Heidi13

When we received the last YF vaccinations in 2015, the doctor used our Health Canada data when reviewing the risk of contracting serious disease, including multi-organ failure from the vaccine. Can't recall what the numbers were at that time, but just checked and they state 2 cases per 100,000 (60 - 69) and 3 cases per 100,000 (>70). Overall, about 65% of these serious illness cases are fatal. Although the risks increase significantly at 60, I agree they are still fairly low. That's why it is important knowing exactly where you are going, so you can accurately determine the risk of contracting YF and compare to the vaccine risk. Based on a risk analysis, which considers the frequency and consequence, I personally don't consider the concerns with the YF vaccine to be overblown. Although the frequency of issues is low, the potential consequences are high, with the resultant being a moderate risk.

There were perks, which from memory included reduced deposit and a discount on the base fare, but zero OBC. May have changed, as we booked the 2015 WC in 2013.

When providing access to the Bridge while underway, I don't see a need for enhanced security measures. Normally visitors would be provided some basic guidelines prior to the visit, which can include don't touch and don't distract the actual watchkeepers. Bridge visits will normally have the Master or an additional officer conduct the tour, as the watchkeepers remain focused on navigation.

Every year the weather systems change. Having spent 35+ yrs working on this coast, I have experienced significant NW storms as early as May. In all my years working this coast, I've experienced at least one 40 kt + storm each month of the year. Since you allude to being a "Blue Water Sailor" you should know that the sea state is not just caused by wind waves, from the prevailing winds, but also swell from weather systems that can be many thousands of miles distant. Since Alaska cruising also involves coastal cruising, the sea state can also be impacted by shoaling waters, especially in areas such as Hecate Strait. I have made hundreds of crossing of Hecate Strait in summer, and while most were calmer than the winter storms, few were devoid of wind waves/swell. In my experience, you have just as much chance of experiencing snotty weather in June/July as mid-late August.

Minus 40 C - that's inhuman. Move to the West Coast, as we complain, and have to wear long trousers, when the thermometer drops to zero.😁

Varies by cruise line. We booked the 2015 Princess WC onboard a previous cruise, and the perks did NOT include OBC.

For those of us that don't cruise Holland America, what is POP dinners.

As I posted previously, please visit a specialised travel medical professional, who has access to the latest WHO recommendations. During our doctor visits, they researched the latest recommendations for each specific area we were visiting. In many cases, cities were low risk, the risks increased when you left suburbia and into the bush.

I have probably received more YF vaccines than most posters. Never had an issue with any of them, with my last one being at 55. Now at 67, based on the risks of the live vaccine, I will never get another YF vaccine. Personally, I prefer to research risks rather than the experiences of a tiny group of recipients. Rather than polling CC posters, I suggest discussing the risks with a specialised medical professional.

I certainly hope the medical professionals giving you the YF vaccination clearly outlines that YF is a live vaccine and the risks increase significantly when over 60. If you are privy to the same information I have been provided, you are braver than me. I have received multiple YF shots since being a teenager, but at 67 would never accept the potential risks of receiving a live vaccine, with the inherent life-threatening risks. Stating you only required a COVID booster for a World Cruise is meaningless without providing information on your previous vaccinations and itinerary. BTW - if you visit a competent travel medicine doctor, they don't just ask for your itinerary (ports of call), they want specific details on any tours and overland tours you are planning. Surely, your family doctor and county health department asked these questions. Our pre-World Cruise cruise visits to a specialist doctor lasted about 1 hr, while they researched every port and tour. Yes, we have completed 3 RTW trips and had to cancel another one. I also spent 35+ years at sea.

The reason the OP is dreading the YF vaccination is because it is a live vaccine and the risks for those over 60 increase significantly. When over 60, the risks are increasingly potentially life threatening. Having received my first YF vaccine at only 17, I have received a number of boosters at 10 yr intervals. My last vaccine was at 55 yrs of age, when they advised the vaccine was good for life, but they had no definitive proof that previous vaccines would be included in the new validity. Since there was no guarantee my previous vaccinations would be accepted by all countries we planned to visit, I opted to get another dose. Remember, when it comes to vaccines, the final decision isn't your country's medical opinion, it is the opinion of the immigration official in each country you visit.

