Sun Princess - Original

[startedwithamouse]

Experienced worker shortages has been apparent worldwide, why would a shipyard be any different?

 

Agree Princess should have cancelled the first two sailings well in advance. 

[Wishing on a star]

I had heard of passengers being 'stuck' with no real effort to make things right on NCL...  

That is interesting to hear about Viking.

[eroller]

1 minute ago, startedwithamouse said:

Experienced worker shortages has been apparent worldwide, why would a shipyard be any different?

 

Agree Princess should have cancelled the first two sailings well in advance. 

 

They should have never been scheduled to begin with.  It’s a new prototype ship.  You don’t schedule revenue cruises right after delivery.  You have a shakedown period for the crew and ship to get up to speed.  This is exactly what Royal Caribbean did with ICON and it was a flawless introduction.  Also the best PR I’ve ever seen for a new ship.  Royal did it the right way.  

[cruisequeen4ever]

1) I feel so bad for the affected pax of the first 2 sailings.

 

2) I am horrified at the lack of empathy and care shown in the announcements Princess has made. I think back to the Diamond Princess; Jan showed compassion and kindness. This lacks the human connection. It’s way too matter of fact. 
 

3) Princess needs to make an announcement addressing people’s concerns about future sailings. They’re losing the trust of pax.

[GrannasVacay]

3 hours ago, eroller said:

That was the rumor yes, but not confirmed by Princess.  
 

And if the real reason then probably a blessing since it could have been disastrous having a water contamination issue with passengers onboard.  

I actually read an Italian article about the strike before Princess gave their reason. But honestly, if they are working on things to make it right, then I'd rather have that then putting me at risk sailing on a ship that has potential problems. 

 

[rheathslc]

24 minutes ago, eroller said:

 

They should have never been scheduled to begin with.  It’s a new prototype ship.  You don’t schedule revenue cruises right after delivery.  You have a shakedown period for the crew and ship to get up to speed.  This is exactly what Royal Caribbean did with ICON and it was a flawless introduction.  Also the best PR I’ve ever seen for a new ship.  Royal did it the right way.  

I am not remotely interested in ever sailing on RC but I still followed all the announcements and the lead up and the reviews from the first passengers and I agree. Flawless is the word.

 

I'm a die hard Princess fan but this whole situation was handled so poorly from the planning to the communication and I don't blame people if they end up writing Princess off after this. 

[eroller]

Just now, GrannasVacay said:

I actually read an Italian article about the strike before Princess gave their reason. But honestly, if they are working on things to make it right, then I'd rather have that then putting me at risk sailing on a ship that has potential problems. 

 

 

I would too.  I would just prefer Princess be straightforward and transparent about what is happening.  They have handled this debacle very poorly, showing little respect for their “valued” guests.  

[GrannasVacay]

Just now, eroller said:

 

I would too.  I would just prefer Princess be straightforward and transparent about what is happening.  They have handled this debacle very poorly, showing little respect for their “valued” guests.  

 

Just now, eroller said:

 

I would too.  I would just prefer Princess be straightforward and transparent about what is happening.  They have handled this debacle very poorly, showing little respect for their “valued” guests.  

Fair point. 

[SouKnoMe]

1 hour ago, Cruising Forever! said:

"Don't mind the diesel coming out of your bathroom faucets!  Just order several gallons of bottled water for daily drinking, brushing your teeth... bathing in, etc.  Please do not smoke anywhere aboard.  That funny truck exhaust smell near the pools should be ignored.  Trust us, this ship is LNG all the way, baby!!!  You don't smell diesel!"  - Thank you, Princess Cruises

 

(Seriously, if the reporting is true on diesel in the water pipes is true, I'd be canceling my Feb 28th cruise today- but we aren't booked on that one!  I'm sitting here wondering if I want to keep my Fall 2024 booking or cancel it... I think my downpayment was refundable.  Diesel in the water is unsafe, period.  If true, this ship builder has some MAJOR issues.)

 

This is what I’ve need thinking. That casino is going to be smoke free. 

[Nemanoxer]

And this is why cruise lines should build their ships with Meyer Shipyards as long as some of our German economy still is available.

 

Ridiculous.

 

Hope my trip in October will not be the maiden voyage.

[JimmyVWine]

7 hours ago, Fortunate 2 travel said:

Saying “sorry” really isn’t enough.

