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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 07:02 AM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleeBelle View Post

Both the American Senate Inquiry, and the British Board of Trade found the White Star line and it's employees liable of negligent navigational practices.
Kangaroo court inquiries by liberal politicians biased against cruise lines! Sometimes ships enounter storms and sometimes icebergs. This was a weather incident!
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 07:24 AM
Paul Motter's Avatar
Administrator
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: in my office!
Posts: 10,850
Send a message via AIM to Paul Motter
Default

Yeah - nevermind that they forgot the good binoculars in England, had reports of icebergs that were delivered to the captain and that the captain ignored them because he wanted to break the speed record with his first crossing.

FULL SPEED AHEAD AND DAMN THE TORPEDOS.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 03:22 PM
Junior Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Kangaroo court inquiries by liberal politicians biased against cruise lines! Sometimes ships enounter storms and sometimes icebergs. This was a weather incident!
Honestly, I'm not sure if you are trying to be funny, ironic, sarcastic, or serious. I'm not sure if you are trolling and trying to get a rise out of me, trying to make an ironic statement about today's modern society, or just lack a thorough knowledge of the matter on which you are speaking.

Context is often difficult to read and easily misunderstood through the written word. Without that context I find it impossible to respond to this comment in a meaningful way. If you would like to clarify your intent it would be most appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 03:39 PM
Banned
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 185
Send a message via Skype™ to Iamboatman
Default

Let me put on my admiralty lawyer hat here (check me out: www.yachtlaw.com). The cruise contract is not infallible and is not, in actual terms, the only governing item. Certain aspects of contracts are routinely found to be contrary to law and, therefore, unenforceable. Other terms are found to be material under the law, so they are implicitly added to the contract.

One area of the law where there is a wealth of examples, are limitation of liability clauses. In many respects they simply do not...forgive me...hold water. Further, under European laws there are many instances where travel contracts are held void because the seller (in this case it might be a cruise line) did not fulfill the material terms of the contract so the passenger is entitled to a full refund. (How about you purchase a hotel room and the room is great except for the bed bugs and broken window. Are you obligated to pay even if there is a no cancellation clause or liability clause when they say, "Sign here"?)

There are many times when it is not about doing what is legally required, but simply doing what is right. It is an old and many times forgotten concept that only those looking to impinge on someone's rights takes the contract out of the drawer where it has been kept.
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 03:59 PM
Junior Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Motter View Post
Yeah - nevermind that they forgot the good binoculars in England, had reports of icebergs that were delivered to the captain and that the captain ignored them because he wanted to break the speed record with his first crossing.

FULL SPEED AHEAD AND DAMN THE TORPEDOS.
Paul, I'm surprised you are so misinformed on this topic. The binoculars for lookouts (there were not separate good and bad sets) were not left in England. Apparently they were lost in the shuffle of command when Chief Officer Wilde was added to the voyage, thus bumping the second officer off of the crew list (I can't remember the mans name at the moment, and no I'm not talking about Lightholler who did make the voyage and took this man's place). Apparently the original second officer had been in charge of the binoculars in question, and the consensus among the experts is that they were most likely locked up in his vacant cabin. The issue is irrelevant anyway as it was pretty well established by maritime experts at the time that the binoculars available in that era did NOT help the lookouts in initially spotting objects at night, but only in identifying them. Identifying the giant floating object in the ships path really wasn't necessary, once it was spotted. Night Vision goggles of course were non existent at the time as was radar, both of which might have helped the Titanic avoid this disaster. What was actually a much more important contributing factor was the fact that no bow lookouts were posted nor was the crow's nest look out strengthened. When Arthur Rostram ran north to rescue the Titanic survivors in the Carpathia, he posted no less then 6 look outs, and all of the bergs they dodged were first seen from deck level, not the crows nest.

Smith did not ignore the iceberg messages. He actually had the Titanic a good 20 miles south of the normal shipping lanes because of the ice messages he did receive. The trouble is that neither he nor his officers saw all of the messages and put together just how enormous the ice field they were steaming in to was. Some of the messages were received by him. Some of them were received by his officers. Some of them were plotted on the charts, some of them weren't. Some of the messages received by the Titanic never made it to any of the officers. The last and best message the Titanic received was possibly never sent out of the wireless room by the overworked operator, and the very final warning wasn't even completely heard because the Titanic's wireless operator cut off the sender, due to the senders improper use of protocol when contacting the Titanic. Smith was also not attempting to set a speed record as this was patently impossible to do. There was no way that the Titanic could match the Cunard speedsters in horsepower, hull form or speed. There were plans to light additional boilers the following morning for a full speed run, and the Titanic was traveling too fast for the conditions, but it is errant nonsense to say that Smith ignored the ice messages because he wanted to set a speed record.

