Jump to content

How About a Cruise With No Ports for Safety


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Cruise Raider said:

 

It's not what 'I want', it is what the administrative powers that be will do.There are exemptions to the PVSA given under extreme circumstances without changing the law via congress.  Whether or not this would be an extreme circumstance is not a decision for any of us here on these boards to make.  I highly doubt it will happen .. again, this is why I stated 'that would be another question'.  

No, there are "waivers" given for a few circumstances, like weather delays, mechanical issues, or deaths onboard.  These are not "exemptions", and are done on a case by case basis, upon appeal, after the fact.  So, the cruise line would have to sell the cruise, knowing that they may end up with a $1.6 million fine (assuming 2400 pax), and hoping that they can appeal this and not pay the fine, with the AMH speaking to CBP as an interested party to the appeal hearing, claiming that they are being discriminated against if the fine is waived.  Like I said, not going to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess would be the intent is that so every passenger has direct access to the outside/fresh air in the case of another lockdown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

No, there are "waivers" given for a few circumstances, like weather delays, mechanical issues, or deaths onboard.  These are not "exemptions", and are done on a case by case basis, upon appeal, after the fact.  So, the cruise line would have to sell the cruise, knowing that they may end up with a $1.6 million fine (assuming 2400 pax), and hoping that they can appeal this and not pay the fine, with the AMH speaking to CBP as an interested party to the appeal hearing, claiming that they are being discriminated against if the fine is waived.  Like I said, not going to happen.

 

Again ... I never said it was going to happen ... which is why I said, 'that is another question'!  There were exemptions given in these cases ... but I guess I should have used the word, 'exception' for the nit pickers.  I've read they are / were looking into it ... that was my only point.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, iancal said:

Unclear to me how the cruise line could ‘screen’ passengers on embarkation.  Certainly temperature is not a reliable guideline.

 

If there was no onsite swab test the next best is temperature is it not?

 

Of course it is not perfect and could flag many who are carriers and not fever as well as flag others that have fever for other things, but for the first past non intrusive it can't be beat.   

 

Love how since it isn't perfect people see it as waste, it's one of many steps we can do.  No different than wash your hands, sigh

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

You raise an interesting point.  My attitude is that I probably won't cruise again until I have been vaccinated and Princess requires a vaccination certificate for all passengers.  If they don't require a vaccination certificate for every passenger, I don't know if I would want to cruise.  If they didn't require everybody to have a certificate and a case appears onboard would I be quarantined onboard even if I were already vaccinated and immune?  These are rhetorical questions - I don't think anyone has any definitive answers to these questions.

 

A high efficacy vaccine with statistical data of minimal downside for all walks of the population or at least "known" risk will be a longtime coming.

 

A possible some efficacy vaccine with limited volume data for downside etc., highly probably by early next year, likely hard to get, but who knows I am sure pro sports, rich people and business willing to buy up in the priority could secure them.  Wonder if cruise company will buy in for that to goose their business and give them to all their passengers and say we can sail all aboard, LOL

 

What will make me feel comfortable to sail is much less.   I will  assume this opening across the world continues to ramp up and works and we get a reasonable spike fo new cases and deaths  ( we will get a spike of both cases and deaths ), and it is managed.   I also get back to traveling every week, and get tested and confirmed for anti-bodies.  That would be enough for me.  I am a low enough risk profile, have always assumed even 5 weeks ago that I will get it ( don't believe a high efficacy low downside vaccine will be available similar to the flu before I would catch it) 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

A high efficacy vaccine with statistical data of minimal downside for all walks of the population or at least "known" risk will be a longtime coming.

 

A possible some efficacy vaccine with limited volume data for downside etc., highly probably by early next year, likely hard to get, but who knows I am sure pro sports, rich people and business willing to buy up in the priority could secure them.  Wonder if cruise company will buy in for that to goose their business and give them to all their passengers and say we can sail all aboard, LOL

 

What will make me feel comfortable to sail is much less.   I will  assume this opening across the world continues to ramp up and works and we get a reasonable spike fo new cases and deaths  ( we will get a spike of both cases and deaths ), and it is managed.   I also get back to traveling every week, and get tested and confirmed for anti-bodies.  That would be enough for me.  I am a low enough risk profile, have always assumed even 5 weeks ago that I will get it ( don't believe a high efficacy low downside vaccine will be available similar to the flu before I would catch it) 

 

 

Right now, most of the increases in cases are as a result of many, many more tests being performed.  The real measures are hospitalizations and deaths but even those numbers are being manipulated.  Doctors are reporting pressure to list Covid-19 as 'suspected' cause of death or as a contributing factor.  It doesn't help when the government is adding financial incentives to list hospitalizations as Covid-19 related.  But even these anomalies don't much reflect a big effect on the overall rate of hospitalizations and deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

A high efficacy vaccine with statistical data of minimal downside for all walks of the population or at least "known" risk will be a longtime coming.

