The-Inside-Cabin

Alaska wasn't nearly as dressy as the Caribbean in our experience. You have a little more room in your luggage when you aren't packing jeans, sweaters, and fleece.

Interesting, I have never done a Caribbean cruise - I would have expected them to be less formal, with everyone wearing shorts and swimwear all day...

Customs and immigration formalities are normally addressed at the first port of entry encountered when entering or returning to a country. So, as an example, on a Western Caribbean cruise that stops at Key Largo, clearance is conducted there, not in Fort Lauderdale. The same applies in this case, where Halifax is the port of entry to Canada and customs and immigration requirements should addressed.

 

 

 

Otherwise, what is to stop a returning Canadian from making purchases in the US far in excess of allowed amounts and get off the ship with them in Halifax to ship home, or even take home if they lived in Halifax? Waiting for clearance in Montreal would be closing the barn door well after the horses have bolted.

A while back on a 4 day from Vancouver to LA, stopped in San Francisco, cleared immigration in San Francisco, but did nothing with customs till LA. We could have easily taken stuff off in San Francisco if we wanted to.....I guess they don't think the effort is worth it

The items that may change on the Canadian declaration after you visit Bar Harbor are shown below. Most people pretty much know if they are planning on buying more than their allowance before they arrive in Bar Harbor. If they change their mind, ( decide to buy a case of wine in Bar Harbor) then they can submit an updated form - they will tear up the old and replace with the new.

It would only be erroneous if you didn't submit an updated form. There is no penalty for submitting incorrect forms to HAL....only if you allow HAL to submit the incorrect form on arrival in Halifax...but you have plenty of time to submit a new form if you bought something in Bar Harbor you have to declare.

This way HAL can process the limited number of changed forms the night before Halifax rather than the entire ship.

If you didn't turn in any form, they would never figure it out until you left Bar Harbor anyway and then they would hunt you down

Most people have a pretty good idea if they plan on buying wine or cigarettes in Bar Harbor before they arrive.

The following duty-free allowances apply to each visitor entering into Canada:

 Gifts (excludes alcohol and tobacco) valued at no more than CAN$60 each.

 1.5 L of wine or 1.14 L of liquor or

24 x 355 ml cans or bottles (8.5 L) of beer or ale.

200 cigarettes, 200 tobacco sticks, 50 cigars or cigarillos and

200 grams of manufactured tob

On our recent cruise from Boston, we filled out the form as others mentioned and we never saw a Canadian customs/immigration person in Halifax. When we left the ship in Quebec....no customs there either.

On our first cruise on the Nieuw Amsterdam last November, the tuxedo percentage was between 20% & 25% of the male passengers. Quite literally in the hundreds. It was the dressiest cruise we've seen in years. I posted about it in my live from.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=44826819&postcount=234

 

There was a pretty big compliment of European passengers and you saw a fair number of ties and a lot of jackets, even on smart casual nights. The only way we would have seen only 5-10 tuxes would have been to close our eyes a few minutes after leaving the cabin. :)

 

We sailed on the NA a few weeks later. It wasn't as dressy, but it was still a pretty good percentage. Perhaps we just end up on more formal ships, but I've never seen just 5-10 guys in tuxedos.

 

On both those cruises, the majority of men wore suits, but most everyone else looked nice as well. Also, they were enforcing the dress code at the MDR and Pinnacle Grill doors. There were people from CC on all three of the weeks, so there's corroboration if you really need it beyond what I put in my two live from reports.

Glad to here you saw that many tuxes....my experience in last 12 months was Hawaii and New England....maybe not the best cruises fir more tuxes. I will be in Alaska soon...will let you know what I see there...

Slacks/Button up/Sport coat alright or is a tuxedo a requirement?

Jacket and tie is minimum standard expected.. You may see 5 -10 tuxedos TOTAL on a good night any more....vast majority wear jacket and tie.....very few people attempt entry to MDR In less.......but...YMMV depending on who is at the MDR door .....and what they have been told by the Bosses....no way to tell in advance what the lowest acceptable standard is on any particular cruise....

Get a jacket that fits......wearing the one from 10 years ago is always too small

bring a jacket and tie and cruise worry free

Here is a tux by some guy named Armani....

http://cdn.yoox.biz/49/49133366fv_13_n_f.jpg

That's $28.34 per night's wear if you have 3 formal nights, $42.50 per night's wear if you have 2.

 

 

 

That's more than double the Hotel Service Charge or 3/4 average alcohol-based drinks per night's wear. Working with my budget, that's not really economical for clothes you can't keep. I'd rather pack my own non-formal but still nice clothes than waste $42.50/night. But each to their own.[/

 

I don't waste money on alcohol so I guess it all evens out......

