CDC only allowing 7 day cruises till Nov 2021

[Steelers36]

1 hour ago, dog said:

And several people are coming into Canada by plane and not doing the 2 week quarantine. Why is that happening?  People in the Toronto hotspots are going to other towns for driver’s tests. So we do have issues here. 

On the first item, yes, that is reported and I think there are just too many for the government authorities to follow up on.  Probably most of the ones caught and fined are ratted on.  The fact that the government follows up with an email and perhaps a phone call doesn't mean much as I don't think they can trace calls.  I don't think the majority are flouting the law. 

 

On the second, just for the record, there is no law that prevents that.  It does illustrate though, that in a large urban metropolitan area if you don't have consistent rules, then people can sometimes literally cross a road and get what they want on the other side of the street.  Shut down restaurants here, and folks will go to a restaurant over there.

 

[Steelers36]

7 hours ago, CineGraphic said:

 The survival rate of 9/11 is 99.999999%, yet we still can’t bring a full size bottle of shampoo on a plane.

I know I am sliding off topic, but your post does have to do with travel rules, similar to CDC orders.  I seriously doubt this TSA rule is what has prevented another 9/11.  I have read (albeit briefly) about technology in scanners that can detect threat liquids from passive (water, shampoo, etc).  IDK why we still have these limits 6-7 years on, other than potential machinery cost.  

Edited November 1, 2020 by Steelers36

[Steelers36]

5 hours ago, senior lady said:

Canada has extended their " no sail order" to the end of Feb/21

Which doesn't mean much as no cruise ships sail in or out of Canada from now through Feb and longer due to weather that isn't conducive to selling cruises.

[Steelers36]

5 hours ago, satxdiver said:

We have a president that insists on holding campaign rallies san masks and everyone standing shoulder to shoulder to better expose all to the infection.

Just to clarify, the rallies or campaign stops are being held, but masks are given out and people are asked to wear them, but not all attendees choose to do so.  As several others have posted in this thread, there seems to be little or no consequence in general for not following guidelines and rules.  Before someone suggests it, I suppose one could argue if the organizers were serious, they could threaten to remove anyone who doesn't wear a mask unless they have an exemption.

 

[trbarton]

7 hours ago, nocl said:

They have been selling cruise all along but none of them have sailed.

 

No word of crews being hired and sent to join ships yet (that news will clearly hit the cruise news sources).

Ships not being relocated to US waters to satisfy the crew protection requirements

 

So I expect that they have been pretty much setting on their hands.  The Chief has indicated that from his experience in NCL it would take between 30-60 days to take a ship from warm layup to active status even without COVID.

 

Then you have the environmental issues related to the CCL court case that add additional issues for the CCL lines.

 

Just from the order you have 

 

First of all the ships must meet the requirements for protection of crew that was required under the no sail order.  Fairly easy for those few ships that remained in US waters a bit more difficult and a bit of a delay for those that left US waters.

 

Then they once they meet all of the preliminary requirements they have to apply to run the practice cruises.  

 

Then after each practice cruise they have to subject an after action report.  Only after the CDC agrees can they move beyond the practice cruises to actually running cruises with passengers.

 

Of course all of this starts only after the ships are staffed, new crew going through quarantine, the ships prepared to sail.

 

Nope this will not be a quick process.

 

 

FYI...I’ve seen a number of stories on YouTube where staff is being hired & are preparing to leave. Look at YouTube to see some of these posts even one from a crew member before he left. 
 

Tom😀

[nocl]

13 minutes ago, trbarton said:

FYI...I’ve seen a number of stories on YouTube where staff is being hired & are preparing to leave. Look at YouTube to see some of these posts even one from a crew member before he left. 
 

Tom😀

I did see one reported that indicated on October 11 that they were starting to bring some crew back, but still nothing of any real magnitude.  More isolated cases.  So lets assume that they are doing it in large numbers for multiple ships. Starting on October 11 that would still mean ships would not be ready even without the requirements into well into December. Then you have the environmental requirements for CCL lines.

Edited November 1, 2020 by nocl

[Loki S]

8 hours ago, Kittyonions said:

Does this 7 day ruling only apply to cruises from US ports? I ask because our final payment is due on 5th November for 14 day coral Princess leaving Santiago on 4 th February 2021. We are assuming this cruise will be unable to operate, but have been advised that unless we make our final payment we will be in breach of contract in UK!

We will be watching and reading any movements and updates. As we’re book on a 14-day Alaska cruise which could also been seen as a b2b 7 day cruise in August 2021. I know it’s sometime until departure and a lot can change, as we’ve all seen. Just really don’t want to pay final amounts as this would be the 3rd cruise that as been impacted. Not sure if we’ll be able to travel to certain countries. IMO Australia is doing quite well. 
 

