FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Cruises (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cruises-179/)
-   -   Possible Return to Cruising (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cruises/2039005-possible-return-cruising.html)

Boggie Dog Apr 29, 2021 7:27 am
Possible Return to Cruising
 
Light at the end of the tunnel?

I'm willing to get underway and 'sea' how it goes.. Hopefully fair winds and following seas.

CDC 'committed' to U.S. cruise industry resuming operations by mid-summer

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is "committed" to the resumption of cruise industry passenger operations in the United States by mid-summer, the agency said on Wednesday, announcing new steps to speed approvals.

Randyk47 Apr 29, 2021 8:13 am
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33213688)
Light at the end of the tunnel?

I'm willing to get underway and 'sea' how it goes.. Hopefully fair winds and following seas.

CDC 'committed' to U.S. cruise industry resuming operations by mid-summer
Wonder if this will have any impact on Canada to open their ports and waters to the bigger cruise ships? There doesn’t seem to be any traction in Congress to waive provisions of the PVSA so the Alaskan season will not happen even if other US based cruises start up in July.

Boggie Dog Apr 29, 2021 8:51 am
Originally Posted by Randyk47 (Post 33213779)
Wonder if this will have any impact on Canada to open their ports and waters to the bigger cruise ships? There doesn’t seem to be any traction in Congress to waive provisions of the PVSA so the Alaskan season will not happen even if other US based cruises start up in July.
Would seem that a waiver of PVSA should be possible. Would a Seattle, Alaska, Seattle itinerary be reasonable?

Randyk47 Apr 29, 2021 9:57 am
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33213878)
Would seem that a waiver of PVSA should be possible. Would a Seattle, Alaska, Seattle itinerary be reasonable?
Possible if a waiver is passed by Congress but the issue then becomes bypassing Canada by going out into the Pacific and staying in International waters until in US waters. I have made the inside passage typically used by cruise ships a number of times and even that can get rough. Going out into the open ocean up there is no Caribbean and can get downright nasty.

Boggie Dog Apr 29, 2021 4:14 pm
I really see no harm of sailing through Canadian waters if not docking. If a ship did dock for an emergency easy enough to quarantine the entire ship.

How other countries welcome ships back will determine how successful the resumption of cruising will be.

Maybe Canada is just PO'd with America for not sending more vaccine their way.

Randyk47 Apr 29, 2021 4:45 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33215037)
I really see no harm of sailing through Canadian waters if not docking. If a ship did dock for an emergency easy enough to quarantine the entire ship.

How other countries welcome ships back will determine how successful the resumption of cruising will be.

Maybe Canada is just PO'd with America for not sending more vaccine their way.
I agree and was actually surprised the ban wasn’t just Canadian ports but also Canadian waters. I would have thought the Alaskan cruise season was a nice boast to at least Vancouver, BC. Canada actually doing fairly well now with vaccines but did get off to a slower start because of an initial shortage.

mahasamatman Apr 29, 2021 9:02 pm
Originally Posted by Randyk47 (Post 33213779)
Wonder if this will have any impact on Canada to open their ports and waters to the bigger cruise ships?
Absolutely not.

Originally Posted by Randyk47 (Post 33215117)
Canada actually doing fairly well now with vaccines
If you think that, you haven't been paying attention. BC is under severe restrictions until at least the end of May, and we still have to wait four months for our second shots.

YVR Cockroach Apr 29, 2021 10:19 pm
The issue that hasn't been addressed is where the crew (at least the non-European big wigs) will get their vaccines from.

Badenoch Apr 30, 2021 5:05 am
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33215037)
I really see no harm of sailing through Canadian waters if not docking. If a ship did dock for an emergency easy enough to quarantine the entire ship.

How other countries welcome ships back will determine how successful the resumption of cruising will be.

Maybe Canada is just PO'd with America for not sending more vaccine their way.
Canada's ban on cruise ships carrying over 100 people is scheduled to be in place until February 22, 2022 and applies to Canadian waters not just ports.

https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-c...e-vessels.html

Minister of Transport, the Honourable Omar Alghabra, announced two new Interim Orders, which prohibit pleasure craft in Canadian Arctic waters and cruise vessels in all Canadian waters until February 28, 2022. This means:
  • Adventure-seeking pleasure craft are still prohibited from entering Arctic waters.
  • Passenger vessels carrying more than 12 people are still prohibited from entering Arctic coastal waters, including Nunatsiavut, Nunavik, and the Labrador Coast.
  • Cruise vessels carrying more than 100 people are still prohibited from operating in Canadian waters.
Pleasure craft used by local Arctic residents will not be affected by these measures.
The ban pre-dates America loaning Canada a million doses of Astra Zeneca, a vaccine that is not approved by the FDA and is prohibited for use in America.