The captain of the Titanic was eventually found by both official investigations to be traveling too fast for conditions, failing to maintain a proper lookout, and failing to establish a proper procedure for the use of navigational information received by wireless. The court case against White Star for negligence argued that Bruce Ismay managing director of the White Star line was privy to this situation because of his presence on board, and his knowledge of some of the ice warnings received (in particular he was shown an ice warning by the SS Baltic another White Star liner about mid afternoon on that fateful Sunday). As the case was settled out of court these allegations of negligence were neither proven or disproved.

Oh and Damn the Torpedoes is actually attributed to Admiral David Glasgow Farragut of the US Navy during the battle of Mobile Bay during the War between the States. The cry was uttered to encourage his officers and men by saying that sometimes risks have to be run to achieve victory, hardly appropriate to use when addressing the Titanic situation.

Sorry if I am boring anybody or derailing the thread but maritime history and ocean liner history is a major passion of mine. It bugs me to see inaccurate information on these subjects. I will now climb down off my soap box and return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Ashlee

Last edited by AshleeBelle; December 16th, 2010 at 04:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 04:15 PM
Junior Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamboatman View Post
Let me put on my admiralty lawyer hat here (check me out: www.yachtlaw.com). The cruise contract is not infallible and is not, in actual terms, the only governing item. Certain aspects of contracts are routinely found to be contrary to law and, therefore, unenforceable. Other terms are found to be material under the law, so they are implicitly added to the contract.

One area of the law where there is a wealth of examples, are limitation of liability clauses. In many respects they simply do not...forgive me...hold water. Further, under European laws there are many instances where travel contracts are held void because the seller (in this case it might be a cruise line) did not fulfill the material terms of the contract so the passenger is entitled to a full refund. (How about you purchase a hotel room and the room is great except for the bed bugs and broken window. Are you obligated to pay even if there is a no cancellation clause or liability clause when they say, "Sign here"?)

There are many times when it is not about doing what is legally required, but simply doing what is right. It is an old and many times forgotten concept that only those looking to impinge on someone's rights takes the contract out of the drawer where it has been kept.
I completely agree that what RCI ended up doing was morally correct. I don't however think it was morally correct for people who were not injured physically in this event to demand additional compensation. Normally limit of liability contracts in this day and age are taken out to CYA against law suits that are often without merit, but that can still suck up mountains of money in court.

As for European law I'm not even sure it applies here. These are US based companies, with headquarters in Florida (one of the things listed in the contracts is that all court cases must be brought in Dade County court, or some such area). In addition none of these ships are registered in Europe, but usually in a country like Liberia, or Panama. If you were trying to bring a case against them that would be the most likely venue to have jurisdiction after the companies headquarters location. One might argue that a case could be brought by the country the voyage originates in but that is subject to some debate. About the only recourse a country would have against the cruise lines as punishment if they refused to do so would be to ban them from their ports. Now that's no small thing in a lot of places, but it is hardly going to carry the weight that millions or billions of dollars in penalties might, or even the revocation of a ships registration might.

I'm not upset that RCI manned(or womanned up if you prefer ) up and did the morally correct thing here. I don't think you can look at any of my posts on this topic and claim that. I am upset that people's first response to a negative situation is to look for a scapegoat, additional compensation, and someone to blame and that they seem to walk around with a sense of entitlement. I'm also annoyed at how incredibly soft we've become when people think that a little bit of heavy weather is sooo traumatizing. Lord, sometimes life happens, find your sea legs, role with the punches and get over it. Be thankful you are alive and safe and not seriously injured.

Last edited by AshleeBelle; December 16th, 2010 at 04:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old December 16th, 2010, 04:26 PM
Banned
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 185
Send a message via Skype™ to Iamboatman
Default

I think much of what you say is correct, but the legal stuff just isn't correct. When a contract for travel is sold to someone in Country X, Country X has jurisdiction to address what it determines are its rights. If a company does not want to comply with those laws then it better not sell its travel product in that country or through agents in that country.

I find many EU laws to be overly gratuitous and quite costly to companies...far moreso than the US. But they are what they are.

So rough seas are contemplated. What occurred most certainly was not. You may disagree, but that is pretty much what the law is.

