Go Back   CruiseMates Cruise Community and Forums > Cruise Lines (Mainstream) > Celebrity
Register Forgot Password?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old December 5th, 2007, 08:49 AM
Junior Member
Beginner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3
Default Celebrity Summit Info. vs. Princess

We are contemplating 2 southern caribbean cruises in March: Celebrity Summit or Crown Princess. We've been on Celebrity 8 times, RCCL 10, HAL Zuiderdam 2 x's, NCL 2 x's, but never Princess. Are a bit nervous/unsure about making the switch. Have been reading on various message boards that the Summit is in need of refurbishment (scheduled for drydock in April 08, I believe?) Celebrity has always been our favorite cruise line but I've been hearing negative
things about the current condition of the Summit, but we like the itinerary.
RCCL cruises out of San Juan are considerably (& surprisingly more $$).
If any of you have been on both lines, please let me know your thoughts.
My husband & I are in our late 40's and our top priorities are the food/service and nice accomodations. We're not late night party people and can take or leave the shows. I'm starting to stress about our decision - currently have a hold on Summit. Crown traditional dining is waitlisted as of now - DH won't go if we can't get traditional dining, which we prefer.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old December 6th, 2007, 01:27 PM
longboysfan's Avatar
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Northern Jersey
Posts: 121
Default

Stick with Celebrity if your priority is the food / service.
From my expirence they are a cut above Princess in this area.
__________________
We be Cruzin... Summitt - from San Juan.
January 2nd - ...... To the South.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old December 24th, 2007, 03:56 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default Re: Celebrity Summit Info. vs. Princess

Quote:
Originally Posted by RosiePosie
We are contemplating 2 southern caribbean cruises in March: Celebrity Summit or Crown Princess. We've been on Celebrity 8 times, RCCL 10, HAL Zuiderdam 2 x's, NCL 2 x's, but never Princess. Are a bit nervous/unsure about making the switch. Have been reading on various message boards that the Summit is in need of refurbishment (scheduled for drydock in April 08, I believe?) Celebrity has always been our favorite cruise line but I've been hearing negative
things about the current condition of the Summit, but we like the itinerary.
RCCL cruises out of San Juan are considerably (& surprisingly more $$).
If any of you have been on both lines, please let me know your thoughts.
My husband & I are in our late 40's and our top priorities are the food/service and nice accomodations. We're not late night party people and can take or leave the shows. I'm starting to stress about our decision - currently have a hold on Summit. Crown traditional dining is waitlisted as of now - DH won't go if we can't get traditional dining, which we prefer.
I would definitely recommend the Crown Princess. You are correct that the Summit is due for drydock next April 08 for maintenance and upgrades. The Crown Princess, on the other hand, is almost a brand new ship compared to the Summit.
The recurring mechanical problems on the Summit also would persuade me to go with the Crown Princess. The food and service is good on both ships but as you said "nice accommodations are very important to you then I again would say that the Crown Princess is way ahead in that department. If you budget allows try one of the mini suites on Princess, they are just outstanding.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old December 27th, 2007, 04:21 PM
Junior Member
Beginner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
Default

My wife and I just took the Panama Canal cruise ferom Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles on the Summit. The ship looked great to us. The staff was outstanding throughtout the ship. We've never been on Princess but Celebrity is our favorite cruise line. Only complaint I had was that they only had karaoke 2 nights out of the 14 but then I'm a big fan of karaoke.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old December 28th, 2007, 04:50 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,771
Default Re: Celebrity Summit Info. vs. Princess