Randyk47 Apr 30, 2021 6:08 am
Originally Posted by mahasamatman (Post 33215575)
If you think that, you haven't been paying attention. BC is under severe restrictions until at least the end of May, and we still have to wait four months for our second shots.
I was going by this article. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/corona...hots-1.5247509

mahasamatman Apr 30, 2021 9:11 am
Originally Posted by Randyk47 (Post 33216186)
That's a very small piece of the whole story. Provinces are setting new records every day with infections and hospitalizations. Hospitals are near capacity in several provinces, some places still have curfews, and most have significant restrictions. Canada got hit very hard with variants.

Boggie Dog Apr 30, 2021 2:41 pm
Originally Posted by Badenoch (Post 33216119)
Canada's ban on cruise ships carrying over 100 people is scheduled to be in place until February 22, 2022 and applies to Canadian waters not just ports.

https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-c...e-vessels.html



The ban pre-dates America loaning Canada a million doses of Astra Zeneca, a vaccine that is not approved by the FDA and is prohibited for use in America.
It's understood that Canada has banned cruise ships from their ports and waters until some later date. I was wondering what harm would be caused by a transiting ship with no scheduled port calls?

Badenoch Apr 30, 2021 3:35 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33217320)
It's understood that Canada has banned cruise ships from their ports and waters until some later date. I was wondering what harm would be caused by a transiting ship with no scheduled port calls?
No harm would be done but sovereign nations typically do not take kindly to foreign vessels violating their territorial waters when they've been told to stay out. Spain tried it in the 90's on Canada's east coast and one of their ships was fired upon and seized.

Boggie Dog Apr 30, 2021 3:52 pm
Originally Posted by Badenoch (Post 33217422)
No harm would be done but sovereign nations typically do not take kindly to foreign vessels violating their territorial waters when they've been told to stay out. Spain tried it in the 90's on Canada's east coast and one of their ships was fired upon and seized.
Not suggesting such action, just wondering why Canada would keep the transit restriction in place if the U.S. resumes cruising. Nothing more! I'm not suggesting that they open their ports. In a transit from the U.S. mainland to Alaska the inside passage is the safest route. While I'm confident cruise ships can tolerate heavy weather I'm not so sure about the passengers. Removing the transit option seems heavy handed and unnecessary in my opinion.

jmastron Apr 30, 2021 4:08 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33217460)
Not suggesting such action, just wondering why Canada would keep the transit restriction in place if the U.S. resumes cruising. Nothing more! I'm not suggesting that they open their ports. In a transit from the U.S. mainland to Alaska the inside passage is the safest route. While I'm confident cruise ships can tolerate heavy weather I'm not so sure about the passengers. Removing the transit option seems heavy handed and unnecessary in my opinion.
I suspect there's either a real or perceived fear that if a ship transiting their waters has an outbreak, there'd be pressure for Canada to assist/let the ship dock. It might take international or per-cruiseline agreements that the ship won't even hint that Canada should accept them, and perhaps waivers signed by the passengers saying they accept the risk of being on a cruise is...being stuck on a cruise until they clear their cases. You don't want a repeat of the Zaandam with people who got on a cruise in *March* after the risks were crystal clear crying that nobody would accept poor infected them.

YVR Cockroach Apr 30, 2021 7:29 pm
Cruise ships from Seattle travel the Pacific all the time, for timeliness if nothing else. That was the standard routing pre-COVID, with the stop at Victoria to fulfil PVSA requirements. Inside Passage will also add to pilotage costs (must run close to or more than $100k for that length of transit), and very likely speed reduction (in addition to timing the tide at Campbell River). The wide-open ocean is used as the ships can go at full speed.

mahasamatman May 1, 2021 8:24 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33217460)
Not suggesting such action, just wondering why Canada would keep the transit restriction in place if the U.S. resumes cruising.
Maybe because (contrary to popular belief in the U.S.) Canada is a sovereign country and doesn't let the U.S. dictate its policies? Why is marijuana still illegal in the U.S. when Canada has legalized it?