Now is a good place for me to repeat the question I asked far more whent I sold more mass market cruises, "If your experience was so bad on that cruise line, why would you want a free cruise on it? Wouldn't you rather spend your time on a cruise you liked???"
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old December 18th, 2010, 12:30 PM
felix_the_cat's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 1,636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T C View Post
It amazes me that people want ridiculous compensation for things such as this ... which is completely out of the control of the cruise line! Weather happens ... you are on the ocean .. you choose to be there ... be grateful that you survived it!

I think back to the incident on the Carnival Splendor ... I would have been perfectly happy to be a passenger on that sailing! Complete reimbursement .. future cruise .. open bar .. allowed to sleep on deck under the stars .. and no one hurt! Really, what has it come to when there are more people looking to file a lawsuit than there are people happy to look on the bright side!

Unless you were actually there - on either of these cruises - you should watch what you say. Only those who experiences these cruises should have a comment about the compensation or how they feel.

BTW there is no bright side to be heaved about under any circumstances.
__________________
Celebrity Constellation - March 17 followed by Celebrity Reflection - March 22

44 cruises - too many to list however cruiselines are in no particular order:

Azamara
Uniworld
RCL
Princess
NCL
HAL
Cunard
Celebrity
and some unknown tub

Yes, I'm a Royal Chump and proud of it.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old December 18th, 2010, 04:01 PM
Junior Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_the_cat View Post
Unless you were actually there - on either of these cruises - you should watch what you say. Only those who experiences these cruises should have a comment about the compensation or how they feel.

BTW there is no bright side to be heaved about under any circumstances.
While I can see your point that it is harder to judge the circumstances if you weren't there, I think it is incorrect that people that weren't there aren't allowed to voice an opinion on the compensation. By that argument we should never allow jury trials to determine fair compensation in civil law suits because "they weren't there". I don't think you will find very many people that agree with that notion.

As to your second comment, are you kidding??? People spend millions of dollars for the thrill of being "heaved around" everyday, through the use of thrill rides, parasailing, sky diving, water skying, snow skiing, white water rafting, and endless other varieties of activities. In fact many of these activities require you to sign a waiver acknowledging the inherent risk involved, that states you hold the operator not liable if you are injured or killed. The waivers are even required on fairly mundane flat water canoe trips in most cases, because God forbid somebody roll the canoe, not have their life vest (in defiance of local ordinances almost everywhere) and end up drowning.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old December 18th, 2010, 05:38 PM
felix_the_cat's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 1,636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleeBelle View Post
While I can see your point that it is harder to judge the circumstances if you weren't there, I think it is incorrect that people that weren't there aren't allowed to voice an opinion on the compensation. By that argument we should never allow jury trials to determine fair compensation in civil law suits because "they weren't there". I don't think you will find very many people that agree with that notion.

As to your second comment, are you kidding??? People spend millions of dollars for the thrill of being "heaved around" everyday, through the use of thrill rides, parasailing, sky diving, water skying, snow skiing, white water rafting, and endless other varieties of activities. In fact many of these activities require you to sign a waiver acknowledging the inherent risk involved, that states you hold the operator not liable if you are injured or killed. The waivers are even required on fairly mundane flat water canoe trips in most cases, because God forbid somebody roll the canoe, not have their life vest (in defiance of local ordinances almost everywhere) and end up drowning.
No, I'm not kidding - but you are certainly. When one does all those things you have listed they know what the risks and perils are and they accept that going in. What you are trying to do is compare apples and oranges. When you are on a cruise you DO NOT expect to be heaved around your cabin and "bed surf" as it was put by someone else. To even think you can compare the two is ridiculous.

As for my original remarks about not being there and therefore not having a right to say what is fair is quite proper. Again - apples to oranges. If you are in court you hear both sides, in this case it's just based on postings, guesses and maybes.

I have a distinct impression you must be either a lawyer or an employee of the cruiseline. Either way - you're reasoning is absolutely faulty. You weren't there and neither was I. Therefore neither of us has any right to decision what was and wasn't fair.
__________________
Celebrity Constellation - March 17 followed by Celebrity Reflection - March 22

44 cruises - too many to list however cruiselines are in no particular order:

Azamara
Uniworld
RCL
Princess
NCL
HAL
Cunard
Celebrity
and some unknown tub

Yes, I'm a Royal Chump and proud of it.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 11:54 AM
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 43
Default Home from Brilliance of the Seas

My partner and I are home from the Brilliance of the Seas.