On another note, Princess have postponed their Australian operations until end of May 2021.

[chengkp75]

12 hours ago, Mary229 said:

We will have to agree to disagree.  I think that single provision will cause them legal and political problems.  

Well, then you'll have trouble with the part that says, since they conducted a request for information, and held a waiting period, that they can make any or all of these requirements permanent without comment or delay.

[Mary229]

54 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Well, then you'll have trouble with the part that says, since they conducted a request for information, and held a waiting period, that they can make any or all of these requirements permanent without comment or delay.

I made no criticism except on the duration of the order.  I am not pounding the podium and looking into other people's comments for meanings and opinions that just aren't there.  My single comment was about the Nov, 2021 duration, stating that it could cause the CDC legal or political turmoil.  

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I made no criticism except on the duration of the order.  I am not pounding the podium and looking into other people's comments for meanings and opinions that just aren't there.  My single comment was about the Nov, 2021 duration, stating that it could cause the CDC legal or political turmoil.  

So, you see a legal problem with them extending the requirements indefinitely, if/when they become permanent?  I could care less about political turmoil.

[Mary229]

10 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

So, you see a legal problem with them extending the requirements indefinitely, if/when they become permanent?  I could care less about political turmoil.

I am speaking of their political turmoil (as in "heads will roll"), not societal turmoil.    Yes, I do see a problem with a permanent ban on an industry without due process.  It is a due process issue, first and foremost

Edited November 1, 2020 by Mary229

[chengkp75]

45 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I am speaking of their political turmoil (as in "heads will roll"), not societal turmoil.    Yes, I do see a problem with a permanent ban on an industry without due process.  It is a due process issue, first and foremost

It is not a "ban" on the industry, it is a set of requirements for that industry to operate within the US.

[Mary229]

7 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

It is not a "ban" on the industry, it is a set of requirements for that industry to operate within the US.

It behaves as a ban.  I think a lot of what is going on in the country outside of this issue is not legal and like the cruise industry everyone is playing along to get along.  The court cases will likely start in the late winter or spring, they may not originate with the cruise industry but they will begin.  If a vaccine is approved then the cases will begin earlier, big if, I understand, we don't need to argue that point.  

[Grego]

On 10/30/2020 at 11:30 PM, jagoffee said:

 

I checked by reading the 40 page document.  I do not think it says anything about prohibiting B2B cruises.  

Page 32 does include a statement stating no cruises more than 7 days.

After I read the document, I do not feel any better about bureaucrats.  IMO it has a lot of B.S. stuff.  But I guess it is a start.  It comes across as a document that says - “I could not do what I wanted (keep it all shut down for a long time),  so I will show them”.  
 

Just my opinion.

We won't know for sure until later this week how this will work.  I can see them making an existing 14 day voyage that begins in Port Everglades, returns after the first 7 days and then on to the next 7 days and making that a B2B.  It makes anyone contacting any medical issue available to return to the embarkation port in 7 days for transport or whatever.  The downside for us that have a 14 day booked early January is that we do get less shareholder benefit, but if we can still do this as  a B2B then we are on voyage closer to our 50th.

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, Grego said:

We won't know for sure until later this week how this will work.  I can see them making an existing 14 day voyage that begins in Port Everglades, returns after the first 7 days and then on to the next 7 days and making that a B2B.  It makes anyone contacting any medical issue available to return to the embarkation port in 7 days for transport or whatever.  The downside for us that have a 14 day booked early January is that we do get less shareholder benefit, but if we can still do this as  a B2B then we are on voyage closer to our 50th.

I believe that the intent of not allowing passengers onboard longer than 7 days (and this means I feel that B2B's won't be allowed), is that the CDC's feeling is anyone onboard a ship longer than 7 days should meet the more stringent crew requirements, over the passenger requirements.

[Potstech]

10 hours ago, HaveWeMetYet said:

Here is what is really painful for the cruise ship lines. In order to get the Conditional Sailing Certificate they have to cancel all sailings that are longer than 7 days that leave and return to US ports or arrive from a foreign destination to a US port until Nov 1 2021. That is a lot of refunds to process all at once. I assume most people are ready to give up and just get a refund.

Why do they have to cancel them now?  Many things will change between now and then which will affect cruise departures. 

[nocl]

9 hours ago, trbarton said:

FYI...I’ve seen a number of stories on YouTube where staff is being hired & are preparing to leave. Look at YouTube to see some of these posts even one from a crew member before he left. 
 

