Bigger ships into Port of Baltimore?

[Williamsburgcruiser]

I realize that the cruise calendar is set for 2025, and part of 2026 - but since the bridge for Baltimore isn't scheduled to be completed until 2028 at the earliest - what's the chances Royal will bring in a Radiance or Voyager class ship?  

It would be a lovely change from the Vision class!

[DeltaOne]

One still has to clear the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.  

 

I believe the clearance for the Bay Bridge and Francis Scott Key Bridge was virtually identical. (About 185 to 186 feet.) So a new bridge to replace the FSK Bridge doesn't change anything as far as cruising out of Baltimore.

[Scottdalfonso]

Yep- it still has a 2nd bridge to clear, so unfortunately, it'll be the same old ships

[Southern Dan]

It would be cool if they built a new port terminal south of the Bay Bridge to accommodate larger ships. 

[smokeybandit]

14 minutes ago, Southern Dan said:

It would be cool if they built a new port terminal south of the Bay Bridge to accommodate larger ships. 

Cool, but certainly unlikely.

[leaveitallbehind]

It is also unlikely that they would reposition a ship for a relatively short period of time.  Not impossible, but unlikely IMO.  But regardless, as mentioned the ships would have to have clearance with the second bridge as that would be the new limiting factor should the new bridge be built with higher clearance.

[leaveitallbehind]

21 minutes ago, Southern Dan said:

It would be cool if they built a new port terminal south of the Bay Bridge to accommodate larger ships. 

Like Annapolis area??  Not very likely at all.  Especially if the goal is only to accommodate larger cruise ships.

[smokeybandit]

If you could guarantee multiple ships year round, then the idea of building an Annapolis port could at least make it to a brainstorm session. Problem is there are only so many itineraries to run out of that area, which limits the number of ships, which limits the investment any cruise line would put into port facilities.

[Charles4515]

39 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

If you could guarantee multiple ships year round, then the idea of building an Annapolis port could at least make it to a brainstorm session. Problem is there are only so many itineraries to run out of that area, which limits the number of ships, which limits the investment any cruise line would put into port facilities.

I think an Annapolis cruise ship port would likely meet with local resistance.  

[leaveitallbehind]

42 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Problem is there are only so many itineraries to run out of that area, which limits the number of ships, which limits the investment any cruise line would put into port facilities.

That's where I see the issue.  Right now the existing convenient and serviceable terminal only serves 3 (?) small to mid-size ships a week from 3 (?) cruise lines. I realize Port Elizabeth in Bayonne is similar to this, but the ship classes that serve that port have 2 - 3 times the passenger volume.

 

Building a terminal area may also require port considerations and IMO would need to be able to attract additional cruise lines along with bigger ships.  You would also have to consider ship resupply logistics, fuel barges, funding, and have the approval of the local community, which may be an issue.  Just don't think its very feasible IMO.

 

Edited May 24 by leaveitallbehind

[TPKeller]

11 hours ago, Southern Dan said:

It would be cool if they built a new port terminal south of the Bay Bridge to accommodate larger ships. 

 

11 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

Cool, but certainly unlikely.

This!

 

Cut to the chase:  Hosting large cruise ships south of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge is never gonna happen!

Lots of reasons, I don't know that the order matters, so just as they come to me:

1. Transportation: The reason Baltimore (and New York, Boston, and Norfolk) work well as cruise terminals is that the passengers can get there easily via several major modes of transportation.  Air, rail, especially road.

The entrance to the parking lot for the Baltimore cruise terminal is literally 120 seconds from the exit off I-95.

Nothing south of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge comes even close to that until you get to Norfolk.

This affects not only arriving and departing passengers, but supplies for the ships as well.  It would be possible for the ships to provision at another port, such as Port Canaveral or Miami, but that ties the itineraries to one of those ports for every cruise.

The further south you go in the bay, the farther you get from all the major transportation lines.

