Queen Mary 2 - Mauritius Fuel Stop

[2behappyatsea]

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

     I suppose those 250 must all have boarded in Southampton back on January 11 - otherwise they most likely would have had to fly to board anywhere else.  

 

That must be a pretty grim cruise now.

 

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

     I suppose those 250 must all have boarded in Southampton back on January 11 - otherwise they most likely would have had to fly to board anywhere else.  

 

That must be a pretty grim cruise now.

No, they are various countries, including the U.S.   I was onboard till Fremantle. I have friends still on board. They are scared and yes, it is grim. 

 

[navybankerteacher]

1 minute ago, 2behappyatsea said:

 

No, they are various countries, including the U.S.   I was onboard till Fremantle. I have friends still on board. They are scared and yes, it is grim. 

 

If they came from different countries, didn’t they have to fly to board the cruise - and, when they get back to Southampton, won’t they have to fly to get home?

 

It sounds like the “unable to fly” rationale was more an argument to stay on board than a real condition.

[bluemarble]

3 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

If they came from different countries, didn’t they have to fly to board the cruise - and, when they get back to Southampton, won’t they have to fly to get home?

 

It sounds like the “unable to fly” rationale was more an argument to stay on board than a real condition.

 

The QM2 2020 full world cruise was sold as both a 99-night round trip from Southampton (Jan 10-Apr 18) and as a 113-night round trip from New York (Jan 3-Apr 25).

[navybankerteacher]

2 minutes ago, bluemarble said:

 

The QM2 2020 full world cruise was sold as both a 99-night round trip from Southampton (Jan 10-Apr 18) and as a 113-night round trip from New York (Jan 3-Apr 25).

 

Yes - but I was responding to the post that stated the 250 remaining on board were from  various countries, including the US.

 Since QM2 is heading straight back to Southampton, it would seem that inability to fly was only a valid reason for those U.K. residents to stay on board.

 

[bluemarble]

Just now, navybankerteacher said:

Yes - but I was responding to the post that stated the 250 remaining on board were from  various countries, including the US.

 Since QM2 is heading straight back to Southampton, it would seem that inability to fly was only a valid reason for those U.K. residents to stay on board.

 

Fair enough. I just meant to mention that some from the US probably did not have to fly to board the ship in New York originally. I suspect those from the US who remained on board for medical reasons either did so to shorten the flight home or else are planning to stay in the UK for a while.

[rafinmd]

8 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

     I suppose those 250 must all have boarded in Southampton back on January 11 - otherwise they most likely would have had to fly to board anywhere else.  

 

That must be a pretty grim cruise now.

I'm pretty sure some boarded in New York January 4.  Captain was clear that the ship would not return beyond Southampton.  Not sure what options those boarding in New York might have.  I think the person who has been posting the most on the roll call boarded in New York.

 

Roy

[tv24]

17 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Is it a matter of cannot affording, or simply not wanting, to lose a deposit?   

 

We cancelled out March 14 flight to our Spring few weeks in Florida.  We can apply rental deposit to a later-in-2020 booking, and air fare to a flight booked within 12 months of original booking (meaning flying somewhere by mid July).  Neither option is good — no point in just going somewhere at a time you do not want to go just because you have money on the table.

 

There are times you just need to bite the bullet and take a loss, rather than throw good money after bad.

We too have lost money on some cancelled travel bookings.  In other circumstances, it would have appeared to be significant, but given the collapse of the economy and the fact that we are retired with secure retirement incomes, we are counting blessings.  This is such a difficult time for everyone, for many different reasons and in many different circumstances.

[Germancruiser]

We all have lost- some more some less because of the lost bookings, canceled flights and cruises!

We also count our blessings - the most important thing is to stay healthy!

[hypercafe]

3 hours ago, Germancruiser said:

We all have lost- some more some less because of the lost bookings, canceled flights and cruises!

We also count our blessings - the most important thing is to stay healthy!

Amem, my focus is staying healthy for me and my family. I have no idea what will happen to the money I have sitting on a June cruise. Even if it goes which seems impossible I would never get on a cruise ship coming from Europe then.

[2behappyatsea]

On 3/24/2020 at 3:12 PM, navybankerteacher said:

If they came from different countries, didn’t they have to fly to board the cruise - and, when they get back to Southampton, won’t they have to fly to get home?

 

It sounds like the “unable to fly” rationale was more an argument to stay on board than a real condition.

I was trying to answer your questions on the one hand, without on the other hand, having to write a book.

yes, they are from different countries. Several of them drove from their own country, took a ferry to England and then drove to Southampton.  Still having their autos in Southampton for the return trips.  Some are from the USA and have no idea how they are getting back home. I do not personally know most of them, but I do know several, so I am only speaking of those. 

[navybankerteacher]

55 minutes ago, 2behappyatsea said:

I was trying to answer your questions on the one hand, without on the other hand, having to write a book.

yes, they are from different countries. Several of them drove from their own country, took a ferry to England and then drove to Southampton.  Still having their autos in Southampton for the return trips.  Some are from the USA and have no idea how they are getting back home. I do not personally know most of them, but I do know several, so I am only speaking of those. 

