600+ pax, so what I'd call a medium size cruise ship). Winds weren't anything approaching hurricane force, but definitely windy. Seas in excess if 25'. They closed all the outside decks. She was pitching and rolling, but not enough to knock the glasses off the tables. IIRC, they changed the theatre show that night because of the risk to the dancers. DH had spent many years in frigates in the North Atlantic, so he didn't think it was bad at all, and remarked that the stabilizers seemed to be doing their job. Me? I took an extra Bonine and went to bed. :o

 

I would think that the mega ships would do as well or better in a storm.

 

Actually, the mega ships would not do as well in a storm as the Queen Mary. The Queen Mary is an ocean liner, which is not the same thing as a cruise ship. An ocean liner is designed to cut through the waves rather than riding them, and liners have a deeper draft for greater stability.

 

You can read more about the difference between ocean liners and cruise ships here: http://www.beyondships2.com/faq-ocean-liners-and-cruise-ships.html

[George C]

have any of you ever been aboard in a serious storm?

 

Been through a few nice storms in smallerships going to Bermuda, we were fine but dinnng room only had about a third of normal crowd

[Heidi13]

have any of you ever been aboard in a serious storm?

 

Having worked at sea for almost 40 years, with 28 years in command I've experienced more than a couple of significant storms. Do you have a question about handling storms?

[Toofarfromthesea]

Thank you for your responses, I have a clearer picture now. It appears that the 'amenities' are the draw. I note that none of the pro mega ship comments reference ports of call. For my wife and myself, a ship is a way to move from port to port, are not at all interested in the 'amenities" aside from a comfortable room, and good food. A small ship cruise like the Lindblad cruises, the smaller the better, although out of our price range is what we like. Visiting small ports in out of the way places appeals to us. Will the pro megaships people comment on port visits, the impact of putting 4-5,000 people ashore in ports, what the disembarking and embarking looks like and the logistics of onshore excursions?

 

Why are you so intent on making people defend preferences that are different than yours? It is not a one-size-fits-all world, people cruise for all kinds of reasons, people are at different stages of their lives, etc. Enjoy what you enjoy and extend that courtesy to others.

[Heidi13]

:o

 

I would think that the mega ships would do as well or better in a storm.

 

Nope, sorry. It will be the exact opposite. The QM2 is a proper liner with scantlings and hull form optimised for ocean voyages. The mega ships do not have optimum scantlings, design and hull forms for ocean cruising. The first RCI mega ship when being delivered to Florida experienced a little wind in the Atlantic, which damaged a number of her boats. The QM2 could probably have completed the voyage at full speed.

 

In saying the mega ships are not optimised for ocean cruising does not mean they are unsafe. They meet the minimum stability criteria, but cannot handle rough seas, at the same speed as an ocean liner.

[Heidi13]

I have been in rough water in a cruise ship with stabilizers. I found them bizarre. The shudder as they engage was more unpleasant than rolling. I too was a tin can sailor in the North Atlantic, on ships capable of rolling 45 degrees to the side, and coming back up. These cruise ships look so damned top heavy, I am amazed they stay upright.

If the stabilizers failed in heavy seas, I would not give them ten minutes.

 

Been on many ships with stabalisers, even some of the earliest versions dating back to the 60's and never experienced that. Can only assume they were damaged.

 

All ships must meet stability criteria and the stabalisers are not taken into account. Even if the stabalisers aren't working, they still reduce rolling slighly when deployed. If they couldn't be deployed, the Captain will alter course and adjust speed to minimise rolling, however that does tend to increase pitching.

[bUU]

Why are you so intent on making people defend preferences that are different than yours? It is not a one-size-fits-all world, people cruise for all kinds of reasons, people are at different stages of their lives, etc. Enjoy what you enjoy and extend that courtesy to others.

To be fair, those who prefer how cruising used to be see their opportunities slipping away as the bigger mass market lines change to serve the mass market more profitably. Some of those cruisers choose to respond to that with a lack of courtesy toward those who the cruise line is catering more to than before.

 

This message may have been entered via voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

[Aquahound]

The first RCI mega ship when being delivered to Florida experienced a little wind in the Atlantic, which damaged a number of her boats. The QM2 could probably have completed the voyage at full speed.

 

In saying the mega ships are not optimised for ocean cruising does not mean they are unsafe. They meet the minimum stability criteria, but cannot handle rough seas, at the same speed as an ocean liner.

 

That's quite a minimization of what actually happened. The incident you are referring to was the Oasis of the Seas. She encountered 60' seas. The ship handled it just fine. The forward lifeboats were damaged due to the lack of adequate shields to protect them. That problem has been fixed.

 

I highly doubt QM2 can make full speed in 60' seas. In fact, I guarantee it.

[Joebucks]

In my opinion, the vast majority of those who hate the "mega ships" hate them for no good reason. Do most people REALLY notice that much of a detrimental downfall to their vacation when a boat has 5k vs 2k? Or is it just in your head that this is the most ships have ever held, therefore it's gotta be bad. Some people just want to feel exclusive and it's always been "cool" to hate the big guys and the status quo. There was once a time where the medium ships were mega ships. Now we're past that.

