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...Disney Cruise Line announced today that the honorary role of "godparent" for its new ship, the Disney Treasure, will be held by The Walt Disney Company cast, crew, Imagineers and employees around the world. The profound declaration is a heartfelt tribute to the more than 200,000 dreamers and doers who make every Disney entertainment, vacation and at-home experience possible. Disney Cruise Line is proud to celebrate...
Latest News...Carnival Cruise Line is adding to its line-up of 2026/27 deployment with sailings from New York City on Carnival Venezia, and more Long Beach sailings on Carnival Firenze and Carnival Radiance. Our two Carnival Fun Italian Style ships offer great options from the east and west coasts, conveniently connecting New York and Long Beach to popular destinations, while delivering unique experiences on board...
Latest News...Vacationers are in for more ways to make memories across Royal Caribbeans latest combination of tropical and Northeast 2026-27 getaways. The lineup of 12 Royal Caribbean ships rounds out a variety of adventures across Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico and the Northeast for every type of family and vacationer to get away any time of year. Crown & Anchor Society loyalty members...
IS she the unluckiest ship currently around ?
Probably the most expensive to own as well given the amount of tme she is not in service or broken, or aground etc.
Not a save the ship campaign, just a use for her as she is Spanish owned.
She could then go to the South Shields area for scrapping and keep the British workers employed !
Her only real claim to fame was that she was the last steam turbine passenger ship built.
Do you think she may be the youngest passenger ship in decades to get to Alang ?
[ 08-07-2009: Message edited by: Pascal ]
Too many inside, basic and very small cabins, too few balconies, lack of reall usable deck space, no lido restaurant etc etc.
Basically Sitmar designed and built a ship that was almost immediately out of date, one only has to looko at the Royal Princess which totally overshadowed her introduction. They obviously designed her to complement their exisiting ships and did not look forward in terms of what she would have to do 10 years on never mind this far ahead - unless there is a a huge pick up in the market I suspect her future is kind of bleak.
quote:Originally posted by Pascal:Do you think she may be the youngest passenger ship in decades to get to Alang ?
On the other hand I don't know who else in their right mind would buy her. I couldn't believe Pullmantur did in the first place.
quote:Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:I wonder if she'll be re-engined? Hopefully she won't be scrapped as she is one of the finest looking passenger ships built in the last 25-years.
But I do not see that as at all likely. In fact it would be a downright stupid move IMHO, as was buying the ship in the first place.
The truth is this was always a ship that felt much older than she was, and she was always a ship that had problems ... I have known quite a few people that worked aboard, and to be diplomatic she is not an easy to ship to run, to say the least.
There are lots of stories that she was sabotaged by the French shipyard workers when being built, and others (rather far-fetched in my view) that she was sabotaged by the Italian engineers when P&O bought Sitmar. I have no idea if these are true (though the shipyard worker stories seem very plausible) or just an attempt to explain a "problem" ship but even if they are false you can imagine the kind of ship that gets people talking that way for 20 years. (As far as the engineers go, more likely IMHO is that the British engineers who replaced the Italian ones for a time after she came under the P&O ownership simply were not quite as good at "massaging" the ship's many faults, not having as much experience.)
Given that there are a lot of more modern ships out there to be had now, I have no idea why anyone would go to the expense of re-engining this one.
I would love to see someone make a success out of her (especially under steam!) as I like the way she looks outside, I like the layout of her accommodation (the decor is just blah) and I like her for sentimental reasons ... but I don't really see it happening.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:Too many inside, basic and very small cabins, too few balconies, lack of reall usable deck space, no lido restaurant etc etc.
On the other hand there are indeed too many insides for the 21st century, and they are, as you said, very plain cabins. And very few balconies. And so on. I never thought the deck space was a problem (it was just laid out in a very "traditional" manner - no big central pool area, etc.) but the lack of a lido restaurant was just stupid. OK, on just about any older ship it will seem too small for today's tastes but to not have one at all...! I don't like these and I can imagine Sitmar management 30 years ago saying, "We don't like them, so we won't put one in" but that is not really how it works if you are a mass market operator.
At least the (small for 2009, big for 1984) gym/spa is on the top of the ship, not down in the bilge where the next set of Sitmar-designed ships (STAR/CROWN/REGAL) had them. Now that must have been one of the most bizarre and retrograde moves ever in cruise ship design.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:Basically Sitmar designed and built a ship that was almost immediately out of date, one only has to looko at the Royal Princess which totally overshadowed her introduction.