Just rented my tux for next week...$85.00.....$15 more for shoes if you want them.......no need to pack anything or worry about what will be acceptable .....when you stack this cost against the price of your vacation.....pretty small percentage wise.

Just printed out my boarding passes for my cruise next week.....it still calls them formal nights on the boarding pass.....

I am taking my first HAL cruise next month to Alaska on the Amsterdam and wanted to get a feel for what HAL and other cruisers consider "formal" wear. I'm in my 30's and am very fashion forward. I tend to purchase higher end clothing and ties don't often make an appearance in runway shows anymore - sport coats and tuxedos might as well be a death sentence for a designer. For formal night, would this suit featured at fashion week in Milan from Fendi for their spring/summer collection be fine for the MDR?

HAL dress code requires a jacket/ tie....so that design would not be acceptable but I would be surprised if they turned you away if you wore that outfit..

You can rent formal clothes online and they will be waiting for you in you cabin. I will do that on shorter cruises.

I really enjoy the HAL production shows. If you enjoy Broadway musicals you will probably enjoy them. But while the shows are enjoyable, they are not at the same level, but plenty good. Much depends on the size of the ship. Bigger ships have larger stages and the shows appear more grand....doing musicals on a small stage is never good as you tend to hear the dancers clomping around....as with any musical, the shows are loud. (so you can't hear the dancers) so suggest you sit in the back or bring foam ear plugs if that is a problem....

Thanks for the report! Do you recall if those were the same nights as the ship entertainer production shows?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was only checked out in the Otter on June 6. Best to wait for the investigation before you label him seasoned.

 

I only know of one mechanical incident on a commercial plane in SE in the last 30 years.

 

If I could slide the decimal point on my bank balance one spot to the right, i'd be out flightseeing today. You're at greater risk driving to the airport.

Every pilot, seasoned or not, gets regular checkouts for part 135 or when switching jobs. That, by itself, doesn't mean much. As you said - best to wait.

Flying is inherently dangerous. Any pilot will tell you. It's our training and experience that mitigates this risk. Flying VMC in IMC conditions is almost always fatal.

Here is the complete quote:

"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

— Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London. c. early 1930's. This famous phrase has been reproduced on posters and plaques many times, almost always with the attribution of 'anonymous.' I was told at a book signing that André Priester (one of the first Pan Am employee's) may have said it, and decided to check this with the late R. E. G. Davies, then curator of air transport history at the Smithsonian and author of a book on Pan Am. Ron called me back and told me the phrase pre-dates Priester. His research showed the originator of the phrase was Captain Lamplugh, who was quite well known in British aviation circles after WWI

Here is the complete NTSB report recommendations from the 2007 accident.

http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/A08_59_62.pdf

Here are the 3 recommendations the NTSB made to the FAA after the 2007 misty fjords accident.

They installed cameras to show real time Misty Fjord weather, started monitoring tour operators to ensure they follow the rules and helped the tour operators develop training to deal with fast changing weather on tour routes.

These aircraft are also equipped with sophisticated GPS systems which can help show nearby terrain to help them avoid CFIT.

We will have to await the final report to see if any of these 2007 issues occurred once again. We should expect a preliminary report in about 3 months and a final in about a year based on past history.

RECOMMENDATON a-08-59

TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: Install and maintain weather cameras at critical areas of air tour routes within the Misty Fjords National Monument and other scenic areas in Southeast Alaska that are frequently traveled by air tour operators.

Date: 6/7/2011

Response: CC# 201100089: The NTSB is pleased to learn that the FAA has installed 10 weather camera facilities along critical air tour routes in southeast Alaska as recommended, including at Kake, Hawk Inlet, Cordova, and Misty Fjords. The FAA’s actions satisfy this recommendation. Accordingly, Safety Recommendation A-08-59 is classified CLOSED -- ACCEPTABLE ACTION.

RECOMMENDATION a-08-60

TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: Develop a permanent mechanism to provide en route and ground-based observations of air tour flights in Southeast Alaska at least once a month during the tour season to ensure operators are adhering to safe flying practices.

From: NTSB

To: FAA

Date: 3/21/2014

Response: We note that, in Fiscal Year 2010, you permanently added en route inspections of air tour operators to FAA Order 1800.56, “National Flight Standards Work Program.” We also note that you used the Surveillance Priority Index (SPI) Tool to establish a special emphasis program ensuring that Aviation Safety Inspectors (ASI) conduct a minimum of 10 unannounced en route inspections and 15 ramp surveillances of air tour operators in southeast Alaska throughout the air tour season. We further note that, as part of the program, ASIs will conduct ground-based surveillance activities (2 per year) of air tour operators in and around the Misty Fjords and Traitor Cove areas and, from the Ketchikan automated flight service station, special emphasis surveillance activities (10 per year) of the Tongass Narrows/Ketchikan Harbor. We are pleased that you have incorporated surveillance activities that are unique and appropriate to the Alaska air tour environment—particularly the remote observations, which we believe sends a message to all air tour operators that the FAA is observing their operations and is not focusing solely on an individual carrier or carriers. Although you are conducting fewer than the monthly inspections we recommended, we believe that the permanent mechanism you have developed will provide en route and ground based observations of air tour flights in southeast Alaska that satisfy the intent of this recommendation. Accordingly, Safety Recommendation A-08-60 is classified CLOSED—ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE ACTION.

