GTJ

An informative article. I note the union chair's assertion, "Having three people on board a train is critical when you’re carrying 600-plus guests on board." In New York City, a subway train, with ten cars each carrying up to 280 passengers each, or a total of 2,800, is operated with a two-person crew: motorman and conductor. That a White Pass Route train requires a three-person crew, based on it carrying less than one-quarter the number of passengers on a New York City train, is not a good argument. The union needs to make a good argument on some other basis, that the operation of the White Pass Route train is distinct enough from the operations of railroads that use two-person crews, that the White Pass Route requires a brakeman as part of a three-person crew.

Absent any action to change the law, the statute would remain in effect. The statute does not require that vessels sailing out of U.S. ports to call at Vancouver. If the port of Vancouver is closed, then the vessel master might, instead, call at a foreign port other than Victoria, such as Vancouver or Prince Rupert. Perhaps some others with expertise in B.C. maritime matters might note if other ports, such as Bella Bella, might be practicable for a short call. If there is a shortage of berthing space these ports might limit the amount of time that passenger vessels would be allowed to call at those ports, so that the space might be shred by multiple vessels in sequence. Passengers on the vessel need not alight at the foreign port at which the vessel calls for the itinerary to be compliant with the PVSA. I see some potential for logistical shuffling, and there might be some temporary change in the law (either legislatively or administratively), but I don't foresee the Alaska cruise industry shutting down on account of actions in Victoria.

A good plan, given the greater regularity of service provided by Metro-North Commuter Railroad, compared to Amtrak, and the flexibility to be able to adjust your travel plans on the fly without the hassle of having to deal with the reservations that Amtrak requires.

I know that 3:00 p.m. is the case for MSC Cruises, a relative newcomer to Brooklyn, as stated in its brochures. Most scheduled departures are around 5:00 p.m., and so I have not yet figured out if that is an actual intended sailing time for MSC Cruises, or if it is when MSC Cruises wants everyone to be checked-in (and with an actual intended sailing time of 5:00 p.m.). Having only two hours, from 11:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m., to embark everyone onto a large vessel can be a challenge. As well, the brochure text is typically drafted by marketing people, who do not always accurately and precisely describe transportation operations. It would be helpful to have feedback from recent passengers to confirm the actual MSC Cruises intended sailing time.

I assume that you're staying at the YWCA Hotel Vancouver, located at 733 Beatty Street. 1. Yes, it is easier to have a taxi driver take you from the airport to the hotel, compared to having to navigate yourself from the airport to the hotel. The greater ease will be reflected in the higher fare for taxi service. The hotel is in taxi zone 8, to fare from the airport to this zone being 34.00 CAD. In comparison, SkyTrain requires is a 2-zone fare, 4.45 CAD, plus a 5.00 CAD surcharge for boarding at the airport, or a total of 9.45 CAD per person. 2. Using SkyTrain, change at Waterfront station to the Expo line, then alight at Stadium-Chinatown station. It might be challenging finding a taxi late at night. The taxi fare would be exceptionally low because you would be traveling just over one block. a distance of less than 800 feet (about 0.15 mile). The taxi fare should be 3.50 CAD flag drop, plus approximately 0.40 CAD for the distance traveled, or a total of 3.90 CAD. It would also be a very easy walk, primarily because of the short distance involved. The sidewalk is well-maintained and reasonably safe to travel upon; it is unlikely that you would get injured in walking the just-over one block distance.

Be careful here. The bus stop on Van Brunt Street at Pioneer Street is only in the northbound (to downtown Brooklyn) direction. Going to the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal (from downtown Brooklyn), the bus stop is at the next corner, King Street. It is a great view looking down Pioneer Street, with the dichotomy of the Red Hook neighborhood against the backdrop of a large modern vessel.

The cited article referred to the possibility of railroad employees going on strike, not the possibility that the cruise vessel to be traveled upon by the posting individual would "cancel Skagway altogether if the trains won’t be running." It would seem to be a scheduling nightmare were all the vessels to cancel the call in Skagway. Thus, in having written, "I have heard . . . ," I would like to know from whom this was heard. A different news report? A railroad union member? Someone else?

