Why is it that each cruise ship companies (or lines) tries to build a new ship that seems to be the ships of all ships? Every year they seem to come out with a brand new ship, that is larger then the one that was built the previous year.
Disney (who needs to stay out of the cruise ship business as they are into to much stuff already) built the Magic, then the Wonder, and I believe it was the Dream next, etc so they can compete with Norwegian and Carnival with bigger vessels.
Today on facebook I noticed this one here that basically looks like a building instead of a boat. If you took this out of the water I am sure that it would be over 20 stories high sitting on dry land. It already is that, but as we all know most ships can go down as much as 50 feet below the waterline and with them getting bigger it may be more than that now.
http://www.placesyoullsee.com/45-stunning-photos-from-the-largest-cruise-ship-ever/
Take a look at this here new ship that is out and about? Not only is it a bit extravagant, but it is ugly to say the least. Are cruise companies getting too ridiculous in the wars for vacationers between their rivals?
no
no
Yes.
Possibly.
Goat.
Quote from: Thing 342 on March 02, 2015, 04:57:01 PM
Possibly.
I would imagine they would at some point in time. Sooner of later they will outgrow the harbors.
poll
I think I should have asked how many of us really travel on cruise ships. I would imagine that many of us love roads here that many of us all travel by road.
Me personally I am not by far interested in cruise travel. I have much more fun staying at a hotel at a prime location or have to move around land from place to place. Plus who needs tons of food as those cruise ships over feed you.
Live and learn.
quote from raodman65:
Quote
Why is it that each cruise ship companies (or lines) tries to build a new ship that seems to be the ships of all ships? Every year they seem to come out with a brand new ship, that is larger then the one that was built the previous year.
Disney (who needs to stay out of the cruise ship business as they are into to much stuff already) built the Magic, then the Wonder, and I believe it was the Dream next, etc so they can compete with Norwegian and Carnival with bigger vessels.
Today on facebook I noticed this one here that basically looks like a building instead of a boat. If you took this out of the water I am sure that it would be over 20 stories high sitting on dry land. It already is that, but as we all know most ships can go down as much as 50 feet below the waterline and with them getting bigger it may be more than that now.
http://www.placesyoullsee.com/45-stunning-photos-from-the-largest-cruise-ship-ever/
Take a look at this here new ship that is out and about? Not only is it a bit extravagant, but it is ugly to say the least. Are cruise companies getting too ridiculous in the wars for vacationers between their rivals?
I agree with what you are saying. It is annoying when people go overboard just to prove that they are better than someone else. It's kinda like all these men in Texas that have huge pickup trucks just to prove their manhood and wealth. Many work in offices and don't need them.
Just wait...someday this will come back to bite them in the ass big time. You think the Titanic was a disaster? Wait until one of these sinks. Remember that one of the reasons for the Titanic disaster was cockiness and overconfidence.
I have always refused to go on cruise ships. Too many people in a small area, also if something goes wrong, you're fucked, and cannot escape.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 02, 2015, 06:38:01 PM
It is annoying when people go overboard just to prove that they are better than someone else.
Pun intended?
Quote from: roadman65 on March 02, 2015, 04:06:12 PM
Why is it that each cruise ship companies (or lines) tries to build a new ship that seems to be the ships of all ships? Every year they seem to come out with a brand new ship, that is larger then the one that was built the previous year.
Disney (who needs to stay out of the cruise ship business as they are into to much stuff already) built the Magic, then the Wonder, and I believe it was the Dream next, etc so they can compete with Norwegian and Carnival with bigger vessels.
Today on facebook I noticed this one here that basically looks like a building instead of a boat. If you took this out of the water I am sure that it would be over 20 stories high sitting on dry land. It already is that, but as we all know most ships can go down as much as 50 feet below the waterline and with them getting bigger it may be more than that now.
http://www.placesyoullsee.com/45-stunning-photos-from-the-largest-cruise-ship-ever/
Take a look at this here new ship that is out and about? Not only is it a bit extravagant, but it is ugly to say the least. Are cruise companies getting too ridiculous in the wars for vacationers between their rivals?
Uh, no: both Port of Miami and Port Canaveral are probably salivating right about now.
Quote from: NE2 on March 02, 2015, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on March 02, 2015, 06:38:01 PM
It is annoying when people go overboard just to prove that they are better than someone else.
Pun intended?
Is that the best you can muster?
Quote from: NE2 on March 02, 2015, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on March 02, 2015, 06:38:01 PM
It is annoying when people go overboard just to prove that they are better than someone else.
Pun intended?
It's also bad for business, I'd imagine.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 02, 2015, 05:29:09 PM
I think I should have asked how many of us really travel on cruise ships. I would imagine that many of us love roads here that many of us all travel by road.
