Welcome to Cruise Talk the Internet's most popular discussion forum dedicated to cruising. Stop by Cruise Talk anytime to post a message or find out what your fellow passengers and industry insiders are saying about a particular ship, cruise line or destination.
>>> Reader Reviews >>> CruisePage.com Photo Gallery >>> Join Our Cruise Club.
Latest News...Queen Anne, the 249th ship to sail under the Cunard flag, set sail just after 9 pm local time as thousands of spectators gathered on the shores to watch the departure from vantage points across the city and along Southampton water. Guests on board the 3,000-guest, 113,000-ton ship are set to enjoy a spectacular sail away party, with celebrations continuing throughout...
Latest News...Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. today reported financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2024 and provided guidance for the second quarter and full year 2024. First Quarter 2024 Highlights: Generated total revenue of $2.2 billion, a 20% increase compared to the same period in 2023 on 8% capacity growth, with GAAP net income of $17.4 million, or EPS of $0.04...
Latest News...The countdown is on for the next big thing coming to vacations, the ultimate short getaway: Royal Caribbean International’s Utopia of the Seas is almost ready for its debut. Starting today, the next in the lineup of game-changing Oasis Class ships is making its way to the open ocean for the first time to begin five days of testing....
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:Sorry - just saw the picture - this actually was a severe fire! Do I see this right: The damage is this extending beyond one fire section?
Do I see this right: The damage is this extending beyond one fire section?
Both of us are feeling sorry today.
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:One moment - first it says that 100 cabins have been damaged by smoke and then everyone talks about a fire in 100 cabins possibly spreading via the balconies?!?!?!?!?!?!?
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:Reading that old ships were safer (keyword United States made of 'inflamable' material) makes me VERY angry! THIS IS SILLY AND NOT BASED ON FACTS!
Why does it make you "VERY" angry? Your'e correct that it is not based on facts. However, theoreticaly the US was not flammable. If everything went as was supposed to the US could not burn because she contained such a small amount of wood or other flammable objects. Now when push came to shove, who knows she might have burnt like a pine tree but like you said it was never proven. However, (risk of cancer aside) I'd feel safer on the US.But Ernst, It's not something to get very angry over.
quote:Originally posted by NWLB: [...]In truth, I think it is amazing that only 11 passengers were hurt, and then only from smoke. [...]
In truth, I think it is amazing that only 11 passengers were hurt, and then only from smoke. [...]
Be aware that inhalation of smoke is actually the main reason for fatalities. In most cases you die from the smoke LONG before flames reach you. Also a very small fire can already produce enough smoke - one or two deep breaths can already be enough! So NEVER underestimate a fire!
As you posted, I also find it somehow reassuring that the crew aboard a ship is capable of handling such an incident.
Life boats in this part of the ship are maybe of limited use - but this is actually one of the reason why such an overcapacity of rafts and boats is necessary.
The damage inside might be less severe - but it is certainly more than a minor incident as the balconies already collapsed.
I always wondered why they do not have 'water jets' (maybe on retractable 'masts' to allow them to point back to the ship) - this could be helpful to protect lifeboats being lowered during a fire, prevent people from boarding the ship and maybe asisst in fighting such a fire.
its very sad. and right after yesterdays tour bus accedent. its not a good week for the cruise industry at all.
quote:Originally posted by J.S.S.Normandie:Why does it make you "VERY" angry? Your'e correct that it is not based on facts. However, theoreticaly the US was not flammable. If everything went as was supposed to the US could not burn because she contained such a small amount of wood or other flammable objects. Now when push came to shove, who knows she might have burnt like a pine tree but like you said it was never proven. However, (risk of cancer aside) I'd feel safer on the US.But Ernst, It's not something to get very angry over.
It makes me VERY angry because it is VERY silly and not true!
Materials on modern cruise ships have to comply with MUCH stricter regulations and the fire fighting equipment is much more sophisticated than it was some decades ago.
You do not seriously believe that the United States was inflamable? There was still enough which could burn. It actually is safer on a modern cruise ship.
[ 03-23-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]
quote:Originally posted by Royal Caribbean Cruiser:if you look at the picture.. there is no way most of that is only smoke damage. do you really think smoke damage could melt a balcolny off the side of a ship, and bend all the metal the way that did? no way! and it seems like the new updates anyways have it that the fire accually "scorched" 75 rooms, and then obviously many more had smoke damage..
Looking at the fire damage pictures it appears the fire started inside a cabin on Dolphin Deck just above the tiny red emergency boat and spread up and out to the deck(s) above that point. The giant suites on Caribe Deck, the deck above that starting (cabin) point, appear to have LOTS of very large wooden tables and deck chairs on the large suite balcony, looking at the balcony exterior picture above.
No one would want to cruise on a ship with bare steel walls, steel furniture, asbestos blankets and pillows.
