Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
Kokomo91165

Suggestions RCL needs to do to get people cruising again

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, karena1 said:

none, I am going the minute they tell me I can. 

I am right there with you!  🙂  Balcony sailaway drink on us, because great cruise addicted minds think alike! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, APDMOM said:

I am right there with you!  🙂  Balcony sailaway drink on us, because great cruise addicted minds think alike! 

you got it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

In my opinion they need to do the following two things:

 

1. Significantly increase their cleaning and sterilization procedures on the ship. 
 

2.  Ban passengers in higher risk categories (age, diabetes, smokers, asthma, autoimmune diseases, etc.) for the forseeable future.  The categories I listed are just possibilities. Ultimately scientists/doctors would have to release a list of categories/conditions that would prohibit going on a cruise ship. 
 

There are obviously a lot more than just these two issues that cruise lines need to address, but these are two of the biggest in my opinion. 


 

 High risk categories don’t mean they are carriers. It just means they are highest risk to have serious consequences. They aren’t any more of a danger to others than people who don’t fit this category.

 

Banning them won’t keep a ship safe from contagion. The Diamond Princess cruisers were infected by the crew, I doubt many of them were elderly or infirm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Snit13 said:

I do believe this is discrimination and against the law.  I am so happy you are in perfect health and wish I could say the same for many cruisers.  For many cruisers this is the main thing to look forward to.  

I absolutely agree with this!  I can understand and support a rule about every cruise passenger buying insurance so that the ship or Coast Guard (aka US taxpayer) is not stuck with a potential bill for illness or evacuation, but everyone should have the choice if they want to cruise.  I am not afraid to die, but I would resent it if my freedom to choose a cruise is stripped away.  You can not predict illness at sea - my husband’s unexpected appendectomy is proof of that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, hazence said:


 

 High risk categories don’t mean they are carriers. It just means they are highest risk to have serious consequences. They aren’t any more of a danger to others than people who don’t fit this category.

 

Banning them won’t keep a ship safe from contagion. The Diamond Princess cruisers were infected by the crew, I doubt many of them were elderly or infirm.

The initial infection on the Diamond was from a passenger from Hong Kong.  He infected both some passengers, as well as members of the crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kokomo91165 said:

1.  Share detailed plan of hygiene protocol for cabins, public areas and cruise terminal 

 

2.  Share detailed plan of screening procedures for guest and crew. 
 

3.  Limit crowded lounges to 50% capacity - such as diamond lounge/concierge lounge, schooner bar, theater, studio B.

 

4.  Reduce 200% single supplement to 150% for 2020 sailings 

 

Please add more suggestions. 

Doubt most these will be implemented. They'll come back faster then 2001 when Post 9/11 - Oct Anthrax scare 2001-2002 was no Single Supplement on many sailings, Lucky Me! Did 4 Cruises Oct-May. One 5niter was only $9 plus $50port, total $59 with no single supplement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hazence said:

The Diamond Princess cruisers were infected by the crew, I doubt many of them were elderly or infirm.

 

read this

https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/severity/diamond_cruise_cfr_estimates.html

 

Age Range No. of passengers Symp. cases Asymp. cases nCFR Expected deaths using nCFR Observed deaths on cruise ship
0 - 9 16 0 1 0.0% (0.0% - 0.9%) 0 (0 - 0) 0
10 - 19 23 2 3 0.2% (0.0% - 1.0%) 0 (0 - 0) 0
20 - 29 347 25 3 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.05 (0.02 - 0.10) 0
30 - 39 428 27 7 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.06 (0.04 - 0.10) 0
40 - 49 334 19 8 0.4% (0.3% - 0.6%) 0.08 (0.06 - 0.12) 0
50 - 59 398 28 31 1.3% (1.1% - 1.5%) 0.36 (0.31 - 0.43) 0
60 - 69 923 76 101 3.6% (3.2% - 4.0%) 2.74 (2.5 - 3.1) 0
70 - 79 1015 95 139 8.0% (7.2% - 8.9%) 7.6 (6.8 - 8.4) 6
80 - 89 216 29 25 14.8% (13.0% - 16.7%) 4.28 (3.8 - 4.9) 1
Totals 3711 301 318   15.15 (13.5 - 17.1) 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, npcl said:

The initial infection on the Diamond was from a passenger from Hong Kong.  He infected both some passengers, as well as members of the crew.

 

And if at that time there was a way to test prior to boarding, that would've saved 12 lives and likely the entire cruise industry.

This is why I feel testing before check-in and putting only 100% immune cruisers onto a ship will likely be the only way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cruiselvr04 said:

Knowledge that the ships air handling systems do not mix between cabins.


Yes! I’m going to need a better understanding of this and know changes were made if needed before I cruise again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

So you wouldn’t pay more to cruise in a balcony cabin with ship at 1/2 capacity or less?