2. Channels - or lack thereof:  If you pull up a chart of the Chesapeake Bay you will see that the channel running down the center is around 55 to 60 feet deep.  The big cruise ships draw 25+ feet.  Outside that channel, the Bay is fairly shallow.  Looking at Annapolis for one data point, the depth as you approach the Severn River quickly drops to around 17 feet, and it continues to drop as you get closer in to Annapolis.  You'd have to dig almost a 4 mile channel of at least 30-35 feet deep by several hundred feet wide to get a larger cruise ship in to that area.  You need the extra width to be able to handle windy days.  If there is any crosswind the ship must "crab" in order to stay in the channel, which makes the width requirement quite a bit wider than "just" the beam of the ship.  Remember the full width of the channel under the Key Bridge is around 700 feet!

This same depth problem exists (even more so) all the way down the bay until you get to Norfolk.

3: Local resistance:  The further south you get away from Baltimore, the more "rural" the areas near the bay become, exacerbating the Transportation issue, in convenience and capacity, AND increasing resistance by the local folks to having thousands of additional vehicles on their small roads bringing passengers and supplies to a ship docked near their quiet little towns.

There are probably more, but these 3 are really enough.

 

• Passengers can't get there easily.
• Ships can't get there at all without spending billions of dollars to dig channels and build facilities.
• And the local residents will fight it tooth-and-nail!

IMHO, the best option for getting a big ship in the area would be to start trying to influence the decisions coming up about the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, which has the same height as the Key Bridge.  There have been discussions and even some preliminary planning for increasing the capacity of that bridge.

With the Key Bridge providing an equal height restriction, it was very easy to dismiss any thoughts to increase the height of the CBB.  Now that the Key Bridge is gone, that whole question is ripe for another look.

I fully believe that's the only practical option, rebuilding the Key Bridge higher, and either rebuilding or modifying the CBB to that same new height.

Theron

[BND]

12 hours ago, Southern Dan said:

It would be cool if they built a new port terminal south of the Bay Bridge to accommodate larger ships. 

Infrastructure isn't there (roads) to access the area easily.  It's been rumored but shot down.

[Charles4515]

6 hours ago, TPKeller said:

IMHO, the best option for getting a big ship in the area would be to start trying to influence the decisions coming up about the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, which has the same height as the Key Bridge.  There have been discussions and even some preliminary planning for increasing the capacity of that bridge.

They are planning to add a third span to the Bay Bridge and leave the other two spans. I think that decision has been made. No design yet for the third span. They need to look at the existing two spans in light of the Key Bridge catastrophe as they don’t have dolphins. I am guessing they will add dolphins. They could look at increasing the height of the two spans. Whatever they do will take many years. Currently they have been boring a second Bay tunnel parallel to the current tunnel. I believe that project is about five years late from when it was supposed to be completed. Increasing the capacity of the Bay Bridge is probably 10 to 20 years away. 

[BND]

3 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

 Currently they have been boring a second Bay tunnel parallel to the current tunnel. I believe that project is about five years late from when it was supposed to be completed. Increasing the capacity of the Bay Bridge is probably 10 to 20 years away. 

The tunnel  you're referring to is the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel between Hampton and Norfolk. The HRBT doesn't actually cross the Bay,  and is having new tunnels added. It crosses over the intersection of the James River, Nansemond and Elizabeth River via I-64.  The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel is the one that crosses the Bay near the mouth and it is not being expanded.

Edited May 25 by BND

[robtulipe]

23 hours ago, Williamsburgcruiser said:

I realize that the cruise calendar is set for 2025, and part of 2026 - but since the bridge for Baltimore isn't scheduled to be completed until 2028 at the earliest - what's the chances Royal will bring in a Radiance or Voyager class ship?  

It would be a lovely change from the Vision class!

We once sailed out of Baltimore on X Summit which is slightly larger at 91K gross tons than Radiance class ships that are 90 gross tons so I suspect the latter could sail out of that port.

