How did the Hurtigruten ships fare during the storm Viking Sky had to deal with?

[RMLincoln]

We cruised Hurtigruten through the same area that Viking Sky had such trouble in, both northbound and southbound on the Coastal Cruise.  Both times we were in that area in the early night time.  I'm guessing that Hurtigruten must have had ships in that stormy area March 23rd, wondering what Hurtigruten did, if anything, maybe diverted further away from the coast?  Viking Sky was unfortunate enough to lose power close to the rocky and dangerous coast. I'm expecting that Hurtigruten anticipated the horrible weather and made adjustments.  I certainly hope they had no issues.  m-- 

Edited March 24, 2019 by RMLincoln

[hallasm]

I did check few time yesterday - Hurtigruten ships in that area were in Harbours located in the Fjords when I checked.

Hurtigruten  have been crossing  those waters twice every day for the last 125 years. I have to admit that when I crossed Stadthavet and Hustedviken in January it was quite choppy and dinner moved forward.

[DrTee]

When you say “dinner moved forward,” that could mean a number of things.

[kathy49]

2 hours ago, DrTee said:

When you say “dinner moved forward,” that could mean a number of things.

no kidding...would be interested what their ships did yesterday.

[RMLincoln]

I saw a track late last night of Nordlys:  She remained circling in sheltered waters about 250 miles north of Viking Sky.  I also heard that 2 other Hurtigruten ships were held in ports, but that is unconfirmed.  If others have info I hope you will post it.  Thanks, m--

[Elka]

Was on the Trollfjord in October, hit choppy seas on 2nd night. Dinner service was suspended, had been served first course and drinks on table. They announced that dinner was going to be later for second seating. We stayed where we were and had no problems.

[grayjay]

Several Hurtigruten ships in the area weathered out the storm in port or left out some of the more exposed ports. The one due to leave Bergen stayed in port and left later. Others didn't cross the worst parts of the churning sea and kept to safer parts of the coast.I also read in another forum of Hurtigruten enthusiasts that when ports like Trondheim couldn't be reached, passengers were brought to another port by bus. Trondheim was snowed in and planes as well as ships were delayed for hours, so many passengers due to leave on connecting flights out of Bergen couldn't do so. But obviously Hurtigruten staff did a great job in finding hotels for overnight stays and re-booking passengers etc.

We'll be leaving on our Hurtigruten cruise in a few days and the weather forecast is still not very favourable, rain, strong winds and snow... Not happy about this, of course, but I trust the crew, the captain of our ship and my trusted ginger tablets ( against sea sickness..) Well, that's weather in Norway - but we had booked that cruise in the hope of a sea journey, good food and views of the Norwegian landscape we love plus Northern lights! Well that's the way the cookie crumbles!

We'll find out what's in store for us.

[RMLincoln]

Bon Voyage!  We did the Coastal 11 day voyage in November on MIdnatsol a few years ago; had a lot of rain but also clearing at night to see the Lights!  That part was Excellent!  As was the food, the people...  the towns we visits.... lots of excellent memories.  Glad to hear that many of the Hurtigruten ships waited in safe places and facilitated connections during difficult weather.   m--

[GeezerCouple]

On 3/24/2019 at 6:50 AM, hallasm said:

I did check few time yesterday - Hurtigruten ships in that area were in Harbours located in the Fjords when I checked.

Hurtigruten  have been crossing  those waters twice every day for the last 125 years. I have to admit that when I crossed Stadthavet and Hustedviken in January it was quite choppy and dinner moved forward.

We did the Coastal RT about a year and a week or so before the Viking Sky's incident.

Northbound, we noticed nothing at all remarkable about this area, and didn't even know it could be "rough seas" there.

 

However, on the Southbound trip, it was VERY different.  I'm not sure exactly where we were, but it was this general area.  We had the early seating for dinner, and soon went to our suite.  Note that our suite was high and aft, so the motion would be... "noticed" 

The Captain had announced that we'd encounter rough seas during the evening/night, and we made note of that.

And then... Yikes!  It was a bit like an amusement park wild mouse ride.  The lighter furniture was shifting around, rather suddenly.  Soon, we couldn't walk or stand up!  We mostly crawled to the bedroom, and got into bed literally for safety.  

But we considered it a great adventure!

(And we were both pleased that we didn't get seasick - and we never had before, so we didn't expect to - AND I didn't get scared - which I would have expected.  Now... IF that happened again, soon after this Viking Sky incident, I may have been more anxious; hard to tell.)

 

DH wanted to get up to look out the windows, and we agreed that he should not do that, lest he fall and get injured.

It was quite an adventure, and we really enjoyed it.