I would not pay much more. Judging by many of the comments I have read here over the years I don't think many people would want to pay more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hazence said:


 

 High risk categories don’t mean they are carriers. It just means they are highest risk to have serious consequences. They aren’t any more of a danger to others than people who don’t fit this category.

 

Banning them won’t keep a ship safe from contagion. The Diamond Princess cruisers were infected by the crew, I doubt many of them were elderly or infirm.

 

1 hour ago, Hoopster95 said:

 

read this

https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/severity/diamond_cruise_cfr_estimates.html

 

Age Range No. of passengers Symp. cases Asymp. cases nCFR Expected deaths using nCFR Observed deaths on cruise ship
0 - 9 16 0 1 0.0% (0.0% - 0.9%) 0 (0 - 0) 0
10 - 19 23 2 3 0.2% (0.0% - 1.0%) 0 (0 - 0) 0
20 - 29 347 25 3 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.05 (0.02 - 0.10) 0
30 - 39 428 27 7 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.06 (0.04 - 0.10) 0
40 - 49 334 19 8 0.4% (0.3% - 0.6%) 0.08 (0.06 - 0.12) 0
50 - 59 398 28 31 1.3% (1.1% - 1.5%) 0.36 (0.31 - 0.43) 0
60 - 69 923 76 101 3.6% (3.2% - 4.0%) 2.74 (2.5 - 3.1) 0
70 - 79 1015 95 139 8.0% (7.2% - 8.9%) 7.6 (6.8 - 8.4) 6
80 - 89 216 29 25 14.8% (13.0% - 16.7%) 4.28 (3.8 - 4.9) 1
Totals 3711 301 318   15.15 (13.5 - 17.1) 7

Wow, about says it all with the high numbers and percent with CV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Snit13 said:

I do believe this is discrimination and against the law.  I am so happy you are in perfect health and wish I could say the same for many cruisers.  For many cruisers this is the main thing to look forward to.  

Is it?  They ban women who are past a certain point in their pregnancy.  

Edited by time4u2go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Allure is just hanging about off Cornwall I do wonder if they may consider doing a couple of cruises to no where just to check how they can instigate new measures, like staggered boarding, keeping to social distancing, how to do the timings for several musters so you aren't rammed in together, how to handle the buffet that is permanently no longer self service, how to enforce washy washy, how to make more space between dining tables, sun loungers not so close together.... so many things to think of now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I concede the smaller point on the Diamond Princess...but not on the larger point of treating the most vulnerable as if they alone are carriers of the disease. There seems to be an idea that removing them from sailing ...protects the other cruisers from infection.

 

Do you presume that barring certain age groups is an equivalent to sterilizing the  ship?

 

If you fear these people because they are most likely to die...how will you know who among the younger people with compromised health...are safe for you to sail with? Will you require physicals be submitted to RCCL before reservations are granted?

 

Suppose the infection wanes in many parts of the country but not NYC and it’s suburbs? Should cruises be denied to people from certain geographical areas?Or certain countries...on a rolling basis, of course.   So if London looks good when you buy the cruise, you will be denied at sail away if numbers there spike again?

 

I live in a gated community  in SC  that’s about half retirees and half second home “part-timers.”  Right now, “everyone’s back.” The retirees are not thrilled with the part timers fleeing  from the N.Y. suburbs or their winter Florida homes. Maybe the part timers fear the “old” retirees as some of you seem to do.
 

But to date...we have had not ONE positive case in our community...NOT ONE case in our zip code. As the weeks have gone by...these suspicious attitudes are abating. 
 

The numbers who died in the 2017-2018 flu season in SC are almost twice the numbers of COVID deaths to date.  Cruises ran full...with every demographic..that winter season.,

 

https://www.scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/media/document/SC_2017-18_End_of_Season_Flu_Report.

 

 

The 2017-2018 flu season in SC killed 289 residents statewide. Business remained opened. People went church,had income from their jobs, spent time with friends, shopped wherever they wished. Hospitals were open for all surgeries and all diagnostic evaluations.

 

The 2020 COVID19 virus has killed 124 statewide as of April 20

 

https://www.thestate.com/news/coronavirus/article241381891.html

 

 

 

If you are afraid, stay home. Don’t try to decide who else has to stay home so you can go.

 

 

 

 

Edited by hazence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should High Risk categories from SC should be exempted from your proposed  ban?  We appear to be faring better than High Risk categories from other states. 


 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are foreign flagged vessels, they can do anything they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The testing before boarding sounds good (temperature scan I assume), but how effective is that? The incubation period of C19 is a few days so if you get infected in the cab ride from the airport to the cruise terminal, your temperature is fine but you'll be infecting fellow passengers/crew in a few days. Same for port days. So I do expect them to start temperature testing, but it won't prevent anything. Maybe limit it?

 

I can see until there's a vaccine:

1. Face masks are mandatory in common areas

2. Limit number of people in restaurants, theaters and swimming pools

3. To accomplish this, limit number of people on cruises. Maybe they'll stop selling inside cabins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Density.