To be fair, they are doing much more than saying "Sorry." Full refund. 50% FCC. Financial consideration for airfare.  That is more than saying "sorry."  If one paid $5,000 for two people to sail, then they get all that money back and can book a similar cruise for $2,500.  Assuming that the timing and logistics work for people, getting a cruise on a new ship at half price is a good deal.  These delays are costing Princess a fortune.  It's not like they are taking this lightly.  Would better communication delivered in a more timely manner be better? Absolutely. But it is what it is.  We've all stewed in an airport waiting area, or on a plane sitting on a tarmac waiting to take off because the airplane has a red warning light that won't go off, and maintenance is needed.  We get mad.  We get frustrated.  But what would we want them to do?  Take off with a mechanical problem?  I doubt that these sailings are getting canceled simply because one of the magicians can't seem to get that card trick perfected just right. Or because Rudy isn't satisfied with the quality of the halibut that has been delivered.  

[JimmyVWine]

6 hours ago, Fortunate 2 travel said:

If it is a major issue why would Princess take delivery??

Everyone is assuming that the diesel-in-the-water issue was just discovered, thus necessitating the cancelation of the 2/18 cruise.  It is entirely possible that the problem was identified quite a while ago and they have been working on it for several weeks (or much longer) and that is why the original inaugural cruise was canceled, but they hoped to have the situation fully remedied and cleared by now.  Maybe they just missed their estimate by a day or two, had to cancel the 2/18 cruise, but are fully confident that the situation is or will be remedied in time for the 2/28 cruise, so they took delivery knowing that the root problem was behind them.  Honestly, if they JUST discovered this diesel issue, they aren't going anywhere before April.

5 hours ago, MsSoCalCruiser said:

But no one received 50% off of a future cruise. They receive a 50% future cruise credit. If their base cruise fair was $2000, then they received a $1000 future cruise credit, not 50% off of a future cruise.

While this is true, I have to believe that people who booked one of these first two cruises paid undiscounted, "as high as they could mark them up" prices, so the 50% FCC will turn out to be MORE than 50% of whatever replacement cruise they book (assuming similar length of sailing).

[lstone19]

22 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

To be fair, they are doing much more than saying "Sorry." Full refund. 50% FCC. Financial consideration for airfare.  That is more than saying "sorry." 

 

While the other stuff is "more than saying sorry," the refund is not. The refund is a basic part of what is required when you fail to provide the contracted service. Why anyone would think refunding the fare for a cancelled cruise would not be required? (I know, some people think the passage contract gives Princess god-like powers but not refunding when they cancelled is not one of them, at least not under the laws of most countries. Some airlines tried that - cancelled flights and then said no refund, just a future credit. The U.S. government stepped in quickly and said WRONG! If a flight is cancelled for any reason, all fare restrictions are cancelled as well and a refund must be offered).

[JimmyVWine]

3 minutes ago, lstone19 said:

 

While the other stuff is "more than saying sorry," the refund is not. The refund is a basic part of what is required when you fail to provide the contracted service. Why anyone would think refunding the fare for a cancelled cruise would not be required? (I know, some people think the passage contract gives Princess god-like powers but not refunding when they cancelled is not one of them, at least not under the laws of most countries. Some airlines tried that - cancelled flights and then said no refund, just a future credit. The U.S. government stepped in quickly and said WRONG! If a flight is cancelled for any reason, all fare restrictions are cancelled as well and a refund must be offered).

I don't disagree, but one cannot assume that the U.S. law as applied to airlines would apply to all passengers, worldwide, for a fare booked on a foreign flagged ship.  "No refunds. Store credit only" is not unusual. Or illegal.  But I agree that it would never happen in these circumstances. 

[Fortunate 2 travel]

39 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

To be fair, they are doing much more than saying "Sorry." Full refund. 50% FCC. Financial consideration for airfare.  That is more than saying "sorry."  If one paid $5,000 for two people to sail, then they get all that money back and can book a similar cruise for $2,500.  Assuming that the timing and logistics work for people, getting a cruise on a new ship at half price is a good deal.  These delays are costing Princess a fortune.  It's not like they are taking this lightly.  Would better communication delivered in a more timely manner be better? Absolutely. But it is what it is.  We've all stewed in an airport waiting area, or on a plane sitting on a tarmac waiting to take off because the airplane has a red warning light that won't go off, and maintenance is needed.  We get mad.  We get frustrated.  But what would we want them to do?  Take off with a mechanical problem?  I doubt that these sailings are getting canceled simply because one of the magicians can't seem to get that card trick perfected just right. Or because Rudy isn't satisfied with the quality of the halibut that has been delivered.  

I appreciate your point of view.  The issue can’t be too major or why take delivery.  Both of these sailings were cancelled with very short notice.  If they need to cancel more, they should do so soon.  I’m glad we booked this ship for a late summer sailing.  I know how much time we have put into our planning and how excited we are.  If we received notice within 4 days we would already be in Rome.  The lack of information from Princess is unbelievable.  Just accept that the mark was missed, but be fair to your customers.

