Alaska Pilots concern about Royal

[LEtue]

I guess I will start following this thread again to see about itinerary changes may be happening on the next few cruises.

 

Been looking at late season sailings and hoping to get up there yet 

[dobiemom]

Now that the Royal Princess has completed couple of cruises, is there an update about the Southeast marine pilots concerns about her maneuverability?

[idahospud]

Here's my blog post from Friday that somewhat covers it. I hope it's okay I just posted the relevant parts.

 

Today I had the opportunity to ask the Captain and 3rd Officer several questions about the route this ship has taken as we've navigated our way to and from Alaska. If you remember, when we left Vancouver we took the green route

 instead of the much more scenic red route. It was quite disappointing.

Today as we're heading back to Vancouver we are again taking the non-scenic route. As I found out in my questioning today, the issue is with the length of the Royal Princess and the British Columbia marine pilot rules. Currently there is a limit on the length a ship can be when passing through the area. While right now the Royal cannot sail those narrower, more scenic waterways they are working to get clearance at some point during the summer. So sailings later in the season may get the scenic route. Lucky ducks.

 

I also asked about the Ketchikan approach. Usually when coming into Ketchikan from the south ships take the red route but we came in on the brown route. Another less scenic route.

Alaska marine pilots had concerns about the maneuverability of the Royal Princess, particularly at lower speeds. So as the ship was needing to slow down to dock in Ketchikan it required a different approach - one that would bring her in from the north. Which now makes sense to why when we left Ketchikan on our way back to Vancouver we we were able to leave from the south. I was told today since we weren't trying to slow down the issue wasn't an issue and we could maneuver on out through the scenic south.

I found the conversation (and information) very interesting.

[idahospud]

16 minutes ago, dobiemom said:

Now that the Royal Princess has completed couple of cruises, is there an update about the Southeast marine pilots concerns about her maneuverability?

I just responded right above. Sorry I forgot to quote you in the post.

[John99]

Thanks Idahospud for the update.  Very good explanation with a diagrams. 

I never thought about Royal’s overall  length being be a problem. 

 

From Princess web-site on ships lengths:

Royal Princess length - 1,083 feet

Coral Princess length - 965 feet

Grand Princess length - 949 feet

Island Princess length – 964 feet

Golden Princess length – 950 feet

Star Princess length – 951 feet

Ruby Princess length – 950 feet

John

[kennicott]

Very interesting. Thanks much idahospud for keeping us updated here. I wonder what the B.C. maximum actual overall length of a cruise vessel allowed east of Vancouver Island currently is? Looking at itineraries for vessels over a thousand feet, offered by other cruise lines, seems to indicate those lines are having the same problem as Princess is with their Royal.  

[dobiemom]

Thanks, idahospud. But I thought the marine pilots were more concerned about the lack of azipods rather than the length of the ship?

[chengkp75]

5 hours ago, dobiemom said:

Thanks, idahospud. But I thought the marine pilots were more concerned about the lack of azipods rather than the length of the ship?

The Alaska pilots are concerned with the lack of low speed maneuverability.  The British Columbia pilots have a regulation limiting the length of ships in particular passages.

[milolii]

This was posted yesterday regarding the June 8 cruise out of Vancover. 

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2667182-sometimes-the-royal-isnt-too-big-for-alaska/