Saga of Eclipse Barnacles continues

[gracebest]

Just now, terrydtx said:

I agree with your comments 100%. This is one of the very rare times a cruise has to be canceled for some emergency repair. Celebrity is the one losing all that revenue from having no passengers on the ship for a week and if they could have avoided this they would have.

 

Just now, terrydtx said:

I agree with your comments 100%. This is one of the very rare times a cruise has to be canceled for some emergency repair. Celebrity is the one losing all that revenue from having no passengers on the ship for a week and if they could have avoided this they would have.

I would agree if it were not for the fact that Eclipse hadn’t sailed in over 2 years.  They could have avoided this by taking care of it before the restart of it on April 23.  They knew there was a problem.  We were handed a letter as we boarded stating that because of the barnacles we would be sailing slower and would have to miss a day in Hilo.  We did the ship tour and the captain said that they had hoped sailing into colder water would dislodge the barnacles.  That obviously didn’t work, so for that poor decision they are inconveniencing May 22 passengers and losing revenue.  Had they taken care of the problem correctly when the ship was out of service they wouldn’t have lost revenue.  I don’t qualify this situation as an emergency.  It was a problem they knew about and hoped it would go away.

[rickip]

My understanding is that they were scheduled for the work to be done, but it had to be cancelled due to inclement weather.  I'm guessing they rescheduled for the earliest possible date after that...

 

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, HMR74 said:

Diesel on the east coast is supossed to be in short supply right now.

Ships, for the most part, don't run on diesel, and the diesel they do run on is not the same diesel as you can buy at a gas station.  Marine Gas Oil (what the ships use in restricted emissions zones) is equivalent to #2 diesel or home heating oil.  For the most part, the ships still run on residual fuel, and there is almost never a shortage of residual fuel, as this is not a product distilled from crude oil, it is the "leftovers" of the crude oil after all possible distillates have been removed.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, gracebest said:

 

I would agree if it were not for the fact that Eclipse hadn’t sailed in over 2 years.  They could have avoided this by taking care of it before the restart of it on April 23.  They knew there was a problem.  We were handed a letter as we boarded stating that because of the barnacles we would be sailing slower and would have to miss a day in Hilo.  We did the ship tour and the captain said that they had hoped sailing into colder water would dislodge the barnacles.  That obviously didn’t work, so for that poor decision they are inconveniencing May 22 passengers and losing revenue.  Had they taken care of the problem correctly when the ship was out of service they wouldn’t have lost revenue.  I don’t qualify this situation as an emergency.  It was a problem they knew about and hoped it would go away.

As noted elsewhere, Celebrity planned on cleaning the hull while at anchor off LA, but could not due to bad weather.  They then sailed to Vancouver and discovered that they could not overcome the drag with additional power, as they had hoped, so that is when the itineraries were changed.  When the hull cleaning at LA fell through, there is a limited number of companies who do this, with limited equipment, and many more ships than cruise ships that utilize their services, so they tend to be booked long in advance.  There are also limited places that allow in water hull cleaning.  And, now, they were very lucky to be able to score a drydock slot on this short notice.  I believe that they did all that could be done given a couple of bad breaks.  Their only other option would have been to cancel everything until they could get a drydock slot, or find a location and service for in-water cleaning.

[NutsAboutGolf]

2 hours ago, gracebest said:

 

I would agree if it were not for the fact that Eclipse hadn’t sailed in over 2 years.  They could have avoided this by taking care of it before the restart of it on April 23.  They knew there was a problem.  We were handed a letter as we boarded stating that because of the barnacles we would be sailing slower and would have to miss a day in Hilo.  We did the ship tour and the captain said that they had hoped sailing into colder water would dislodge the barnacles.  That obviously didn’t work, so for that poor decision they are inconveniencing May 22 passengers and losing revenue.  Had they taken care of the problem correctly when the ship was out of service they wouldn’t have lost revenue.  I don’t qualify this situation as an emergency.  It was a problem they knew about and hoped it would go away.

 

I don't expect a Captain to know every little detail about boat maintenance but WOW is that just wrong.

[HMR74]

19 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Ships, for the most part, don't run on diesel, and the diesel they do run on is not the same diesel as you can buy at a gas station.  Marine Gas Oil (what the ships use in restricted emissions zones) is equivalent to #2 diesel or home heating oil.  For the most part, the ships still run on residual fuel, and there is almost never a shortage of residual fuel, as this is not a product distilled from crude oil, it is the "leftovers" of the crude oil after all possible distillates have been removed.

tks for the education. in a few words how is jet fuel created. If diesel is the base where it all starts from and if diesel is in short supply, does that not mean that everything, every derivative of diesel, is tight?

