If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Ray Goldenberg wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:21:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote: Thanks for saying that, Ernie. I'm glad there are some in the industry that will speak out for the impact of a company's decisions on the customer outside of the bottom line. Hi Ben, I could be wrong but I don't think Ernie is part of the cruise industry unless he now flys on a sea-plane. vbg Isn't Ernie in the travel industry? Ben Best regards, Ray LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL 800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905 http://www.lighthousetravel.com |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Ray Goldenberg wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:21:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote: Thanks for saying that, Ernie. I'm glad there are some in the industry that will speak out for the impact of a company's decisions on the customer outside of the bottom line. Hi Ben, I could be wrong but I don't think Ernie is part of the cruise industry unless he now flys on a sea-plane. vbg Isn't Ernie in the travel industry? Ben Best regards, Ray LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL 800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905 http://www.lighthousetravel.com |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom K" wrote in message ... "number6" wrote in message ups.com... FeAudrey wrote: You're not going to miss the Statue of Liberty; it's right opposite Red Hook. Not exactly ... the Statue is somewhat north west from Red Hook... You'll sail south and already be past it ... Bayonne's terminal is also past Lady Liberty on the way out of NY Harbor. From what I've seen, the new terminal will be a little farther up in the harbor as the Statue of Liberty on the other side of Fort Jay, or between the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel and the Brooklyn Bridge. I'm honestly very disappointed in both Carnival/Princes/Cunard and RCI/Celebrity not sailing from Manhattan any longer from a "sailing past the sights" perspective. Though I've tried getting away from the Manhattan terminals on a crowded day... and it's not pretty. I'm not sure there is any good solution. Maybe the only good solution (too late now) might have been sailing out of NJ from up in Hoboken (up by Ken G.). That way you'd still sail past all the great sights. Though the roads there couldn't support any additional traffic. --Tom The tradeoff is that they can be in open water about an hour sooner both ways. This lets them get an extra two hours per cruise where they can open the ship stores and casino for that all important on-board revenue. -- I'm Tom Smith, and I approved this message. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"Karen Segboer" wrote in message ... Tom, I think the HAL piers in Hoboken are long gone, otherwise they "cudda been contendas" Karen, doing a poor Marlon Brando "On The Waterfront" But da wadda's still dare... All you need is the water... you can add piers. --Tom |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message ink.net... George Leppla wrote: "shoreguy" wrote That's a shame. Part of the wonder of cruising to or from NYC is that trip past the Statue of Liberty and up the Hudson to midtown. I still remember the first time. Many of the crew gathered on the bow and were as overwhelmed as we were. The "shame" lies in the fact that for years and years, New York City refused to spend any money to provide cruise passengers with proper facilities. I have been in many ports and in my opinion, the cruise ship terminals in New York were the worst managed permanent facilities I have ever seen. NYC is interested in getting the Olympics in 2012 and finding something to do with the train yards on the West side. The shame I see is not recognizing the whole allure by various parties to those visiting the city via ship, at a time when cruise ship travel is expanding. Did you see the NYC subways in the 1970s? or Times Square? or Bryant Park? There are a number of public facilities that were in disrepair or obsolete the city turned around, after years of neglect. The facilities would be easy. The problem I see is 12th Avenue. Royal Caribbean had the right idea by moving to New Jersey. Carnival Corp is heading to Brooklyn and that may be an improvement depending on how they develop the terminal, parking and access. I have visions of Red Hook becoming just another traffic jam. I don't know about right idea, it is an idea that makes business sense. But, they also could have recognized the allure of cruising into the center of Manhattan and campaigned with proposals on how to improve it. Passengers and crew are in the heart of the city when cruising into and from NYC piers, only a few avenues away from it. That's a good thing for both. NCL based a ship year round in NYC. It's working out well. With much fewer sailings out of Manhattan, maybe the Port Authority will finally be able to handle what little they have left. There are always issues of coordination in NYC. I think most pax feel that keeping the ships in Manhattan would be worth it. But it just isn't that big a priority for the players involved to do so. Ben S. I don't think the issue is the areas or NYC, or the money. It's the road infrastructure. It just can't support that level of people when you have 3-5 big ships in port. --Tom |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
"George Leppla" wrote in message ... "shoreguy" wrote That's a shame. Part of the wonder of cruising to or from NYC is that trip past the Statue of Liberty and up the Hudson to midtown. I still remember the first time. Many of the crew gathered on the bow and were as overwhelmed as we were. The "shame" lies in the fact that for years and years, New York City refused to spend any money to provide cruise passengers with proper facilities. I have been in many ports and in my opinion, the cruise ship terminals in New York were the worst managed permanent facilities I have ever seen. You could have spent all the money you had on beautiful, well operating terminals... but you'd still be stuck with the NYC roads, bridges and tunnels. The roads there simply can't support the added volume of traffic when 3 or more huge ships are in port. To think money spent on terminals would have solved the problem is being in denial. I've been there on crowded days. It's ugly. They do things like closing the entrance when it's jam packed, and sending you up-town the West Side Highway, using it as a "staging" area. And all that does it tie up all the roads in the area. Something totally radical might have