I can see that everyone has some pretty strong opinions. We didn't really expect anything back but what we paid for and didn't receive. The cost of the Egyptian excursions were refunded to our Sea Pass card the next day, as was the original $200. I'm not going to say we were "happy" with it, because what would have made us happy was to see Egypt ... the reason for purchasing the cruise. But we didn't blame Captain Nick entirely. Although he should have returned to port in Rhodes when we saw the weather deteriorating the 70 foot waves and 80 mph winds were not his fault. We did not insist on more or have any intention on pursuing anything further than holding each other and being grateful that we are still alive to have some more years together and maybe another cruise or two in the future. We were not a part of the mob down stairs in the Centrum. Frankly, we were a little embarrassed for those people and how they behaved.

But after the mutiny, it became clear Royal was going to be forced into keeping a lid on the outrage.

And that's part of the what the market will bear, or as we like to call it: Capitalism. That's just business. If the entire ship revolts and the company risks a public image nightmare...they have to pay. That's just how it works. I don't feel sorry for them any more than do I blame them. And Royal Caribbean likewise wouldn't feel sorry for me if they had to tell me, for example, I took too long to cancel a cruise so they were keeping all my money. It's just how it works.

(Footnote: Don't ever use Air France. You are likely to regret it for the rest of your life.)

Last edited by DetroitMark; December 20th, 2010 at 12:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 05:23 PM
Senior Member
First Mate
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 403
Default

Thanks for the update and first hand account of the event. Could you share "how long" the rocking of the ship that caused all the damage occured and about when to when? Reports from the news circuit made it seem that the conditions were worst in the early morning hours; however, no perspective if it was like 5 hours of "thrashing" or just 30 minutes. Thanks,
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 06:57 PM
felix_the_cat's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 1,636
Default

Not that I don't agree with you because I do, but what happened with Air France?

You're lucky you were able to get home. I do know some from that ill-fated cruise are stuck in London and so far have been told they can't get out until the 24th at the earliest.
__________________
Celebrity Constellation - March 17 followed by Celebrity Reflection - March 22

44 cruises - too many to list however cruiselines are in no particular order:

Azamara
Uniworld
RCL
Princess
NCL
HAL
Cunard
Celebrity
and some unknown tub

Yes, I'm a Royal Chump and proud of it.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 07:01 PM
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 43
Default

It started at 2:15am +2 GMT. The actual listing event probably lasted about 5 minutes although it felt like an eternity. Each list took about 10 to 15 seconds to throw us from one side to the other. Then it hung, seemingly motionless, silent for a few seconds, and began to list back the other way. We were lifted to 10 degrees off perpindicular according to Captain Nick. For all intents and purposes we were on our side at the end of each list. So figure about 20 good heels before she was righted enough to actually stand up and be able to balance your self.

The storm itself began just minutes after we left Rhodes. And we were in "very high seas" from then until well into Monday evening, with the heeling event being the peak of winds, wave and roll. Captain Nick warned us of potential "high seas" when we left port at Rhodes, so reports that the weather forecasts were "twice what was predicted" is a twist of the truth.

Waves at peak were about 60 feet. I know from our deck 7 balcony they were at least eye level. Monsters. Literally. Every wave a deadly wall of water. It was horrifying. Winds according to the tracking channel on the stateroom TV just before the heeling incident were maximum 82, average 70 mph or so.

When the ship listed starboard I was bracing against the frame of the sliding glass door and staring straight down at the foam. My partner had managed to crawl to the other side of the room; he was attempting to hold things down to prevent damage and injury. But that became a fruitless venture. When it listed to port I was staring straight into the dark sky although there was nothing to see but black. But you could sense by the feel of the gravity, and all of the loose items rolling like boulders in a rock slide, the bed just on the verge of leaving the floor that we were as far as it goes without tipping over. I've heard subsequent reports of staterooms on 7 taking on water. But I'm not sure if that was from waves or from actual dipping, although I wouldn't be shocked by the latter. It was definately possible in my opinion.

Last edited by DetroitMark; December 20th, 2010 at 07:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 07:18 PM
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_the_cat View Post
Not that I don't agree with you because I do, but what happened with Air France?

You're lucky you were able to get home. I do know some from that ill-fated cruise are stuck in London and so far have been told they can't get out until the 24th at the earliest.
Believe me, my heart aches for those poor folks that got diverted to London instead of Amsterdam like we were. Many of them are still there, a few will be there days from now.

Air France's problem wasn't just the weather, but also their incompetence and their inferior website.