 

All was calm when we woke up the next morning, other than some chairs having tipped over and many things having fallen off table and counter tops, etc.

 

But it is sobering to think what CAN happen, if things don't go quite right...

[It gives us pause about our possible Antarctic cruise, given the "Drake Shake"...]

 

What is it about THIS area off the coast of Norway that it is known for "rough seas" (even absent other exacerbating problems)?

 

GC

[hallasm]

Here is an update on Hurtigruten sailings that day as well of a brief description of the Hustavika from Norwegian Pilot handbook. 

 

None of Hurtigruten's planned routes that day  between Bergen and Trondheim went as normal.

Due to the bad weather, the captain chose to stay in Trondheim, for the southbound sailing passing Hustadvika towards Bergen and Hurtigruten hired aircraft to transport the passengers to and from Bergen.

They also postponed the Friday departure northbound from Bergen with half a day to Saturday morning, to wait for the weather to be lied. Therefore, northbound Hurtigruten ships passed Hustadvika Sunday morning instead of Saturday night

 

Source Norwegian pilot 1 http://www.kartverket.no/dnl/den-norske-los-1.pdf page 162

Hustadvika is one of the most dangerous waters along the Norwegian  Coast. The coastline is completely unprotected to the sea, and low waters with many small Islands. The depth varies largely between 40 and 100 m.

The problem is mainly related to different direction of the current from the tide and the wind.

When the waves meet the current, this leads to even more troubled sea. Low tide gives outgoing current from Julsundet Strait, and with wind and waves from NW the sea becomes very rough.

[OnTheJourney]

On 3/24/2019 at 5:17 PM, grayjay said:

Several Hurtigruten ships in the area weathered out the storm in port or left out some of the more exposed ports. The one due to leave Bergen stayed in port and left later. Others didn't cross the worst parts of the churning sea and kept to safer parts of the coast.I also read in another forum of Hurtigruten enthusiasts that when ports like Trondheim couldn't be reached, passengers were brought to another port by bus. Trondheim was snowed in and planes as well as ships were delayed for hours, so many passengers due to leave on connecting flights out of Bergen couldn't do so. But obviously Hurtigruten staff did a great job in finding hotels for overnight stays and re-booking passengers etc.

We'll be leaving on our Hurtigruten cruise in a few days and the weather forecast is still not very favourable, rain, strong winds and snow... Not happy about this, of course, but I trust the crew, the captain of our ship and my trusted ginger tablets ( against sea sickness..) Well, that's weather in Norway - but we had booked that cruise in the hope of a sea journey, good food and views of the Norwegian landscape we love plus Northern lights! Well that's the way the cookie crumbles!

We'll find out what's in store for us.

 

 

So WHY did Viking Sky (which I was on) decide it was ok to sail in such a dangerous area under such conditions?  Couldn't the Sky have also temporarily put in to Trondheim?  It seems much of what ensued could have been easily avoided. 

Edited April 1, 2019 by gretschwhtfalcon

[hallasm]

4 hours ago, gretschwhtfalcon said:

 

 

So WHY did Viking Sky (which I was on) decide it was ok to sail in such a dangerous area under such conditions?  Couldn't the Sky have also temporarily put in to Trondheim?  It seems much of what ensued could have been easily avoided. 

Good question- you might want to ask Viking directly - Viking Sky should have sailed either to Trondheim or Molde rather than doing the Hustadvika crossing. 

Someone might want to stay at the scheduled sailing rather delaying the following cruise?

Edited April 1, 2019 by hallasm
Spelling

[OnTheJourney]

Not sure when the next cruise was going to be...but ours was the last Northern Lights trip for the year. It started in January and ended with the 3/14 sailing. Went back and forth between Bergen and Tilbury. 

[hallasm]

5 hours ago, gretschwhtfalcon said:

Not sure when the next cruise was going to be...but ours was the last Northern Lights trip for the year. It started in January and ended with the 3/14 sailing. Went back and forth between Bergen and Tilbury. 

A total of six Viking Searching the Northern Lights cruises scheduled between January 10 and March 10, 2020. Hope they have ‘learned the lessons’

[OnTheJourney]

I think there is some merit to what you're saying. This was a new itinerary for them. I don't think more than about half of the trips made it into Bodo, and now the problem sailing south in Hustadvika. I have no problems going with Viking again, but won't be repeating this trip. 

[Hanoj]

On 3/31/2019 at 10:51 PM, hallasm said:

Good question- you might want to ask Viking directly - Viking Sky should have sailed either to Trondheim or Molde rather than doing the Hustadvika crossing. 

Someone might want to stay at the scheduled sailing rather delaying the following cruise?