[ 03-23-2006: Message edited by: Royal Caribbean Cruiser ]
quote:Originally posted by Ernst: You do not seriously believe that the United States was inflamable? There was still enough which could burn. It actually is safer on a modern cruise ship.[ 03-23-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]
Lets put it this way, there was as good a chance the US couldn't burn as there is that NCL will restore her.
quote:Originally posted by WhiteStar:What will this cost the cruise line? How many months out of service and lost revenue? How much to repair and clean the ship? How many crew sent home while repairs are made? How many vacations disrupted? I would think this is a major blow for Princess. Bad PR as well.
Oh yes, those poor, poor multimillionaires at Princess!
quote:Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage: No one would want to cruise on a ship with bare steel walls, steel furniture, asbestos blankets and pillows.
Oh don't be so sure. It could have a prison theme like the HBO show 'OZ'.
From what I have read, most if not all the furniture onboard cruise ships today come from companies that specialize in the hospitality industries. This furniture must have some sort of fire rating along w/the bedspreads, carpets and draperies etc.. It is not fireproof but possibly fire resistant-up to a point. SSUS was the first and last large liner to take fire protection to another level as Mr. Gibbs was all about safety. He of course took it to the extreme and the end result was a cold metallic-but very safe ship. There is a middle ground w/mandatory fire sprinklers, firedoors/walls along corridors and stair towers, fire resistant furniture etc. and constant monitoring. Look at how many people cruise on a weekly basis and luckily there was only one death in this tragic accident. More cruise passengers were killed (on dry land) in that horrific bus accident in Chile that on a basically very safe cruise ship.
Materials which may be used on cruise ships have to comply with very strict rules - which demand that they can withstand certain temperatures for a certain time (not forever!) without starting to burn or that they do not continue to burn on their own after having been exposed to a flame for some time etc. - but there is nearly nothing which would not burn somewhen!
The goal is that in case of a fire everyone can get out safely - which more or less was the case aboard Star Princess. To achieve this, materials which are not easily combustible are used - but this is only halve the rent! It is utmost important that the fire is detected quickly - that the smoke is removed - and that it is extinguished. (sprinklers buy some time - but they are not capable to extinguish all fires (some, yes) - sprinklers are not an 'alternative' to 'inflamable materials' as often said)
ad United States: She definitely set standards at her time but compared to a modern cruise ship I guess that one could not call her safe. (...as she was when sailed...)
Frist, not knowing a detailed list of the materials used I am sure that there was a lot aboard which could burn. Just one example would be the insulation of the cables (keyword PVC - nasty stuff when burning) - but also other materials would come to my mind. There was for sure more than enough of these materials aboard. Beside that 'inflamable' (see above) to the standards of her time does not necessarily mean that these materials would comply with nowadays MUCH stricter rules. (one example of a material which was believed to be safe is capton)
Second, her fire detecting, fire figthing equipment and especially the ventilation system to remove smoke is for sure not even coming close to a modern state-of the-art system.
The ship wasn’t seriously damaged and would sail back to Fort Lauderdale on Friday, Peterkin said. There was no immediate confirmation from officials at the cruise line.
The Coast Guard said cabins from decks nine through 12 were affected.
“The ship is seaworthy,” Peterkin said. “They’ll sail out tomorrow. The cabins that have been damaged, those people obviously can’t stay on board so we’re moving them to a hotel.”
[ 03-23-2006: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]
quote:Originally posted by Royal Caribbean Cruiser:ok dmwnc.. just wondering what does that have to do with me saying 75 of the rooms accually burnt up? but yes.. there was deffinately something there for the fire to burn...[ 03-23-2006: Message edited by: Royal Caribbean Cruiser ]
The MSNBC report indictated that 70+ cabins were scorched...
Definition of scorched: damaged or discolored by superficial burning
This may have been caused by fires external to the cabins by materials on the balconies on fire...the point I was trying to make.
But I have to think they'll have to strip the ship down and replace a goodly amount of steel just from the warping that might have taken place. Not a hard fix I wouldn't think, but costly and time consuming.
The real question is if they contract in the Caribbean, send her to the states, or send her over to Europe. (unless she is or was the ship that burned in Japan a few years ago, I'm not up on which of that class was built where.)
Likewise, has the smoke damage hurt much of the rest of the ship? Not going to be cheap no matter what they need to do.
If the fire were completely internal, I find it so hard how it could have spread so immensely between the sprinklers (or even Hi Fog) and the fire doors. Maybe I'm wrong but I'm on the external verandah school of thought. I've never seen sprinkler or Hi Fog heads out on the verandah. Could this be a new measure to be implemented down the road?
quote:Originally posted by shipcafe:Hopefully we're just one day closer to making ships non-smoking.
As much luck as Carnival had with Paradise I dont think we will be that lucky...
Time for the rest of the industry to follow
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1:As much luck as Carnival had with Paradise I dont think we will be that lucky...
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...