I've never been on a cruise ship. though some of my non-roadgeek friends like them. Indeed, I ran into two of them on the beach when I was in south Florida last month; they had some time to kill between their flight arrival in Fort Lauderdale and their cruise out of its port. Cruise ships just have about zero appeal to me.
What I do like are long-haul auto ferries, with or sometimes without my car. Few frills, but often great scenery (especially the Alaska Marine Highway routes, many of which I've traveled), and much less expensive.
I'm confused. What's wrong with building bigger boats again?
Are we supposed to limit ourselves to what has already been done, and that's it? Would you have the same issue if someone wanted to build a bigger building? Or wanted to create a faster plane?
What's wrong with Disney being in the cruise business? They appear to run a line of ships in good demand by their target audience.
Overall, cruise lines are extremely successful. Even those that seemingly couldn't do anything right (Carnival) are still doing very well.
For the record, I've been on 2 cruises. And I've been at 2 all-inclusives. They provide unlimited food options too. Maybe we can rant about that tomorrow.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 02, 2015, 09:48:24 PM
I'm confused. What's wrong with building bigger boats again?
Paying extra for something unneeded.
I went on a cruise up in Alaska several years back.
I took my cruise control out.
I actually went on a Disney cruise with my family in Spring 2009 (and being with family made it quite enjoyable). It also gave me a chance to go on FL 528 for the first time (going from Orlando to Cape Canaveral, where the ship was) and do an almost-full clinch (the only section I haven't been on is FL 528 from I-4 to the Turnpike, as we got on it coming from the Turnpike). The ship went to the Bahamas and stopped on an island, so that gave us a chance to be on the beach some, and we also went to the island with the capital Nassau and checked that out. All I can remember doing on the ship most of the time is turning every last hallway into a driving simulator, pretending they were roads. When we were sitting in our room, I'd doodle roads in notebooks. I swear, my crazy mind can make anything fun by somehow putting roads into it. So all in all, I could say I had a pretty good time on that cruise, and I can say I've done one before. However, it's not the best way I'd want to spend my time, and if something bad did happen, I definitely wouldn't wanna be on no cruise ship.
Getting back on-topic, I must say that eventually cruise ships will have to stop getting more and more massive. We cant possibly get to a point where we've got a crazy large cruise ship that can fit NYC's entire population.
Quote from: adventurernumber1 on March 02, 2015, 10:36:56 PM
I actually went on a Disney cruise with my family in Spring 2009 (and being with family made it quite enjoyable). It also gave me a chance to go on FL 528 for the first time (going from Orlando to Cape Canaveral, where the ship was) and do an almost-full clinch (the only section I haven't been on is FL 528 from I-4 to the Turnpike, as we got on it coming from the Turnpike). The ship went to the Bahamas and stopped on an island, so that gave us a chance to be on the beach some, and we also went to the island with the capital Nassau and checked that out. All I can remember doing on the ship most of the time is turning every last hallway into a driving simulator, pretending they were roads. When we were sitting in our room, I'd doodle roads in notebooks. I swear, my crazy mind can make anything fun by somehow putting roads into it. So all in all, I could say I had a pretty good time on that cruise, and I can say I've done one before. However, it's not the best way I'd want to spend my time, and if something bad did happen, I definitely wouldn't wanna be on no cruise ship.
Getting back on-topic, I must say that eventually cruise ships will have to stop getting more and more massive. We cant possibly get to a point where we've got a crazy large cruise ship that can fit NYC's entire population.
If you believe in global warming and that the ice caps will melt and the sea level will rise, flooding the planet, we may all need to live on boats and become a seafaring civilization. Disney and Carnival are just looking out for the best interests of civilization by developing this technology in advance.
Quote from: corco on March 02, 2015, 10:40:14 PM
If you believe in global warming and that the ice caps will melt and the sea level will rise, flooding the planet, we may all need to live on boats and become a seafaring civilization. Disney and Carnival are just looking out for the best interests of civilization by developing this technology in advance.
Or we can just move to Colorado, and skip the seasickness.
Quote from: oscar on March 02, 2015, 10:46:56 PM
Quote from: corco on March 02, 2015, 10:40:14 PM
If you believe in global warming and that the ice caps will melt and the sea level will rise, flooding the planet, we may all need to live on boats and become a seafaring civilization. Disney and Carnival are just looking out for the best interests of civilization by developing this technology in advance.
Or we can just move to Colorado, and skip the seasickness.
Yeah, we mountain westers have more guns than you coastal folk. You can pry our land out of our cold, dead hands.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 02, 2015, 09:48:24 PM
I'm confused. What's wrong with building bigger boats again?
What's wrong is that when these huge-ass cruise ships make ports of call in relatively small towns and unleash their swarm of patrons upon them, mayhem ensues. I recall a family trip to Acadia National Park where we stayed in Bar Harbor and it was quite pleasant... except for the one afternoon that a cruise ship pulled up and turned everything into a crowded mess. That was awful. We intentionally went somewhere where it wouldn't be too crowded and it got spoiled for us.