So back to my original point:  some of those who insisted that they could not fly and thus must stay on board were likely simply bloody minded and determined to finish their cruise.

 

There are always some “special cases” for whom reasonable protocols must be waived.

[2behappyatsea]

On 3/23/2020 at 11:29 PM, Germancruiser said:

milamber- thanks for the information. So the QM2 - as I suspected- does not continue to New York. Therefore sailings after April 18th are canceled, too!. Where did you get that information- since I did not hear a thing from Cuanrd line about the sailings after April 18th. Thanks again!

I’m not the original person who posted that info, but also was on board till Fremantle. That info was given to us by the Captain. 

[Covepointcruiser]

They, at least, are safe from the virus until they get back to Southampton.   It doesn’t seem they have any chance of getting the virus if they don’t port.    I don’t believe Cunard is making any money from the Casino or Spa.   They are concessions and not owned by Cunard although they may get some percentage of sales.   
 

Unless confined to my cabin I would much rather be on the QM2 than anywhere else.   Is she breaking any speed records getting back to Southampton?

[bluemarble]

11 minutes ago, Covepointcruiser said:

...  Is she breaking any speed records getting back to Southampton?

 

Currently doing between 17 and 18 knots on the way to Durban (as reported by AIS), so definitely no speed records.

Edited March 26, 2020 by bluemarble

[Solent Richard]

18 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

So back to my original point:  some of those who insisted that they could not fly and thus must stay on board were likely simply bloody minded and determined to finish their cruise.

 

There are always some “special cases” for whom reasonable protocols must be waived.

Excellent point shipmate.

 

I often wonder how any of these '300' would fare if medically evacuated during the cruise.

[Cruise NH]

3 hours ago, Solent Richard said:

Excellent point shipmate.

 

I often wonder how any of these '300' would fare if medically evacuated during the cruise.

 

I was one of the ones going down to see the doctor to stay onboard the QM2.  In the end I decided to brave the flight and now I'm home...but this post isn't about me (except to say I've traveled all over the world without flying, it can be done).

 

While waiting for the doctor we spoke to many of the other passengers wanting to stay on the ship and were able to follow up with some of them later.  These were not all 'fear of flying' people.  There are genuine medical reasons for not being able to stand the pressure inside an aircraft.  

 

Of the Americans we spoke to the attitude was...well they'll start doing transatlantics again sometime, as soon as they can... then I'll go home... One women we spoke with (American) has friends in the UK and relatives in Denmark.  She planned to wait it out.  

 

I will admit there was one Brit we spoke with who did not go down to medical but wasn't going to leave.  He told us he paid to go round trip Southampton and that's what he was going to do.  He also said that he would strip down to his underwear if they tried to force him off to make a scene.  He was laughing as he told us this.  We have no idea if he's still on the ship.  The last we saw of him he was lounging on deck 7 after lunch on disembarkation day.  He wasn't even going to go down to the pursers office to tell them he was staying.  

 

 

[Germancruiser]

I don´t blame the Brit who insisted to stay on- will be interessting if someone posts when getting back how they handled 300 passengers- in matters like dining- and so on. I don´t think they have thrown big balls in the Queens Room.

[BlueRiband]

Those from North America who genuinely cannot fly will be stuck on that side of the Atlantic until Cunard resumes TA service.  The only other alternative might be travel by freighter, but their medical issues would probably exclude them. 

[Bigmike911]

I am still not clear why Cunard wanted to empty the ship and fly folks home from Australia. If they were aboard, and no new boarded in Fremantle or there after it seems to me that tossing them off the ship so that Cunard doesn't have to serve them seems a bit of a public relations issue. After all the ship is returning to Southampton. Maybe some on could explain Cunard's rationale. 

[Jack E Dawson]

2 hours ago, Bigmike911 said:

I am still not clear why Cunard wanted to empty the ship and fly folks home from Australia. If they were aboard, and no new boarded in Fremantle or there after it seems to me that tossing them off the ship so that Cunard doesn't have to serve them seems a bit of a public relations issue. After all the ship is returning to Southampton. Maybe some on could explain Cunard's rationale. 

 

I agree Bigmike911, its not clear to me either. It seems to be a tale of two ships in how things were handled on the QM2 vs QV. How is it that Cunard can offer one type of guidance to one ship and completely different guidance to the other. In my opinion, there seems to be two key decisions made by Cunard and/or the Captains that have cased these conflicting situations. First was the decision to allow QM2 passengers to disembark in Fremantle for shore excursions and then reboard. I remember thinking when I read this on Safarigals blog, "that's it, the jig is up, the cruise is over." On the other hand, when QV stopped in Ft. Lauderdale, the decision was made that if you get off, you can't get back on. This decision allowed Cunard the option of keeping the ship in a self quarantine environment and continuing as a cruise. With the QM2, there was no way of knowing who brought what back on board from their shore excursions. The second pivotal decision was when Cunard decided to continue QM2's voyage back to Southampton classified as a merchant ship while QV continued on as a cruise ship. I could understand this if there had only been a hand full of passengers staying on board after Fremantle but not with 250. Perhaps Cunard was caught by surprise by how many continued on but "it is what it is" so why not put your best foot forward. Surly World Cruise passengers must be some of Cunard's most important customers. Perhaps when the QM2 passes the 14 day mark post Fremantle, without any onboard illness, they will at least open deck 7 up to the passengers and allow more freedom of movement. I think that once this crisis is over, more information will come to light. But even now, it is obvious that Cunard was faced with an unprecedented and complex situation with so many elements (such as port closings) completely out of their hands. At this point I still remain convinced of Cunard's commitment to service and passenger experience and of course, passenger safety. We continue to count the days till our January cruise on the QV.