Tom😀

Looked around the Internet after reading your post. I did find some videos and some references to some crew members. Unfortunately the ones I found seem to be related to crew members joining ships that will be sailing in other places. Such as those joining the Quantum for its planned december sailings out of Singapore. Not so.much for people joining ships that plan to sail from US ports.

[mellon1]

On 10/30/2020 at 11:30 PM, jagoffee said:

 

I checked by reading the 40 page document.  I do not think it says anything about prohibiting B2B cruises.  

Page 32 does include a statement stating no cruises more than 7 days.

After I read the document, I do not feel any better about bureaucrats.  IMO it has a lot of B.S. stuff.  But I guess it is a start.  It comes across as a document that says - “I could not do what I wanted (keep it all shut down for a long time),  so I will show them”.  
 

Just my opinion.

Thanks for reading the document for all of us!  We have six 7 day B2Bs starting Jan 2022.  Really hoping that this will all be over by then.  Keeping my fingers crossed!

[Steelers36]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

I believe that the intent of not allowing passengers onboard longer than 7 days (and this means I feel that B2B's won't be allowed), is that the CDC's feeling is anyone onboard a ship longer than 7 days should meet the more stringent crew requirements, over the passenger requirements.

I wonder how this will work (for enforcement) as many have posted on here about constructed B2B's where they switched ships or cruise companies in Port Everglades. 

 

I also wonder if a ship can be turned around in a day, or else the typical Princess 4:00pm departure from PE will be gone by the wayside and evening departures will become the norm for the near future.  They can still make it to Princess Cay no porblem for the following morning.

 

[oskidunker]

Would not apply for cruises in Europe, as far as I know. 

[dog]

Re: B2B— out of Ft Lauderdale- should have to disembark and be re-tested with negative results before re embarking. 

[chengkp75]

14 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

We now have a group of unelected bureaucrats who have completely taken all rights away from the cruise lines to conduct business in the USA.

Really, Hank?  So, I guess that MARPOL, SOLAS, the Clean Water and Air Acts, OSHA, the FAA and the ICC, to name just a few, should all be abolished because they place restrictions on companies doing business in the US?

[MamaFej]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I believe that the intent of not allowing passengers onboard longer than 7 days (and this means I feel that B2B's won't be allowed), is that the CDC's feeling is anyone onboard a ship longer than 7 days should meet the more stringent crew requirements, over the passenger requirements.

Perhaps it's because I'm more than a bit cynical, but I see the 7 day requirement as a number within the 5-14 day incubation period that happens to coincide with a common cruise length. It's a perfect length to allow cruise lines to say about someone later diagnosed, "There's no way you can prove that this person got it on the ship. It could have easily been before embarking or after disembarking. Don't blame us." 

______________

OT: while I understand what the cheng in your screen name means, I always think of my friend K. P. Cheng (born in 1975) when I see it. In fact, the first time I saw it, I wondered if you were her, before reading your post.

[nocl]

3 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

I wonder how this will work (for enforcement) as many have posted on here about constructed B2B's where they switched ships or cruise companies in Port Everglades. 

 

I also wonder if a ship can be turned around in a day, or else the typical Princess 4:00pm departure from PE will be gone by the wayside and evening departures will become the norm for the near future.  They can still make it to Princess Cay no porblem for the following morning.

 

Of course if they switch ships, even under current rules they would qualify as a different voyage.

 

Unlike the Chief, I am not convinced that B2B will not be allowed.  However, if they are allowed I would expect that the passenger will have to fully leave the ship after the first voyage (with luggage), get tested prior to disembarkation, then go through the complete embarkation process which might mean another test.  Of course this could raise an issue if the next cruise down not leave the same day.  Or if the intent is to get on one ship and board another the same day.  The length of time to do tests and disembark all passengers will make departures a little less exact and certainly take much longer.

 

Unfortunately the order does not include a definition of what the CDC considers to be a cruise.  If they use the current definition as used by CBP and the Coast Guard, then B2B on the same ship might not be allowed, because under their definition it is one cruise.  

 

So probably 50/50

[caribill]

5 minutes ago, nocl said:

 

Unlike the Chief, I am not convinced that B2B will not be allowed.  However, if they are allowed I would expect that the passenger will have to fully leave the ship after the first voyage (with luggage), get tested prior to disembarkation, then go through the complete embarkation process which might mean another test. 

 

That would be the test before boarding for the new cruise. However, you will likely need to present a negative result from a PCR test taken within the previous 72 hours, not easy to do if you have been on a cruise ship. That will not be the type test given after disembarking.