RosiePosie,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
We are contemplating 2 southern caribbean cruises in March: Celebrity Summit or Crown Princess. We've been on Celebrity 8 times, RCCL 10, HAL Zuiderdam 2 x's, NCL 2 x's, but never Princess. Are a bit nervous/unsure about making the switch. Have been reading on various message boards that the Summit is in need of refurbishment (scheduled for drydock in April 08, I believe?) Celebrity has always been our favorite cruise line but I've been hearing negative
things about the current condition of the Summit, but we like the itinerary.
RCCL cruises out of San Juan are considerably (& surprisingly more $$).
If any of you have been on both lines, please let me know your thoughts.
My husband & I are in our late 40's and our top priorities are the food/service and nice accomodations. We're not late night party people and can take or leave the shows. I'm starting to stress about our decision - currently have a hold on Summit. Crown traditional dining is waitlisted as of now - DH won't go if we can't get traditional dining, which we prefer.
I would not go aboard MV Crown Princess if there was a reasonable alternative, for several reasons.

>> 1. This ship copies many layout flaws of MV Grand Princess that are extremely annoying if you happen to encounter them. By way of example, the only gathering space outside the dining room used for "traditional" dining is an elevator/stair lobby, which fills up very quickly when folks start to gather for dinner. Aboard MV Grand Princess, folks in wheelchairs could not get off the lifts because that lobby was packed with folks waiting to enter the dining room.

>> 2. Princess seems to handle the balance between "Anytime Dining" and "Traditional Dining" very poorly, in particular doing nothing to make additional space available for "traditional dining" when either seating sells out -- and this is true even if the there are enough people on the waiting list for either seating to fill another main dining room! Also, many folks who book "Traditional Dining" and decide to go to "Anytime Dining" instead when they arrive aboard ship don't bother to inform the Maitre d'Hotel so he can reassing the places reserved for them in "Traditional Dining" to folks who are on the waiting list. Adding insult to injury, the line does nothing to follow up when folks assigned to "Traditional Dining" don't show for two or three consecutive nights, either. I also find that the service in "Anytime Dining" does not meet the same standard as in "Traditional Dining" because the waitstaff don't have a chance to get to know your preferences.

Of course, YMMV. Have a great cruise, whichever you decide!

Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old January 13th, 2008, 06:42 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default

Every cruise ship that I have ever sailed, including the Summit, the area in front of the dining room is always a mess a minute or so before the dining room opens. The easy way around this is to arrive early or arrive two minutes after the dining room opens.

Celebrity does not offer the choice between Traditional dining and anytime dining but I understand that they are probably going to go with this improved dining option. First seating on all cruise lines always fills up first and fortunately for us we prefer second seating and have never had any problem with Princess. We have not tried anytime dining because we like the second seating in the traditional format.

As I said before the biggest difference between the Summit and Crown is the repeating propulsion problems on the Summit that have impacted so many cruises over the years and remain a constant threat of occurring.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old January 14th, 2008, 05:58 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,771
Default

Nurse Debra,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
Every cruise ship that I have ever sailed, including the Summit, the area in front of the dining room is always a mess a minute or so before the dining room opens. The easy way around this is to arrive early or arrive two minutes after the dining room opens.
It's one thing to see a queue at the door to the dining room awaiting its opening. It's quite another to have a situation in which there's noplace for passengers to await the opening of the dining room, which is the situation outside the dining room that serves "Traditional Dining" on Princess's post-Panamax vessels. The result is that the stair/elevator lobby gets so packed that passengers in wheelchairs could not get off the elevator on that deck.

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
Celebrity does not offer the choice between Traditional dining and anytime dining but I understand that they are probably going to go with this improved dining option. First seating on all cruise lines always fills up first and fortunately for us we prefer second seating and have never had any problem with Princess. We have not tried anytime dining because we like the second seating in the traditional format.
The original poster said that her party want Traditional Dining, and indeed that one of the problems with the cruise aboard MV Crown Princess is that "Traditional Dining" is completely reserved.

And FWIW, "Anytime Dining" is NOT an improvement. The quality of service suffers because you don't have the same waitstaff every evening. The fact that "Traditional Dining" seems to be chronically sold out is one of the reasons why I decided to stop cruising with Princess five years ago. I once got stuck in "Anytime Dining" and firmly resolved that it would be the last time!

