Healthy Sail Panel

[NavArch64]

Healthy Sail Panel Report just released by RCCL/NCL. Very detailed. Everyone interested in going to sea again should read it.

[npcl]

here is link

https://www.royalcaribbeangroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Healthy-Sail-Panel_Full-Recommendations_9.21.20_FINAL.pdf

[prescottbob]

2 hours ago, npcl said:

here is link

https://www.royalcaribbeangroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Healthy-Sail-Panel_Full-Recommendations_9.21.20_FINAL.pdf

 

Item 16: Masking, other than dining /pools I would assume.

Item 59: Cruise line excursions only (at least for initial re-start).

 

We'll be on the sidelines / doing land touring for some time it looks like.

 

May everyone remain to be well. 

Bob 

[cruisemom42]

Initial recommendations for re-start -- cruises not longer than 10 days, ideally not longer than 7 days.

 

Fewer ports, utilize private islands where feasible, or ensure tight control at other ports (including only ship-sponsored tours).

 

Crew housed individually "where possible" (not exactly a mandate; I'd like stronger wording here.)

 

Emphasis placed on cruise lines having a plan in place for an unanticipated mass debarkation if needed and that cruise lines should also have a plan to get any sick passengers home without mixing with healthy ones.  (I think this is likely a non-negotiable for CDC at any rate....given what we've seen.)

 

The first two things I mention alone are enough to make cruising sound pretty unappetizing to me in the near-term.

[npcl]

41 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Initial recommendations for re-start -- cruises not longer than 10 days, ideally not longer than 7 days.

 

Fewer ports, utilize private islands where feasible, or ensure tight control at other ports (including only ship-sponsored tours).

 

Crew housed individually "where possible" (not exactly a mandate; I'd like stronger wording here.)

 

Emphasis placed on cruise lines having a plan in place for an unanticipated mass debarkation if needed and that cruise lines should also have a plan to get any sick passengers home without mixing with healthy ones.  (I think this is likely a non-negotiable for CDC at any rate....given what we've seen.)

 

The first two things I mention alone are enough to make cruising sound pretty unappetizing to me in the near-term.

this is just their recommendations. Will still need to see how the cruise lines address them in their actual plans.

 

 

[rkacruiser]

4 hours ago, prescottbob said:

Item 16: Masking, other than dining /pools I would assume.

Item 59: Cruise line excursions only (at least for initial re-start).

 

Item 59, I can live with.

Item 16, no, that is not something that I can accept at this time.  Wearing a mask to embark, disembark?  I probably could bring myself to accept this--for awhile.  Once aboard, I want to be "mask free".  I am "mask free" in my home.  Why should I pay to "have a good time" and have to wear a mask?  

 

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Initial recommendations for re-start -- cruises not longer than 10 days, ideally not longer than 7 days.

 

Fewer ports, utilize private islands where feasible, or ensure tight control at other ports (including only ship-sponsored tours).

 

I can accept both of these conditions.  For awhile.  

 

This Healthy Sail Panel "stuff" is coming from NCL and RCI.  CCL has had no involvement as far as I have read.  That raises suspicions on my part.  The current President of CLIA is an executive of Royal Caribbean.  The President, I think.  Why isn't there some CCL "buy-in" in this Panel's work?

[dogs4fun]

5 hours ago, prescottbob said:

Item 59: Cruise line excursions only (at least for initial re-start).

 

We'll be on the sidelines / doing land touring for some time it looks like.

Same here. 

[cwtravel]

If these guidelines are incorporated HAL might be able to start with one ship, from Ft. Lauderdale to Half Moon Cay, Grand Turk, Amber Cove and possibly Mahogany Bay, Roatan.

 

 

 

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

This Healthy Sail Panel "stuff" is coming from NCL and RCI.  CCL has had no involvement as far as I have read.  That raises suspicions on my part.  The current President of CLIA is an executive of Royal Caribbean.  The President, I think.  Why isn't there some CCL "buy-in" in this Panel's work?

 

Basically CCL took all their toys (ships) and left US waters in a fit of pique (my words) because they disagreed with CDC's requirement to monitor COVID on ships still in US waters with crew. They also seem to want to baulk at plans for restarting in the US, which is basically what this "Healthy Sail" panel is about -- cruise lines that want to get started cruising back in the US sooner rather than later.