If people wish to cram themselves by the thousands onto a boat to go putter around the ocean, I may question their sanity but ultimately it is their vacation and so what should I care. But when I'm trying to enjoy somewhere landside and a cruise ship shows up and fucks it up with their crowds of goddamned tourists, then I object.
There need to be rules saying that if you've got a big boat, except in an emergency you can only stop and let people off in a big city.
What I do not like, which is in full agreement with an earlier comment, about these big ships are a disaster waiting to happen. They do not learn as the Titanic should be remembered by all!
For me personally it was the Poseidion Adventure Movie that made be not ever to want to go on a cruise. Although a fictional story and most of the action artwork of Irwin Allen to create the compromising situation that makes the movie the adventure it was, it still has merit as a rogue wave could easily turn a large vessel like an aircraft carrier topside if it hit it broadside. My sister and mom want me to cruise, saying I would have a good time, but I argue with them on the fact that to me I have a better time on land and using my own money wisely in the process.
Plus cruise ships also are not like the Love Boat on TV was. Crew members work from the moment they get up to the moment they sleep. It is not like Gopher, Isaac, and the Doc all mingling with the passengers and enjoying the amenities of the ship. You work in real life the whole entire day! And yes you do not get a day off! You work the whole entire cruise for whatever it lasts and you get a brief break at port, but you have to turn over the ship for next cruise. They do give you one week off a month to compensate, but remember that is cause US labor laws do not apply here! Most cruise ships (even US owned lines) are registered in a foreign country, so they can get away with slave labor practices and the unions of America that would stop them from doing it. In essence they treat their crew like crap!
Quote from: Duke87 on March 02, 2015, 11:57:11 PM
What's wrong is that when these huge-ass cruise ships make ports of call in relatively small towns and unleash their swarm of patrons upon them, mayhem ensues. I recall a family trip to Acadia National Park where we stayed in Bar Harbor and it was quite pleasant... except for the one afternoon that a cruise ship pulled up and turned everything into a crowded mess. That was awful. We intentionally went somewhere where it wouldn't be too crowded and it got spoiled for us.
One small Alaska town famously revolted against a cruise ship visit. When the cruise ship came by Tenakee Springs, in southeastern Alaska, the town put out the unwelcome mat for the tourists, and pretty much shut down until the pissed-off tourists got back on board and the ship left, never to return.
Tenakee Springs is served by one of the smaller vessels on the Alaska Marine Highway ferry system, but is the only AMHS port where vehicles may not be taken on or off the ferry (with exceptions such as for emergency or other official vehicles, the only ones allowed in Tenakee Springs).
Quote from: roadman65 on March 03, 2015, 03:41:15 AMThey do not learn as the Titanic should be remembered by all!
Other than, you know, providing enough lifeboats for everyone on board and having sectioned hulls, of course!
The Titanic was tiny in comparison to these 'x of the Seas' liners, BTW.
I can't imagine anyone tempting fate by saying "unsinkable". And in this aviation age, breaking the record for a trans-Atlantic crossing is rather meaningless so the pressure wouldn't be as high.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 02, 2015, 04:06:12 PMTake a look at this here new ship that is out and about? Not only is it a bit extravagant, but it is ugly to say the least.
Horses for courses, I guess.
Whenever there's the cruise ship equivalent of a planetary alignment in Southampton, half the city goes out and takes photos of the floating behemoths.
Also pretty irrelevant in the most part. The people on the boat don't care what the boat looks like on the outside as they only see it at a port*, the people in the port cities don't care as cruise liners come bringing money or hoards and that is what matters to them (also at Southampton, it's hard to get too close to them unless a passenger, plus they look nicer than the container ships that are the dock's other business!).
The Titanic cared about looks, and didn't put the second row of lifeboats on the ship.
*with rare exceptions of double teaming. But only Cunard seems to do that, and very rarely (if not only once when the QE2 and Queen Victoria crossed the Atlantic for the first/nearly-last time). Cunard's liners make some effort on looks, rather than going for sheer size.
Quote from: corco on March 02, 2015, 11:02:39 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 02, 2015, 10:46:56 PM
Quote from: corco on March 02, 2015, 10:40:14 PM
If you believe in global warming and that the ice caps will melt and the sea level will rise, flooding the planet, we may all need to live on boats and become a seafaring civilization. Disney and Carnival are just looking out for the best interests of civilization by developing this technology in advance.
Or we can just move to Colorado, and skip the seasickness.
Yeah, we mountain westers have more guns than you coastal folk. You can pry our land out of our cold, dead hands.
By then your water funding will long since have run out, and you'll have used up your bullets on one another over what drops remain. Water, water everywhere, but a big arid wasteland in the interior.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 02, 2015, 11:57:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 02, 2015, 09:48:24 PM
I'm confused. What's wrong with building bigger boats again?
