Another situation where people came back late from an excursion, were left behind, and blamed the cruise line...

[birdofsong]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/norwegian-cruise-line-passengers-were-103151038.html

 

This is why I always book excursions with the cruise line.  I'd rather pay more than worry about not getting back on time.  My sister took a train excursion in Alaska through Royal, the train broke down, they were two hours late, and the ship waited.  

[gfargo53]

we were on that train excursion.so were about 700 other passengers

[joepeka]

Maybe I've missed it but I haven't read anything to indicate these pax were not on a NCL sponsored excursion. Did I miss it?

Edit: There is a Fox News report that, per NCL, the pax left the ship on their own or used a private excursion provider. I did miss it.

Edited April 2 by joepeka

[OCSC Mike]

32 minutes ago, birdofsong said:

I'd rather pay more than worry about not getting back on time

By all means do whatever makes you feel comfortable. I’m not here to convince you otherwise. Just be aware it’s not always about saving money. There are tons of experiences in most ports not offered directly by Royal.

[smokeybandit]

I'm all for independent tours, but I'm not sure I'd do one in a place that isn't an everyday cruise port

[cruiselvr04]

10 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

I'm all for independent tours, but I'm not sure I'd do one in a place that isn't an everyday cruise port

i think you do have to look at where you’re at before you book something independent.  A port of call that’s rarely used, an island off the coast of Africa, with people who may not fully understand being timely, probably not. We book independent excursions and will continue to do so.  But there are times when a long distance is involved or the port time is short, we will not.  

[ARandomTraveler]

I book independent excursions 100% of the time on Caribbean cruises. But on my 12 day cruise in Asia last summer (Singapore, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan), I didn't even consider an independent tour, I booked ship tours for the whole thing. I wasn't willing to risk it in countries where there are very few reviews for independent tours, the language barrier is pretty extreme, and where there was a level orange travel advisory from the United States in some of the ports. I wasn't willing to get left behind. 

[Tin can]

I thought the cruise lines waited if they could for their own excursions and took responsibility to get you to the next port if they couldn't.

 

I'm sure their is no absolute guarantee they will wait, I recall a Royal sailing in the Meditteranean that had to leave late passengers on one of their tours due to rising tides at the next port or something like that and the late passengers were transferred to meet them.

[FamilyCruiserUK]

There are soo many variables as to why the cruise line decides to leave people behind. Its not like they can sit around all day with their feet up waiting. 

Port fees, as in keeping the port staff longer, security and rope people. 

Fuel to next destination if they have to speed up

Same as aircraft at airports they have time slots to move in and out of ports with pilots

Opening times of shops onboard. Money lost from sales.

Keeping to schedule, prob lots of pressure from above.

Longer hours for the staff, some may be cutting into their scheduled breaks, before their next job around the ship.

 

And that's just off top of my head. By all means take any kinda of trip you want but make sure your back in time.

 

 

[twangster]

It is always interesting to me when a story starts out with people explaining how they are "experienced cruisers" then we find out they do something everyone who is an experienced cruiser knows you should not do.  

[twangster]

As far as tendering operations it's not as simple as "I can see the ship" therefore the ship must ready to perform tending operations.  

 

Tendering and moving guests between the ship and a tender is inherently risky.  That risk can be reduced when a ship is using its own dual purpose lifeboat/tenders and/or an approved 3rd party tendering company such as the tender boats used in places like Grand Cayman or Cabo. 

 

During normal tendering operations the crew of the tender and the crew of the ship are highly trained in tendering operations.  They've done this countless times and they have procedures in place that reduce the risk to the level that tendering can be safely performed.

 

Tendering operations with any other private boat or in this case the local coast guard boat could simply be a violation of company policies. Attempting to transfer guests with unknown and unproven private boats is very risky.  It may require rope ladders or other apparatus to account for differences in vessel height.  The local coast guard vessels are probably not designed to be dual purpose coast guard / tender boats.    Attempting to transfer guests between any vessel other than approved and known tender boats has tremendous risk associated with it.  The local coast guard personnel may be excellent mariners but that doesn't mean they have a lot of experience attempting to transfer guests between their craft and a passenger vessel. 

 

In this case it sounds like the ship was ready to sail.  It's own tenders had most likely been brought back on board and stowed.  Tendering apparatus had probably been stowed and the deck crew associated with tendering operations had returned to their normal duties.  It's not so simple as just open a door and allow the errant guests to walk on board.  "I can see the ship" doesn't mean the ship is ready for safe tendering operations.  