[BND]

7 minutes ago, robtulipe said:

We once sailed out of Baltimore on X Summit which is slightly larger at 91K gross tons than Radiance class ships that are 90 gross tons so I suspect the latter could sail out of that port.

It's been established that Radiance Class will fit under the bridges.  Tonnage isn't necessarily the issue, height is.  Radiance class is a bit wider than Vision class which is why it has a higher tonnage.

Edited May 25 by BND

[Another_Critic]

29 minutes ago, robtulipe said:

We once sailed out of Baltimore on X Summit which is slightly larger at 91K gross tons than Radiance class ships that are 90 gross tons so I suspect the latter could sail out of that port.

Are you sure it was Summit and not Galaxy or Mercury?

[Charles4515]

24 minutes ago, robtulipe said:

We once sailed out of Baltimore on X Summit which is slightly larger at 91K gross tons than Radiance class ships that are 90 gross tons so I suspect the latter could sail out of that port.

I doubt you sailed out of Baltimore on Celebrity Summit. Celebrity has not sailed out of Baltimore for many years. As for Radiance class if they can sail out of Baltimore how come none ever have? If they can it does not seem like there is a need for larger ships out of Baltimore. 

[leaveitallbehind]

5 minutes ago, Another_Critic said:

Are you sure it was Summit and not Galaxy or Mercury?

Or maybe RCCL Grandeur, which was based out of Baltimore for a number of years and was a ship on which we sailed from there twice.  Summit for many years until this year was based out of Port Elizabeth, Bayonne.

[Charles4515]

28 minutes ago, BND said:

It's been established that Radiance Class will fit under the bridges.  Tonnage isn't necessarily the issue, height is.  Radiance class is a bit wider than Vision class which is why it has a higher tonnage.

It has been said they can yet it has never happened. If there is a demand for bigger ships out of Baltimore why hasn’t RCI ever used that class out of Baltimore? 

[DragonOfTheSeas]

13 minutes ago, Another_Critic said:

Are you sure it was Summit and not Galaxy or Mercury?

We sailed on the Mercury twice from Baltimore. If fact, we were on the second to the last voyage before they sold the ship. It was a smaller ship.  To my knowledge there have been no larger X ships sail from Baltimore. I check ship availability from Baltimore often.

[BND]

18 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

It has been said they can yet it has never happened. If there is a demand for bigger ships out of Baltimore why hasn’t RCI ever used that class out of Baltimore? 

Don't ask me.  Ask Royal.

[Charles4515]

1 minute ago, DragonOfTheSeas said:

We sailed on the Mercury twice from Baltimore. If fact, we were on the second to the last voyage before they sold the ship. It was a smaller ship.  To my knowledge there have been no larger X ships sail from Baltimore. I check ship availability from Baltimore often.

I sailed on both Mercury and Galaxy out of Baltimore. If Summit had sailed out of Baltimore I would have been on it as I lived 35 miles from the port. 😀 I cruised on Summit 8 times the first time when she was in her first year of service, that was a southern Caribbean. I did Summit 5 times out of Bayonne. 

[BND]

1 hour ago, robtulipe said:

We once sailed out of Baltimore on X Summit which is slightly larger at 91K gross tons than Radiance class ships that are 90 gross tons so I suspect the latter could sail out of that port.

Summit sailed out of NJ.  We were on her about 8 years ago to Bermuda.  And, until recently she was still going out of NJ.  I know we were booked on her in July 2022, but cancelled to go with friends out of Baltimore instead.

Edited May 25 by BND

[Another_Critic]

18 minutes ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Or maybe RCCL Grandeur, which was based out of Baltimore for a number of years and was a ship on which we sailed from there twice.  Summit for many years until this year was based out of Port Elizabeth, Bayonne.

I've sailed on both Summit (from Cape Liberty) and Grandeur (7 times all from Baltimore).  Summit was based at Cape Liberty, Bayonne.  I don't think anyone would confuse the two.