 

To tell the truth, I didn't see much different there than what is currently being done by MSC and Tui on their "early" Med cruises -- at least to the extent known. I suspect there will end up being more commonalities than differences among how the various cruise lines plan to restart "safely".

[cruisemom42]

4 hours ago, npcl said:

this is just their recommendations. Will still need to see how the cruise lines address them in their actual plans.

 

 

 

Yes, I realize that. Do you think their release was timed to coincide with the end of the CDC's period for public comment?

[npcl]

37 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Yes, I realize that. Do you think their release was timed to coincide with the end of the CDC's period for public comment?

that and the timing of the expiration of the no sail order.

 

with the stunts that HHS has pulled and the recent power grab that all new regulations must be signed by Secretary of HHS taking away that authority from FDA and CDC not even sure if CDC can issue an extension without HHS signing.

Edited September 21, 2020 by npcl

[rkacruiser]

36 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Basically CCL took all their toys (ships) and left US waters in a fit of pique (my words) because they disagreed with CDC's requirement to monitor COVID on ships still in US waters with crew.

 

Your comment expresses an opinion that I have not read on CC from others.  A "fit of pique"?  Why did you choose those words to post?   

[npcl]

1 minute ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Your comment expresses an opinion that I have not read on CC from others.  A "fit of pique"?  Why did you choose those words to post?   

I certainly agree with her and have posted similar comments about the cruise lines lack of cooperation with CDC, the efforts they have taken to avoid testing and reporting results, including their removal of ships from us waters.

[rkacruiser]

2 minutes ago, npcl said:

with the stunts that HHS has pulled and the recent power grab that all new regulations must be signed by Secretary of HHS taking away that authority from FDA and CDC not even sure if CDC can issue an extension.

 

Add that to the reversal within 24 hours of the latest CDC postings about how far in the air the virus can spread.  Who is in charge of HHS, the FDA, the CDC?  Goofy, Donald Duck?  No, it must be the Roadrunner.  

[rkacruiser]

1 minute ago, npcl said:

I certainly agree with her and have posted similar comments about the cruise lines lack of cooperation with CDC, the efforts they have taken to avoid testing and reporting results, including their removal of ships from us waters.

 

OK.  Let's assume that CCL was "miffed".  They chose to do what they did for whatever reasons that they had.  Is that a good reason why they have not been involved in this Healthy Sail Panel?  

[npcl]

53 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Basically CCL took all their toys (ships) and left US waters in a fit of pique (my words) because they disagreed with CDC's requirement to monitor COVID on ships still in US waters with crew. They also seem to want to baulk at plans for restarting in the US, which is basically what this "Healthy Sail" panel is about -- cruise lines that want to get started cruising back in the US sooner rather than later.

 

To tell the truth, I didn't see much different there than what is currently being done by MSC and Tui on their "early" Med cruises -- at least to the extent known. I suspect there will end up being more commonalities than differences among how the various cruise lines plan to restart "safely".

a couple of difference MSC does more testing of crew before boarding ship and I believe the crew does their quarantine period on shore before joining ship.

 

also MSC does the testing at time of boarding, in these recommendations the testing including cost is the responsibility of the passenger, done in advance.

[npcl]

11 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Add that to the reversal within 24 hours of the latest CDC postings about how far in the air the virus can spread.  Who is in charge of HHS, the FDA, the CDC?  Goofy, Donald Duck?  No, it must be the Roadrunner.  

my read is Alizar Secretary of HHS is trying to restrict the line agencies and he is using HHS legal to try and force the agencies to do things that they oppose.

[npcl]

8 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

OK.  Let's assume that CCL was "miffed".  They chose to do what they did for whatever reasons that they had.  Is that a good reason why they have not been involved in this Healthy Sail Panel?  

I think that they did not want their name with their competition. there was no reason for them to do so since the panel is really not offering anything new, and it was clear that the report was going to be used by CLIA.

[rkacruiser]

Just now, npcl said:

I think that they did not want their name with their competition. there was no reason for them to do so since the panel is really not offering anything new, and it was clear that the report was going to be used by CLIA.

 

I accept that as a good reason!  Particularly since the President of the CLIA is Adam Goldstein who is also President of Royal Caribbean Cruises.  

 

Has the CLIA become as political as the CDC, FDA, and HHS?  

[iancal]

It will be meaningless if they cannot attract enough customers.