What's wrong is that when these huge-ass cruise ships make ports of call in relatively small towns and unleash their swarm of patrons upon them, mayhem ensues. I recall a family trip to Acadia National Park where we stayed in Bar Harbor and it was quite pleasant... except for the one afternoon that a cruise ship pulled up and turned everything into a crowded mess. That was awful. We intentionally went somewhere where it wouldn't be too crowded and it got spoiled for us...But when I'm trying to enjoy somewhere landside and a cruise ship shows up and fucks it up with their crowds of goddamned tourists, then I object.
Cruise ships just don't randomly pull up to shore and unleash their captive audience. These towns have purposely built ports and facilities for these cruise ships, and the schedules are known upwards of 18 months in advance. The visitors then come off the ship and spend...spend...spend!
What's more interesting is that one tourist thinks what they are doing is OK, but are pissed that other tourists are ruining their trip. For the most part, the locals are either happy all tourists are there, because they're making money, or aren't happy that you're there, getting in their way, jamming their roads, sitting at traffic lights trying to figure out which way to go.
What if there was a big convention in town? Would that ruin your trip too? It's all part of planning...when I go on vacation, I do take a look to see if there's any major activities in town at the same time. If I can avoid it, I would. It's no different than me avoiding, say, State College PA, on days when Penn State will play a football game at home. If I'm going to be in a city that is also a cruise port of call, I will find something to do that day that avoids them.
Quote
If people wish to cram themselves by the thousands onto a boat to go putter around the ocean, I may question their sanity but ultimately it is their vacation and so what should I care.
There need to be rules saying that if you've got a big boat, except in an emergency you can only stop and let people off in a big city.
Um, again, the town and the state has actually built the facilities to welcome them.
Quote from: oscar on March 03, 2015, 03:45:48 AM
One small Alaska town famously revolted against a cruise ship visit. When the cruise ship came by Tenakee Springs, in southeastern Alaska, the town put out the unwelcome mat for the tourists, and pretty much shut down until the pissed-off tourists got back on board and the ship left, never to return.
The cruise ship that stopped there was one of the small, quaint ships: 120 passengers. A large ship that Pete doesn't like would never be able to make this stop. Maybe the argument should be they should all be built bigger, since smaller ships have the ability to make stops in towns that aren't expecting them.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 03, 2015, 03:41:15 AM
For me personally it was the Poseidion Adventure Movie that made be not ever to want to go on a cruise. Although a fictional story and most of the action artwork of Irwin Allen to create the compromising situation that makes the movie the adventure it was, it still has merit as a rogue wave could easily turn a large vessel like an aircraft carrier topside if it hit it broadside.
Aren't movies made that bring disaster to roads, bridges, buildings, entire towns, volcanos, planes, tidal waves, earthquakes, aliens, etc, etc, etc? I know people have fears of all sorts of various things, but it shows that someone will be scarred for life about a specific subject, but recreate that movie and vary the issue (say, a rogue wave knocking over a suspension bridge), and you wouldn't give a second thought about travelling over a bridge in the future.
Quote
Plus cruise ships also are not like the Love Boat on TV was. Crew members work from the moment they get up to the moment they sleep. It is not like Gopher, Isaac, and the Doc all mingling with the passengers and enjoying the amenities of the ship. You work in real life the whole entire day! And yes you do not get a day off! You work the whole entire cruise for whatever it lasts and you get a brief break at port, but you have to turn over the ship for next cruise. They do give you one week off a month to compensate, but remember that is cause US labor laws do not apply here! Most cruise ships (even US owned lines) are registered in a foreign country, so they can get away with slave labor practices and the unions of America that would stop them from doing it. In essence they treat their crew like crap!
Most of this is true. But for many of these people, it represents a living, and a good one at that compared to many of their neighbors. It's like any other job - they do choose to do it, and some of them have been working on cruise lines for years. I imagine it's easier to deal with if they don't have a spouse and kids, and if they enjoy meeting new people. But it's like any customer service job: The majority of people you see are enjoyable people. The 5% of visitors that think it's all about them will make their life hell.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 03, 2015, 09:26:09 AMQuote from: oscar on March 03, 2015, 03:45:48 AM
One small Alaska town famously revolted against a cruise ship visit. When the cruise ship came by Tenakee Springs, in southeastern Alaska, the town put out the unwelcome mat for the tourists, and pretty much shut down until the pissed-off tourists got back on board and the ship left, never to return.
The cruise ship that stopped there was one of the small, quaint ships: 120 passengers. A large ship that Pete doesn't like would never be able to make this stop. Maybe the argument should be they should all be built bigger, since smaller ships have the ability to make stops in towns that aren't expecting them.
