After reading Marc's and other LCTr's concern over the problem with the Mariner Pod, I sent the thread to Mr. Conroy, who took his valuable time to reply. Pls see below:


Thank you for the heads up on the feedback on the changes in schedule due to the pod problem.



Let me share with you what we are up against here and if I may I would love your suggestion as how to further clarify the issue.



Rest assured we would love to have the pod fixed during the next dry-dock; unfortunately it will not be possible.



 The Voyager and Mariner have very different technology in their pods and the problems they encountered were also quite different.



The Voyager pod defect was discovered by our crew before any real damage was done primarily because of the problems we encountered on the Mariner led us to do an inspection that was not suggested by the maker. Since the defect was repaired prior to failure no damage was done so it was a matter of making repairs versus replacing critical custom made components.  



Unfortunately the Mariner had a hidden defect in the way the insulation for the motor was mounted in the pod which the manufacturer was aware of but failed to notify us or any of the other users of the system. Due to this defect a portion of the insulation on one of the pods separated from its mounting and fell in the windings damaging 1/2 of the electric motors mounted in the pod.



The insulation in both pods has been modified and the damaged pod was repaired and has been certified by the Bureau Veritas (the Safety Society for the Flag State) to operate but to insure a safety margin it will be run at only 50% of full power. With one pod operating at 50% output and the other pod running at full power the ship can make a maximum speed of 18 knots versus the 19.5 to 21 knots (depending on sea conditions) with both pods functioning fully.



We typically schedule the ships at 18.5 knots and have the extra power available to counter sea conditions or to further maximize the time in port. We are now scheduling at 17.5 knots with only about .5 knots margin so we were required to make the adjustments that we just released.



The guest in the note mentions the arrival change in Hong Kong. We could actually make the distance between Hong Kong and Shanghai even at the adjusted speed, unfortunately due to heavy traffic the port of Shanghai only allows arrival and departures to take place at slack tide period.



We have order a replacement electric motor for the damaged one but unfortunately it takes 9 months to build it and then another 4 months to install inside the pod housing.



To mitigate the impact of these repairs and not have the ship laid up for 3 to 7 months we have actually order a complete new pod which is currently under construction in France. This new pod will take 16 months to build and 10 days to install so to be safe and to insure we will not be forced to cancel additional cruises; we will change it either immediately after the 2008 Alaska season or in January 2009 prior to the Circle South America voyage.



Once to new pod is install we will ship the damaged pod back to the manufacturer and have it rebuilt and stored in a ready to install state. That way if we have any other problems with the system it will be a mater of days to make the repair rather then a matter of months.



In the meanwhile we have planned the 2008 schedule taking the adjusted speed into consideration so we can maximize the port visits. This speed is the same speed most other ships are scheduled at some when done in advance the adjustments will be fairly minor.



Again thank you for bringing this to my attention and sorry for the long response but there is no quick solution to this issue.



Kindest personal regards,



Mark  



Mark S. Conroy │  President

Wes, How absolutly terrific that you took the time to ask the question. While some of us might be disappointed that the speed must be reduced it is always beneficial to have an understanding of what the problem is and what Regent is doing about it. It does appear that Regent is doing its best under the circumstances. Would be interesting to know what kind of discussions Regent has had with the manufacturer. Suspect this will get around the internet very fast but it is LCT and the Brown & Keene cruisers who know first.

Many "atta boys" to you.

Wes; You might want to post this over on cruisecritic. That's where all the consternation exists. Some folks are really stirring the pot on the issue.

Doug, thanks did about ten min ago..hooah..r/wes

Wes, thank you so much for getting through to Mark Conroy. On cc, with perhaps a wider audience of non-participants/lurkers (who may hear just the bad stuff, and equate minor changes as major ones when they are not) it will quell any rumors posted, and prevent a serious public relations set-back for Regent. Nothing better than to get an answer from the top!
I applaud Mark Conroy for taking the time to respond. Don't know what other line might give a personal response from the president of the company.

Mark,

Another "thank you."

Cerinda

[url=http://www.TickerFactory.com/]

Thank you so much for following up and posting the thoughtful, thorough response.