Viking has been deftly silent, showing all the reserve of a company expecting lawsuits. I get that. But I have a cruise less than two months, albeit not in the same region, but I want an explanation why they sailed into a "bomb cyclone." Seems the ship was as capable of handling the conditions as it was assumed. I have contacted Viking and all I have received is, "Trust Viking." On the call from the Viking sales office through which I booked my cruise I was told last Friday that there would be announcement forthcoming "soon" from Viking about these concerns.

 

That Hurtigruten ships didn't sail in the Hustadvika in those conditions leaves much to be answered for by Viking in my opinion.

[OnTheJourney]

Have to agree completely. Without having the weather-related info that I can only presume the bridge had, it seems reasonable to assume that so much of what they are now going through - spending undoubtedly millions in refunds, mostly likely medical expenses, etc. not to mention the likelihood of legal claims - could have been easily avoided. Being that we already missed Bodø, and were rather loping along sort of slowly since we now had an extra sea day to kill, I can't imagine that we still would not have gotten to Stavanger nearly on time. It will indeed be interesting to see if any official statement is made (or else info that might leak out anyway) as to why the decision was made to sail. Merely saying the ship is capable of handling such waters doesn't quite satisfy. 

[Elka]

I think that Viking thought that the weight of the ship and the stabilizers that the ship had was what decided them. The ships that Hurtigruten has aren’t as heavy and are more Ferry like. I am familiar with car carrying Ferries, I go to Martha’s Vineyard every year and have traveled on those ferries. You can look up the weights of the ships.

[GeezerCouple]

9 minutes ago, Elka said:

I think that Viking thought that the weight of the ship and the stabilizers that the ship had was what decided them. The ships that Hurtigruten has aren’t as heavy and are more Ferry like. I am familiar with car carrying Ferries, I go to Martha’s Vineyard every year and have traveled on those ferries. You can look up the weights of the ships.

 

The regular car ferries in the USA, such as the Vineyard ferries, are NOTHING like the Hurtigruten ferries. 

 

Hurtigruten ferries have cabins and suites for hundreds of passengers; sit-down restaurants, with buffet service for breakfast and lunch, and multicourse served meals for dinner.  Wine is offered by the bottle or glass, etc.  There is daily housekeeping for the cabins and suites, as many people stay on board for many days.  The familiar Coastal Round Trip is 12 days.

There are other differences, too.

 

GC

[Elka]

1 minute ago, GeezerCouple said:

 

The regular car ferries in the USA, such as the Vineyard ferries, are NOTHING like the Hurtigruten ferries. 

 

Hurtigruten ferries have cabins and suites for hundreds of passengers; sit-down restaurants, with buffet service for breakfast and lunch, and multicourse served meals for dinner.  Wine is offered by the bottle or glass, etc.  There is daily housekeeping for the cabins and suites, as many people stay on board for many days.  The familiar Coastal Round Trip is 12 days.

There are other differences, too.

 

GC

 

I was on the MS Trollfjord in October 2018. I even gave a review of my trip. Don’t tell me the differences between the two, I am perfectly aware of them. When the Viking Sky ran into trouble and I became aware of it, I looked online to see what the difference in weight of the ships were. Did you? I noticed that the tonnage of the Viking ship was heavier than the Hurtigruten ships by at least 20,000. I also looked to see where the Hurtigruten ships were during the time when the Viking ship was out to sea. I know that the officers of the Hurtigruten ships are more knowledgeable of the area than the Viking officers. 

 

To me, the Hurtigruten ships do carry freight and cars, so I make a comparison to the Martha’s Vineyard Ferry. Yes, the itineraries and services are different, but the Hurtigruten ship felt to me like the Ferry going back and forth to Martha’s Vineyard. Both are light ships in comparison to a regular Cruise line ship.

[GeezerCouple]

1 hour ago, Elka said:

 

I was on the MS Trollfjord in October 2018. I even gave a review of my trip. Don’t tell me the differences between the two, I am perfectly aware of them. When the Viking Sky ran into trouble and I became aware of it, I looked online to see what the difference in weight of the ships were. Did you? I noticed that the tonnage of the Viking ship was heavier than the Hurtigruten ships by at least 20,000. I also looked to see where the Hurtigruten ships were during the time when the Viking ship was out to sea. I know that the officers of the Hurtigruten ships are more knowledgeable of the area than the Viking officers. 

 

To me, the Hurtigruten ships do carry freight and cars, so I make a comparison to the Martha’s Vineyard Ferry. Yes, the itineraries and services are different, but the Hurtigruten ship felt to me like the Ferry going back and forth to Martha’s Vineyard. Both are light ships in comparison to a regular Cruise line ship.