I sure hope that "Pete" isn't me. I have no horse (or boat) in this race and never made any comment about cruise ships. People like them, whatever. They're not in my way and I'm not in theirs.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on March 03, 2015, 10:29:36 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 03, 2015, 09:26:09 AMQuote from: oscar on March 03, 2015, 03:45:48 AM
One small Alaska town famously revolted against a cruise ship visit. When the cruise ship came by Tenakee Springs, in southeastern Alaska, the town put out the unwelcome mat for the tourists, and pretty much shut down until the pissed-off tourists got back on board and the ship left, never to return.
The cruise ship that stopped there was one of the small, quaint ships: 120 passengers. A large ship that Pete doesn't like would never be able to make this stop. Maybe the argument should be they should all be built bigger, since smaller ships have the ability to make stops in towns that aren't expecting them.
I sure hope that "Pete" isn't me. I have no horse (or boat) in this race and never made any comment about cruise ships. People like them, whatever. They're not in my way and I'm not in theirs.
Wow...did I err on that one! Sorry about that Pete! Obviously I was referring to Roadman's dislike of big cruise ships!
Quote from: english si on March 03, 2015, 05:38:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 03, 2015, 03:41:15 AMThey do not learn as the Titanic should be remembered by all!
Other than, you know, providing enough lifeboats for everyone on board and having sectioned hulls, of course
And the International Ice Patrol, rapid advancement of maritime communications, "speed limits" in ice fields, mandatory lifeboat drills and inspections, required 24/7 365 on-duty radio operators, etc.
A personal concern about modern cruise ships for me would be the large amount superstructure compared to the very shallow hull. Very little of these boats today are useful for keeping them up right. Although, that is probably part of the reason they are kept in calm areas such as island hopping and sea wandering.
IMHO, if one doesn't like cruise ships or going on a cruise; then there's one simple solution, don't sign up for nor go on one!
Some people like to go on them (for reasons previously mentioned), some people don't. It's called freedom of choice.
It's not like Carnival, Norwegian, Royal Carribean, Disney, etc. are pointing guns towards people's heads demanding that they partake in one of their cruises.
For those that mention the Titanic; that wasn't a cruise ship in the modern-day sense but rather a means of Trans-Atlantic travel/commuting (airlines & airports, as we know them, didn't exist back then).
Maybe
Quote from: roadman65 on March 02, 2015, 05:29:09 PM
I think I should have asked how many of us really travel on cruise ships. I would imagine that many of us love roads here that many of us all travel by road.
There are instances like this (http://www.tallinksilja.com/en/web/int/galaxy-siljaline-cruise-ship) and this (http://www.vikingline.fi/sv-fi/hitta-resa/reguljarresor/) where the cruise ship
is the road (these make up parts of highways E18 and E20).
Cruise ships are so much fun. Go Carnival, not Royal Caribbean. The Norwegian Jewel is good too.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 03, 2015, 09:26:09 AM
What's more interesting is that one tourist thinks what they are doing is OK, but are pissed that other tourists are ruining their trip. For the most part, the locals are either happy all tourists are there, because they're making money, or aren't happy that you're there, getting in their way, jamming their roads, sitting at traffic lights trying to figure out which way to go.
Yes but if I am in a town it is because
I made a deliberate decision to go there. If people off a cruise ship are in a town it is because the cruise operator led them there and they just followed like a bunch of sheep. Blech.
Honestly if there is a convention or sporting event in town I will respect the crowds a lot more since in those cases each individual person in the crowd made an individual decision to go there and is there for some more significant purpose than grazing on tourist kitsch.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 03, 2015, 08:05:26 PMThere are instances like this (http://www.tallinksilja.com/en/web/int/galaxy-siljaline-cruise-ship) and this (http://www.vikingline.fi/sv-fi/hitta-resa/reguljarresor/) where the cruise ship is the road (these make up parts of highways E18 and E20).
They are just big ferries that take quite a bit of time to cross and have luxury rooms - no different to this (http://www.brittany-ferries.co.uk/fleet) ferry company that offers long cross-channel routes from England/Ireland to France, and England to Spain routes that take 2 nights.
And I'm not sure that the routes you suggest are the right ones for those E roads, but those companies do offer the E18 route.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 04, 2015, 01:51:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 03, 2015, 09:26:09 AM
What's more interesting is that one tourist thinks what they are doing is OK, but are pissed that other tourists are ruining their trip. For the most part, the locals are either happy all tourists are there, because they're making money, or aren't happy that you're there, getting in their way, jamming their roads, sitting at traffic lights trying to figure out which way to go.
Yes but if I am in a town it is because I made a deliberate decision to go there. If people off a cruise ship are in a town it is because the cruise operator led them there and they just followed like a bunch of sheep. Blech.
Huh?
When people elect to go on a cruise, there is an entire printed itinerary detailing where the ports of call are. On most cruise sites I've looked it, this is posted on the pages before you even get to the pricing pages. Those people specifically booked that cruise based on the ports the ship would be stopping at. It's not like they get 2,000 people to jump on a boat and the captain shouts "Surprise! We're going to Maine today!".