[insidecabin]

11 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

I don't disagree, but one cannot assume that the U.S. law as applied to airlines would apply to all passengers, worldwide, for a fare booked on a foreign flagged ship.  "No refunds. Store credit only" is not unusual. Or illegal.  But I agree that it would never happen in these circumstances. 

UK the law is to process the refund within 14 days not 3 weeks

And also allows for all losses not limits like $200 air allowance.

[cr8tiv1]

Please help me out here.  If the ship is a full LNG fueled vessel, why is there diesel?  

 

This is an honest question...I'm confused.

[JimmyVWine]

3 minutes ago, cr8tiv1 said:

Please help me out here.  If the ship is a full LNG fueled vessel, why is there diesel?  

 

This is an honest question...I'm confused.

There are many cruise ships that are now LNG-capable.  Very few of them are actually running on that fuel  due to cost.  Especially in Europe. Just a guess, but perhaps Sun Princess is joining those ranks.  Or maybe testing while in dock or while doing open water testing necessitated checking out both diesel and LNG usage even if LNG was going to be the preferred fuel going forward.  Or maybe the desalination process used to produce potable water uses diesel fuel in the production system that is completely independent of the LNG used for propulsion. 

[StevenW]

19 hours ago, azbirdmom said:

Yep.  Actively being discussed on the main Sun Princess thread.  Heads ought to roll over this whole debacle.

 

I thought THIS was the main Sun Princess thread...?

[Pixelskaya]

Diesel in the water?

So, can passengers with a drink package who don’t intend to drink any water during the cruise still board the ship? Asking for a friend

[kathy49]

40 minutes ago, insidecabin said:

UK the law is to process the refund within 14 days not 3 weeks

And also allows for all losses not limits like $200 air allowance.

I thought the 3 weeks was pretty long...I do think most on the first cancellation got it much faster.

[New2cruise2022]

32 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

There are many cruise ships that are now LNG-capable.  Very few of them are actually running on that fuel  due to cost.  Especially in Europe. Just a guess, but perhaps Sun Princess is joining those ranks.  Or maybe testing while in dock or while doing open water testing necessitated checking out both diesel and LNG usage even if LNG was going to be the preferred fuel going forward.  Or maybe the desalination process used to produce potable water uses diesel fuel in the production system that is completely independent of the LNG used for propulsion. 

Cost AND availability. It isn’t as easy to find as conventional fuels. 

[eroller]

53 minutes ago, cr8tiv1 said:

Please help me out here.  If the ship is a full LNG fueled vessel, why is there diesel?  

 

This is an honest question...I'm confused.

SUN PRINCESS is duel fuel capable.  Meaning she can run on LNG or the much cheaper HFO (heavy fuel oil).  HFO is more toxic to the air environment and there are certain sensitive regions where it can’t be burned.  I’m guessing SUN PRINCESS will use LNG close to shore and in sensitive regions, then switch to HFO in the open seas.  I’m guessing she also has scrubbers, which is a system that uses water to filter the exhaust fumes in the funnel.  That water  (sludge) is then collected in tanks to be disposed of ashore or in some cases pumped overboard (closed loop or open loop).  

[EDVM96]

1 hour ago, JimmyVWine said:

There are many cruise ships that are now LNG-capable.  Very few of them are actually running on that fuel  due to cost.  Especially in Europe.

Sustainable LNG cruising is a lie, anyway. It's just greenwashing. Companies that claim to reduce their emissions by switching to LNG are giving misleading information, as LNG still is a fossil fuel.
 

For a cruise in Europe for example, large LNG carriers first have to transport the liquid gas from the U.S. (the world’s largest LNG exporter). And these carriers run on regular, super dirty heavy fuel oil. 🤣
 

Edited February 14 by EDVM96

[memoak]

1 hour ago, lstone19 said:

 

While the other stuff is "more than saying sorry," the refund is not. The refund is a basic part of what is required when you fail to provide the contracted service. Why anyone would think refunding the fare for a cancelled cruise would not be required? (I know, some people think the passage contract gives Princess god-like powers but not refunding when they cancelled is not one of them, at least not under the laws of most countries. Some airlines tried that - cancelled flights and then said no refund, just a future credit. The U.S. government stepped in quickly and said WRONG! If a flight is cancelled for any reason, all fare restrictions are cancelled as well and a refund must be offered).

It is much more than a full refund.  Just as example if you paid $10,000 for a cruise you get all that back plus $5,000 for a future cruise