I would not ordinarily walk from Smith and Ninth Streets. When I travel to Red Hook, I take the subway into downtown Brooklyn, then the B61 bus. It is a short ten minute walk from Van Brunt Street to the passenger terminal. My wife organized a large group that in 1-1/2 weeks will be sailing with MSC Cruises out of Brooklyn. They're coming from mostly the five boroughs and routinely travel using public transportation. They can't afford cars of their own, and do not routinely use car service. An inside stateroom is expensive for a vacation. I expect that most will arrive in Red Hook either by ferry, from Pier 11, or by B61 bus, from downtown Brooklyn.

For U.S. states I have touched, the only one left being Hawai'i. Not much interest in beaches or other things Hawaiian, but I share that same type of urge to visit for completing the list, so I have been looking at some Hawaiian cruises to do so. For the record, I have visited all the Canadian provinces, but I am missing one Mexican state (Colima, a challenge to get there). Still some effort for Central American countries, still needing to visit El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua (some cruises visit the last two, not so for El Salvador).

Of course! The ultimate self-sufficient trip would be to use Capital Transit to and from the glacier. Cost is two dollars per person bus fare each way, walking the short distance from the transit bus stop to the visitor center. Add five dollars to the cost for admission to the visitor center. See here for directions: http://www.juneaucapitaltransit.org/how-to-ride-to-the-mendenhall-glacier-visitor-center-with-capital-transit. There are also some private companies that provide basic transportation to and from the glacier, also without a formal tour. The best known is the "Blue Bus," operated by M&M Tours of Juneau. The cost is $49.95 round-trip, including visitor center admission. See http://www.mmtoursofjuneau.com/product-page/blue-glacier-express.

Part of that discussion on congestion pricing will be happening on Tuesday afternoon in the first panel of the bus conference being held by the New York City Bar Association, "The Role of the Private Bus in Congestion Mitigation & Pricing Plans." http://services.nycbar.org/EventDetail?EventKey=TRAN062723 The bus companies serving New York City are concerned about fees being imposed on the many companies that provide public transportation in and out of Manhattan (and who would pass the cost on the bus passengers in the form of higher fares). The irony of this cannot be understated. I hope that day will never come for me! Indeed, having my visited my doctor last week for my annual physical, she said I should try to walk more, aiming for a few miles each day.

Do you have a source for that news? It would seem to be a scheduling nightmare for all the lines to reschedule to other ports (though "day at sea" is their usual fallback). But the White Pass Route also controls the docks in Skagway, so there could be significant effects for a strike. Maybe this is a test of Carnival?

Alas, the bus route was cut back and does not presently go as far as Eielson. Traditionally within the transit bus industry, the "HoHo" bus is operated in December, with the driver wearing a bright red suit.

Difficult to do this exactly because of the train schedules. You would not be able to get from the vessel to the train station in Vancouver in time for the morning train, and the evening train only goes as far as Seattle. The most convenient alternative would be to travel from Vancouver to Seattle by bus, then from Seattle to Portland by train. From Vancouver, Cantrail Coach Lines goes directly to the Amtrak station in Seattle, and Amtrak will sell a combined ticker for Cantrail plus Amtrak, from Vancouver to Portland. The 9:00 a.m. bus arrives in Seattle at 12:45 p.m., in time for the Amtrak train at 2:12 p.m., arriving in Portland at 5:37 p.m. Anticipate the fare to be about $77.

MSC departs Brooklyn at 3:00 p.m., so seven hours prior to departure would be 8:00 a.m. arrival at LaGuardia. That is rather early. It seems to be much effort, coupled with a high transfer fare, such that I would likely look for other options. I note that I live very close to LaGuardia. If I were departing on that vessel, I would plan to board at approximately 12:30 p.m. (their check-in deadline is two hours before departure), and to do so I would be at my subway station, Main Street, around 11:00 a.m. to 11:15 a.m.

It will be a different type of experience, and I would urge you approach it, at least initially, with an open mind.

