A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Cruises
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Brooklyn Welcomes Cruise Ships!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 15th, 2005, 02:41 PM
Ray Goldenberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brooklyn Welcomes Cruise Ships!

Hi Everyone,

I have learned that starting in April 2006 Carnival Corporation’s P&O
Princess Cruises International division will relocate all New York
calls to the new Brooklyn cruise terminal. This division includes
Princess and Cunard. Manhattan will no longer be used. The initial
ships will be the Queen Mary 2 & the new Crown Princess. This move
will relieve the congestion at the Manhattan cruise piers. If you
have missed any of my news' postings, they are available on my web
site.

Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com
  #2  
Old April 15th, 2005, 03:30 PM
Sue and Kevin Mullen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Ray Goldenberg wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I have learned that starting in April 2006 Carnival Corporation’s P&O
Princess Cruises International division will relocate all New York
calls to the new Brooklyn cruise terminal. This division includes
Princess and Cunard. Manhattan will no longer be used. The initial
ships will be the Queen Mary 2 & the new Crown Princess.


This is what I read in Cruise News Daily yesterday and posted about in
a different thread. Getting the info from you, a second source, I
guess it is really true.

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


  #3  
Old April 16th, 2005, 07:44 AM
Thomas Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.

--
I'm Tom Smith, and I approved this message.


  #4  
Old April 16th, 2005, 01:24 PM
Tom K
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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


  #5  
Old April 16th, 2005, 04:04 PM
Sue and Kevin Mullen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Tom K wrote:

"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.


ROTFL. Sad but very true even at midnight or 1AM.

sue
  #6  
Old April 16th, 2005, 06:12 PM
Chrissy Cruiser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:24:57 -0400, Tom K wrote:

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.


Cruel shoe, Tom, cruel shoe.
  #7  
Old April 16th, 2005, 02:23 PM
number6
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Thomas Smith wrote:



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.

--


They look good on paper ... Do the maps show the number of vehicles
using it ??? Or the lane closures ... ??? Or the construction projects
....???
Then the problem is that the exit ramp will back up ...

At least an all highway route will eliminate hijacking ...
But they still have to build a lot of access roads ...

  #8  
Old April 16th, 2005, 09:22 PM
Tom K
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"number6" wrote in message
oups.com...


They look good on paper ... Do the maps show the number of vehicles
using it ??? Or the lane closures ... ??? Or the construction projects
...???
Then the problem is that the exit ramp will back up ...

At least an all highway route will eliminate hijacking ...


Not really... when it's bumper-to-bumper traffic, the locals wander out and
have you at their mercy if you can't move.

But they still have to build a lot of access roads ...


On what "available" land?

--Tom


  #9  
Old April 16th, 2005, 04:02 PM
Sue and Kevin Mullen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Thomas Smith wrote:

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).


This sounds right, altho I don't know the exact street or exit for the
new terminal.

Folks from New Jersey can take I-278 across Staten Island
and the Verazano Narrows bridge, and end up going directly to the terminal,


Those of us coming from NJ will go over the Outerbridge or Goethals
Bridges, both tolls and very often backed up. From there we take
I-278, better known locally as the Staten Island Expressway. This road
is also most often in lousy condition and very heavy, backed up
traffic. Then you get to the Verazano bridge, $7 toll last I remember
and backed up traffic most of the time. From there we go to the BQE
which is also famous for heavy congestion. It used to be in bad shape,
but that may of changes since I was last on it.

The roads for us going to Bayonne or up to NYC are in better condition
and don't back up as much. Yes I know the Lincoln Tunnel can back up
and once you get to the pier in NYC you can sit for awhile in line.
This still is a much easier trip, then the one to the new Brooklyn
terminal will be.

unless traffic gets real fun at the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel (I-478) right
there.


Coming from NJ, going through Brooklyn, you don't go thru the tunnel.
Traffic going to the tunnel can be fun, but I haven't experienced it
for many, many years.

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.


I am not as familiar with this route, but from north Jersey I would
probably take the Lincoln Tunnel into Manhattan and then the Brooklyn
Battery Tunnel into Brooklyn.

sue
  #10  
Old April 16th, 2005, 09:39 PM
Tom K
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Sue and Kevin Mullen" wrote in message
...


Coming from NJ, going through Brooklyn, you don't go thru the tunnel.
Traffic going to the tunnel can be fun, but I haven't experienced it for
many, many years.

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.


I am not as familiar with this route, but from north Jersey I would
probably take the Lincoln Tunnel into Manhattan and then the Brooklyn
Battery Tunnel into Brooklyn.


You may actually get regional differentiation.

You may find that the Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island crowd goes with
Carnival, Princess, Cunard. And the New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Upstate NY
crowd goes with RCI, Celebrity. Simply because of the ability to get to the
pier.

--Tom


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.