 

Jack

[Windsurfboy]

Their handling of the Capetown to Southampton leg also left much to be desired. 

 

We had phone call the day after they didn't let anyone board in Fremantle, this was  in response to my earlier email asking if over 70s still could cruise, we were told QM2 was still sailing from Capetown as scheduled and not to listen to rumours about Fremantle. Only to get an email the next day that it was cancelled, no further contact no mention of help to get home.. 

 

Luckily as soon as I heard about people not boarding at Fremantle, I  booked a plane home, which we then moved forward when South Africa announced that they would not be letting Europeans in to the country . If we'd  left it to Cunard we would stil be in Capetown under their much stricter lockdown. 

[Colin_Cameron]

58 minutes ago, Jack E Dawson said:

 

How is it that Cunard can offer one type of guidance to one ship and completely different guidance to the other.

I'm not so sure that they did. (But I don't KNOW any more than anyone else on this board)

 

On the day that they made the decision to suspend all operations the two ships were in different situations. QM2 was in port, in a country that would that would allow them to disembark the passengers. QV was at sea, heading for a country that wouldn't.

 

Like you, I thought at first that if they had made the decision a few hours earlier, before allowing people ashore in Fremantle they would have been able to carry on. No consolation for those of us waiting to board there but perhaps for those onboard willing to continue, non-stop to Southampton. But then I realised that they had been ashore the day before in Bussleton, and a couple of days before that in Adelaide, and a couple of days before that in Melbourne. Even those who boarded in Sydney hadn't been on a full two weeks. It was, theoretically, quite possible that there were a large number of infected people aboard not yet showing symptoms.

 

QV was heading for Ft Lauderdale where US authorities wouldn't allow anyone other than US citizens off the ship. It wasn't any decision on Cunard's part that 'allowed them to continue the cruise', but rather the inability to end it.

[Matelot70]

On 3/23/2020 at 10:51 AM, Solent Richard said:

Should have mentioned these are virtually live shots, 15 minutes old.

Was wondering if anything else has been posted on your Facebook group about Durban fuelling as QM2 arrived there over 36 hours ago. After anchoring until this morning it has now been circling to the NE for about the last 10 hours

 

https://www.iol.co.za/ios/news/south-africans-trapped-on-luxury-cruise-ship-off-durban-want-to-come-home-45698624

Edited March 28, 2020 by Matelot70

[SEFlyer]

On 3/25/2020 at 7:49 PM, navybankerteacher said:

So back to my original point:  some of those who insisted that they could not fly and thus must stay on board were likely simply bloody minded and determined to finish their cruise.

 

There are always some “special cases” for whom reasonable protocols must be waived.

 

Which part of the Channel tunnel do you not get?  Anybody in Western Europe can easily take a train to London and on to Southampton so the non UK/US passengers could be from half a dozen or more countries in Western Europe.  And it is possible for Canadians in the Eastern part of the country to easily travel to New York without flying.  They, too, would qualify as non UK/US.  The world doesn't totally revolve around the US and UK and those fortunate enough not to originate in either are not all bloody minded.

[bluemarble]

On 3/26/2020 at 5:19 PM, Cruise NH said:

... I will admit there was one Brit we spoke with who did not go down to medical but wasn't going to leave.  He told us he paid to go round trip Southampton and that's what he was going to do.  He also said that he would strip down to his underwear if they tried to force him off to make a scene.  ...

 

Here's a link to an article in today's Sunday Post from Scotland that reminded me of the above post from exactly a month ago.

 

Scottish pensioner who was one of the world’s last cruise passengers reaches dry land after month on luxurious but deserted liner

 

Here's a partial quote from that article.

 

“We got a very formal letter from Cunard that said, ‘Due to the coronavirus outbreak we regret to inform you the world cruise is at an end and we plan to fly you all home tomorrow’.

 

“Quite a few of us ­protested. The reason many of us took the voyage was to avoid flying, and the last thing we wanted to do was take a long flight home.

 

“We asked where the ship was going, and they were very coy at first. Then they admitted it was going back to Southampton. I dug my heels in and said if they wanted me off the ship, they would have to carry me off and it would be headline news in the next day’s papers. They knew I meant business and they gave in and agreed to take us back by sea.”

 

Overall, the article comes across as generally positive about the entire experience and closes with this quote.

 

“I’d like to say thank you, a really big thank you, to captain Aseem Hashmi and his incredible crew who sailed Queen Mary 2 home, navigating some extraordinary circumstances along the way.”