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
As I said before the biggest difference between the Summit and Crown is the repeating propulsion problems on the Summit that have impacted so many cruises over the years and remain a constant threat of occurring.
You keep bringing this up, but when was the last propulsion incident aboard GTS Summit? Link, please!

Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old January 14th, 2008, 10:18 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 2,617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by longboysfan
Stick with Celebrity if your priority is the food / service.
From my expirence they are a cut above Princess in this area.
everyone has his own views on this but I think Celebrity has gone down in the part few years and my clients feel the same, especially the Summit. That being said, there really isn't much difference in the quality of any mass marketed lines. Price and itinerary should be the guiding factors in most cases.

Nita
__________________
ncl, carnival, HAL, Costa, RCI, commodore,chamdres,celebrity,Princess
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old January 15th, 2008, 03:20 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
Quote:
Originally Posted by longboysfan
Stick with Celebrity if your priority is the food / service.
From my expirence they are a cut above Princess in this area.
everyone has his own views on this but I think Celebrity has gone down in the part few years and my clients feel the same, especially the Summit. That being said, there really isn't much difference in the quality of any mass marketed lines. Price and itinerary should be the guiding factors in most cases.

Nita
I agree that that overall Celebrity ships have gone down the past few years in the area of ship maintenance and also Celebrity's customer service. The food and service have, at least in my opinion, remained good. I also agree that there really is not much difference in the quality of any of the mass marketed cruise lines with one notable exception.

Norm: To answer a few of your questions the OP is thinking of booking a cruise less than four months from sailing and on any cruise line you will not have "pick of the liter" as far as dining choices. I also never said "anytime dining was an improvement or was not an improvement, all I said was that Princess gave its passengers another choice as to how they would prefer their dining arrangements. Geez!

As for the last Summit pod failure it was on an Alaskan cruise on May 7 of 2006 and resulted in two missed ports and never getting to a glacier and cruising the Inside Passage in the dark. Other than a few other problems the cruise was great. The only compensation for most passengers was $100 for what was referred to by Celebrity as "a slight inconvenience".
Most Celebrity cruises do not encounter these problems but when they do happen the above is an indication of what can and has happened to a lot of passengers over the years. It has been a record breaking length of time between pod failures for the Summit and at this time the GTS Summit is now way over due for another pod failure.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old January 15th, 2008, 05:59 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,771
Default

Nurse Debra,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
Norm: To answer a few of your questions the OP is thinking of booking a cruise less than four months from sailing and on any cruise line you will not have "pick of the liter" as far as dining choices.
True enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
I also never said "anytime dining was an improvement or was not an improvement, all I said was that Princess gave its passengers another choice as to how they would prefer their dining arrangements. Geez!
The fact remains that the OP explicitly said that "Anytime Dining" was not an acceptable option, so why assert it as a reason to choose Princess?

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
As for the last Summit pod failure it was on an Alaskan cruise on May 7 of 2006 and resulted in two missed ports and never getting to a glacier and cruising the Inside Passage in the dark. Other than a few other problems the cruise was great. The only compensation for most passengers was $100 for what was referred to by Celebrity as "a slight inconvenience". Most Celebrity cruises do not encounter these problems but when they do happen the above is an indication of what can and has happened to a lot of passengers over the years. It has been a record breaking length of time between pod failures for the Summit and at this time the GTS Summit is now way over due for another pod failure.
You're right about the "record breaking time" between pod failures -- and actually it has been on all four ships of the Millennium class. Indeed, the pod failures were happenning more or less annually on these ships before 2006. One usually sees this sort of improvement only when the engineers really do fix the problem. Thus, I don't see how you can regard the pod failures as a current issue that should influence somebody's choice of cruise ship.

