Great Western Coffee Shop

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57527891)


Oh dear ...

I used to be in the "No way" category ... but that was in the last millennium.  Odd really as I loved day trips out on Waverley and her cousins on the Clyde.  Our first "Perl Whirl" in 2000 converted us.

Cruising will be very different, I suspect, when we return (which is booked) but care has been taken in our own arrangements to allow for cancellations as the industry and the holidays falter back.  Due to our circumstances, that IS easier for us than for many people, for which I'm thankful.

In another story, I noted that a cruise from Southampton was unable to dock at Greenock ...

Well ...


I think that tells me that very few of our members cruise or are likely to do so!   I wonder how many of you might go on a "land cruise" by train ...

Indeed….the views are constantly *changing* on a land cruise. A big difference

Restrictions being suitably eased, I'm seriously thinking of a Mosel/Rhine river cruise next year and boss lady seems to be in agreement.  They have the advantage of constantly changing beautiful scenery, not just open sea, and interesting stops every day.  The idea had been with me for a while and watching a recent TV program on Mosel river cruises rather helped me to make my mind up.
Land cruises by train are also very much on the agenda, probably UK first but, in the words of Arthur Daley, "the world is our lobster"!

I'm picky on cruise itineraries.  For me what is important is the port days - interesting places and plenty of time in port.  Then the occasional sea days let me rest between the port days.  This means I prefer the smaller cruise ships - not those big new things that look like blocks of flats and that only visit a limited number of ports.

But I also know people who prefer sea days because they enjoy the care-free pampering.  That's just not for me.

Yes ... think I follow that. But yet of all the things we (Lisa and I) do, these tend to be the impulse buys and from the heart rather than the head. Turns out we fancy a real eclectic mixture; no problems in deciding between us either.

Been away - so missed this.

My wife and daughter are cruise veterans, but you will never get me on board an ocean-going ship! I am more of a land cruise person.

The ladies of the household had booed to go on a 'Search for the Northern Lights' cruise back in October 2020; that was obviously cancelled and they were re-booked on the equivalent 2021 cruise. That was cancelled about 10 days ago and they have been re-booked on the 2022 version.

I did manage a cruise 'up the Inside Passage' (British Columbia) back in 2002, but that was part of a longer itinerary. For now, I'll stick to the IOW or CalMac ferries.

I was opposed to cruising on health and hygiene grounds long before the present pandemic.
Large numbers of people crammed together asks for illness to spread. Norovirus and related illness were a recurring feature of cruises.
Apart from crowding, I blame the spread of infections on two factors.
Firstly low temperature laundry processes. Modern washing machines and detergents can render bed linen etc. clean LOOKING at 40 degrees or even less. A temperature too low to kill bacteria.

Secondly, poor standards of food hygiene with many catering staff from countries with flexible standards. Lack of refrigerated displays for help yourself buffets and the like.

Add to this the risks of mechanical breakdowns and failures, that even if not dangerous can certainly spoil a holiday.

Here is a nice video taken on a cruise ship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jvx70ebtil0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jvx70ebtil0)

I've been on 5 cruises with P&O (the last 2 years ago) and long before Covid was even a thought, hand-sanitising was strictly enforced on entering the dining rooms and widely used when entering the food servery areas in the buffets.

Cleanliness on board always seemed pretty good to me and I never experienced any onboard food-poisoning outbreaks or anything else.

As usual, it seems to me that you look for the negative in order to support your belligerent views, rather than the reality, which is that the issues you describe (including a cruise ship encountering a storm) are fairly rare.

My experience of the latter is that it's sometimes a lot rougher outside than the ship will make you feel it is.

Everything is a risk.  I note that with up to 5,200 guests on Iona (the ship we are sailing on) at normal times, and 1,800 crew, over 8 days, you'll have 56,000 person days on board.  Average UK life expectancy is just over 80 years - about 29,000 days.  So on that cruise, on the law of averages, you must expect people to pass away. People typically don't start if they're really sick - so chances are perhaps lowered.  Average UK passenger cruise age is 57 - so perhaps chances are increased.  I am aware of the stats, and of people passing during past cruises I have taken.

On the less dramatic side of scratched, bruises, sickness including from food or airborne infections - tend to happen more frequently, don't they, when you're away from daily routine?   I am satisfied that they are dealt with well on the cruises we have been on - with major reputable lines. That's not only in presentation to the guests (who could soon be thin on the ground if they were not!) but also in what actually happens.

I see nothing "belligerent" in my views. I simply stated that I am opposed to cruises for the reasons given.
If others wish to cruise then that is up to them.

I would not ban cruises in general, the fuel consumption is regrettable but that is true of many other things also.

I would support a ban on cruise ships visiting certain locations where significant harm results. Examples include Venice (the wakes of huge ships even moving very slowly cause flooding) and remote locations where endangered wildlife is disturbed, or fragile ecosystems damaged by sheer numbers of visitors.

Well, I'm sure the industry heaves a huge sigh of relief at that news  ;)

Grahame, will be interested to hear your impressions on Iona  :)

With a none-landing cruise next month, I'm sure it will one very difficult to avoid my posts describing the experience in many of my usual places  ;D

A friend of mine has made many lengthy voyages as a passenger on a cargo ship, and they speak well of this mode of transport.
Facilities are less than on a liner, but the cabins are often bigger and better, and the atmosphere more relaxed. Food is limited in choice but of excellent quality. Soft drinks and food included, alcoholic drink is extra but at duty free prices not bar prices.

One crossing was in very bad weather, and verging upon dangerous, but others have been pleasant.

They have also traveled on a dual purpose ship that carried a dozen shipping containers, deck cargo, and about 50 passengers. Such ships serve the smaller islands in many parts of the world.

 Any "Port" in a storm eh Broadgage? ;)

Following from my earlier post on this thread, if any Coffee Shop members have any experience of river cruises in Europe, I'd be interested in their observations....good, bad and ugly!

Grahame is, of course, quite right............everything is a risk, but most people don't understand risk anyway. Most people do not accept that they at greater risk of death on the M1 on the way to Luton Airport than on the Airbus (or Boeing 737 even !) flying from there to Ibiza. The blood clots saga with the Astra Zeneca vaccine is another example.

(https://i.postimg.cc/d3LGZvyL/JWN-0194.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/1V18bkMQ)


There are much more obvious ways to demonstrate risk reduction on a cruise............(for johnneyw's info this was on the Nile !) Absolutely no one was in the slightest bit concerned about their safety on this trip !