Food Quality vs. Cruise Length
 

We've cruised quite a bit over the years averaging 15 days per cruise
(some less some more). However our last 2 cruises have been 3-day
weekend things.

My impression of the food on these shorter cruises was that it was of
poorer quality than on the longer cruises we've taken.

When I say "poorer quality", I mean:
1) Presentation of the food was not as nice
2) Dishes were "simpler" - for example, the Prime Rib was simply a slab
of meat with no vegetables, rice or potatoes included
3) Fewer courses were served
4) One lunch was not edible (fish and chips cooked in oil that was cold
when the food was dropped in) although I was allowed to order something
else after my original choice was served.
5) Deserts were plain (ice cream available but no hot fudge or any
other sort of topping)

I could add other examples but you probably get the point of my post.

Is my experience unique or have you seen the same thing on the short
cruises you've taken?


Gary

Food Quality vs. Cruise Length
 

wrote:
tion of the food was not as nice
2) Dishes were "simpler" - for example, the Prime Rib was simply a slab
of meat with no vegetables, rice or potatoes included

No veggie or carby side dish offered with the prime rib? That's just
odd.

Is my experience unique or have you seen the same thing on the short
cruises you've taken?

Well, here's my impression of what's going on...but it extends farther
than the dining room. It seems that the cruiselines use their oldest
and most outdated ships on the shorter 3 and 4 day cruises. And, imho,
it seems the cruiselines tend to neglect their older builds, not
instituting the same level of service, food...overall product, that one
would experience on the newer ships. Carnival, especially, seems to do
this. Everyone says, "you haven't tried Carnival until you've tried the
'new" Carnival" which to me implies that you will get a very different
cruise on the newer ships (all, btw, doing the 7+ day itineraries) than
what you'll get on their older ships, doing the shorter cruises. RCI
also uses their older ships for the shorter cruises. Personally, I
think the quality should be consistent, fleet-wide. If someone's just
trying cruising, opting for a short 3 or 4 day cruise, and they end up
on one of the neglected (because it's old) ships, and they experience
what you did, regarding food, why would they repeat on the same line?

Anyway, just my thoughts and observations. I'm curious to see what
other folks have to say on this topic.

Lee


Gary

Food Quality vs. Cruise Length
 

Don't know if this has anything to do with it either but I'll throw it
out there. I know they used these shorter cruises to break in new
hires. They uses these ships for training. Then when their first
contract is up and they get offered another job they move to one of the
"new, longer sailing" ships. I was told this by several Carnival
employees. So if the shorter cruises are a training ground them that
might explain the food quality & quality in general. New Chefs in
training?

Food Quality vs. Cruise Length
 

"RICK DAVIS" wrote in message
...
Don't know if this has anything to do with it either but I'll throw it
out there. I know they used these shorter cruises to break in new
hires. They uses these ships for training. Then when their first
contract is up and they get offered another job they move to one of the
"new, longer sailing" ships. I was told this by several Carnival
employees. So if the shorter cruises are a training ground them that
might explain the food quality & quality in general. New Chefs in
training?


I figured the training was done on the older ships. About 6 years ago, we
went on the Tropicale (I believe one of its last Carninval voyages) for $199
each for 4 days. A good deal, so well took 'em up. ANyway, I started playing
blackjack whre I'd always broke about even. I came back home with a couple
hundred more than I left with and spent $$ on lots of other things too! I
knew then that the edalers were training! Hasn't happened since!!!!

Food Quality vs. Cruise Length
 

I really believe that another thing comes into play... where the ship gets
it's provisions. We've been on the same ship (Constellation) 3 times
sailing different length cruises, from different locations.

Food on the San Juan sailing was good... not great, but good. Service was a
bit "spotty". 7 Night sailing.
Food on the NY sailing to New England/Canada was superb... and so was the
service. NY provisions are probably top end. 11 Night sailing.
Food on the Norway sailing out of England was not even as good as the San
Juan sailing.... not sure how good the provisions out of England typically
are. 14 Night sailing.

--Tom

wrote in message
oups.com...
We've cruised quite a bit over the years averaging 15 days per cruise
(some less some more). However our last 2 cruises have been 3-day
weekend things.

My impression of the food on these shorter cruises was that it was of
poorer quality than on the longer cruises we've taken.

When I say "poorer quality", I mean:
1) Presentation of the food was not as nice
2) Dishes were "simpler" - for example, the Prime Rib was simply a slab
of meat with no vegetables, rice or potatoes included
3) Fewer courses were served
4) One lunch was not edible (fish and chips cooked in oil that was cold
when the food was dropped in) although I was allowed to order something
else after my original choice was served.
5) Deserts were plain (ice cream available but no hot fudge or any
other sort of topping)

I could add other examples but you probably get the point of my post.

Is my experience unique or have you seen the same thing on the short
cruises you've taken?


Gary

Food Quality vs. Cruise Length