That said, I would also point out that Celebrity has provided more than just compensation to passengers whose cruises have been shortened or cancelled due to the problem. As one of the passengers booked on a cancelled cruise, I received a full refund plus a free cruise of equal duration (which I used on the same itinerary a few weeks later when the cruise fare would have been considerably higher).

Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old January 16th, 2008, 12:01 AM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev22:17

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
As for the last Summit pod failure it was on an Alaskan cruise on May 7 of 2006 and resulted in two missed ports and never getting to a glacier and cruising the Inside Passage in the dark. Other than a few other problems the cruise was great. The only compensation for most passengers was $100 for what was referred to by Celebrity as "a slight inconvenience". Most Celebrity cruises do not encounter these problems but when they do happen the above is an indication of what can and has happened to a lot of passengers over the years. It has been a record breaking length of time between pod failures for the Summit and at this time the GTS Summit is now way over due for another pod failure.
You're right about the "record breaking time" between pod failures -- and actually it has been on all four ships of the Millennium class. Indeed, the pod failures were happenning more or less annually on these ships before 2006. One usually sees this sort of improvement only when the engineers really do fix the problem. Thus, I don't see how you can regard the pod failures as a current issue that should influence somebody's choice of cruise ship.

That said, I would also point out that Celebrity has provided more than just compensation to passengers whose cruises have been shortened or cancelled due to the problem. As one of the passengers booked on a cancelled cruise, I received a full refund plus a free cruise of equal duration (which I used on the same itinerary a few weeks later when the cruise fare would have been considerably higher).

Norm.
Hi Norm: Well we agree about the record breaking, to-date, for the Summit. The Constellation has never had a pod failure since it had the problem with a salt water leak when it was first launched. The ship went to dry dock and the leak was fixed. There after the Constellation has a perfect record.

You: "Indeed, the pod failures were happening more or less annually on these ships before 2006".

I am afraid again your information is incorrect. The truth is that both the Millennium and Infinity had major propulsion problems that lasted for a grand total of about thirty-five weeks last year (2007) alone.

The Millennium sailed with these same propulsion problems at reduced speeds from January 1, 2007 until dry dock in mid April of 2007.

You also forgot about the Infinity which sailed with these same propulsion problems at reduced speeds from January 1, 2007 until dry dock on May 20, 2007.

Since the Celebrity Infinity and Millennium sailed for a total of about 35 weeks during the 2007 cruise season, which caused missed ports, late arrivals and missed flights home because of these problems, I don't see how you can say that this is not a current issue and it should be a key consideration in choosing what ship to sail. Especially since there has been no permanent fix for this problem by Celebrity after all of these years. Just to set the record there have been seventeen of these exact same failures spread over the three ships (Infinity, Summit and Millennium).

[color=red]You: "I would also point out that Celebrity has provided more than just compensation to passengers whose cruises have been shortened or cancelled due to the problem".[/color]

Outside of the disappointment of a cancelled cruise that you may not be able to reschedule, I agree that the compensation for a cancelled cruise is fair. This year Celebrity avoided the "free cruise give away" by continuing to sail the Infinity and Millennium at reduced speeds, after the propulsion problems first began, until the date of a scheduled dry docks was reached. Thus, no "free" cruises in 2007.

The real rub comes for those who are trapped on a cruise in which the propulsion is not working properly. As I pointed out on the May 7, 2006 Summit Alaskan cruise the compensation that each passenger (first two in a cabin only) received was $100 for missing just over half of a cruise that cost some people over $8,000. Now if you call that more than just compensation that is, I guess, certainly your right. I am sure you remember that there was after many complaints by the passengers an offer of 30% off another Celebrity cruise. Most of the passengers either lived too far away (almost half came from overseas) to come back to the US, to use the coupon (it was limited to only cruises in North America) or the passengers did not want to take another chance with Celebrity.