Originally Posted by YVR Cockroach (Post 33217768)
Cruise ships from Seattle travel the Pacific all the time, for timeliness if nothing else. That was the standard routing pre-COVID, with the stop at Victoria to fulfil PVSA requirements.
For years, most round-trip cruises to Alaska have plied the Inner Passage. It's the only way to get a decent 7-night itinerary from Seattle.

Boggie Dog May 5, 2021 8:53 pm
The latest update from CDC.

Test cruises with volunteer passengers are on the horizon as CDC issues new guidance
On Wednesday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released additional guidance for cruise ships with instructions for trial voyages with volunteer passengers meant to take place in advance of sailings that include paying passengers.

"With the issuance of these next two phases, cruise ship operators now have all the necessary requirements and recommendations they need to start simulated voyages before resuming restricted passenger voyages and apply for a COVID-19 conditional sailing certificate to begin sailing with restricted passenger voyages," the CDC said on its website, noting it may adjust requirements and recommendations in the future.
Ships requiring a high level of vaccinated crew and passengers can bypass the test cruise phase.

As a stockholder of one cruise line I hope a successful resumption of operations can resume. Who's up for a test cruise?

freecia May 7, 2021 7:19 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33229895)
Ships requiring a high level of vaccinated crew and passengers can bypass the test cruise phase.
If Florida won’t allow Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings to require proof of COVID-19 vaccination for passengers and crew, the company’s CEO says it will take its ships elsewhere.
CEO Frank Del Rio made the threat during an earnings call Thursday, just days after Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill passed by the Republican-controlled state Legislature that bans businesses, schools and government entities in Florida from asking anyone to provide proof of a COVID-19 vaccination.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/bus...251212754.html

Looks like no cruise lines had filed for test cruises as of yesterday.

BamaVol May 14, 2021 11:30 am
Originally Posted by jmastron (Post 33217488)
I suspect there's either a real or perceived fear that if a ship transiting their waters has an outbreak, there'd be pressure for Canada to assist/let the ship dock. It might take international or per-cruiseline agreements that the ship won't even hint that Canada should accept them, and perhaps waivers signed by the passengers saying they accept the risk of being on a cruise is...being stuck on a cruise until they clear their cases. You don't want a repeat of the Zaandam with people who got on a cruise in *March* after the risks were crystal clear crying that nobody would accept poor infected them.
Given the CDC requirements for vaccinations of pax and crew, the ships would be safer than the Province where they would have to dock. At 95% & 98%, what’s the likelihood of a massive outbreak on board?

Badenoch May 14, 2021 12:10 pm
Originally Posted by BamaVol (Post 33251346)
Given the CDC requirements for vaccinations of pax and crew, the ships would be safer than the Province where they would have to dock. At 95% & 98%, what’s the likelihood of a massive outbreak on board?
Canada is far behind the U.S. on vaccinations and we continue to face elevated case loads and hospitalizations. The federal government continues to impose quarantine restrictions on anyone entering the country regardless of their vaccination status. Therefore allowing leisure cruisers to enter the country with no restrictions is not going to happen until returning Canadians can do the same.

BamaVol May 15, 2021 6:30 am
Originally Posted by Badenoch (Post 33251451)
Canada is far behind the U.S. on vaccinations and we continue to face elevated case loads and hospitalizations. The federal government continues to impose quarantine restrictions on anyone entering the country regardless of their vaccination status. Therefore allowing leisure cruisers to enter the country with no restrictions is not going to happen until returning Canadians can do the same.
I’m not suggesting that Canada open its borders to tourists. I’m just trying to understand why cruise ships would be kept out of Canadian waters. Fears over an outbreak onboard and the need for an emergency docking seem misplaced. I’m wondering what the real reason is. I guess we won’t know unless someone from the Canadian government says.

mahasamatman May 15, 2021 12:03 pm
Originally Posted by BamaVol (Post 33253053)
I’m just trying to understand why cruise ships would be kept out of Canadian waters.
Every country is possessive about their waters. I'd say most (if not all) countries would reject the idea of giving away something they "own" (the waters) when there's only a downside (environmental damage) and no benefit (port calls).