 

Now, I get that there are many people who love to just relax. They could sit on their balcony for 75% of the cruise and be content. In that case, they don't need all of the extra amenities. Still doesn't mean a mega ship would ruin their vacation though.

[pacruise804]

have any of you ever been aboard in a serious storm?

 

We've done 5 ocean cruises, and three have had rough seas.

 

2014 Grandeur of the Seas - lots of motion, hard to walk straight (comical trying to use the treadmill:')). No sea sickness though.

2017 Regal Princess - calm most of the trip, but gale force winds on our return from Halifax to Brooklyn. Lots of side to side motion, items rolling in cabin (upper level, aft). DH had a migraine with some sea sickness, I was fine on the ship but a few moments of queasiness - first experience with "land sickness" when we returned (Sea Bands and migraine medicine helped).

2018 Carnival Pride - returned home in a Nor'Easter. Lots of front to back motion so some difficulty walking. No motion sickness. Felt motion longer on land, but no mal debarqument.

[mom says]

In my opinion, the vast majority of those who hate the "mega ships" hate them for no good reason. Do most people REALLY notice that much of a detrimental downfall to their vacation when a boat has 5k vs 2k? Or is it just in your head that this is the most ships have ever held, therefore it's gotta be bad. Some people just want to feel exclusive and it's always been "cool" to hate the big guys and the status quo. There was once a time where the medium ships were mega ships. Now we're past that.

 

Now, I get that there are many people who love to just relax. They could sit on their balcony for 75% of the cruise and be content. In that case, they don't need all of the extra amenities. Still doesn't mean a mega ship would ruin their vacation though.

 

Since when is this an " if you don't love it then you must hate it" situation? Or, if there are things a person does not like, then they must, by default, ruin their vacation? I would think that most cruisers exist within a world without such extreme viewpoints. They may PREFER to sail on medium to small ships, and their reasons for not sailing on the mega ships are just as valid FOR THEM, as your reasons for loving the large ships are FOR YOU. I see no reason to flippantly dismiss someone else's opinions just because they differ from yours.

[mom says]

Nope, sorry. It will be the exact opposite. The QM2 is a proper liner with scantlings and hull form optimised for ocean voyages. The mega ships do not have optimum scantlings, design and hull forms for ocean cruising. The first RCI mega ship when being delivered to Florida experienced a little wind in the Atlantic, which damaged a number of her boats. The QM2 could probably have completed the voyage at full speed.

 

In saying the mega ships are not optimised for ocean cruising does not mean they are unsafe. They meet the minimum stability criteria, but cannot handle rough seas, at the same speed as an ocean liner.

 

This is why I hang around here. It's always so nice to learn new things from people who really know their stuff.

[cruisemom42]

In my opinion, the vast majority of those who hate the "mega ships" hate them for no good reason. Do most people REALLY notice that much of a detrimental downfall to their vacation when a boat has 5k vs 2k? Or is it just in your head that this is the most ships have ever held, therefore it's gotta be bad. Some people just want to feel exclusive and it's always been "cool" to hate the big guys and the status quo. There was once a time where the medium ships were mega ships. Now we're past that.

 

Now, I get that there are many people who love to just relax. They could sit on their balcony for 75% of the cruise and be content. In that case, they don't need all of the extra amenities. Still doesn't mean a mega ship would ruin their vacation though.

 

 

I don't "hate" mega ships, but I don't plan to travel on them either. The largest ship I've sailed on was the Regal Princess at about 3500. Yes, I can tell very real differences between a ship with that many passengers and those with fewer than 1,000. Here are a few:

 

-- The large ships can only dock at certain ports. Since I cruise for the itinerary and not the ship, then yes a mega-ship with limited port options would definitely ruin my vacation.

 

-- Dining room service is more personalized. Your waiter is taking care of fewer tables and it's possible to make special requests without disrupting the flow of service (which in the larger ships is now akin to a well-oiled production line, but not very personalized). Also, since the food is made in smaller quantities, it tends to be better.

 

-- Embarking, disembarking, and getting off/on the ship at ports is never a problem. Nor is tendering an issue -- the entire ship can be tendered within an hour or so.

 

-- Never any long lines at guest relations if you have to ask a question, pick up your passport, etc. Same with shore excursions desk -- no waits.

 

-- Easy to zip around the ship from your cabin to main deck to pool, etc.

 

-- Much easier, especially as I travel solo, to meet people and see them multiple times. On Regal Princess you might have an interesting conversation with someone and never see them again for the entire cruise.

 

 

It's true that smaller ships lack some things that larger ones have in spades. However, those things are not really high on my list of "must haves" when I'm selecting a cruise. I'm glad there are mega-ships for those who appreciate them, but I dread being in port with one or more of them as they tend to put a lot of stress on the tourist infrastructure of most places....

