And some passengers agree.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/02/15/cnn-cruise-ship-katrina_n_2695814.html
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Carnival Cruise ship lost power in Gulf, passenger reactions overboard?
- Thread starter PracticalMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And some passengers agree.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/02/15/cnn-cruise-ship-katrina_n_2695814.html
I'm sure everyone would be singing a different tune if the whole ship was infected with something because of the conditions. It's really easy to sit behind a computer screen and say it wasn't so bad.
Let's see, Terry gets off the ship late Thursday night and her Texas attorneys file a complaint in the Miami federal court on Friday.
Something about this smells as bad as parts of the ship probably did.
YEah but my post wasn't about a guy behind a computer screen. It was a link to a passenger who said so.....
----------
If I was on that future jury and a lawyer for the cruise ship pointed out that any passenger who did that was obviously more worried about making some money then seeking any kind of care....I would agree.
The officers on titanic actually managed to keep the power running until the very last moments before it sank. lol
YEah but my post wasn't about a guy behind a computer screen. It was a link to a passenger who said so.....
The passenger said that it was a bit overkill to compare the situation to Katrina, which it was. But he didn't say that it wasn't a living hell. I'm sure the thousands of people who had crap running down their walls weren't exaggerating. Biological waste is vile and can kill someone who doesn't have a very strong immune system. Immune systems of people in first world countries pale in comparison to those of people in third world countries. There isn't enough room on the outside decks for 4000 people to set up camp, and the inside of the ship was unbearable because it was impossible to breath. I would not accept $500 compensation. They should have cancelled another cruise, refunded and compensated those passengers and explain the situation, and then send that cruise to pick these people up. Keeping them stranded at sea in a floating portapotty is unacceptable and I would not join a class action, I would sue on my own. They cheaped out on sending another ship so they wouldn't have to lose money on another cruise full of people, and they should pay for it.
Pretty sure they all signed a contract that said stuff like this happens and they would sue if the ship broke down. If so, they are **** out of luck in my book.
Of course stuff like this happens, but it doesn't excuse the fact that when it happened the company did a piss poor job responding to it. They were negligent in their response. No one is blaming them for the engine room fire, no one would blame them if they sent another cruise in a day or two to pick them up. But towing them back to Alabama at 6mph for 6 days is absolutely unacceptable. I think carnival is screwed.
A CNN legal analyst reported a couple days ago the passengers were likely legally SOL due to contracts. As long as the cruise line dropped them on dry ground, even in a foreign country, basically relieved them of most liability. I don't know if the analysit knows what he's talking about as each case has their own merit. Of course reputation will likely rule the day.
I think you are oversimplifying.
First of all, they would have had to have a ship that had not yet departed on another cruise (they normally disembark / embark with 4 or 5 hours in between) - Carnival has a lot of ships but the timing would have had to have been perfect. So maybe you narrow that down to 3 or 4 ships that would have been close enough to be of use.
And since the timing had to be right, what are you telling the 4,000 people that are waiting on the pier for their cruise? Sorry, but you're **** out of luck? Please fly back to where you came from? Now you have TWO PR disasters.
So now you have an empty ship heading to the Triumph. How safe would it have been to transfer 4000 people from one to the other? Remember the reason why it didn't go back to Mexico was because of the currents.
Titanic hit an iceberg. The engines continued to work.
The Carnival ship had a fire in the engine room. The main engines were rendered unavailable. But the ship was never in danger of sinking.
I'm not saying it should have been same day, but you can easily tell people that have a cruise in 2 days that it is cancelled because of this. That would NOT have been a PR disaster.
Tell that to the 4000 people whose vacations you just ruined. This is America. It would have been a PR disaster.
Canceling a cruise (with compensation) to evacuate a disabled ship would be a PR disaster? I don't believe that. It would have been a financial hit for the company and nothing more, but they chose not to do it and have a PR disaster and a lot of lawsuits instead.
CNN showing a ship being towed in with people practically jumping off is not good PR.
We'll agree to disagree.
I also have to assume that Carnival weighed the pros & cons of each. Had they waited 2 days, which you seem to think is a decent enough time to work it out, and then waited a day or two for it to arrive, how much time would have been saved? And you haven't responded to the safety of transferring 4000 people in open water between vessels.
There is no doubt they're in a PR nightmare, but why assume you're thinking of things they didn't?
----------
Either way it's not going to be good PR - but let's be honest, CNN treated that ship as if they had just escaped from Somalian Pirates after coming home from war in the Middle East.
Fair enough.
If done properly it shouldn't be a problem, honestly it's one of those things they should have a procedure for.
I'm not, I just think they chose the wrong option.
Agreed. When i saw the one lady crying that when she spoke to her daughter she wasn't sure if she would ever see her again I actually burst out laughing.
The problem is that they make these ships that can hold over 4000 people, (and getting bigger every year). And then they don't have backup plans to keep the water running when they lose power is a design flaw. Maybe the regulations need to be stepped up for when things like this do happen.
I don't think you fully appreciate how risky and unsafe it is transferring passengers between ships in open water. It would be worth the risk if the crippled ship was sinking, but short of that pulling another ship alongside or lowering life rafts is too hazardous. We're talking about a population of a floating city here and the ships involved would need to be huge. It's likely far better to tow it in and live with inconvenient conditions than risk loss of life in an open water transfer.
Absolutely correct. It took over five hours to get the passengers off the ship when it was finally docked and stationary. Too many chances there would have been serious injury, possibly deaths, had that been attempted in the open sea.
As to the lawsuit:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...awsuitbre91e11k-20130215,0,6630601,full.story
I would say at the very least, a full refund for the cruise. I realize that they get a free cruise in the future, but I wouldn't have wanted to shell out thousands for such a terrible experience.
They got a free cruise, a full refund and $500. And memories to last a life time!!