 

If you want to equate the Martha's Vineyard ferries to the Hurtigruten ferries, especially such as Trollfjord, you go right ahead.

 

(As an aside, there are "regular Cruise line ships" that have a fraction of the number of passengers as the Trollfjord, and are also, accordingly, much smaller ships.)

 

But what you think is equivalent is indeed what you think is equivalent.

 

GC

[Elka]

16 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

 

If you want to equate the Martha's Vineyard ferries to the Hurtigruten ferries, especially such as Trollfjord, you go right ahead.

 

(As an aside, there are "regular Cruise line ships" that have a fraction of the number of passengers as the Trollfjord, and are also, accordingly, much smaller ships.)

 

But what you think is equivalent is indeed what you think is equivalent.

 

GC

 

Look at pictures of the Martha’s Vineyard Ferries that the Steam Ship Authority has and look at Hurtigruten’s ships. The keel lies in the water on both ships about the same. Shapes are similar. Hurtigruten is considered a Ferry, so are the ships to Martha’s Vineyard. Personally, I consider Hurtigruten a hybrid of Ferry services and cruise ship. I think I am a couple of years younger than you, and I have been on the Ferry to Martha’s Vineyard for over 45 years of my life. I think I can tell when something is similar. By the way, you can buy alcohol on the Ferry to Martha’s Vineyard. 

[hallasm]

2 hours ago, Elka said:

Look at pictures of the Martha’s Vineyard Ferries that the Steam Ship Authority has and look at Hurtigruten’s ships.

Very interesting discussion Elka - but I strongly believe you're wrong and GeezerCouple right.

You cannot compare the ' Steam Ship Authority ' and 'Hurtigruten' vessels - correct that they both are considered ferries, but the Martha’s Vineyard Ferries are constructed as a ferry where cars are loaded at the front/end of the ship while the Hurtigruten vessels are constructed to sail in rough seas along the Norwegian West coast including Hustadvika.

The major differences are that cars/goods at Hurtigruten vessels are loaded into the side of the ships and all Hurtigruten vessels are equipped with stabilisers (except MS Vesterålen and MS Lofoten).

Look at the picture below where I have marked the ports for loading cars - the overall construction of the two type of ships are very, very different.

Edited April 4, 2019 by hallasm

[Elka]

13 minutes ago, hallasm said:

Very interesting discussion Elka - but I strongly believe you're wrong and GeezerCouple right.

You cannot compare the ' Steam Ship Authority ' and 'Hurtigruten' vessels - correct that they both are considered ferries, but the Martha’s Vineyard Ferries are constructed as a ferry where cars are loaded at the front/end of the ship while the Hurtigruten vessels are constructed to sail in rough seas along the Norwegian West coast including Hustadvika.

The major differences are that cars/goods at Hurtigruten vessels are loaded into the side of the ships and all Hurtigruten vessels are equipped with stabilisers (except MS Vesterålen and MS Lofoten).

Look at the picture below where I have marked the ports for loading cars - the overall construction of the two type of ships are very, very different.

 

Hallasm, yes, both ships are constructed for their needs. By the way, in those 45 years that I have taken the Ferry to the Vineyard, I have driven onto the Ferry quite a number of times. There was a feeling to the Hurtigruten ship that was similar to the Ferry and I have been in rough seas on both. The Vineyard Ferry crosses in 45 minutes, goes round trip in 2 hours. They have mail trucks, food trucks and deliver a lot of stuff that is needed. 

 

I tried to look at the weight of the Martha’s Vineyard Ferries but couldn’t find it. I looked at the weight of the Viking Sky and the Hurtigruten ships. I found that the Viking ship was heavier than the Hurtigruten ships, at least by 20,000 tons. (not sure how to put it in metric) I think that was partly why the Captain of the Viking ship tried to sail in the storm, forgetting that storms at sea are more dangerous or he felt that he could handle it. I also think that staying in a port with the fees that a ship incurs when tied up was something that Viking wanted to avoid. I wouldn’t be surprised if all those possibilities were part of the reason the ship sailed that day. Hurtigruten must have taken a hit financially also. Not only did they not sail that day but the freight and goods that the ships deliver to the ports were delayed. The passengers had to be accommodated, but they made the correct decision to remain where they were.

 

 

[hallasm]

6 minutes ago, Elka said:

Hurtigruten must have taken a hit financially also. Not only did they not sail that day but the freight and goods that the ships deliver to the ports were delayed. The passengers had to be accommodated, but they made the correct decision to remain where they were.

Hurtigruten certainly took a hit financial.

On 3/27/2019 at 4:23 AM, hallasm said:

Hurtigruten hired aircraft to transport the passengers to and from Bergen.