[squick64]

I've mostly been on mid-size ships but have been on one mega (?) ship, NCL's largest. I book cruises for different reasons--maybe for the destination (as in the case of Alaska or Norway), maybe for just "a vacation" and fun, maybe for the ship. It varies. I'm booked on RCCL's SotS next year, and I booked that solely so I could experience the ship. I'm interested to see what it's like. It's huge. It has numerous restaurants and activities and great shows. I booked it in the same way I'd book Universal Studios or something--for the size and options and general wonder of such a huge ship (largest cruise ship in operation).

[jocap]

Nope, sorry. It will be the exact opposite. The QM2 is a proper liner with scantlings and hull form optimised for ocean voyages. The mega ships do not have optimum scantlings, design and hull forms for ocean cruising. The first RCI mega ship when being delivered to Florida experienced a little wind in the Atlantic, which damaged a number of her boats. The QM2 could probably have completed the voyage at full speed.

 

In saying the mega ships are not optimised for ocean cruising does not mean they are unsafe. They meet the minimum stability criteria, but cannot handle rough seas, at the same speed as an ocean liner.

There's an interesting interview with naval architect Stephen Payne, who designed the QM2, here on Cruise Critic.

[sloopsailor]

Actually, the mega ships would not do as well in a storm as the Queen Mary. The Queen Mary is an ocean liner, which is not the same thing as a cruise ship. An ocean liner is designed to cut through the waves rather than riding them, and liners have a deeper draft for greater stability.

 

You can read more about the difference between ocean liners and cruise ships here: http://www.beyondships2.com/faq-ocean-liners-and-cruise-ships.html

 

And because Queen Mary II's hull is designed to cut through the waves, she is too deep drafted to get into many ports that the cruise ships get into. QE2 has a draft of 39 feet. Oasis of the Seas has a draft of 31 feet, 8 feet less for a ship that has 50% more gross tonnage (225, 282 vs 151,400 for QE2).

 

Oasis class are considered to have deep drafts for cruise ships. In comparison, Celebrity Reflections, currently Celebrity's largest ship, has a draft of 28 feet, 11 feet less than QE2 and 3 ft less than Oasis class. NCL's largest ship, Bliss, is 28.5. Carnival's largest ship, Vista, is 27 feet.

 

QE2 might be better able to handle rough seas (which is exactly what she was designed for), but she cannot get into the vast majority of cruise ship ports due to her deep draft.

 

Mega ships, on the other hand, are not designed to regularly cross the ocean, but to visit ports that require them to stay in calmer waters closer to shore rather than the rougher conditions out in the open seas.

 

Each design has its intended benefits.

[snowflakesb]

I sailed on the Oasis in 2012, it was only my second cruise and my first solo cruise and I loved it. It never felt crowded and I found lots of places to be alone if I wanted too. The only time I had to wait on anything was the elevator which is normal on most ships. That being said I have been on 2 Princess cruises and loved them too. I understand it is not for everyone, but there is so much to do or not do whatever you like.

[donaldsc]

I can't figure it out. The biggest ship I have ever sailed on was about 2000 passengers and it was way too bog for me. Most of my cruises have been on R class ships although one or 2 have been on ones that had about 1200 passengers. Opinions obviously vary but in my opinion, the big ships are like sailing on a carnival (lowercase) side show.

 

DON

[bUU]

Opinions obviously vary but in my opinion, the big ships are like sailing on a carnival (lowercase) side show.

So what does that make the R-class ships? Assisted Living centers?

 

 

 

This message may have been drafted using voice recognition. Please forgive any typos.

[SteveH2508]

So what does that make the R-class ships? Assisted Living centers?

 

 

 

This message may have been drafted using voice recognition. Please forgive any typos.

 

If I ended my days living like I did when on Azamara Journey (an R class ship) I would be one very happy bunny...

[bUU]

If I ended my days living like I did when on Azamara Journey (an R class ship) I would be one very happy bunny...

That's really the key though - that experience is offered by Azamara, not one of the mid-grade cruise lines, like Celebrity, Holland America, or Princess.

[Aquahound]

That's really the key though - that experience is offered by Azamara, not one of the mid-grade cruise lines, like Celebrity, Holland America, or Princess.

 

Have you cruised Celebrity Xpedition?

[cruisemom42]

That's really the key though - that experience is offered by Azamara, not one of the mid-grade cruise lines, like Celebrity, Holland America, or Princess.

 

...Princess still has one of the R-class ships (same size and build as Azamara's and two of Oceania's ships).

[bUU]

...Princess still has one of the R-class ships (same size and build as Azamara's and two of Oceania's ships).

The question was whether Princess offers the specific cruising experience that those folks who were touting that class were venerating in prior posts. Another question is whether Princess is going to add to that portion of their fleet or instead are they going to let that portion of their fleet continue to shrink and instead add more bigger ships such as the three 143,700 GT ships that they currently have on order.

 

This message may have been drafted using voice recognition. Please forgive any typos.

Edited July 26, 2018 by bUU