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

tks for the education. in a few words how is jet fuel created. If diesel is the base where it all starts from and if diesel is in short supply, does that not mean that everything, every derivative of diesel, is tight?

No, crude oil is where it all starts from.  Petroleum distillates (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, lube oil stocks) are literally distilled from crude oil, like alcohol is distilled.  The crude is heated, and pumped into a distillation tower, where the various products are drawn off at various levels with the higher levels being cooler than the lower.  So, petroleum gas comes off at the top, then in descending order, gasoline, kerosene (from which jet fuel is made), diesel, and residuals.  Cracking hydrocarbon molecules can aid in producing more products like lube oils after the distillation process, and also to produce more distillates than would naturally occur.  The distillation process can be varied to produce more or less of a particular product depending on demand.  For instance, typically during summer, gasoline is produced more than diesel due to demand for driving, and in winter, diesel (home heating oil) is produced more than in summer.  Europe considers gasoline to be mainly a "by-product" of producing the diesel that the majority of their vehicles operate on, so they send their unwanted gasoline to the US Northeast.

 

As noted, ship's "bunker fuel" is what is left over after the distillation process.  This fuel is thick, tarry, and black, much like a driveway sealer, and has to be heated to 140*C (280*F) and injected at a pressure of 30,000 psi before it will ignite.  Many people think that "diesels" run on "diesel fuel", but in fact can run on residual fuel, crude oil, diesel, coal dust, or even wheat dust.

[chengkp75]

32 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

I don't expect a Captain to know every little detail about boat maintenance but WOW is that just wrong.

Not really.  The warm water species of barnacles that live in the SoCal area only range as far north as SF.  While barnacles are found in nearly all water temperatures, there are warm water and cold water species, and they don't feed well (and hence don't live long) in the improper temperature range.  Subjecting warm water barnacles to cold water can lead to die off, and when the barnacle dies off, it stops exuding the sticky "glue" that holds it to the ship, and the shells can break off with vessel motion.  While this is not going to provide a complete cleaning of the hull (for certain, the attachment "disc" will remain even after the barnacle breaks off, and continue to provide drag), it can certainly help, and may get the ship to where it can make maximum speed using more power.  I've been on offshore oil rigs where the warm Gulf Stream meets the cold Newfoundland Current, and as the Stream moves north and south during the year, the barnacles and other marine growth will experience a major die-off and clog the sea strainers repeatedly.

[HMR74]

19 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

No, crude oil is where it all starts from.  Petroleum distillates (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, lube oil stocks) are literally distilled from crude oil, like alcohol is distilled.  The crude is heated, and pumped into a distillation tower, where the various products are drawn off at various levels with the higher levels being cooler than the lower.  So, petroleum gas comes off at the top, then in descending order, gasoline, kerosene (from which jet fuel is made), diesel, and residuals.  Cracking hydrocarbon molecules can aid in producing more products like lube oils after the distillation process, and also to produce more distillates than would naturally occur.  The distillation process can be varied to produce more or less of a particular product depending on demand.  For instance, typically during summer, gasoline is produced more than diesel due to demand for driving, and in winter, diesel (home heating oil) is produced more than in summer.  Europe considers gasoline to be mainly a "by-product" of producing the diesel that the majority of their vehicles operate on, so they send their unwanted gasoline to the US Northeast.

 

As noted, ship's "bunker fuel" is what is left over after the distillation process.  This fuel is thick, tarry, and black, much like a driveway sealer, and has to be heated to 140*C (280*F) and injected at a pressure of 30,000 psi before it will ignite.  Many people think that "diesels" run on "diesel fuel", but in fact can run on residual fuel, crude oil, diesel, coal dust, or even wheat dust.

THanks for the education! Now, if ships use the bottom of the barrel, is that why there are environmental concerns and the move to LNG, and soot on balconys towar the rear of the ships.

Also, would energy usage be better if it was a better grade, or is that basically impossible or too costly  to get.

[chengkp75]

26 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

THanks for the education! Now, if ships use the bottom of the barrel, is that why there are environmental concerns and the move to LNG, and soot on balconys towar the rear of the ships.

Also, would energy usage be better if it was a better grade, or is that basically impossible or too costly  to get.