Obviously being so "traditional" is a problem for the ex FAIRSKY but there is so much more to it than that. If you look at the HAL "N" ships they have had very long and successful careers and show no signs of slowing down, and they are also almost reactionary for 1980s ships (aside from the presence of HAL's signature Lido Restaurant and their diesels they are probably even more traditional than FAIRSKY) and they even had problems when new (vibration) and yet nobody is suggesting they might be destined for the beach any time soon.
So I think Sitmar could still have been just as myopic (except maybe with the choice of steam turbines) and still created a ship that would not have been the "problem" ship that was built.
She suffered with a lot of engine problems while in service.
She also received serious damaged in 1956 when she was hit on her port side by a tanker about 170 miles off of the port of Colombo.
The damage was so serious that bars had to be welded to her hull to support the top decks before she continued her voyage to Sydney where repairs were completed.
As for the bars welded to the hull - well that has happened since - the old Island Princess for instance after her collision with Regent Sea.
While not pointing fingers in any way I do know Princess were very taken aback when Sky Princess was moved across to the UK register. Investigations seemed to show that Sitmars practice of paying bonus's based on reduced costs (maintainance etc) had probably led to incorrect or lack of proper maintainace and I heard that in various instances they discovered second hand parts were used. Obviously this was second hand, I only served on her a couple of years later and then only for 1 Alaskan season, and I admit in comparison to Sea, Island, Royal and Pacific Princess she was not my favourite by any means, and yes she was an operational bitch to run by comparison. That said I also served on Star Princess (FairMajesty) and while she was obviously bigger and economically a success for Princess she was probably my least favourite ship to serve on and it is telling that she left the fleet relatively quickly. Poor design abounded both front of house and back of house, Doug has mentioned gym, but the biggest balls up for most pax was the design of the observation lounge (Windows to the World) where the majority of people could not even see a window never mind see out, it was completely gutted and redone a couple of years later. But even small details like waterfalls that overflowed every time the ship moved and floortiles in the galleys and service areas that "chewed" through the soles of your shoes - the shoes ever lasted much beyond a couple of months. And again the lack of balconies went against everything that the rest of the industry was doing. A very poor overall design. Mind Crown and Regal had poor design issues to - while the Dome looked great from the outside inside as a space it never really worked and of course it led to both ships suffering a lack of open deck space, the lido has to be extended later in life as it was truely too small and the kids areas also had to be reinvented by adding space over the lido cafe. Again relatively few balconies for her size. In other words - perhaps Sitmar's design team left something to be desired.
quote:Originally posted by dougnewman:There are lots of stories that she was sabotaged by the French shipyard workers when being built, and others (rather far-fetched in my view) that she was sabotaged by the Italian engineers when P&O bought Sitmar. I have no idea if these are true (though the shipyard worker stories seem very plausible)...
Are you serious? Really whatever! And I'm not saying that because I'm French.Who in his right mind, in any industrialized country, would do that? And even if so, don't you think there's a guarantee police (and insurances involved, even if the shipyard goes bankrupt) that would have make Sitmar to return or go to court and start legal action against the builder or insurances? And for your information several shipyard workers at La Seyne were expecting for a similar job into another French shipyard at the time (or St Nazaire' Chantiers de l'Atlantique then buying their shipyard). If a technical problem occurs in a ship, it is, believe me, rather easy to determne if it is the result of sabotage or negligences made in purpose, in that case those workers would have been "burnt". Not to mention that most of the mechanical parts and various devices were not made in the shipyard itself but by firms all other France and Europe, which were not affected by the upcomming bankrupcy.That not the maximal care would have been put into the building of this ship, considering the circumstances then, I understand (but I don't approve at all), but to speak about sabotage as "very plausible"...I would have thought you were a more intelligent and pragmatic boy than relying on such a farfetched rumours Doug! Obviously, I was wrong...
EDIT: by the way, she's laid up at about 3 kilometers away from my home, but I have yet to see her! Will be able to do so soon I hope.
[ 08-08-2009: Message edited by: Vaccaro ]
The sister ship to the ss Iberia, which was the ss Arcadia, both entering service in 1954, carried on in service cruising from Australia until 1979 when she too was sold to Taiwan for scrapping.