Hope this helps to refresh your memory about these on-going Celebrity propulsion problems.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old January 17th, 2008, 01:37 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,771
Default

Nurse Debra,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
The real rub comes for those who are trapped on a cruise in which the propulsion is not working properly. As I pointed out on the May 7, 2006 Summit Alaskan cruise the compensation that each passenger (first two in a cabin only) received was $100 for missing just over half of a cruise that cost some people over $8,000. Now if you call that more than just compensation that is, I guess, certainly your right. I am sure you remember that there was after many complaints by the passengers an offer of 30% off another Celebrity cruise. Most of the passengers either lived too far away (almost half came from overseas) to come back to the US, to use the coupon (it was limited to only cruises in North America) or the passengers did not want to take another chance with Celebrity.
This paragraph reflects a gross misunderstanding of what constitutes a "missed cruise" under the terms of the cruise contract, which basically states that the cruise line can change the ship's itinerary for any reason with no obligation to the passengers. Thus, "missed cruise" legally means that the cruise line does not accommodate you aboard the ship for the dates promised. By contrast, your complaint reflects a "missed tour by cruise ship" mindset that has neither basis in reality nor legal standing in any court of law. If the cruise line cancels or shortens a port of call, the passengers have no legal recourse whatsoever even if the change in itinerary is due to gross negligence on the part of the cruise line. Note, BTW, that this is true of every major cruise line, and not just Celebrity. If Celebrity gave a shipboard credit of $100 per passenger for a cruise that skipped a couple ports of call, that's purely a gesture of good will on Celebrity's part for which the fortunate recipients ought to be thankful.

Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old January 17th, 2008, 08:17 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,088
Default

Agree with Norm, the following week was a missed cruise because they didn't go while the repair was made. They received a very nice package from Celebrity. Full compensation for missed cruise and another cruise to take its place. Using the words missed cruise for the previous cruise is really misleading and shows the posters obvious agenda as has been evident on this and other boards.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old January 17th, 2008, 12:03 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev22:17
Nurse Debra,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
The real rub comes for those who are trapped on a cruise in which the propulsion is not working properly. As I pointed out on the May 7, 2006 Summit Alaskan cruise the compensation that each passenger (first two in a cabin only) received was $100 for missing just over half of a cruise that cost some people over $8,000. Now if you call that more than just compensation that is, I guess, certainly your right. I am sure you remember that there was after many complaints by the passengers an offer of 30% off another Celebrity cruise. Most of the passengers either lived too far away (almost half came from overseas) to come back to the US, to use the coupon (it was limited to only cruises in North America) or the passengers did not want to take another chance with Celebrity.
This paragraph reflects a gross misunderstanding of what constitutes a "missed cruise" under the terms of the cruise contract, which basically states that the cruise line can change the ship's itinerary for any reason with no obligation to the passengers. Thus, "missed cruise" legally means that the cruise line does not accommodate you aboard the ship for the dates promised. By contrast, your complaint reflects a "missed tour by cruise ship" mindset that has neither basis in reality nor legal standing in any court of law. If the cruise line cancels or shortens a port of call, the passengers have no legal recourse whatsoever [i]even if the change in itinerary is due to gross negligence on the part of the cruise line[i]. Note, BTW, that this is true of every major cruise line, and not just Celebrity. If Celebrity gave a shipboard credit of $100 per passenger for a cruise that skipped a couple ports of call, that's purely a gesture of good will on Celebrity's part for which the fortunate recipients ought to be thankful.

Norm.
Hi Norm: You had me going there for a minute and I thought maybe I had a typo in my last post, but I re-read my last post and absolutely no where did I say "missed cruise". If you would re-read my post you will not find the term "missed cruise" used anywhere and you probably were confused when you saw the term "missed ports" which has happened quite a lot over the years because of this design flaw. Missed ports means ports that you thought you were going too are were not able to reach because of the need for Celebrity to run the ship at much slower speeds when there is one of these propulsion problems The term that I used was for emergency dry dock was "cancelled cruises", which until last year occurred right after a propulsion problem on the Infinity, Summit or Millennium. As I said before, in 2007 Celebrity decided to keep sailing the Infinity and Millennium after the propulsion problems first started at reduced speeds until the time for a previously scheduled dry dock time was reached many months later.