Yes, the heavy metals tend to remain in residual fuels, and lead to sulfur and nitrous oxides pollutants, which can be removed by exhaust gas scrubbers.  Also, the IMO has moved the allowable sulfur content of residual fuel from 3.5% to 0.5% worldwide, which has reduced sulfur oxide emissions by 84% already. Soot is from incomplete combustion leaving carbon particles on turbocharger blades and boiler tubes, which is then cleaned off nightly to keep the thermal transfer surfaces clean.  Distillate fuels can reduce soot.  Much of the switch to LNG fuel by the cruise lines is a cost decision, not an environmental decision, though it gives an apparent eco-friendly PR bonus.  The problem with LNG is the same as the "cow fart" crises, between the well head and the engine, an amount of LNG is "lost", known as "methane slip", which most environmentalists don't want to talk about.  This is because methane is 200 times more damaging as a greenhouse gas than CO2, and hangs around about 10 times as long.  In the US, where the vast majority of cruising happens, LNG has a significant cost savings over even residual fuel.

 

As for energy usage from a "better grade", actually the residual fuel gives the best energy per gallon of almost any fuel.  While diesel has an "energy density" of 42Mj/kg (megajoules/kilogram), and residual oil typically has 40Mj/kg, you would think that diesel is a better fuel.  But, the engine uses fuel by the volume (liter or gallon), not weight (kilogram or pound), so you have to convert these figures to energy per volume (Mj/ltr) by multiplying by the density.  Residual fuel oil has a density of .992, while diesel is .830.  So, the energy per liter is 39.68Mj/ltr for residual, and 34.86Mj/ltr.  So, the "lower grade" fuel gives more energy per gallon.

[HMR74]

30 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, the heavy metals tend to remain in residual fuels, and lead to sulfur and nitrous oxides pollutants, which can be removed by exhaust gas scrubbers.  Also, the IMO has moved the allowable sulfur content of residual fuel from 3.5% to 0.5% worldwide, which has reduced sulfur oxide emissions by 84% already. Soot is from incomplete combustion leaving carbon particles on turbocharger blades and boiler tubes, which is then cleaned off nightly to keep the thermal transfer surfaces clean.  Distillate fuels can reduce soot.  Much of the switch to LNG fuel by the cruise lines is a cost decision, not an environmental decision, though it gives an apparent eco-friendly PR bonus.  The problem with LNG is the same as the "cow fart" crises, between the well head and the engine, an amount of LNG is "lost", known as "methane slip", which most environmentalists don't want to talk about.  This is because methane is 200 times more damaging as a greenhouse gas than CO2, and hangs around about 10 times as long.  In the US, where the vast majority of cruising happens, LNG has a significant cost savings over even residual fuel.

 

As for energy usage from a "better grade", actually the residual fuel gives the best energy per gallon of almost any fuel.  While diesel has an "energy density" of 42Mj/kg (megajoules/kilogram), and residual oil typically has 40Mj/kg, you would think that diesel is a better fuel.  But, the engine uses fuel by the volume (liter or gallon), not weight (kilogram or pound), so you have to convert these figures to energy per volume (Mj/ltr) by multiplying by the density.  Residual fuel oil has a density of .992, while diesel is .830.  So, the energy per liter is 39.68Mj/ltr for residual, and 34.86Mj/ltr.  So, the "lower grade" fuel gives more energy per gallon.

So, basically there is no such thing as a free lunch in anything. Any reaction in energy causes another reaction. We just need to keep the top people in govt, any party, from messing up a bunch of delicate balances with superficial decisions.

[mrbocbox]

TOOO MUCH SCIENCE!!!

[catspaw1]

5 hours ago, gracebest said:

 

I would agree if it were not for the fact that Eclipse hadn’t sailed in over 2 years.  They could have avoided this by taking care of it before the restart of it on April 23.  They knew there was a problem.  We were handed a letter as we boarded stating that because of the barnacles we would be sailing slower and would have to miss a day in Hilo.  We did the ship tour and the captain said that they had hoped sailing into colder water would dislodge the barnacles.  That obviously didn’t work, so for that poor decision they are inconveniencing May 22 passengers and losing revenue.  Had they taken care of the problem correctly when the ship was out of service they wouldn’t have lost revenue.  I don’t qualify this situation as an emergency.  It was a problem they knew about and hoped it would go away.

I agree. We own a 44' sailboat  & are always aware of growth on the hull. On a regular basis we dove on it to get rid of any growth or barnacles. If the boat isn't moving or is in warmer weather, things grow more quickly. So all ships are aware of this. The question is why didn't celebrity do anything about it? If all the world's navies deal with this why couldn't celebrity? Incompetence I think.

[Peteymil]

1 minute ago, catspaw1 said:

I agree. We own a 44' sailboat  & are always aware of growth on the hull. On a regular basis we dove on it to get rid of any growth or barnacles. If the boat isn't moving or is in warmer weather, things grow more quickly. So all ships are aware of this. The question is why didn't celebrity do anything about it? If all the world's navies deal with this why couldn't celebrity? Incompetence I think.