The only Shorex we booked was the Hunter Valley tour from Sydney. Brilliant tour, but there was only 4 pax. All other ports in Aus/NZ we did small group private tours, which were exceptional.

The determining factor for Bridge visits is first and foremost the Ship's Security Plan (SSP), which is a requirement of the ISPS Code. If the SSP provides any restrictions on Bridge visits, the Master must comply, lest s/he is committing a serious non-compliance. On many ships, Bridge visits are restricted to when the ship is in port. The Viking SSP obviously gives the Master significantly more latitude in approving Bridge visits. Therefore, provided the SSP does not prohibit them, every visitor to the Bridge is at the Master's discretion. Having been brought up on pax vessels and having conducted Bridge visits every 1/2 hr on sea days, I was always comfortable having pax visit. However, many Masters were not so comfortable.

My favourite Alaska cruises were my first seasons working on the original Princess ships - Island Princess and Sun Princess (Spirit of London). They had about 700 pax and we rarely had more than 2 ships in port. Lots of space aboard the ships and ports weren't crowded. Unfortunately, those days will probably never return. As a pax, in Alaska, we have sailed on Sun Princess, Island/Coral Princess and Diamond/Sapphire Princess. The Sun Class had the worst pax/space ratio, so were the most crowded. The other 4 ships were larger, with Diamond/Sapphire having a few more pax and Island/Coral having less, providing better pax/space ratios onboard, so less crowding. Also did one cruise with RCI, on Radiance, as I knew the Captain. Didn't enjoy that one, which was my only Alaska cruise that didn't visit Glacier Bay. Another consideration for mega ships, is which prime viewing areas are restricted to Suites/Elite pax, etc and/or additional fee areas. With Princess, once they introduced the Sanctuary, those prime areas required an additional fee. In Glacier Bay, it was a significant charge. For photographers, what open decks are available that don't have glass screens. On Island/Coral, I didn't use the upper fwd decks because of the high screens, preferring the fwd decks below the Bridge. Personally, I now prefer ships with a max of 1,000 pax and pax/space ratios of > 50. Unfortunately, none of the mainstream lines meet this criteria, so if sticking to my preference, I am limited to premium/luxury lines. If looking for an exceptional BC Coastal/Alaska experience, seeing most of the Inside Passages, your other option is checking out the local ferry schedules. Alaska State ferries operate from Washington State, up the BC Coast to Alaska. Although BC Ferries no longer provide service from the Lower Mainland, they have a daily daylight sailing between Port Hardy (north tip Vancouver Island to Prince Rupert). It alternates north/south daily through the summer. The route is spectacular, having completed it way too many times, both by cruise ship and ferry.

The air conditioning may not be the root cause, as somebody had to bring the virus onboard. However, the air conditioning is a contributing factor, as in addition to cooling the air, it lowers the total humidity. Less humid air dries out the membranes in the nose, which is your defence against airbourne viruses, etc. If you don't use a nasal spray you increase the risk of contracting an airbourne virus.

Glacier Bay is a National Park operated by the Parks Service. They issue requests for proposal to the cruise industry to apply for entry permits. Permits are valid for 10-years and were last issued about 2019. Princess and HAL have the most permits, and from memory, NCL, Cunard, Seabourn and Viking also have some permits. RCL were offered permits, but declined, so no RCI ships visit Glacier Bay. Ships are normally limited to 2 vessels per day, which can be restricted to 1 vessel early/late season. The size of the ship, has minimal impact on whether the ship will sail, or how much of the Inside Passage the ship navigates. The largest Princess ships, the Royal Class, do not sail through Seymour Narrows and the Canadian Inside Passage. The reason is not the size, but the fact the ships do not handle well, as Princess went cheap with propulsion and manoeuvring equipment. Back in the 70's and 80's Alaska cruises sailed the entire Inside Passage, but this required 2 Canadian pilots for 48 hrs, US Pilots for most of the remainder and lots of additional fuel. To provide perspective, on 7-day R/T Vancouver cruises, I spent only 6 hrs a week on the Bridge without a pilot aboard. As the size of ships increased and cost cutting became the norm, they cut the top half of the Canadian Inside Passage, saving 50% of the pilotage fees and reducing fuel consumption. Cutting some of the Alaska Inside Passage saved additional pilotage fees. Some smaller ships do still sail the total Inside Passage, but they are usually the very small expedition ships. Entering Glacier Bay is based on permits, not the size of the ship. However, some of the very smaller expedition ships are US Flagged, and never having worked on US tonnage, I have no experience on whether they get preferential treatment. On foreign-flagged tonnage, the size of the ship has zero impact on entering the bay. This is from completing 2-seaons working Alaska cruises on the Bridge, then 30+ years working on the Canadian West Coast. Clearly the advice provided by the 3-cruise rookies isn't overly accurate.

