Just returned from a crazy Alaskan cruise on the Sun Oct 2-11!

[PurpleKa]

15 minutes ago, Tally Cruiser said:

Well if YOU can't report accurately and rely on "reportedly" it's considered heresay which is not admissable in a court of law....

 

I know I'm not obligated to read anything. 48 hrs of the same diatribe when others have refuted your statements just says to me you are here for the sake of batching. If you feel you are entitled to compensation,I can assure you, I'm not funding you....

That’s . . . Not exactly what hearsay is or how it works. https://law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/b723/14hearsay/T14.pdf
 

But this isn’t a court of law and the conversation isn’t evidence being offered in a case, anyway.

 

I suspect either you are getting me mixed up with someone else or didn’t read all the posts, but to my knowledge nothing of significance that I’ve said I experienced or observed has been “refuted” (someone on the 4th floor who was asleep by midnight saying they didn’t personally experience what someone else on the 10th floor experienced at 3am doesn’t refute either person’s experience, for example—two people can have different experiences and both be valid) and several others have said they experienced something similar as well. 
 

Again, I’m trying to process and understand what I experienced, not attempting to get compensation from anyone at this point.
 

It’s been a little over 48 hours since we all arrived home from this cruise, and a little over a day since I joined the conversation.

 

This is an internet conversation, on a discussion board. I’m sick and bored and see no reason why I and others can’t continue engaging in the conversation as long as we are interested in talking amongst ourselves about it. Why are you so invested in discouraging us from discussing it?

[RD64]

Not attempting to get “compensation at this point”.. Does this mean that you plan on seeking compensation at some later point in time?

[Kgodin]

Did everyone get a $21 refund for missing Icy Straight? 

[chengkp75]

I will make this one post, based on my 46 years of seagoing experience, and my several years experience on the Norwegian Sky (sister ship to Sun).

 

First off, the only thing the Captain "has a duty" to inform you of is if there is an emergency.  All else is customer relations, and I don't comment on that topic, as it has never been in my wheelhouse.

 

Second, unless you are privy to the NCL SMS (Safety Management System), as required by the IMO's ISM (International Safety Management) Code, and what it says about handling a ship in rough weather, or leaving port in heavy weather, you cannot possibly say whether or not the "Captain blew it and NCL blew it".  The Captain has to adhere to the policies and procedures written in the SMS, based on both industry best practices and NCL's corporate history, and these policies and procedures govern virtually every action any NCL employee takes in doing the business of operating a ship.  Now, the ISM does also give the Captain "overriding authority" to make decisions that affect the safety of the ship, crew, passengers, cargo, and the environment.  This "overriding authority" means that no one, not NCL corporate, not the USCG, not anyone, can countermand the decisions made by the Captain at the time of the incident.  Now, if that decision violates the company's SMS policies and procedures, then the Captain will have to justify his/her actions at a later date, but if it is found that he/she followed the SMS to the letter, there is no blame, nor punishment.  I am not qualified to judge the Captain's decisions, and there are only about 2 other members of CC that actually have the experience of being Captains, and could make a judgement, if they knew all the facts.

 

Some have questioned leaving port in the first place.  As a seasoned Naval sailor has mentioned, the best place to be in a storm is out to sea.  In fact, just a couple weeks ago, the USCG ordered ships to leave the Florida ports ahead of a storm, since it was more dangerous to remain in port than to stay.  Whether the decision to leave port was the ship's (based on the SMS policies), or the harbormaster's, or the USCG, we don't know at this time, and I guarantee that no one on this forum will ever know.

 

Some have questioned whether the ship could have "sailed away" from the storm.  The last option a Captain wants to take in a storm is to put the wind and waves on the stern (i.e. running away from the storm), as the stern of most ships, and cruise ships in particular are more prone to damage from seas than the bow, the bow handles seas better than the blunt stern, and you tend to lose the ability to steer the ship when running with the waves.  All of which could have led to a much worse outcome.

 

Some have questioned why other ships stayed in the "Inside Passage", and didn't suffer the same seas as the Sun.  Could the Sun have made it to the Inside Passage in time?  If not, then the question is moot.  Yes, the other ships were heading northbound, while the Sun was southbound, so those ships could simply slow down and stay within the lee in the Passage, where the waves and wind would be less, and the ship still have some room to maneuver.