Given the mess-up in the bathroom construction on the Mariner (bathtubs with sills 6" too high and ceilings correspondingly 6" too low vs. specifications) and now the pod problem that (a) wasn't flagged for the ships with the problem and (b) takes more than a year (????) to either repair or replace, I'd assume Regent isn't looking for more new ships from the manufacturer of the Mariner.

I am booked on PANDA but won't book anything else on Mariner until this problem is resolved. Too bad as she's my favorite of the Regent ships. Not so much better, though, that I want to put up with the delays inherent in the pod problem vis-a-vis port stops.

Cheers, Anne

Wes...thanks for going to the "top"!

I will be on the Mariner with Mr. Conroy in a few weeks. I'm sure he will be repeating this information then, but as someone else said - "we heard it here first!"

Wish it was an easier fix.

Margo

Many thanks, Wes, for going the extra mile for us.

Wes,
Thanks for sending that message.
I cannot conceive of another Line's chief sending a message like this one. Many Kudos to Mr. Conroy.

as for the tubs - on one of my cruises I had dinner with an Officer who told us of his Warnings to the architects about the tubs. he was looking at the plans & told one of the responsible people that, in his view, the ceilings would be too low in light of the way the tubs were designed. He did not press the issue however, and his "warnings" were not really related to the proper people.

Thanks, Wes for inquiring about this.
I am impressed with Mark Conroy's message to you (and to us).

thanks Wes - it certainly does elucidate the situation much better!

Masaki

Wes, thanks for getting the answer. So, it looks like either the Grand Pacific 2008 will be delayed or the Circle South America 2009 will be delayed. Maybe, they will delay the SA cruise enough to actually be in Rio for Carnivale. :D

I still don't understand why he blames our delayed arrival in Hong Kong on Shanghai conditions; we are leaving Shanghai the same time as in the printed brochure. Oh well, any explanation will do. ;)

Anne, the Mariner was French-built; need I say more. Sure, Chantiers de l'Atlantique built the SS France, SS Normandie, and Queen Mary II. However, the Voyager, Navigator, and all four SilverSea ships were all built in Italy.

Well, if many pax take the attitude that they will avoid Mariner until this problem is fixed, perhaps that means more specials will come down the tubes in 2008. A few price reductions would certainly help ease the pain.

Marc, I think the Chinese "play games" with the ships and the docking times. Particularly the American ships. Twice we have sat out in the ocean waiting for the Chinese to give us permission to enter the harbor. I am sure we had an appointed time but we were not allowed to enter.

A Captain once told me this is regular procedure. They give a docking time and then at the end say sorry "you have to wait". There were so many ships out in the ocean waiting for permission to enter the harbor.

We were also messed around once in the dock on clearance and then made to leave early the next day. I understood on this trip the Captain requested a dock further out and he would bus the passengers but this request was denied.

With all this power playing going on Shanghai is still a sensational port of call and well worth the hassle the ship and the guests have to go through to visit. You soon forget in a frenzy of shopping heaven and sight seeing.

My guess is with Marc Conroy's comment they had a docking slot in the original schedule but it has been changed now causing the late arrival into port. Nothing to do with the speed, if the pod was 100% the same delay would have happened.

Wendy may have hit why Regent is so quiet on these types of subjects. I have had emails asking why Regent does not do an announcement about the pod.

Probably most of the guests on the Mariner are not aware the ship has a pod problem. The majority of the schedules are not even affected, so in reality there is no problem that causes any issues for the passengers. It is only the long sea parts of a trip that cause any problems now with the itinerary. Advertise the fact a pod is not up to par and people dont book the ship when in reality it will not affect them on their cruise at all. If you take all the passengers on these ships the percentage that read these boards and are in the "know" is very very small.

An announcement about issues like this and it becomes a much bigger problem. Although I like everything to be out on the table I certainly see the reasoning for not making a big announcement about the pod.

Ngaire, yes, the docking time in Shanghai has changed. We now arrive three hours earlier at 4am instead of 7am. The departure time is still 1pm. I just wonder how this affects arrival time in Hong Kong. If it is because we must delay our departure in Shanghai for five hours allowing us to leave at 6pm insead of 1pm, that is great! However, a later departure in Shanghai has not been posted.

I was just trying to point out the inconsistency in Marc Conroy's response. It might be just a slip of the tongue in that he meant to say that Hong Kong authorities would not let us in until later.