Welcome to cruise critic. Cruise options Each cruise has pros and cons, so it will depend on your preferences. At first glance, the earlier cruise seems to be the better option, as in addition to the usual SE Alaska ports, it visits Hubbard Glacier. Here are a few pros/cons to consider. 3/5/25 Cruise - based on the itinerary on the Princess website, it shows sailing down to Juan de Fuca and up the Pacific Ocean. With a 16:00 departure from Vancouver, this should provide reasonable scenic cruising until darkness about 21:00. However, you have 2-days at sea in the Pacific Ocean, which has the potential for a rough start to the cruise. Sitka is definitely a positive, especially with the Russian heritage. Hubbard Glacier, especially so early in the season is probably at best 50/50, due to ice in the water. The probability of missing Hubbard is much higher early season. Icy Point Straight is also a positive. 28/5/25 Cruise - this will spend less time in open ocean and also visits the spectacular College Fjord. As an additional benefit, in Whittier you can book the Phillip's 26-glaciers tour, which starts a short walk from the dock. This is an amazing cruise that gets much closer to numerous glaciers. Still a bit early for salmon running, but you should see more wildlife than early May. Been to all the SE Alaska ports well over a couple dozen times and still enjoy going back, so I expect you will have no issues with a 2nd visit. This cruise will complete the Canadian Inside Passage between the mainland and Vancouver Island mostly in daylight, which is exceptional scenic cruising. With respect to driving the Rockies, if flying BA, you can fly into Vancouver and return from Calgary. For a vehicle, you can hire a car or a small motorhome (caravan). Having driven the Rockies multiple times with a Ford F-350 or F-450 and a 41' 5th wheel trailer, both options are viable. My concern with the earlier cruise is the potential for snow at higher elevations and potentially on some of the mountain passes. Mid-June would definitely be a better time for the Rockies drive and seeing wildlife. Overall, although missing Sitka is a huge negative, in my opinion, the positives for the Rockies tour and seeing College Fjord outweigh missing Sitka.

Lots of factors determine how close you get to the glaciers, with the ship's tonnage not really being a factor. The key factors are ice in the water, the ship's hull rating and the presence of marine life, which can preclude any vessel access. The mega ships and medium sized cruise ships generally have basic ice class hulls in accordance with their Classification Society. These ships cannot operate in ice, except occasional small bergy bits. You will find small expedition ships with ice classifications in accordance with the IMO Polar Code that can operate in new summer ice. These ships would have no problems accessing the Alaska glaciers. However, they are considerably more expensive. The time of year and itinerary are also huge factors. In early season, you have a higher probability of not getting up to Hubbard Glacier and same with Tracy Arm. Whereas, Glacier Bay is almost guaranteed to see at least 1 glacier. One is often closed due to marine life, but 2 others are normally available, throughout the entire season. In working 2 full Alaska seasons + almost a dozen cruises as a pax, I have never failed to get into Glacier Bay, have only made it into Tracy Arm once and missed Hubbard about 3 times. With respect to the height of lounges above the water line, it may be a consideration for the smallest of the expedition ships, but for any vessel of 500 + pax, I'll suggest it isn't a factor worth considering. I'll suggest the pax/space ratio is of significantly higher concern. It doesn't matter how nice the lounges are, if you are sharing them with thousands of fellow pax. Smaller ships generally have considerably more space per pax, so you have more prime viewing areas per pax. When cruising Alaska, for me it is all about the scenery, so I'm not concerned how many activities the ship offers. Cruising close to the Solstice also provides many hours of daylight to enjoy the scenery, when cruising inland passages.

It is possible, but not really practical.

The definitive word is "Tried". Since navigable waters are under Federal jurisdiction, the Provincial Govt can try, but they do not have jurisdiction.