 

 

Totally agree......we will be LUCKY if they come up with some type of vaccine (like annual flu shot) that could prevent most people from getting COVID-19 or lessen the symptoms of COVID-19 if a person does contact COVID-19 but does not mean they still could not die from it.

 

I am very skeptical that they will come up with a vaccine by October that will be like a measles shot and prevent COVID-19 completely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We were booked on a Heroes Cruise offered by Celebrity in March free to Military and First Responders.   Cruise was from San Pedro to Ensenada (1 hr stop no body allowed off).   Celebrity had 6

or 7 scheduled.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2020 at 3:45 PM, Coral said:

I would not be interested.

 

I want to see ports. I don't cruise just for the ship but for the convenience of not packing and unpacking

 me too....I've always used a cruise for transportation.....

Princess has no ships that I would enjoy being on for several sea days in a row, three is my limit...now other cruise lines...I could go for Panorama out of San Pedro or a mega RCI(if only)  Not enough variety food/ entertainment on board with Princess...always has been a port cruise line for me...

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

Carnival has replaced the "tenders" with "water shuttles" at Princess Cay.  The water shuttles are much larger than the tenders kept onboard the ships so it would be easier to keep social distance on the trip to the beach.

 

Are you sure of that? I know that is true at Carnival's Half Moon Cay.

 

Princess has renamed the tenders to be "water shuttles." Just look at a current itinerary for a cruise that has a tender port. It will now say "water shuttle required" when it used to say "tender required."

 

Also, Princess ship maps that did have the deck where you boarded the tender on the map now that that location labeled "water shuttle embarkation" when it used to be labeled "tender."

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

And it wouldn't work well for you.  The folks who don't like sea days will make it easier to have 50% capacity.

You also forgot to include those that will not cruise again until there is a vaccine and the general anti-cruise feeling amongst the general public.

Assuming that everything goes well for the guinea pigs cruising in late summer and fall,  the only sailings that might be over 50% capacity would be the Christmas and New  Year's  sailings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the Jones Act intends for the ship to dock ,not that the passengers disembark. necessarily?  So stopping for supplies only should satisfy the rule.

If the military special mentioned above was not allowing passengers off the ship in Ensenada then that proves the rule does it not?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Daniel A said:

Carnival has replaced the "tenders" with "water shuttles" at Princess Cay.  The water shuttles are much larger than the tenders kept onboard the ships so it would be easier to keep social distance on the trip to the beach.

 

7 hours ago, caribill said:

 

Are you sure of that? I know that is true at Carnival's Half Moon Cay.

 

This is the water shuttle I took from Regal Princess to Princess Cay on February 3 this year.

P2030061.thumb.JPG.2ffc389a002c5696852ae6362da14c5d.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the water shuttle I took from Regal Princess to Princess Cay on February 3 this year.P2030061.thumb.JPG.2ffc389a002c5696852ae6362da14c5d.JPG&key=ffbb4e09aedcb01ef483f96899e3cf2c9aef3e73070ea9149e9fce104dd152ba

 

 

That is new since the last time I was at Princess Cay. Makes more sense than lowering ships tenders but the capacity will still be limited.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Charles4515 said:

 

That is new since the last time I was at Princess Cay. Makes more sense lowering ships tenders but the capacity will still be limited.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

They have 2 of them, so can move a lot of people in a short period of time....

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

 

This is the water shuttle I took from Regal Princess to Princess Cay on February 3 this year.

P2030061.thumb.JPG.2ffc389a002c5696852ae6362da14c5d.JPG

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Daniel A said:

Right now, most of the increases in cases are as a result of many, many more tests being performed.  The real measures are hospitalizations and deaths but even those numbers are being manipulated.  Doctors are reporting pressure to list Covid-19 as 'suspected' cause of death or as a contributing factor.  It doesn't help when the government is adding financial incentives to list hospitalizations as Covid-19 related.  But even these anomalies don't much reflect a big effect on the overall rate of hospitalizations and deaths.

Not sure where you are getting information that Doctors are reportng pressure to list COVID-19 as suspected cause of death.

 

Any references?

 

There is a term for any hospital or medical professional that lists an incorrect ICD-10 code in reimbursement filings.

 

It is called fraud.  There is a little thing called the False Claims Act. Any Doctor or hospital administrator filing such an incorrect claim would be subject to prosecution.

 

Most recent cases that have hit the news has been more about states trying to change the way stats are reported to lower the counts, to support re-openings. Such as Florida firing the person that built their dashboard because she would not drop some stats from the page.