been the only solution. Perhaps something like putting the check in terminals on the NJ side, and ferrying you (like a tender ride) to the ships on the NYC side. --Tom |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"George Leppla" wrote in message ... "shoreguy" wrote That's a shame. Part of the wonder of cruising to or from NYC is that trip past the Statue of Liberty and up the Hudson to midtown. I still remember the first time. Many of the crew gathered on the bow and were as overwhelmed as we were. The "shame" lies in the fact that for years and years, New York City refused to spend any money to provide cruise passengers with proper facilities. I have been in many ports and in my opinion, the cruise ship terminals in New York were the worst managed permanent facilities I have ever seen. You could have spent all the money you had on beautiful, well operating terminals... but you'd still be stuck with the NYC roads, bridges and tunnels. The roads there simply can't support the added volume of traffic when 3 or more huge ships are in port. To think money spent on terminals would have solved the problem is being in denial. I've been there on crowded days. It's ugly. They do things like closing the entrance when it's jam packed, and sending you up-town the West Side Highway, using it as a "staging" area. And all that does it tie up all the roads in the area. Something totally radical might have been the only solution. Perhaps something like putting the check in terminals on the NJ side, and ferrying you (like a tender ride) to the ships on the NYC side. --Tom |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
"Thomas Smith" -NO-SPAM wrote in message ... "Sue and Kevin Mullen" wrote in message ... Ray Goldenberg wrote: This move will relieve the congestion at the Manhattan cruise piers. Yeah, it will relieve the congestion in Manhattan, but for those of us coming from New Jersey, it is going to be a pain getting there. The route we will have to take is usually congested no matter what time of the day you are there. sue Granted my New York geography is a bit lacking, but I pulled up maps of the area where the Brooklyn cruise ship terminal will be. If I am reading this right, it will be at Atlantic Ave. and Columbia St., right off exit 27 of the BQE (I-278). Folks from New Jersey can take I-278 across Staten Island and the Verazano Narrows bridge, and end up going directly to the terminal, unless traffic gets real fun at the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel (I-478) right there. Now, if you are coming from the north, you could take I-95 across the George Washington Bridge, pick up the Deegan Expressway (I-87) south to the Grand Central Parkway (I-278) towards LaGuardia (is that the Tri-Borough Bridge?), and follow I-278 as it becomes the BQE. Now, you New Yorkers, please tell me what is wrong with these directions. Nothing is wrong with your directions. The problem is that they aren't roads, bridges and tunnels. They're long parking lots. Like when it take you 3 hours in bumper-to-bumper traffic just to cross Staten Island and the Verrazano... You can be stuck in traffic up on the bridge and watch your ship sail out of the harbor. At least you'll get good pictures, even if you miss the cruise. --Tom |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
"Thomas Smith" -NO-SPAM wrote in message ... "Sue and Kevin Mullen" wrote in message ... Ray Goldenberg wrote: This move will relieve the congestion at the Manhattan cruise piers. Yeah, it will relieve the congestion in Manhattan, but for those of us coming from New Jersey, it is going to be a pain getting there. The route we will have to take is usually congested no matter what time of the day you are there. sue Granted my New York geography is a bit lacking, but I pulled up maps of the area where the Brooklyn cruise ship terminal will be. If I am reading this right, it will be at Atlantic Ave. and Columbia St., right off exit 27 of the BQE (I-278). Folks from New Jersey can take I-278 across Staten Island and the Verazano Narrows bridge, and end up going directly to the terminal, unless traffic gets real fun at the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel (I-478) right there. Now, if you are coming from the north, you could take I-95 across the George Washington Bridge, pick up the Deegan Expressway (I-87) south to the Grand Central Parkway (I-278) towards LaGuardia (is that the Tri-Borough Bridge?), and follow I-278 as it becomes the BQE. Now, you New Yorkers, please tell me what is wrong with these directions. Nothing is wrong with your directions. The problem is that they aren't roads, bridges and tunnels. They're long parking lots. Like when it take you 3 hours in bumper-to-bumper traffic just to cross Staten Island and the Verrazano... You can be stuck in traffic up on the bridge and watch your ship sail out of the harbor. At least you'll get good pictures, even if you miss the cruise. --Tom |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Surfer E2468" wrote Going out of red hook is like sailing from philadelphia,would have to think several times about sailing from either one,do not want to take a risk that big The Philadelphia passenger terminal is part of the Philadelphia Naval Base. It is a military installation and as those things go, probably more secure than most ports in terms of passenger safety and parking. I'm pretty sure from your post that you have never been there. The terminal itself is a beautiful brick structure. You take a shuttle bus from teh parking lot (free) and when you arive, you are usually freeted by either a Colonial Drum and FIfe Corps or a group of Mummers. Ben Franklin is usually in attendance welcoming you to Philadelphia. There are plenty of check-in stations and once you go through that, there is a new, modern walkway that takes you to the ship. Elevators and escalators are available. It is a shame that there aren't more ships sailing out ofPhiladelphia because it is a fine facilty that is run very well. -- George in PA http://www.countryside-travel.com Miracle in May - http://www.cruisemaster.com/miracle.htm The Mother of All Group Cruises 2 - http://www.moagc2.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Think YOUR Cruise Was Bad? | Chrissy Cruiser | Cruises | 5 | February 14th, 2005 07:31 PM |
HAL 2006 Deploys 13 Ships, All 7 Continents! | Ray Goldenberg | Cruises | 0 | February 9th, 2005 04:52 PM |
Cruise Ships to Serve as Floating Hotels! | Ray Goldenberg | Cruises | 9 | February 9th, 2005 02:53 AM |
holland america cruise holland america cruise line alaska cruise holland america holland america cruise ship | Islam Promote Peace | Cruises | 3 | July 31st, 2004 10:31 PM |