RECOMMENDATION A-08-61

TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: Develop, in cooperation with Southeast Alaska commercial air tour operators, aviation psychologists, and meteorologists, among others, a cue-based training program for commercial air tour pilots in Southeast Alaska that specifically addresses hazardous aspects of local weather phenomena and in-flight decision-making.

From: FAA

To: NTSB

Date: 1/4/2012

Response: -From Michael P. Huerta, Acting Administrator: The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Juneau-based Flight Standards District Office, in cooperation with local operators in Southeast Alaska, the Medallion Foundation, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health/Center for Disease Control, developed a cue-based weather-training program that was incorporated into air tour operator-specific training programs. As of the 2011 Alaska air tour season, all air tour operators in Southeast Alaska have added materials and concepts developed as part of the cue-based training project to their training programs. These include, but are not limited to, training videos, use of basic airplane training devices with wide screen outside view, and photo-realistic instrument panels for each type of tour airplane. These devices include programmable visibility restrictions and deterioration rates, visibility targets, and photo-realistic terrain. Ketchikan, Alaska-based air tour operators' cue-based training programs were approved and implemented prior to the 2010 air tour season. Prior to the 2011 air tour season, the Juneau, Alaska-based air tour operators' cue based training programs were approved and implemented. I believe that the FAA has effectively addressed this safety recommendation, and I consider our actions complete

This thread is open for discussions of the accident cause and investigation

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2227075

Thanks for starting this thread and for your research.

 

You have found 3 air accidents in the past 10 years on commercial flightseeing tours in Alaska. What percentage is that, would you think? How many flightseeimg trips have occured in that time period? It must be many thousands.

 

Sent from my LG-D801 using Forums mobile app

Yes, it is quite a few when you think about Denali, Juneau and Ketchikan. The only fatals in the last 10 years, now 4 total, were all in Misty Fjord operations.

Thanks for starting this thread and for your research.

 

You have found 3 air accidents in the past 10 years on commercial flightseeing tours in Alaska. What percentage is that, would you think? How many flightseeimg trips have occured in that time period? It must be many thousands.

 

Sent from my LG-D801 using Forums mobile app

Here is a link to the accident statistics from the FAA

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/divisions/alaskan_region/acc_stats/

I'm not sure if I'd call the death of 9 people a "mishap".

My background is in naval aviation where we use the term mishap instead of accident. Accident implies that the incident could not have been prevented while mishap is used to set the tone that every incident could have been prevented.. Some countries use mishap to describe less serious incidents.

The discussions of how and why are to lessen the chances of this happening again. There have already been a couple informative posts about how bad these sightseeing flights can be in poor weather conditions.

 

Potential customers of these flights have a right to be better informed about what they are signing up for, and until now nobody was saying much about the subject. Now is the time to discuss the subject.

 

igraf

I started a new thread to discuss the aviation safety and investigation details. Please join me here for that important discussion. Leave this thread for the condolences.

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?p=46954171#post46954171

I started this thread for those interested in discussing the aviation safety and investigation aspects of this terrible tragedy. There are 2 other threads offering appropriate condolences to those affected.

Please limit this thread to the facts you learn from a variety of sources and the upcoming investigations.

The aircraft was a de Havilland Turbine Otter - which means it has a turbine engine - not a piston engine.

I reviewed every the NTSB database for fatal aviation mishap flying anywhere in Alaska under part 135 (air charters) for the last 10 years. There were a total of 3 anywhere in the state that involved scheduled flight seeing tours.

There were 2 in 2007 (also in Misty Fjords) one in 2013 originating in Petersburg and then the latest one yesterday.

There were others involving air taxi and cargo, but not tours.

As a result of the 2007 mishaps (which involved weather) they installed more weather cameras in the misty fjords area. http://avcams.faa.gov/sitelist.php

Here is a link to the 2007 NTSB reports

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Results.aspx?queryId=9db62d6b-5d93-4ddb-a87b-976371c910f9

Yes, let's not make speculations.

 

 

Please don't make speculations, especially without sufficient facts. For instance, piston engines can't "flame out".

I agree we don't need to speculate at this point. But to set the record straight. but the mishap aircraft was a DHC-3-T Turbo-Otte as was likely fitted with either Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-27 or Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-34 turboprop engine.

Piston engines don't flame out.

Turboprop engines are turbine engines and can flame out.