Boggie Dog May 15, 2021 1:22 pm
Originally Posted by mahasamatman (Post 33253723)
Every country is possessive about their waters. I'd say most (if not all) countries would reject the idea of giving away something they "own" (the waters) when there's only a downside (environmental damage) and no benefit (port calls).
I don't see an environmental downside of a ship solely transiting territorial waters.

reflektia May 15, 2021 1:46 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33253932)
I don't see an environmental downside of a ship solely transiting territorial waters.
Possibly refers to waste discharging: https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresource...0Annex%20V.pdf

ijkh May 15, 2021 2:08 pm
Here a historical reason why not:
 
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33217320)
It's understood that Canada has banned cruise ships from their ports and waters until some later date. I was wondering what harm would be caused by a transiting ship with no scheduled port calls?
P.S. I WAS onboard.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...38ad22cb18.jpg
Crash of the MV Sundancer from Seattle in Campbell River.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...6361d65663.jpg

YVR Cockroach May 15, 2021 2:12 pm
Originally Posted by reflektia (Post 33253986)
Possibly refers to waste discharging: https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresource...0Annex%20V.pdf
+ pollution from ships. The large cruisecos have been loath to use marine diesel so have chosen to install scrubbers which - though approved (by the U.S. E.P.A.?) - seem to work much better(or only) in the lab than in actual deployment. Use of bunker oil is otherwise forbidden within 200 miles of U.S. shores.

There's also the matter of what to do with the acids, heavy metals and other nasty byproducts of bunker fuel.

https://www.cruiselawnews.com/2019/0...ter-pollution/

Last cruise I did, the cruise line went to exclusively using marine diesel worldwide.

YVR Cockroach May 15, 2021 2:19 pm
Originally Posted by ijkh (Post 33254032)
P.S. I WAS onboard.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...38ad22cb18.jpg
Crash of the MV Sundancer from Seattle in Campbell River.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...6361d65663.jpg
I remember that sinking. It was very fortunate that the ship got to a dock before keeling over.

mahasamatman May 15, 2021 3:38 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33253932)
I don't see an environmental downside of a ship solely transiting territorial waters.
I'm glad that not everyone is that blind.

Originally Posted by reflektia (Post 33253986)
Possibly refers to waste discharging
That's part of it, but it goes much further.

Boggie Dog May 15, 2021 3:47 pm
Originally Posted by mahasamatman (Post 33254238)
I'm glad that not everyone is that blind.


That's part of it, but it goes much further.

Aren't there regulations imposed by many countries regulating what can be discharged from ships if X miles from shore?

Were ships transiting these waters pre-COVID?

What's different now?

mahasamatman May 15, 2021 4:02 pm
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 33254253)
What's different now?
There's no economic benefit to offset the damage. Nations continually make these kinds of tradeoffs.

ranles May 22, 2021 5:55 pm
All this talk about Canada. What if one is flying to Europe, Asia or ... and is transiting thru Canada to get to their cruise?

mahasamatman May 22, 2021 8:49 pm
Originally Posted by ranles (Post 33271619)
What if one is flying to Europe, Asia or ... and is transiting thru Canada to get to their cruise?
You're taking your chances. From https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid/tr...ictions/border
You are exempt from the arrival and Day-8 testing requirements and the mandatory hotel stopover, as long as you remain in the secure transit area to complete your connection within 24 hours.

If you need to leave the airport or the secure transit area due to a flight cancellation or delay, you become subject to mandatory quarantine until your flight departs.

ranles May 23, 2021 11:21 am
Thank you

Boggie Dog May 24, 2021 8:16 pm
Cruises that are starting up. First couple of months will be watch closely.

Major cruise lines to restart voyages for vaccinated passengers
After a year of crippling losses, Carnival and Royal Caribbean said late last week their first post-pandemic cruises will set sail in July, after the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) earlier this month gave the green light to allow trips with passengers and crew who received Covid-19 vaccinations.

"We have been waiting for a very long time to announce a resumption of cruising from the US. We are so proud to be sailing for the first time in over a year from our special homeport of Seattle to the breathtaking state of Alaska," Harry Sommer, chief of Norwegian Cruise Line, said in a statement.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:08 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.