 

A broken balcony door/window on deck 8 is not "taking on water", as there would only be possible water ingress if a sea reached that deck, and only during the time the sea was there.  We don't know whether the glass broke due to a wave impact, or the flexing of the ship.  Also, some water leaking through the "weathertight" doors on the promenade deck is not "taking on water".  Those doors are not "watertight", and if a wave deposits enough water on the deck to overpower the drains, then some can leak under the doors.  "Taking on water" means that something below the waterline has broken, and a continual flooding of water is happening, or that the ship has taken a sufficient list (in the case of the Sun, about 40-45*, so no one would be walking anywhere) that the weathertight doors are continually in the water and leaking.

 

The slamming that the ship underwent was likely unavoidable.  The Captain will try to slow the ship down to where the period (frequency) of the waves matches the speed and length of the ship, so the ship rides up one side of the wave and down the other.  However, there is a limit to how slow you can go in a storm, as ships don't steer when going slow, so at some point you have to realize that you can't slow any more, and you are going to have to accept some slamming, which is mostly the bow not being able to rise up the front of the wave, but slamming into the wave.  The ability to steer in a storm is paramount, as if you take a wave bow on, the sea wants to throw the bow to one side or another, and if the ship cannot steer to counter this turning of the ship in one direction or the other, the next wave will do the same, but turning the ship further, until the ship is "broadside" to the sea, and is now not running up and down the waves, but rolling up one side and down the other, and this is where a ship can become damaged, and truly start "taking on water", and taking on a consistent list, leading to worse flooding.

 

You all can take this post any way you like, these are facts, not opinions, and there are some on this thread who will not be convinced otherwise than NCL placed their lives in danger for some nefarious reason.  I would think that everyone who cruises, after the Costa Concordia, would know that the Captain is personally responsible for every passenger and crew life, and decisions like this are not taken lightly, nor for economic reasons.

[Nicky Mouse]

25 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I will make this one post, based on my 46 years of seagoing experience, and my several years experience on the Norwegian Sky (sister ship to Sun).

 

First off, the only thing the Captain "has a duty" to inform you of is if there is an emergency.  All else is customer relations, and I don't comment on that topic, as it has never been in my wheelhouse.

 

Second, unless you are privy to the NCL SMS (Safety Management System), as required by the IMO's ISM (International Safety Management) Code, and what it says about handling a ship in rough weather, or leaving port in heavy weather, you cannot possibly say whether or not the "Captain blew it and NCL blew it".  The Captain has to adhere to the policies and procedures written in the SMS, based on both industry best practices and NCL's corporate history, and these policies and procedures govern virtually every action any NCL employee takes in doing the business of operating a ship.  Now, the ISM does also give the Captain "overriding authority" to make decisions that affect the safety of the ship, crew, passengers, cargo, and the environment.  This "overriding authority" means that no one, not NCL corporate, not the USCG, not anyone, can countermand the decisions made by the Captain at the time of the incident.  Now, if that decision violates the company's SMS policies and procedures, then the Captain will have to justify his/her actions at a later date, but if it is found that he/she followed the SMS to the letter, there is no blame, nor punishment.  I am not qualified to judge the Captain's decisions, and there are only about 2 other members of CC that actually have the experience of being Captains, and could make a judgement, if they knew all the facts.

 

Some have questioned leaving port in the first place.  As a seasoned Naval sailor has mentioned, the best place to be in a storm is out to sea.  In fact, just a couple weeks ago, the USCG ordered ships to leave the Florida ports ahead of a storm, since it was more dangerous to remain in port than to stay.  Whether the decision to leave port was the ship's (based on the SMS policies), or the harbormaster's, or the USCG, we don't know at this time, and I guarantee that no one on this forum will ever know.

 

Some have questioned whether the ship could have "sailed away" from the storm.  The last option a Captain wants to take in a storm is to put the wind and waves on the stern (i.e. running away from the storm), as the stern of most ships, and cruise ships in particular are more prone to damage from seas than the bow, the bow handles seas better than the blunt stern, and you tend to lose the ability to steer the ship when running with the waves.  All of which could have led to a much worse outcome.

 

Some have questioned why other ships stayed in the "Inside Passage", and didn't suffer the same seas as the Sun.  Could the Sun have made it to the Inside Passage in time?  If not, then the question is moot.  Yes, the other ships were heading northbound, while the Sun was southbound, so those ships could simply slow down and stay within the lee in the Passage, where the waves and wind would be less, and the ship still have some room to maneuver.