The reason why cruise ships can be as big as they are is that they rarely go far. You won't ever see a cruise ship take a trans-atlantic trip. It wouldn't make it half way there due to how inefficent it is at burning fuel, how top heavy it is, etc.
The idea is to get an "exotic" vacation without leaving the comforts of home. No worries about voltages, eating local food that will make you sick, etc.
Every time I see the title of this thread, I think, "Eventually. The people will run out of food otherwise."
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 04, 2015, 08:39:21 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on March 04, 2015, 01:51:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 03, 2015, 09:26:09 AM
What's more interesting is that one tourist thinks what they are doing is OK, but are pissed that other tourists are ruining their trip. For the most part, the locals are either happy all tourists are there, because they're making money, or aren't happy that you're there, getting in their way, jamming their roads, sitting at traffic lights trying to figure out which way to go.
Yes but if I am in a town it is because I made a deliberate decision to go there. If people off a cruise ship are in a town it is because the cruise operator led them there and they just followed like a bunch of sheep. Blech.
Huh?
When people elect to go on a cruise, there is an entire printed itinerary detailing where the ports of call are. On most cruise sites I've looked it, this is posted on the pages before you even get to the pricing pages. Those people specifically booked that cruise based on the ports the ship would be stopping at. It's not like they get 2,000 people to jump on a boat and the captain shouts "Surprise! We're going to Maine today!".
Having been on a couple of cruises myself; I do recall that on one cruise, a port of call (to a private resort island) was cancelled due to bad weather (the island dock was too small for the ship; transport to/from the island was done with smaller launches/shuttles aka
tending); such was substituted for a
Day at Sea. Thankfully, the next port of call (to Nassau in the Bahamas) wasn't.
Nonetheless, if passenger(s) don't want to get off the ship at a particular port of call (for whatever reason); they just simply stay on the ship.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on March 04, 2015, 09:03:09 AM
The reason why cruise ships can be as big as they are is that they rarely go far. You won't ever see a cruise ship take a trans-atlantic trip. It wouldn't make it half way there due to how inefficent it is at burning fuel, how top heavy it is, etc.
You may want to let Royal Caribbean know that. The largest cruise ship in the world, the Allure of the Seas, makes that 'impossible' Trans-Atlantic trip twice a year. For 2015, Royal Caribbean has 12 scheduled sailings. And that's just one cruise line - I'm sure most of the others do the same.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on March 04, 2015, 09:03:09 AM
The reason why cruise ships can be as big as they are is that they rarely go far. You won't ever see a cruise ship take a trans-atlantic trip. It wouldn't make it half way there due to how inefficent it is at burning fuel, how top heavy it is, etc.
The idea is to get an "exotic" vacation without leaving the comforts of home. No worries about voltages, eating local food that will make you sick, etc.
Well, other than the cruise ships that do round-the-world itineraries and the like! We have a friend in Florida who took a round-the-world cruise. She really enjoyed it, but I'm not sure I'd want to go away for that length of time, and the issue of dealing with the mail, packages, bills, etc., is certainly a major hassle. She said it took her over a month to ensure all the proper arrangements were made for that sort of thing.
There are a number that do transatlantic cruises as well, though sometimes those are offered as "repositioning" cruises where the cruise line is relocating the ship for the coming season and they figure they may as well make some money rather than moving an empty ship around.
We've been on two cruises, one from Seward to Vancouver and the other roundtrip out of Copenhagen through the Baltic Sea, both on the same ship (Holland America's Veendam). The ship accommodates around 1300 passengers, so it's smaller than the big floating cities roadman65 describes. A travel agent friend of ours recommended the mid-size ship. We enjoyed both cruises quite a bit, and as jeffandnicole notes, the stated itinerary for each was a part of why we chose to do them (indeed the itinerary was specifically what attracted me to the Baltic Sea cruise).
It's obviously fair to recognize that you don't get to visit an area in-depth. You barely scratch the surface of most ports you visit (our cruise spent two days in St. Petersburg, but you could spend a week there and not see everything....yet one day in Sitka was more than enough). On the other hand, it's a much more practical way to see a variety of places in some circumstances. The Alaska Panhandle is a hassle due to the lack of roads–your options are, basically, to fly (expensive) or to take the Alaska Marine Highway (potentially slow and doesn't go everywhere....our cruise went into Glacier Bay National Park, for example). The Baltic cruise went: Copehagen--->day at sea--->Tallinn--->St. Petersburg (two days)--->Helsinki--->Stockholm--->Visby (partial day)--->Warnemunde (most of us took a train to Berlin for the day)--->Arhus (half day)--->Copenhagen. That's not an easy itinerary to do unless you take a cruise, and the complicated Russian visa requirements would just make it that much worse. There are other places where I wouldn't consider a cruise, such as Atlantic Canada. I can drive there and give myself a lot more flexibility.