[ace2542]

To be fair NCL left them in a very dangerous place off the cost of Nigeria wasn't it? Leaving someone behind in Africa is not the same as leaving them in Spain or Iceland or whatever. Particulary Americans, Brits or Australians.

Edited April 3 by ace2542

[twangster]

9 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

To be fair NCL left them in a very dangerous place off the cost of Nigeria wasn't it? Leaving someone behind in Africa is not the same as leaving them in Spain or Iceland or whatever. Particulary Americans, Brits or Australians.

 

Looks to be about 300 miles off the coast of Nigeria.  

 

However there is also the concept of personal accountability.  If it is as dangerous as you suggest, in choosing to self explore in such a place, one would think they would take that into account in making choices for such a port of call. 

 

The Captain has to consider all factors and every passenger on board their vessel.  The next port of call may have tidal restrictions.  There could be incoming weather or other factors.  If the area is not safe as you suggest, delaying at anchor also has security implication for thousands on board.  Delaying and subsequently altering an itinerary due to some errant guests could have implications beyond ruining the vacation plans of thousands.  

 

On the surface I don't see how these guests had their lives put at risk.  If that was the case I am confident they would have played that card when hyping this to the media.  It was their choice.  After all they are experienced cruisers.  

[Biker19]

24 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

To be fair NCL left them in a very dangerous place off the cost of Nigeria wasn't it?

Remote, yes, dangerous, probably less so than Nassau.

 

Biker, who is waiting for the next installment of wild hypotheticals from ace.

Edited April 3 by Biker19

[ace2542]

18 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

Remote, yes, dangerous, probably less so than Nassau.

 

Biker, who is waiting for the next installment of wild hypotheticals from ace.

I think you mean Hati didn't you? Temps are in the mid 30s in Lagos at least right now. And the nearest embassy hundreds of miles away.

[robmtx]

I'm grumpy this morning...

 

Good for NCL, sticking to policy. The moment one domino falls and exceptions are made, the moment we are all sitting around for hours waiting on the scheduley-challenged. 

[Biker19]

24 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

I think you mean Hati didn't you?

No.

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

To be fair NCL left them in a very dangerous place off the cost of Nigeria wasn't it? Leaving someone behind in Africa is not the same as leaving them in Spain or Iceland or whatever. Particulary Americans, Brits or Australians.

If it is so dangerous then why is NCL porting there in the first place and letting guests travel around on their own?

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, Biker19 said:

 

Biker, who is waiting for the next installment of wild hypotheticals from ace.

You mean like RCI requiring people to sleep in their cabins wearing a mask... forever?

[A&L_Ont]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

To be fair NCL left them in a very dangerous place off the cost of Nigeria wasn't it? Leaving someone behind in Africa is not the same as leaving them in Spain or Iceland or whatever. Particulary Americans, Brits or Australians.

 

They booked their own excursion, to go off with a guide they never met in the same dangerous place.  One would like to think the same guide would at least get them headed in the right direction to the next port of call, not to mention the NCL port agent is there to assist. 

[A&L_Ont]

47 minutes ago, robmtx said:

I'm grumpy this morning...

 

Good for NCL, sticking to policy. The moment one domino falls and exceptions are made, the moment we are all sitting around for hours waiting on the scheduley-challenged. 

 

NCL paid their expenses to get to where they eventually boarded the ship, so they didn't totally stick to policy.  That was a gesture that I would not have expected had I missed the ship.  

[A&L_Ont]

This was the story I saw this morning. One was pregnant and some were elderly so I'm not sure how easily they could have boarded the cruise ship from the military vessel.  In watching the video they didn't look overly nimble. 

 

The best line was the woman stating that although there is a set of rules NCL followed their rules too rigidly.🤦‍♂️  That was about 1minute into the video.

 

 

Edited April 3 by A&L_Ont

[smokeybandit]

Hopefully they got banned from sailing NCL in the future.

[Ocean Boy]

6 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Hopefully they got banned from sailing NCL in the future.

So that they can switch over to RCI?😁

[Ocean Boy]

15 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

The best line was the woman stating that although there is a set of rules NCL followed their rules too rigidly.🤦‍♂️  That was about 1minute into the video.

 

 

Was that before or after the guy spouted off reasons, like currency and language issues etc., that make going off on a private journey not the best idea?