I joined Iberia in Belfast before her trials and know just how unreliable she was after her maiden voyage was delayed due to strikes round the Australian coast which prevent her outward cargo and mail being unloaded.
She was seven days late leaving Fremantle and her engines were flogged for the homeward voyage so that she arrived in UK to start her UK cruising season on time.
From then onwards she suffered with mechanical problems !
quote:Originally posted by Vaccaro:EDIT: by the way, she's laid up at about 3 kilometers away from my home, but I have yet to see her! Will be able to do so soon I hope.[ 08-08-2009: Message edited by: Vaccaro ]
Don't worry Dominique, it seems that you will have plenty of time to see her !
Anyway it's true that that the period 1970-1985 wasn't the most glorious for French passenger shipbuilding (except for Dubigeon Normandie's ferries, perhaps...), but I think it was the case for most countries.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:And again the lack of balconies went against everything that the rest of the industry was doing. ... Again relatively few balconies for her size.
Other than ROYAL PRINCESS, ROYAL VIKING SUN and CRYSTAL HARMONY, most ships that were built in this time period (up until 1992) had very few balconies.
STAR PRINCESS had more than SOVEREIGN OF THE SEAS, CROWN/REGAL had more than MONARCH/MAJESTY. HORIZON and ZENITH had no balconies at all. COSTA CLASSICA and ROMANTICA ... again very few balconies.
Yes, that would help all these ships look dated very quickly but as far as balconies they were not behind the times at all.
quote:Originally posted by Vaccaro:Are you serious? Really whatever! And I'm not saying that because I'm French.Who in his right mind, in any industrialized country, would do that?
I am not saying that it happened - but yes, I do think it is plausible. It is a scenario I can imagine happening quite easily - a shipyard about to go under, a lot of disgruntled workers around, a few of them (not many, just a few) decided to intentionally do poor work as low-level sabotage out of anger and frustration. Perfectly believable, I think.
I am not talking about massive groups of workers going around rigging the ship to blow up or something - I mean small scale stuff.
Of course it is just a rumor but it is a rumor that seems to me like it could be true. I have no idea whether or not it happened but I certainly wouldn't be shocked if it did.
The only reason I regard the other rumor about Sitmar engineers sabotaging the ship because P&O bought it as far fetched is that as far as I know, they kept their jobs.
quote:Originally posted by Pascal:Anyway it's true that that the period 1970-1985 wasn't the most glorious for French passenger shipbuilding (except for Dubigeon Normandie's ferries, perhaps...), but I think it was the case for most countries.
quote:Originally posted by Neil - Ex P. & O. S. N. Company.:If she is sold to Alang, she will not be one of the newest ships scrapped as the P & O passenger ships ss Iberia was only 18 years old when she was scrapped at Taiwan in 1972.
That's true. Those postwar P&O ships looked far older w/their traditional exteriors. In some ways, the lovely Iberia and Arcadia (except for the funnels) looked like pre-war ships. In comparison, when I see pics of the former RVL trio it's hard to believe that they are almost 40-years-old! (and they were re-engined late in life)
For those who previously worked on her, exactly what's wrong with her besides the steam turbines? She's had a few mishaps (groundings and a leak) but many ships go through their issues. Look at how many problems QE2 had until she was re-engined.
Maybe someone should send them an e mail and see if they are prepared to take an offer ?! I suspect given that she is doing nothing and her ptoential costs even if she were running they might be prepared to take a very low bid.
In fact if they were to take a very low bid it could be that she is a good candidate for a permanently moored hotel - and I am no fan of ships being hotels but if the price was low enough the economic case for using her as such might actually mean that this isia case that would work, 300 rooms (assuming 2 become 1) and her biggest problem is removed by suing shoreside power only. Given her relative youth she has a good number of years before her.
[ 08-12-2009: Message edited by: Pascal ]
quote:Originally posted by Pascal:Don't worry Dominique, it seems that you will have plenty of time to see her !Anyway it's true that that the period 1970-1985 wasn't the most glorious for French passenger shipbuilding (except for Dubigeon Normandie's ferries, perhaps...), but I think it was the case for most countries.
Well France build the Nieuw Amsterdam and Noordam 1983/84. Bringing back St Nazaire in passenger ship building.
Greetings Ben.
Many thanks for the comments.
Not sure when you went on Arcadia but I was on her when she did the Alaska cruises in 1974 and also on her final period of cruising from Australia.
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...