 

Phrasing like house crews individually 'where possible' is gobbly gook BS cruise line nonsense.

 

Are we interested in cruise where we have to wear masks?  No

Are we interested in 7 day cruises? No

Are we interested in cruises with few stops, and when the stops are private islands?  No

Are we interested in cruise line excursions? Absolutely not

etc., etc., etc.

 

Do we have any confidence that the cruise lines will actually follow these guidelines to the letter? 

Absolutely not.

 

This just seems like a big, meaningless PR exercise to me.   Intended to give some naive cruisers the warm and fuzzies.   Something to put on a glossy brochure, web page, or advert,  and forget about.   We will not be depending on the Healthy Sail Panel to decide when it is safe for us to cruise.  No sale.

 

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by iancal

[dobiemom]

(I hope this is allowed.) Here's a 10-min video summarizing the 66-page document:   https://youtu.be/YPSWq93p1Qo

[cruisemom42]

2 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Has the CLIA become as political as the CDC, FDA, and HHS?  

 

Perhaps that would be better phrased as:  Have the CDC, FDA and HHS become as political as CLIA?

 

CLIA is a trade industry group and they spend a significant sum annually in lobbying efforts. While all of the major cruise lines individually spend money in lobbying, CLIA also lobbies on behalf of all of them and for the last several years has spent around a million bucks on their efforts....

 

 

[Hlitner]

I guess over 35 years in government health care (and health care policy) has made me naïve and skeptical.   If anyone on my staff had delivered, to me, such a document I would have sent them back to the "drawing board."  Much in this document makes little sense.  For example, testing 5 days 4 days or even 3 days before arriving at the port is near useless since this would not detect any virus exposure during a person's travel to the port.  And consider that it is that travel that puts folks at the highest degree of risk.   When they write about "social distancing" on a ship (with these lines we are talking large mass market vessels) there are no guidelines how this can possibly be achieved.  Trying to picture 6+ feet of spacing in show rooms, bars, casinos, and even on deck is very difficult to imagine.  Even if this could be achieved by significantly reducing capacity (and the ability of the cruise line to make a profit) the experience would not endear most passengers to that type of cruise travel.  

 

So this is how we see it.  The cruise lines are truly in a desperate situation and would say and do just about anything to resume operations.  Just picture thousands of passengers wanting to browse shops in Phillispburg, St Maarten while on a carefully chaperoned excursion with 60 other souls.   Pity the poor lady who needs her "Diamonds International" fix.  I understand that the path to normal operations might be to start very slowly and pray that all goes well and confidence is restored.  But lets face it, given a choice of cruising to a few ports and being treated like caged cattle might not be a good choice for many folks.  DW and I would be fine on a Caribbean cruise in something akin to MSC's Yacht Club because we would not bother to get off the ship in any of the ports (been there done that over 100 times).  But there is no way we would travel in places like Europe with these kind of restrictions.   If this kind of thing becomes the cruising norm you will wave to us from your cruise excursion because we will be doing our usual independent land trip.  When you drive down the Blvd St Germain (Paris) with your masked nose stuck against the sealed window gazing at the cute café it will be DW and me sitting at the table with our usual carafe of vin and a nice pastry.  And you will be able to listen to your guide say, "that is a nice cafe where normal folks sit, relax, eat, and drink,

 

Hank

[iancal]

Ditto.

 

What I do not understand is why it apparently took them so much time to come up with this fud.

 

An intermediate marketing specialist could have done the bulk of it with a little research ( and as much integrity) in half the time.

 

The CLIA is going to protect my interests?  Really?

Edited September 22, 2020 by iancal

[chengkp75]

This document is an advisory board's recommendations, and a "talking point" or "negotiating stance".  It is not a concrete action plan which is what the CDC is requiring.  Whether or not the cruise lines have been promulgating action plans using these recommendations, so that if/when the CDC agrees that this document is an acceptable position they can submit plans immediately, or whether they don't want to "waste time" (as one executive has stated before) making plans until they know the basic framework is acceptable, I don't know.  If they are not "wasting time", then they will need time to promulgate plans and then submit them to the CDC for approval before any sailing happens.

 

Personally, I feel that the actual "no sail order" will likely lapse, but based on the "request for information", which is a step in the process of making new regulations, that all of the requirements listed in the no sail order are about to become federal regulations for the health clearance of passenger ships from now on.