 

This is the issue the cruise ships must resolve. Why are we doing so much better in certain counties? In certain states? 
 

In NYC people, rich and poor, live in crowded high rises. In my county, rich and poor live mostly on their own plot of land...whether a lakefront private home...or a rusted trailer on a 1/2 acre plot.

 

WE have no subways or trains to get to our jobs. LA is doing better than NYC...probably because most people commute on those freeways...not masses of humanity pushed together in subways.

 

The New York based media is reporting what they see. They are fearful and their reporting reflects that that fear. They live in a dense population and want everyone to stay inside till there is some sort of all clear. Except for essential workers who must cram onto crowded subways before and after their shifts at the hospital...at the grocery store. Face to face underground with strangers again. 

 

But there are large parts of the country that are realizing they see something different. From this perspective, suggestions that certain people be barred in the future from a vacation activity...is actually just buying you a false sense of security. You would be better off cruising with a senior from a zip code with NOT ONE POSITIVE CASE ...than a 30 year old subway commuter from NYC.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

Astronauts can’t fly with these issues. Is it discrimination to Astronaut candidates?

Really?  While the cruise contract keeps the cruise lines protected it is NOT a job application.  Good luck with your astronaut career!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based entirely on how they’ve handled refunds, they’ll have to do something about deposits and final payment dates. It’s entirely their own doing

 

Less of a deposit and a final payment date +/- 30 days.

 

If they make no changes to deposits I don’t see people booking a year or 16 months out anymore.

If they leave final payment out so long I see people not bothering to book until inside final payment.... and I think demand will allow them to wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, NateUpNorth said:

Based entirely on how they’ve handled refunds, they’ll have to do something about deposits and final payment dates. It’s entirely their own doing

 

Less of a deposit and a final payment date +/- 30 days.

 

If they make no changes to deposits I don’t see people booking a year or 16 months out anymore.

If they leave final payment out so long I see people not bothering to book until inside final payment.... and I think demand will allow them to wait.

And that is exactly what I think the majority of people will do - wait to book much closer to the departure date - at least for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, hazence said:

 High risk categories don’t mean they are carriers. It just means they are highest risk to have serious consequences. They aren’t any more of a danger to others than people who don’t fit this category.

 

Banning them won’t keep a ship safe from contagion. The Diamond Princess cruisers were infected by the crew, I doubt many of them were elderly or infirm.

 

No but banning them will reduce the possibility that the medical facilities will be overwhelmed if an outbreak does occur.  It also reduces the cost getting them to treatment and reduces the exposure of first responders that must transport them to treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ipeeinthepool said:

 

No but banning them will reduce the possibility that the medical facilities will be overwhelmed if an outbreak does occur.  It also reduces the cost getting them to treatment and reduces the exposure of first responders that must transport them to treatment.


Can you say with any scientific certainty that a senior from a zip code with no positive cases over many weeks would pose any more of these risks than a 39 yr old subway commuter from NYC?

 

An outbreak could be started by any one person and then “overwhelm medical facilities.”  Any outbreak “puts first responders at risk.” 
 

That’s a false sense of security. 
 

Our daughter is a physician at a large regional hospital also in SC but another county than ours. Over these weeks, they have had only ONE hospitalized COVID19 patient and not in intensive care.  
 

Fact is...conditions are very different parts of the country. You can ban by age demographics but regional demographics create a level of risk as well.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

In my opinion they need to do the following two things:

 

1. Significantly increase their cleaning and sterilization procedures on the ship. 
 

2.  Ban passengers in higher risk categories (age, diabetes, smokers, asthma, autoimmune diseases, etc.) for the forseeable future.  The categories I listed are just possibilities. Ultimately scientists/doctors would have to release a list of categories/conditions that would prohibit going on a cruise ship. 
 

There are obviously a lot more than just these two issues that cruise lines need to address, but these are two of the biggest in my opinion. 

 

So no one over age 60? or age 65? No one who has received chemo for cancer and survived? No one with MS? CF? Lupus?PsoriasisRheumatoid arthritis? About 35 million Americans have diabetes - they can't sail either huh? Oh, and I guess you also don't want them at amusement parks. Or staying in hotels? or flying in airplanes? or in movie theaters? These places are ripe for infections. Can't take a chance.

 

Please post your thoughts on the Special Interest Cruising Board: https://boards.cruisecritic.com/forum/114-disabled-cruise-travel/.  See what reception you get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, time4u2go said:

Is it?  They ban women who are past a certain point in their pregnancy.  


the way it works under US federal law (no idea how this applies to cruise ships) is that you can discriminate freely against an unprotected class (eg young people) but can only discriminate against a protected class (eg old people) if (1) you can show the discrimination serves a necessary purpose and (2) show that the discrimination you propose is the least intrusive way of accomplishing that purpose. There’s no way a blanket ban on 70+ cruisers meets the second objective, but requiring a doctors note might pass muster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...