Both inside and outside routings are navigationally acceptable options for most ships, with the biggest differences being risk, costs and crew fatigue. For a vessel steaming south down Hecate Strait, bound for Victoria, the outside route is the preferred option, as it will have lower costs (fuel and pilotage), lower risks (significantly less confined navigation) and causes significantly less crew fatigue. The vessel remains in open waters at a constant speed until just prior to arrival Victoria. This provides optimum fuel consumption. The pilotage is short, as the pilot is picked up a couple miles from the breakwater at Brotchie Ledge. When in open waters, the Bridge and Engine Control Room (ECR) manning is at the lowest level (probably identified as green), which only requires the regular watchkeeping officers and ratings. For the same vessel to navigate the inside passage to Victoria, it is compulsory pilotage from about Pine Island (top end Vancouver Island) to alongside the Ogden Point berth. This will take 17 to 24 hrs depending on slack water at Seymour and the ship's speed. Therefore, the ship is paying 2 pilots for up to 24 hrs. Note - pilots are an expensive addition to the Bridge Team. Being confined waters, the navigation risks increase significantly. Therefore, with increased navigation risks, the Bridge and ECR manning is increased. I don't have access to the latest Carnival procedures, but it is probably "Red" zone for most of the route. This requires additional resources, including the Master or Staff Captain on the Bridge and Chief Engineer or Staff Engineer in the ECR. The benefit of the inside passage, especially if it is a daylight sailing is the spectacular scenery. Sadly, cost cutting has eliminated most of the Inside Passage, as back in the early days of Alaska Cruising, ships used the entire BC Inside Passage that starts at Grenville Channel, just south of Prince Rupert.

Connectivity may depend on whether the ship is still using the geostationary satellites, or if they have a Starlink system. As you proceed further north in Alaska, the altitude of the geostationary satellites reduces, and with mountainous terrain, you have increased potential for the signals being blocked. Over the years we have received a signal almost everywhere except alongside the Railway Dock in Skagway. Even on the large Princess Grand Class ships, we didn't get a signal when alongside that berth. Haven't experienced Starlink, but with the ever increasing number of satellites being launched, I anticipate they should have a reasonable chance of continuous connectivity. With respect to sailing between Kodiak and Dutch Harbour, you have open waters to the south, so if using geostationary satellites, while they will have low altitude, you should not have any obstructions to block the satellite signals. If Starlink, with the route being mostly open waters, you should get some visible satellites, so I expect you would receive connectivity.

The Captain and Bridge Team didn't take a wrong turn, as without a Coast Pilot onboard, the Master cannot enter compulsory pilotage waters. If the Ops Office or vessel hadn't ordered the pilot, BC Coast Pilots don't have any based in Port Hardy, they send them up from Vancouver/Victoria, as required. Large cruise ships also need senior 5 yr + pilots, and since the pilotage is 12 hrs +, they require 2 pilots. The chance of having 2 additional senior pilots sitting in Port Hardy is negligible, so the only option is going down the coast and entering Juan de Fuca.

With respect to Viking and the cruise lines/shipping companies I worked for, I wouldn't agree that the Marine Industry is manned on the "Boeing" model, as almost all crew are responsible for the end product. As the Chief posted, manning agencies employed by the cruise lines, in the countries that supply large quantities of hotel ratings, are little more than personnel departments specialising in recruitment. With Viking, the manning agencies recommend employees, who must pass 2 company interviews before they commence onboard training and familiarisation. They are only hired upon completion of the ship based training, with a number not even making it to this stage. (As per Director Hotel Ops, who served on Viking Sun as GM for a number of weeks) The manning agencies are involved in the recruitment phase and once hired by the cruise line, the ratings only work for a single employer, who provides all the tools, equipment and safety gear to perform the role. All of these factors do not meet my definition of a contractor, who is normally responsible to providing their own equipment, works for multiple employers and is responsible for their own transportation. The ratings, if not maintaining the required standards for the position will be terminated by the cruise line, not the manning agency. It will be similar for Deck & Engineering Officers supplied by the ship manager. If any officer is not meeting the required standards outlined in the SMS, they will be returned to the ship manager and replaced by a new officer.

Providing the itinerary will assist in proving an informed reply to your question. Any additional information on cancelled ports since the itinerary was first published will also help.