I feel there is a huge difference between a "missed tour" and a missed port because your ship was not able to run at normal speed. To set the record straight, the only "gross misunderstanding" was when you reported that there had been no more propulsion problems on any of the Celebrity m-class ships since 2006. Clearly, that was incorrect information.

As far as legal implications, that you mentioned, of Celebrity sailing ships that sometimes are not mechanically sound, I am not a lawyer and will not even pretend to know how any court would look at this matter.

I know of people who would not be upset if they missed all of their ports on a cruise and would be happy with a $100, or so, on board credit to make up for it, so I feel there is no need to be quite so defensive about this issue. It is great that we all have different opinions but some things are not subjective like food and are just hard facts.

The great thing about cruisemates is that it provides all of the information that will help you plan a cruise that is right for you.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old January 17th, 2008, 06:06 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,771
Default

Nurse Debra,

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
Hi Norm: You had me going there for a minute and I thought maybe I had a typo in my last post, but I re-read my last post and absolutely no where did I say "missed cruise". If you would re-read my post you will not find the term "missed cruise" used anywhere and you probably were confused when you saw the term "missed ports" which has happened quite a lot over the years because of this design flaw.
See boldface in the following paragraph, which I quoted from your previous post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by In your Previous Post, You
The real rub comes for those who are trapped on a cruise in which the propulsion is not working properly. As I pointed out on the May 7, 2006 Summit Alaskan cruise the compensation that each passenger (first two in a cabin only) received was $100 for missing just over half of a cruise that cost some people over $8,000. Now if you call that more than just compensation that is, I guess, certainly your right. I am sure you remember that there was after many complaints by the passengers an offer of 30% off another Celebrity cruise. Most of the passengers either lived too far away (almost half came from overseas) to come back to the US, to use the coupon (it was limited to only cruises in North America) or the passengers did not want to take another chance with Celebrity.
(boldface added)

Your wording of "missing just over half of a cruise" would imply that you expect to get at least "just over half" of the cruise fare back. No, you paid for a cruise of seven (or however many) nights, and you received a cruise of that many nights. The cruise simply did not include all of the ports indicated on the original itinerary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
Missed ports means ports that you thought you were going too are were not able to reach because of the need for Celebrity to run the ship at much slower speeds when there is one of these propulsion problems
Yes, I understand the term "missed ports" -- but the reality is that cruises frequently skip scheduled ports of call for many reasons.

BTW, a ship's propulsion requirements are not linear. The ships of the Millennium class, which have a top speed of about 25 knots with both pods working, can travel at about 17-18 knots on one pod -- a reduction of only about a third in maximum speed on a loss of half of their propulsion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
As far as legal implications, that you mentioned, of Celebrity sailing ships that sometimes are not mechanically sound, I am not a lawyer and will not even pretend to know how any court would look at this matter.
The occasional failure of a propulsion pod does not mean that a ship is not "mechanically sound." Indeed, the ships have enough redundancy (two pods) to maintain propulsion in the event of a failure, so none of the failures have endangered the ship or any passengers in any way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by You
I know of people who would not be upset if they missed all of their ports on a cruise and would be happy with a $100, or so, on board credit to make up for it, so I feel there is no need to be quite so defensive about this issue. It is great that we all have different opinions but some things are not subjective like food and are just hard facts.
Yes, and it's quite evident that you are not one of the passengers who would not be upset. Rather, I agree with Don -- it's rather evident that you are quite upset and are posting here in an attempt to cause serious harm to Celebrity Cruises.