I'm not suggesting cruises are ideal for everyone. People who are into doing their own thing and not adhering to a schedule would probably be better off doing something else, although you don't have to go on the ship's organized shore excursions at each port. (In Russia those excursions were ideal, though, because it meant we didn't have to obtain visas nor deal with the utterly incomprehensible Cyrillic-lettered signs!)
To Jeff and Nicole, no not going on a cruise is not only because of the classic disaster film. I just really have no interest in them.
As far as other disaster films go about other places, there is a minor difference. If a ship capsizes, you do not die instantly unless you are on deck. If you are inside trapped in an air pocket, you may suffer some.
I still fly on planes even though they crash some. I would still go in a tall building even after 9/11. I have no interest in cruises and to me there is too much on firm soil that I want to see and have already built some places I love to go.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 04, 2015, 10:01:37 AM
...It's obviously fair to recognize that you don't get to visit an area in-depth. You barely scratch the surface of most ports you visit...
This is one of the reasons why I like cruises - it gives you a sample of the various destinations. One of our cruises was to Bermuda. It did nothing for me. Another cruise included stops in the Grand Cayman Islands, and I'd love to go back to the Grand Cayman Islands someday.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 04, 2015, 10:53:26 AM
I have no interest in cruises and to me there is too much on firm soil that I want to see and have already built some places I love to go.
For the most part, my travelling is domestic in nature. I always say there's a LOT to see in this country alone, before I go venturing off to other parts of the world. But also seeing how a lot of people travel all over the world, especially those in high school and college, makes me kinda wish I did the same during that time.
I think we need to keep moving forward with ship-building technology.
Size is definitely of interest here, since someday we'll need to be able to build ships big enough to support thousands or even millions of people for many years as they cruise through interstellar space en route to new homes on other planets.
Sure, we have a long way to go, but you gotta start somewhere. (Where we're going, we don't need roads.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 04, 2015, 10:01:37 AMWell, other than the cruise ships that do round-the-world itineraries and the like! We have a friend in Florida who took a round-the-world cruise. She really enjoyed it, but I'm not sure I'd want to go away for that length of time, and the issue of dealing with the mail, packages, bills, etc., is certainly a major hassle. She said it took her over a month to ensure all the proper arrangements were made for that sort of thing.
We have family friends who took a three-month round-the-world cruise on the
QE2 ten years ago, with ports of call that included Tahiti, Hong Kong, Bombay (I think), Dubai, Alexandria, Barcelona, Southampton, and New York. For them it was a convenient way to sample multiple countries in a single package soon after retirement. I think they got about 20 countries per $30,000 ticket, plus the ability to recover on the ship after each port call.
I have been on backpacking trips through multiple countries (on a much smaller budget, of course) and have learned that after a fairly short while, say a week or so, travel fatigue sets in and it becomes very attractive to settle in a city for a while just to avoid the hassle of navigating transport and schlepping luggage to new lodgings on an almost-daily basis.
To answer the OP's question, I don't think cruise ships will ever go away for the simple reason that the rich (like the poor) will always be with us, though obviously the demand will ebb and flow with the economy. Disliking the congestion that cruise ships cause in port cities when they disgorge passengers is essentially a company-town complaint. If you don't like cruise ships, why would you live in a Florida port city? Similarly, if you don't like small airplanes, why live in Wichita?
I was not implying that cruise ships are going away, but the fact that each year a new bigger vessel is being built.
Like one poster even said that some could never make a trans Atlantic voyage because the size of them makes them all top heavy.
My point was is there ever going to be a point where the rivalry between cruise lines is ever going to stop them all from building bigger boats each year?
Quote from: english si on March 04, 2015, 08:10:25 AM
And I'm not sure that the routes you suggest are the right ones for those E roads, but those companies do offer the E18 route.
No, they are correct. Those ships used to have a green E18 shield painted on both sides, but that seems to have been discontinued.
The shortest E18 sea crossing is Kapellskär, Sweden to Naantali (Swedish NÃ¥dendal), Finland, and is signed E18 all the way to the sea terminals. Alternatively, Stockholm to Turku (Ã...bo) is also a longer trip by sea, but still E18.
Stockholm to Tallinn (generally via Mariehamn, Finland) is E20, also signed right up to the ships.
I really don't see the appeal of cruise ships that much.
I'm a simple man, a humble peasant.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 04, 2015, 01:17:25 PM
I was not implying that cruise ships are going away, but the fact that each year a new bigger vessel is being built.
My point was is there ever going to be a point where the rivalry between cruise lines is ever going to stop them all from building bigger boats each year?