Marc, I just reread Mark Conroys comments, your post and then my response and realised it was Hong Kong you were talking about NOT Shanghai -- SORRY. I was about to go back and redo that post, but you were TOO SPEEDY - here is your response already.

I bet he also misread your the part of your post just like I did. I am so conditioned to the problems in Shanghai he may be also and perhaps it was Hong Kong that would not let us in. It is now Chinese.

The good thing is with an arrival time of 4.00am in Shanghai now maybe we will really make it in for an early morning disembarkation.

Let me clarify to say I will (and do) happily book Regent cruises. I am so pleased with Mark Conroy's explanation, as I can better plan my trips. My travel $$$ get largely redirected rather than foregone.

I remember the October 2004 China trip with great fondness, and can also vouch for Ngaire's comments on Shanghai delays. They were a pain in the butt; in that case, we were delayed about 12 hours.

Cheers, Anne

We don't know of any other CEO from a cruise line who would take the time to respond to Wes like Mark Conroy did. To Mr. Conroy's credit, We have always found him to be approachable when a passenger has a comment or a question. The reason Regent is our favorite cruise line is due to the outstanding staff, crew and CEO. We thank them for making our cruise days with them such special ones and we hope to continue crusing with them for many years to come.

Would anyone care to comment if the pod slowness would affect an Alaskan itinerary in any perceptible way?

I just finished the full SA cruise on the Mariner. We had emails in advance about port changes due to the pod problem. While on the cruise all the changes appeared to be complications with the ports and not speed. In fact, on the revised schedule we were consistently early arriving at ports - 2 to 4 hours ahead and often the captain extended the stay. I believe they now have the average speed calculated and itineraries should now be accurate (we hope.)

To my knowledge there have been no changes to the Alaskan Itinerary due to pod speed.

We have cruised in China twice and on the second trip (2002) the government played a lot of "games" regarding clearances, schedules and docking locations. Add to that some of the tidal limitation in and out of both the port near Beijing and Shaghai and things get very complicated.

I can't remember where we were (a port between Beijing and Shaghai I think) but the officials cleared the ship then called all the tour busses back - no reason given - the captain was so upset we left as soon as we were able - very disappointing but completely out of control for anyone involved with the cruise line. In one location they made us go through security screening as we were leaving the ship - that caused quite a bit of confusion because the equipment (used for re-entering the ship area) had to be reversed - it was sort of funny how complicated it got!

In China the schedule may be more influenced by government than pods.

We just came off the March 13th Mariner cruise and had a great time. We booked for next year.
All ports were made on time and I have nothing but good things to say about the ship and crew...

No one mentioned Pods, all I ever heard was
" Sure I'LL have another glass of Wine"

billp1 - glad to hear all is well - we board on Friday - I won't mention pods either - but may utter the "W" word a few times! ;)

Re: Alaska cruises, there is an unconfirmed post on the other board that Ketchikan has been dropped and Campbell River has been added to the Southbound Alaska cruises. Several other lines have done the same thing so I am not sure if this was a "pod" decision or an attempt to vary the itinerary.

I think it's a interesting trade off, considering the weather in Ketchikan. I think all we did in port was to stand next to the rain gauge and take pictures, lol.

Well four of us along with our SO's finally met on the Mariner : Billp1,Ragmar,Esther(from CC) and RPM. As Boll said the wine flowed freely(the Chateau Neuf de Pape was awesome) I never felt any vibration and we were aft.Chef Mike is now on Mariner so you knew the food was excellent. The St Patrick's day Party on deck was a blast!
Have a great cruise Margo we sure did

Pat and Ray, I am glad you had a great cruise!! Isn't it fun meeting people in person!

The change in Alaska was not to do with the pod. The information (as best as I can remember) was there were so many ships in port that the experience would be less than stellar and they thought Campbell River would be more appealing to the passengers.

All of us at LCT know that it is the company and the great Regent experience that really makes the trip special. A change in itinerary can only improve a fantastic travel experience. MUSH on!!

Pat & Ray...thanks for the heads up on the Chateau Neuf de Pape - oen of our faves. We haven't cruised with Chef Mike -we'll look forward to that experience.