In reality, Celebrity Cruises has been in a horrible legal bind since the pod failures started occurring on these vessels. It's obvious that the pods supplied by Alston-Rolls Royce either were not suitable for this class of ship or were defective, and that the manufacturer's replacement parts were no better, but the manufacturer would not admit to that fact due to obvious concerns of potentially staggering legal liability. Unfortunately, Celebrity Cruises could not sustain a claim in court without proof, in the form of a documented series of several failures, that the failures were not isolated incidents. Any removal of these vessels from service would have left the line open to the legal argument that it overreacted and did not give the replacement parts a fair trial to see if they corrected the problem on the part of the manufacturer, potentially absolving the manufacturer of liability, while simultaneously depriving the cruise line of the revenue that it needed to meet its financial obligations on these vessels. The cost of replacement of these units with units from another manufacturer before the manufacturer conceded that there was a problem, probably requiring structural changes to the elements that support the pod to accommodate differences in design and mounting in addition to the procurement and installation of the replacement pods, also would have been quite steep and probably unrecoverable based on the same legal argument. Likewise, disposal of the affected vessels also was not an option because they would not have fetched a sufficient price to meet the financial obligations due to the known problems. Practically speaking, therefore, the line's only real option was to continue to operate these ships while building a "paper trail" to bolster its claim against the manufacturer.

That said, it's important to note that the manufacturer did finally concede that the original pods had a problem and provided pods with a new design when the last failure aboard GTS Infinity occurred. The engineers probably had enough data on the failures to know what they needed to fix and how to fix it, so the new pods probably have solved the problem. We'll know for sure in a few months.

Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old January 17th, 2008, 08:05 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 529
Default

Other than missing half of a planned cruise itinerary, I did not imply anything and again I am afraid again you are somehow jumping to conclusions that are just not there. I am glad to see that you recognized that I did not use the term "missed cruise" in my post. Another point that you may have missed was that I was only correcting your post, when you said that "the last propulsion failure for Celebrity was in 2006" and that was totally incorrectt and in fact as I said before there were two propulsion failures on two different ships that went on for a very long time in 2007. It is great to offer information but it must be factual.
My comment about poor compensation was only in response to you saying that all Celebrity passengers were treated generously when these problems occur, which in my opinion, I will say is not true. On the bright side as far as I know all of the other times this problem has happened there was not as much missed from the itinerary as on the Summit in 2006.
As far as mechanically sound there again we are using a subjective approach instead of being objective, for example if my car is only running on four cylinders out of six it and is still able to run slowly, that still does not mean that it is mechanically sound and the same would apply to a cruise ship.
I can't imagine where you got that phrase "serious harm" from and the only serious harm that I can see would be suppressing or giving incorrect information that would prevent people knowing about this possible problem and not allowing them to make their own decisions. Unless I am wrong, that is the whole purpose of cruisemates.
Unless you are an attorney working for Celebrity, there is absolutely no reason to even mention whether or not passengers have any legal rights when a ship sails with a problem that has been known about since way back in 2001.
I think we can agree to disagree about opinions, as long as non subjective information remains factual.
__________________
With integrity nothing else matters; without it nothing else matters.

Winston Churchill

email: debra2106@yahoo.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2008, caribbean, celebrity, celerity, crown, princess, propulsion, refurb, refurbished, refurbishment, summiet, summit, summitt, versus, vs

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Summit Photo's & info!! Pringle8 Celebrity 11 April 15th, 2006 10:30 AM
Celebrity Cruise :) Anyone Summit May6-20? FOD on Celebrity tanonal Gay / Lesbian Cruising 0 April 29th, 2005 07:42 PM
Celebrity Summit vs Princess Star kevo Alaska 4 August 2nd, 2001 10:09 AM
Help Ocean Princess or Celebrity Summit Nancy Chit - Chat for Cruisers 4 July 4th, 2001 10:57 AM
Celebrity Summit vs. Ocean Princess Phill Princess Cruise Lines 4 March 12th, 2001 02:58 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


 

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:14 AM.
design by: Themes by Design

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1