If the market ever makes smaller ships a more attractive proposition, then perhaps that's what will dictate that decision. Other than convincing passengers that you're leaving a comparatively-smaller carbon footprint than a giant ship, or perhaps mentioning that there's less of a crowd, consumers will likely prefer something that offers more options, activities, and space. To the operators...a larger craft means more berths, and potentially more revenue.
Like any other luxury, I'm sure when a recession hits, they're less passenger-laden like any other form of leisure transport. As these ships are probably planned and constructed over the span of a half-decade or so, they aren't just created on a whimsy...they probably know what they're doing; some other ships are probably set to "retire" after 30 years of usage, so something new takes that place.
I've taken a few "one day cruises", but I think I'd get bored after a few days of sleeping, eating, walking about, et al...on the same ship.
We have been on a couple of music-theme cruises in the last two years, one on Carnival, one on MSC. Celtic Thunder was the main attraction, but many other Irish bands performed on board as well. They stopped in the Bahamas (on one trip), Jamaica and the Caymans (on the other). The itineraries were very full of performances and other activities centered around the bands on-board, and included excursions in the ports. We did them as 25th wedding anniversary gifts -- the actual date was midway in between.
Don't worry -- I got some road-geeking done in Miami before- and afterward in both cases.
I am not sure we would have gone on them if the attraction of five days solid of live music by bands we like were not part of the experience, even if it was in November. "Generic" cruises are not our bag.
I've only been on one short cruise, part of a family event a few years ago. It was OK, but I learned cruises are not really my thing. This one was only a few days and very unstructured (you could eat anywhere any time, no dress codes, all those other things that would really annoy me).
One situation that might make me want to take another cruise would be if it was a means for me to get to some new places I otherwise would not go. One that stopped at several island nations, none of which is worth a plane ticket and some hotel nights on its own, would have some appeal. I know some people who have done the long cruises (several weeks to months) who were then able to see lots of places and had the choice of how much of the local culture to experience. I for one would enjoy some sightseeing and trying the local cuisine in many places but if and when that was not appetizing, it would be nice to have reliable meals back on the boat. Same for lodgings. No need to worry about quality of the hotel in some third world location. Spend the day exploring a bit, then be back in a comfortable place for the night while they take you to the next place. Of course, these kind of cruises are so far out of my price range, it's not happening any time soon anyway.
As for the original question, I think that answer is simple: they'll stop building larger ships when it's no longer technologically feasible and, of course, profitable to do so.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2015, 01:36:58 PM
Quote from: english si on March 04, 2015, 08:10:25 AM
And I'm not sure that the routes you suggest are the right ones for those E roads, but those companies do offer the E18 route.
No, they are correct. Those ships used to have a green E18 shield painted on both sides, but that seems to have been discontinued.
I like this idea. I would like to see a giant US 9 logo on the side of the Cape May-Lewes Ferry.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on March 05, 2015, 12:54:09 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2015, 01:36:58 PM
Quote from: english si on March 04, 2015, 08:10:25 AM
And I'm not sure that the routes you suggest are the right ones for those E roads, but those companies do offer the E18 route.
No, they are correct. Those ships used to have a green E18 shield painted on both sides, but that seems to have been discontinued.
I like this idea. I would like to see a giant US 9 logo on the side of the Cape May-Lewes Ferry.
SS Badger ferry carries a homemade US 10 logo.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FDpsrGzF-IQE%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&hash=64d0bfffbe3b97bf280d17653a01d13f46e7bb4d)
Quote from: Pete from Boston on March 05, 2015, 12:54:09 AM
I like this idea. I would like to see a giant US 9 logo on the side of the Cape May-Lewes Ferry.
Relative to the rest of the ship, the E18 shields were not that large, rather like the U.S. 10 shield above in terms of proportion.
I looked for a while for an image of one of the vessels on that route with an E18, but could not find one. I did find some images of ships with the (now obsolete) E3 shield (largely replaced by E18 and E20 in Sweden and E18 in Finland) painted on the hull, like this one:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simplonpc.co.uk%2FBore%2FBotnia_1967_05.jpg&hash=a5135d40ef98b8eb0616aee01dc23b773272c874)
I've never been on a cruise. If I did go on one, I'd like it to be for destinations where I could not easily go by car, like the Alaskan panhandle or a bunch of smaller islands. It's not a high priority for me, though.
As for ships getting bigger and better, why wouldn't they? A floating hotel/resort isn't my cup of tea, but there are plenty of people who love them.
I will say that given the choice, I would choose a cruise over an all inclusive resort any day. Resorts have no appeal to me at all. If I'm visiting somewhere, I want to actually be able to visit it and not be stuck in a resort the whole time. At least with a cruise you do get the chance to visit places.
iPhone
Aaaand introducing the "world's smartest ship", the Quantum Of The Seas:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/09/sailing/quantum-of-seas-smartest-cruise-ship/index.html
Somebody just upped the severe overkill benchmark with this one; unfortunately it's going to be based out of Asia thru 2015...