[QUOTE=catherder;125807]Your snark detector is malfunctioning today. I am no friend of the cruise industry- saw enough “behind the scenes” when I worked for a certain water (think boilers and coolant) treatment company (the same one that tried unsuccessfully to keep NCL from ruining- and blowing up- the Norway)
;)[/QUOTE]
Do you think that if NCL had handled the Norway correctly she could still be sailing today? I know she was on her last legs then anyway but there are certainly ships older than she would be today who are still very active.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125810]Do you think that if NCL had handled the Norway correctly she could still be sailing today? I know she was on her last legs then anyway but there are certainly ships older than she would be today who are still very active.[/QUOTE]
Even with stellar chemical control and prudent operation, all propulsion boilers need to be re-tubed (based on wall thickness and other criteria) and have other repairs and inspections done at intervals, and it’s an expensive process. So, unless they were making killer money with the Norway, I think she’d be gone by now. Propulsion boilers need TLC and nobody wants to bother with the cost of that anymore. Except MarAd and a couple other entities.
[QUOTE=catherder;125819]Even with stellar chemical control and prudent operation, all propulsion boilers need to be re-tubed (based on wall thickness and other criteria) and have other repairs and inspections done at intervals, and it’s an expensive process. So, unless they were making killer money with the Norway, I think she’d be gone by now. Propulsion boilers need TLC and nobody wants to bother with the cost of that anymore. Except MarAd and a couple other entities.[/QUOTE]
actually I believe NORWAY would still be sailing because she had a dedicated following who returned to cruise on her over and over. They alone would have kept the ship profitable because they kept her booked but once the bookings ever then fell off to the point when she made losses for them, NCL would have disposed of her. Of course, her untimely demise spelled doom for all the other old warhorse cruiseships out there both steam and motor.
Fairsky (the last steam powered passenger ship ever built) made it a good few years after France’s demise but she’s gone now too. Sad to see the old girls go… They’re really what got me into this business, even though for several different reasons i’ll never sail on one. Black days for the history of the maritime industry. Strange to think that the chapter of steam is only just coming to a close now
[QUOTE=c.captain;125822]actually I believe NORWAY would still be sailing because she had a dedicated following who returned to cruise on her over and over. They alone would have kept the ship profitable because they kept her booked but once the bookings ever then fell off to the point when she made losses for them, NCL would have disposed of her. Of course, her untimely demise spelled doom for all the other old warhorse cruiseships out there both steam and motor.[/QUOTE]
Well, they did keep her running for some time after the disastrous boiler casualty, but apparently, she became unprofitable enough for them to dispose of her, because that’s exactly what became of “Blue Lady”
Updated - - -
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125831]Fairsky (the last steam powered passenger ship ever built) made it a good few years after France’s demise but she’s gone now too. Sad to see the old girls go… They’re really what got me into this business, even though for several different reasons i’ll never sail on one. Black days for the history of the maritime industry. Strange to think that the chapter of steam is only just coming to a close now :([/QUOTE]
Hey Paddy I love steam, ok? My four Navy ships were all 650 lb plants, I managed two steamships as a port engineer, cripes I have a stateroom keyfob from the SSUS…I have hydrazine in my veins. I cringed when I read the NTSB report on the Norway. And the NTSB report wasn’t all too kind to my former company either (unfairly so, since they had no legal authority over NCL and were only in the role of consultants).
Tarred and feathered, that’s what should have been done to the lot but I am not the queen of the world, so there ya go. End rant.
Really? I thought the boiler explosion was the end of NORWAY’s career?
from Wikipedia
On 25 May 2003, after docking in Miami at 5:00 a.m., the Norway was seriously damaged by a boiler explosion at 6:37 a.m. that killed eight crew members, and injured seventeen, as superheated steam flooded the boiler room, and blasted into crew quarters above through ruptured decking. None of the passengers were injured. The National Transportation Safety Board determined that “the probable cause of the boiler rupture on the Norway was the deficient boiler operation, maintenance, and inspection practices”. On 27 June 2003, NCL/Star decided to relocate the Norway, and she departed Miami under tow, although at first NCL/Star refused to announce her destination. However, she headed towards Europe and eventually arrived in Bremerhaven on 23 September 2003. NCL announced that constructing a new boiler was not possible; boiler parts, however, were available to repair her. In Bremerhaven she was used as accommodation for NCL crew training to take their places on board the line’s new Pride of America.
followed by
“The Norway will never sail again,” it was announced on 23 March 2004, by NCL Chief Executive Colin Veitch. The ship’s ownership was transferred to NCL’s parent company, Star Cruises.
the remaining history after that was all just a fait accompli…
a gorgeous and grand lady was put to death and her body disposed of.
as an aside, my parents first cruise in their life was aboard NORWAY and today after 20 years and probably a dozen other ships, they still hold that one cruise as their favorite. As stated by them “it was like being on a real ship”
[QUOTE=c.captain;125857]As stated by them “it was like being on a real ship”[/QUOTE]
YES. That’s my whole point. A “REAL” ship. Some people think I’m a sappy old sentimental fool, and I am that, for certain, but I’m also a purist and I love ships above all else. I have an ample appreciation for the fact that this whole “thing” is a business, whatever form the ship takes, and businesses have to make money. Unfortunately the ugliness of most modern ships can be attributed to that fact alone. I humbly ask, isn’t there some way we can reconcile these two schools of thought? There must be someway that ships (of all kinds, passenger and cargo alike) can be beautiful, functional, and profitable all at the same time.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125859]There must be someway that ships (of all kinds, passenger and cargo alike) can be beautiful, functional, and profitable all at the same time.[/QUOTE]
not in 2013 nor in the future as it is unfolding before our eyes. Ships are owned by corporations and those exist to earn profits above all else these days. It over rides all other considerations…PERIOD!
I’m trying to think of where I read that. If I’m mistaken about that my bad…I knew she ended up as a floating accom for awhile. I did read in the same place that her cabins were selling for rock bottom prices near the end so my comment on that regard stands. They gotta make money or it’s off to ship heaven they go.
Crap, i hate posting on my phone from the fricking airport. It’s too early for this shit.