I agree and to those who say they were going to take care of it but there was inclement weather, I think Celebrity needed to be prepared for that and allow time in case of that situation occurring. It's not like they faced inclement weather for a couple of months. They just did not allow for the maintenance that needed to be done. So now 4 cruises are affected, the May 15 cruise has been significantly altered, and May 22nd has been cancelled, and for many people customer service has been poor. 

[catspaw1]

11 minutes ago, Peteymil said:

I agree and to those who say they were going to take care of it but there was inclement weather, I think Celebrity needed to be prepared for that and allow time in case of that situation occurring. It's not like they faced inclement weather for a couple of months. They just did not allow for the maintenance that needed to be done. So now 4 cruises are affected, the May 15 cruise has been significantly altered, and May 22nd has been cancelled, and for many people customer service has been poor. 

It's deferred maintenance right now that appears was not done on a timely basis. I worked for NAVSEA- we build Navy boats - everything that floats for USN so understand this. That's why we have a huge maintenance budget. Doesn't Celebrity???

[chengkp75]

12 minutes ago, catspaw1 said:

It's deferred maintenance right now that appears was not done on a timely basis. I worked for NAVSEA- we build Navy boats - everything that floats for USN so understand this. That's why we have a huge maintenance budget. Doesn't Celebrity???

Unlike the Navy, Celebrity needs to make a profit, so no, Celebrity does not have the maintenance budget at the level of the US Navy.  No commercial venture could take a ship out of service for a year, the way the Navy routinely does.  Would you scrape your boat's hull several months before you were going to start using it, with the resultant regrowth, or would you do it just before getting underway?  Unlike your boat, commercial ships are not allowed to scrape hulls willy-nilly, but must use certified cleaning services that recover all water and debris from the cleaning to separate it and treat it before returning the water to the sea.  These services are typically booked solid, so if the weather doesn't cooperate when you have scheduled them, they move on to the next customer, and you have to try to reschedule when and where possible.  These cleaning jobs can also only be done in approved locations.  If cleaning services were so readily available, or drydocks available to do an out of water cleaning, why have they waited until the 22nd to do this, why not cancel the first possible cruise, or cancel the balance of the current voyage, and send the ship to get cleaned right away?

[Fly and Sail]

On 5/6/2022 at 5:20 AM, mkayreagan said:

Our 5/22 Eclipse Sailing is cancelled as of 6 PM EDT last night, 5/5. At first I thought it might be a bogus email, sent to “Dear Guest.” Husband called Celebrity this morning and they confirmed. We had $1000 in hotels booked that we could cancel without penalty, but our almost $2000 in airfare on Air Canada can’t be cancelled. We do get full credit on future flights but not many good flight options from Orlando. I’m done with Celebrity.

 

As much as I hate Flights by Celebrity but this is the only way to be 100% protected in case something goes pear shaped with your cruise. Either that or using air miles.

 

There is no way in hell I'd book expensive tickets that are non-refundable when it comes to cruising these days especially on airlines that have screwed people over in the past (Air Canada is one of them).

 

Did AC really charge you $1000/person for MCO-YVR? That's insane!

[catspaw1]

19 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Unlike the Navy, Celebrity needs to make a profit, so no, Celebrity does not have the maintenance budget at the level of the US Navy.  No commercial venture could take a ship out of service for a year, the way the Navy routinely does.  Would you scrape your boat's hull several months before you were going to start using it, with the resultant regrowth, or would you do it just before getting underway?  Unlike your boat, commercial ships are not allowed to scrape hulls willy-nilly, but must use certified cleaning services that recover all water and debris from the cleaning to separate it and treat it before returning the water to the sea.  These services are typically booked solid, so if the weather doesn't cooperate when you have scheduled them, they move on to the next customer, and you have to try to reschedule when and where possible.  These cleaning jobs can also only be done in approved locations.  If cleaning services were so readily available, or drydocks available to do an out of water cleaning, why have they waited until the 22nd to do this, why not cancel the first possible cruise, or cancel the balance of the current voyage, and send the ship to get cleaned right away?

Yes thank God for USN. Yes we have facilities that commercial ships don't have but they have a routine maintenance schedule. It appears Celebrity does not. USN also has an outstanding dive team. And yes a ship needs to be checked on a regular basis to monitor conditions. 

[NutsAboutGolf]

54 minutes ago, Fly and Sail said:

 

As much as I hate Flights by Celebrity but this is the only way to be 100% protected in case something goes pear shaped with your cruise. Either that or using air miles.

 

There is no way in hell I'd book expensive tickets that are non-refundable when it comes to cruising these days especially on airlines that have screwed people over in the past (Air Canada is one of them).

