[ 12-30-2007: Message edited by: Atlcruiser ]

The Spirit Class is the way to go. Wonderful ships. In fact I prefer them over the Vista Class (at least HAL's Vista Class).

quote:

---

Originally posted by mec1:
And the promenade deck is the worst I've experienced on any ship - two useless passageways on either side of the ship, mostly with blank steel bulkheads due to the galley

---

Ha! Now that's where NCL's Prom 'artwork' would be a bonus

I'm a shareholder and I can see that it doesn't bode well for the future of the company. They will be getting a letter from me at some point. Why on earth would i want to sail on a near identical twin especially one so badly designed, if it weren't for price or the itinerary?

Couldn't agree more about the utterly rubbish layout of that class of ship. And of course on Serena you also experienced farcussian splendors, which are hmm...

When I think of what is on Disney ships, NCL ship - that is what fun ship architecture and design should be IMHO.

I agree also with goodclicks, the Carnival software (food, service, entertainment), is considerably better than expectations.

I posted comments about the bad Destiny class layout over on Cruise Critic - this response amused me
------------------------------------------------------
AS someone who has cruised on both spirit and conquest class ship and someone who will be cruising on both the spirit and the freedom next year, I can tell assure all readers here that the Spirit class is not superiour to the conquest class. They are different adn conquest is a larger ship but to trash this fine class of ship like the op did is ridiculousand misleading.

Of course they wouldn't redesign a great ship because of a few whiners that no not of what they speak and complain mainly because they are lazy and don't like to walk
------------------------------------------------------

Naturally I nicely pointed out that the Spirit class are ever so slightly longer than the Destiny class, and thus probably further to walk

Check out this Carnival Splendor - Farcus video. Whatever we think of Farcus and those designs, all power to Carnival for putting something like this on their website.

[ 01-01-2008: Message edited by: Matts ]

I find it quite bizarre that the Destiny ‘platform’ gets much criticism as does Carnival's décor in general, yet they are still the number one cruise line.

In contrast there seems to be unanimous agreement that the RCI fleet and NCL’s newbuilds are all well designed.

Of course 'Carnival Destiny' was innovative when she entered service in 1996, purely because she was the biggest cruise ship and the first to exceed Queen Elizabeth's tonnage. However, the Carnival fleet has been short of innovation ever since. Mind you it has not effected their business.

Question: How has the Destiny design evolved. They added another deck, didn't they? How many more cabins/pax? Anything else?

[ 01-01-2008: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matts:

I posted comments about the bad Destiny class layout over on Cruise Critic - this response amused me

---

It sounds like you have discovered the "Carnival Cheerleaders". A rather humorous bunch that will defend Carnival to the bitter end, no matter how factual or valid the infraction may be. Actually every message board over on CC has a group of cheerleaders. These are people that are loyal to the line and think "their" line can do no wrong. Many have never sailed on any other line but "theirs". Cunard and Holland America have a fairly vocal group of Cheerleaders, but Carnival's can get pretty rowdy too! Sometimes it's fun to post something provocative or negative just to stir them up! They scurry like little rats to the defense of their cruise line. Sometimes you would think you are insulting their mother as opposed to a publicly traded company. It can be amusing though.

I also agree about the food and service being quite good on Carnival, and often times better than the so called premium competition. I have always felt Carnival offered an underrated product, while many other lines are overrated with hype.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
.

Question: How has the Destiny design evolved. They added another deck, didn't they? How many more cabins/pax? Anything else?

---

CARNIVAL DESTINY is actually one of a kind, and many consider her the best looking (from the exterior) of the lot. After DESTINY the TRIUMPH and VICTORY added another deck of cabins. It's really just a quarter deck of cabins located high and forward on the ship. This change has stuck with all remaining ships of the class. The next major evolution came with CONQUEST. A mid-section was added giving this class some added length. Some additional public space was added and of course more cabins. COSTA CONDORDIA is the hopefully the final evolution of this class, with an enclosed midship pool and redesigned spa. The basic layout is still the same as the original CARNIVAL DESTINY though with some lounge rearrangement specified by Costa. CARNIVAL SPLENDOR will be very much like CONCORDIA but the aft pool will become open-air, with no glass dome. This will be a first for this class of ship and I think it will be a great improvement.

Next is CARNIVAL DREAM, and let us hope all the design flaws of the Destiny/Conquest/Concordia Class are left behind.

It feels like the theatre and the two dining room were put in place and then everything else just wedged in wherever it would fit.

They are truly bizarre ships, but obviously they must be successful from a commercial standpoint given how many of them have been built!

The only nice thing I can say about them is that they have very large cabins.

[ 01-01-2008: Message edited by: dougnewman ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
Of course 'Carnival Destiny' was innovative when she entered service in 1996, purely because she was the biggest cruise ship and the first to exceed Queen Elizabeth's tonnage. However, the Carnival fleet has been short of innovation ever since. Mind you it has not effected their business.

[ 01-01-2008: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

---

First to all Happy New Year.

Malcolm this is not correct. It was the Sovereign Of The Seas that surpace the QE2 as biggest passenger ship in the world in 1988.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maasdam:

First to all Happy New Year.

Malcolm this is not correct. It was the Sovereign Of The Seas that surpace the QE2 as biggest passenger ship in the world in 1988.

Greetings Ben.

---

First, also a Happy New Year.

The ships turn their back on the sea.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

First, also a Happy New Year.

Malcolm is correct - he meant Queen Elizabeth which was the larges passenger ship ever built until Carnival Destiny. QE2 never was the larges passenger ship and Sovereign of the Seas was smaller than Queen Elizabeth. (if we just stay with the gross tonnage and do not consider how this number was calculated in the 1940ies as opposed to the 1990ies)

---

I never realized there was a different method to calculate gt prior to what we use now. Any idea what QE and QM would come in at using todays measurement standards?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

First, also a Happy New Year.

Malcolm is correct - he meant Queen Elizabeth which was the larges passenger ship ever built until Carnival Destiny. QE2 never was the larges passenger ship

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:

Was'nt QE2 the largest passenger ship in service between late 1974 (when ss France was withdrawn) until she re-appeared as ss Norway in 1980??

---

Yes, that is correct, but QE2 was never the largest passenger ship ever. That distinction went directly from QUEEN ELIZABETH to CARNIVAL DESTINY (in terms of GRT.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

First, also a Happy New Year.

Malcolm is correct - he meant Queen Elizabeth which was the larges passenger ship ever built until Carnival Destiny. QE2 never was the larges passenger ship and Sovereign of the Seas was smaller than Queen Elizabeth. (if we just stay with the gross tonnage and do not consider how this number was calculated in the 1940ies as opposed to the 1990ies)

---

Whoooooops forget here predecessor Queen Elizabeth. My excuses Malcome you are totally right.
Good begin of CT 2008

today, ships' tonnage is calculated based on the 1969 Tonnage Measurement Convention.

There are quite a few ships that got significantly larger when they were recalculated using the new method, such as the former Home Lines "Atlantic" (today MSC's "Melody"), which went from 19,337 gross registered tons (grt) to a gross tonnage (gt) of 35,143. Please see here for additional information on the two systems.

Best,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maasdam:

Whoooooops forget here predecessor Queen Elizabeth. My excuses Malcome you are totally right.
Good begin of CT 2008 .

---

Don't worry Ben, I'm often wrong - but not in this case.

Queen Elizabeth capsized in 1972 (scrapped in 1975) so 20+ years passed before 'Destiny' superseded her gt.