Edited by npcl
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gmjc2 said:

Surely the Jones Act intends for the ship to dock ,not that the passengers disembark. necessarily?  So stopping for supplies only should satisfy the rule.

If the military special mentioned above was not allowing passengers off the ship in Ensenada then that proves the rule does it not?

 

 

Nope.  Not if the cruise line intentionally planned on passengers not being allowed off.

 

Under PCSA a few years ago the cruise lines were doing the technical stops in Ensenada and Victoria, with no passengers disembarking.  That came to an end  around the same time that cruises to nowhere stopped and the regulations enforced. Now a cruise lines must plan for a stop that does involve passenger disembarkations.

 

The funny thing in all of this is discussion is that the passengers on a ship leaving from a US port, will pose a greater risk to the people in the ports they might visit, then the people in the port are likely to pose to the passengers on the ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

No, there are "waivers" given for a few circumstances, like weather delays, mechanical issues, or deaths onboard.  These are not "exemptions", and are done on a case by case basis, upon appeal, after the fact.  So, the cruise line would have to sell the cruise, knowing that they may end up with a $1.6 million fine (assuming 2400 pax), and hoping that they can appeal this and not pay the fine, with the AMH speaking to CBP as an interested party to the appeal hearing, claiming that they are being discriminated against if the fine is waived.  Like I said, not going to happen.

Correct me if I am wrong about this, but my recollection is that while there have been some changes in interpretation of the regulations over the past 10 years or so, those changes have been made in the direction of tightening loop holes (technical stops, crew visa's on cruises to nowhere, etc.) So the odd of the direction changing is probably slim to none.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, gmjc2 said:

Surely the Jones Act intends for the ship to dock ,not that the passengers disembark. necessarily?  So stopping for supplies only should satisfy the rule.

If the military special mentioned above was not allowing passengers off the ship in Ensenada then that proves the rule does it not?

 

 

First, it's the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA), not the Jones Act.

 

As noted, a ship has to allow passengers to disembark, or the stop isn't legal.  Now, whether anyone will, that's on them, but the ability to do so must be there.

 

I'm thinking the military/first responder cruises are not viewed as a cruise, maybe the passengers are not paying for it?  As a private party, it may be allowed.

 

 

Edited by Shmoo here
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, npcl said:

Not sure where you are getting information that Doctors are reportng pressure to list COVID-19 as suspected cause of death.

 

Any references?

 

 

It is one of many right wing conspiracy theories about COVID-19 in the US that are put out all the time of how the number are inflated to hurt POTUS.....

Edited by PrincessLuver
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, npcl said:

Correct me if I am wrong about this, but my recollection is that while there have been some changes in interpretation of the regulations over the past 10 years or so, those changes have been made in the direction of tightening loop holes (technical stops, crew visa's on cruises to nowhere, etc.) So the odd of the direction changing is probably slim to none.

Yes, slim to none, and Slim just left the room.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Shmoo here said:

I'm thinking the military/first responder cruises are not viewed as a cruise, maybe the passengers are not paying for it?  As a private party, it may be allowed.

Nope.  Whether a person is paying for the transportation or not is not relevant.  Anyone carried on the ship that is not required for the maintenance, navigation, or primary purpose of the ship, is considered to be a passenger.  So, the guest lecturers are passengers, and corporate executives riding the ship for observations of operations are passengers, even though they are not paying for the cruise.

 

I believe this is being classified as a cruise to nowhere, which is legal under the PVSA, but that CBP and Homeland Security have waived the visa requirements for the crew for these specific cruises.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chengkp75 said:

Nope.  Whether a person is paying for the transportation or not is not relevant.  Anyone carried on the ship that is not required for the maintenance, navigation, or primary purpose of the ship, is considered to be a passenger.  So, the guest lecturers are passengers, and corporate executives riding the ship for observations of operations are passengers, even though they are not paying for the cruise.

 

I believe this is being classified as a cruise to nowhere, which is legal under the PVSA, but that CBP and Homeland Security have waived the visa requirements for the crew for these specific cruises.

That makes more sense, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being on many cruises, Most ports look all the same.  Unless you are big into beaches. It’s really should not matter.  I would go on a port less cruise.  As long as the casino is open. 
 

My biggest concern is the cruise industry as a hole did nothing about other virus on there ships.  Hard to believe now they are going to change.  What are they going to do to insure safety on there ships.  If someone doesn’t wear a mask in public ?  If someone breaks virus rules on the ship. ?  

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
      • Q&A with Chris Prelog, President of Windstar Cruises!
      • Register Now for Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Royal Caribbean
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...