 

A broken balcony door/window on deck 8 is not "taking on water", as there would only be possible water ingress if a sea reached that deck, and only during the time the sea was there.  We don't know whether the glass broke due to a wave impact, or the flexing of the ship.  Also, some water leaking through the "weathertight" doors on the promenade deck is not "taking on water".  Those doors are not "watertight", and if a wave deposits enough water on the deck to overpower the drains, then some can leak under the doors.  "Taking on water" means that something below the waterline has broken, and a continual flooding of water is happening, or that the ship has taken a sufficient list (in the case of the Sun, about 40-45*, so no one would be walking anywhere) that the weathertight doors are continually in the water and leaking.

 

The slamming that the ship underwent was likely unavoidable.  The Captain will try to slow the ship down to where the period (frequency) of the waves matches the speed and length of the ship, so the ship rides up one side of the wave and down the other.  However, there is a limit to how slow you can go in a storm, as ships don't steer when going slow, so at some point you have to realize that you can't slow any more, and you are going to have to accept some slamming, which is mostly the bow not being able to rise up the front of the wave, but slamming into the wave.  The ability to steer in a storm is paramount, as if you take a wave bow on, the sea wants to throw the bow to one side or another, and if the ship cannot steer to counter this turning of the ship in one direction or the other, the next wave will do the same, but turning the ship further, until the ship is "broadside" to the sea, and is now not running up and down the waves, but rolling up one side and down the other, and this is where a ship can become damaged, and truly start "taking on water", and taking on a consistent list, leading to worse flooding.

 

You all can take this post any way you like, these are facts, not opinions, and there are some on this thread who will not be convinced otherwise than NCL placed their lives in danger for some nefarious reason.  I would think that everyone who cruises, after the Costa Concordia, would know that the Captain is personally responsible for every passenger and crew life, and decisions like this are not taken lightly, nor for economic reasons.

Thank you @chengkp75, I've always enjoyed your posts and your insight, going all the way back to the NCL Project America(Hawaii) days. (btw, had great dinner with Brian Walters (our GM) last year on the Sun and had great convo about early days in Hawaii)

 

It's refreshing to get the insight and perspective from people with actual experience of what is involved behind the scenes.

Edited October 14, 2023 by Nicky Mouse

[ChiefMateJRK]

Yep.  Big thanks to @chengkp75.  You've confirmed what many of us have believed about the amount of "silly" in this thread.  That said, I suspect that the fun may now diminish or end.  Oh well, it's only a matter of time before the next one.  I will say that I've added "sleeping out with the lifeboats" as a new cherished comedy memory.  I may never look at a lifeboat the same way again. 🤣

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, PurpleKa said:

I eventually decided they were probably the lifeboats banging against the sides of the boat in the wind.

I'll break my silence on this to debunk this potentially dangerous assumption.  The lifeboats are not free swinging in their davits so they could bang against the ship.  When stowed, the crew use thick bands to lash the boat securely against the davit.  These bands must be released and removed before the boat can be lowered, which is why the crew report to the boats to prepare them, long before passengers are mustered.

 

If you think about it, you would realize that a fiberglass boat repeatedly banging against a heavy steel structure, with large, sharp protrusions, would not have lasted an hour before becoming a pile of junk.

 

The banging you were hearing, and I say this with experience on the Sky in storms, was either the waves slapping against the hull, or the storm valves working.  The storm valves are one-way valves that allow the drains from the open decks to drain through the pipes to the sea, but close to prevent seas from coming back up into the drain pipes.  This is done with a heavy clapper that is free swinging, and in violent rolling motion, this clapper will slam shut and be heard as high as deck 12 (I know, I've heard it), when the valve is down on deck 2.

[laudergayle]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

I'll break my silence on this to debunk this potentially dangerous assumption.  The lifeboats are not free swinging in their davits so they could bang against the ship.  When stowed, the crew use thick bands to lash the boat securely against the davit.  These bands must be released and removed before the boat can be lowered, which is why the crew report to the boats to prepare them, long before passengers are mustered.

 

If you think about it, you would realize that a fiberglass boat repeatedly banging against a heavy steel structure, with large, sharp protrusions, would not have lasted an hour before becoming a pile of junk.

 

The banging you were hearing, and I say this with experience on the Sky in storms, was either the waves slapping against the hull, or the storm valves working.  The storm valves are one-way valves that allow the drains from the open decks to drain through the pipes to the sea, but close to prevent seas from coming back up into the drain pipes.  This is done with a heavy clapper that is free swinging, and in violent rolling motion, this clapper will slam shut and be heard as high as deck 12 (I know, I've heard it), when the valve is down on deck 2.

You’re such a patient man.  Your professional explanations always make me feel more confident about cruising.  Thank you.