 

Did AC really charge you $1000/person for MCO-YVR? That's insane!

 

For this very reason and to avoid a foreign country I would have booked the Solstice out of Seattle.  As I pointed out, charters can happen on any sailing and it just happened on NCL's newest ship the Prima over NYE.  The reason AC was slow to refund folks during the pandemic was they were out of money, they are heavily subsidized by the Canadian govt and were awaiting a bailout which they ultimately received

[Fly and Sail]

10 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

For this very reason and to avoid a foreign country I would have booked the Solstice out of Seattle.  As I pointed out, charters can happen on any sailing and it just happened on NCL's newest ship the Prima over NYE.  The reason AC was slow to refund folks during the pandemic was they were out of money, they are heavily subsidized by the Canadian govt and were awaiting a bailout which they ultimately received

 

Exactly why I'm on the Solstice right now. I didn't trust the Canadians opening their ports and figured worst cases Congress will authorize another Jones Act/PVSA waiver for this years season.

 

Turns out I was lucky for a whole different set of reasons but well... it is as it is.

 

As far as AC is concerned, all airlines worldwide were out of money but AC blatantly refused tor refund anything and then even lobbied the government to make credits a lawful method of refund. Thank god the USDOT took a different position and forced AC to return CASH. The government should have let AC go bust but that's all water under the bridge now.

[Fly and Sail]

On 5/5/2022 at 10:33 AM, rotoal said:

Does anyone know about Solstice?  Weren’t both Eclipse and Solstice off the coast of San Diego?  
 

I would assume that both ships are having the same problem.
 

 

 

Solstice is fine. Talked to hotel director Mario yesterday about this issue with Eclipse and he said that Solstice just had this done and received a full coat of paint in the dry dock.

[BigAl94]

5 hours ago, Fly and Sail said:

 

Solstice is fine. Talked to hotel director Mario yesterday about this issue with Eclipse and he said that Solstice just had this done and received a full coat of paint in the dry dock.

Strange as Solstice was dry docked and hull painted in January 2021 and Eclipse in February 2021. Where is Eclipse being dry docked this time?

[chengkp75]

7 hours ago, catspaw1 said:

Yes thank God for USN. Yes we have facilities that commercial ships don't have but they have a routine maintenance schedule. It appears Celebrity does not. USN also has an outstanding dive team. And yes a ship needs to be checked on a regular basis to monitor conditions. 

While I am grateful that the US has the best Navy in the world, I would hold on casting aspersions based on a comparison of the two.  Celebrity has routine scheduled maintenance, as required by IMO convention, international law, and the law of the flag state.  In fact, I know a good bit about the Navy and their practices, and I would say that the ISM Code (International Safety Management) that mandates a preventative maintenance program that meets or exceeds the equipment manufacturer's requirements, or meets or exceeds the best maritime industry standards, and is audited annually by a third party surveyor, is as good, or better, than the Navy's program.  Can maintenance get deferred, yes, within statutory limits, as it does with the Navy as well, due to extenuating circumstances.  Does the Navy dive team wait around until a ship schedules a survey, or do they have to be out every single day booking work in order to make a profit?  Also, as I remember, the Navy is exempt from many environmental regulations, and likely could clean a hull where others could not.

[catspaw1]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

While I am grateful that the US has the best Navy in the world, I would hold on casting aspersions based on a comparison of the two.  Celebrity has routine scheduled maintenance, as required by IMO convention, international law, and the law of the flag state.  In fact, I know a good bit about the Navy and their practices, and I would say that the ISM Code (International Safety Management) that mandates a preventative maintenance program that meets or exceeds the equipment manufacturer's requirements, or meets or exceeds the best maritime industry standards, and is audited annually by a third party surveyor, is as good, or better, than the Navy's program.  Can maintenance get deferred, yes, within statutory limits, as it does with the Navy as well, due to extenuating circumstances.  Does the Navy dive team wait around until a ship schedules a survey, or do they have to be out every single day booking work in order to make a profit?  Also, as I remember, the Navy is exempt from many environmental regulations, and likely could clean a hull where others could not.

As you should know, any government agency on any level- local,  state & federal is not out to nor can they legally, with the exception of revolving funds, make a profit. The governments mission is to serve the US people. From my experience working for USN, there is no one else that can compete with the Navy. Very high standards. But it sounds like Celebrity blew this whole barnacle episode. I wonder how many people would not book a celebrity cruise again after this fiasco?  If compensation was better maybe, but they did not seem to treat passengers well with low compensation. Just IMHO.

[dodger1964]

3 hours in port has to be a record?