Our flight out was cancelled due to snow in Paris, although they lied on the phone and said that it wasn't even though my reservation said it was. The woman just said it was a mistake. Then of course when we got to the airport, they finally got honest. It was too late to go with another airline at that point so we took their new intinerary to Amsterdam. We got seated rows apart. And while that's not that big of a deal on a 2 hour flight, transatlantic it just sucks. Especially when you've been meticulous, doing all due diligence, showing up early, checking in online ... doing everything they ask and still getting a crap product. If any other business behaved like the airlines are presently behaving they'd be bankrupt. I am just baffled that they are getting away with it. And I'm equally as shocked that ship lines aren't capitalizing on how the airline industry has fallen into horrible disrepair, and offering transatlantic commutes at discount.

Then before we left Barcelona I tried checking in online again to pay my excess baggage fees and we kept getting an error window that said "unfortunately the reservation tool is unavailable. please try again later. we are working to fix this situation." So I did try, again and again. What I didn't know is that the website was charging my debit card everytime I attempted to purchase baggage allowance, even though it was telling me to try later.

$880 Later I am still waiting to have Air France out of my life. I had to go to the bank and fill out paperwork to force them to return the money, despite the fact that Air France support told me there was never actually any money changing hands, it was "just a hold." My bank tells me that if they can't prove cause for the charges within 48 hours it will be deposited back to my account.

While I was in Barcelona and attempting to call them to perhaps try and pay for the baggage fees on the phone, and since by now Paris was once again the focus of a snowstorm and flights were being delayed I thought I should check ahead, the phone just rang. A recording explained that since I was calling from Europe to a U-S 800 number they would not pay the toll. Air France...wouldn't pay the toll from Barcelona. Wrap your brain around that. And yes...the return flight was a mirror image of the outbound, cancellations and all.

So after being on hold for 20 minutes, I had a $30 phone charge on my hotel bill that I don't begin to know how to ask for, when I am already waiting for them to return $880 that they errantly took from me. And they never did answer the phone, and they never did answer a single email.

The....worst....airline...on....the.....planet.
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old December 20th, 2010, 07:46 PM
felix_the_cat's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 1,636
Default

Having had problems with Air Frances personally and for clients, I can understand exactly where you are coming from. I don't understand why and how the airlines are getting away with so much rubbish these days. I suppose, like anything else, the more we put up with the more they will shovel at us.

Anyway, I'm glad to see you made it home and relatively unscathed. Now I'm just hoping that those stuck in London can make it home before Christmas.
__________________
Celebrity Constellation - March 17 followed by Celebrity Reflection - March 22

44 cruises - too many to list however cruiselines are in no particular order:

Azamara
Uniworld
RCL
Princess
NCL
HAL
Cunard
Celebrity
and some unknown tub

Yes, I'm a Royal Chump and proud of it.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old December 31st, 2010, 10:40 PM
Junior Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 13
Default

I was on the Brilliance when it listed, and had a thread going on another board, which seems to have been quoted all over the place. CBS and NBC wanted to talk to me, but I said no.

I was disgusted with some of my fellow passengers rude behaviour. Yes, I was scared, and I thought for a few minutes that this was it. My life is over. I have a fear of drowning, and it was staring me in the face with each list.

I also have whiplash and a severely pinched neck nerve from being tossed around my cabin like a rag doll. For those that didn't live it, you have no idea what it was like. I have many physio/chiro appointments ahead of me. I am in constant pain.

I won't comment on the compensation except to say this: I never expected it to be a full refund. $100 each for my roomie and I, however, was a joke for what happened to us and the ship. The cruise was not the cruise that you would expect. The spa, gym, casino, shops, pool, outside decks, solarium, kid's arcade, etc were all shut down for varying amounts of time. Some venues never opened for the remainder of the cruise.

I won't travel in the Med in December again. After the cruise, I was stranded in England for 8 days, because Heathrow couldn't handle 3 inches of snow. I finally got home to my family late Christmas Day afternoon.

Nevertheless, I did have a good time on my cruise, and of course I'll cruise again!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
brilliance, caribbean, carnival, carribean, cruise, egypt, high, hit, huge, mediterranean, problem, rcl, royal, seas, storm, wave, waves

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
High waves claim 2 lives on cruise in Europe dudestir127 Teen Cruisers 1 March 4th, 2010 06:23 PM
BadCruise-Fire,waves port changes because of waves ect. djboomb Teen Cruisers 4 July 28th, 2004 11:15 AM
Brilliance 8/6 Med. janetj Shore Excursions 0 July 1st, 2004 10:55 AM
Brilliance 8/6 Med. janetj Royal Caribbean International 0 July 1st, 2004 10:48 AM
High Waves? Cabo San Lucas Bluebonnet Royal Caribbean International 1 October 28th, 2002 03:56 PM


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 01:27 PM.
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