To avoid confusion, it is best to use the acronym GCT, or the name Grand Central Terminal, when referring to the railroad terminal used by Metro-North Commuter Railroad. ("Grand Central Station" is the name of the post office next to GCT, and the name of a former railroad station in Chicago; "Grand Central" is the name of the subway stations below GCT.) If the weather is pleasant, and you're not overloaded with baggage, you might to consider walking. It is about one-half hour distant.

Generally, older large American cities, particularly in the eastern part of the country, are very much walkable. Even western cities can be walkable if you're in the city centre. The walking problems are most severe in suburban areas. New Jersey can be particularly challenging because of its many older highways built to narrow lane standards, sometimes with not practicable room for walking. But other states also have that problem, including places such as Florida, and sometimes around port areas.

That's the way it should be, though my focus on saying that is travel by railroad more so than by ocean vessel. New York-bound trains from Montréal travel two hours to the international border, then sit in the station for more than one hour while customs and immigration officials go through the train inspecting all passengers. Why can't those U.S. officials board the train in Montréal and complete their inspection while en route? (There is a plan to have U.S. pre-clearance in Montréal before boarding, but that seems forever-delayed, and it would still require more total elapsed time than inspection while enroute.) It is good to know that it is practicable for U.S. officials to do their inspections while enroute aboard ocean vessels.

I am not familiar with this service. Have you tried disaggregating any of the to ascertain if the package price is great than the component prices (i.e., Trinity adds a mark-up for their packaging) or lower than the component prices (i.e., Trinity receives discounted rates that it passes along to its clients)?

Correct. Any company can have something go wrong.

To be certain, however, Viator does not operate any tours. Viator is a third-party intermediary that sells tours operated by other companies. As Viator itself discloses on its website: "Viator, Inc. facilitates your booking, but a third party tour operator provides the tour/activity directly to you. Viator, Inc. does not provide tours or activities itself." In Québec, Viator sells the Unitours tour. Buying the tour through Unitours directly costs 74.70 CAD, while buying the same tour through Viator costs 66.90 USD, the equivalent of 87.93 CAD. In other words, by paying an additional 13.23 CAD, Viator will "facilitate" making a booking with Unitours, something that might be helpful for those individuals uncomfortable with making a booking with Unitours directly.

I generally dislike inclusive tours, in part for the very reason stated: loss of control during the tour. For that reason I typically prefer arranging regularly scheduled transportation, around which I can reliably fit in those things that I want to do. (Another reason I generally dislike inclusive tours is that I do not like being herded around.) Might it be practicable to arrange regularly scheduled transportation instead of doing the NCL-packaged tour?

For similar reasons, I have never really like the term "HoHo." I think the term is used to distinguish between those tour buses on which all passengers remain on the same bus for the duration of their tour, from those tour buses on which passengers may switch from bus-to-bus. Transit buses are usually not used as tour buses (with very limited exceptions), and with the defining characteristic of transit buses being to provide point-to-point transportation, the ability to "hop on" "hop off" in a series of point-to-point rides is inherent to transit buses, and the term "HoHo" is not generally applied. All that said, the transit buses at Denali do differ from ordinary transit buses in that they are used not so much for point-to-point travel as in most cities, but as a full loop, there-and-back, for touring purposes, much like a tour bus. Moreover, the transit bus fare is not a specific amount paid in the farebox for each boarding, or for a ticket from point A to point B, but for a round-trip excursion ride. I think that I also dislike the term "HoHo" because of its association with tour buses, which I generally view as overpriced, I generally prefer the use of transit buses, with which the term is not generally used (and thus my prejudice). The Denali transit buses constitute a distinct type of transportation.

Unfortunately, you did not understand the point being made, and got lost on the details and your own emotion. The point being made was that, no mater what means of travel one uses, something bad can happen. Those bad incidents can include very bad incidents, including the deaths of individuals. These incidents include the aforementioned Amtrak train on the Cascades corridor, the murder of Leon Klinghoffer aboard the cruise vessel Achille Lauro, and the beheading of a passenger aboard a Greyhound Canada motorcoach, among other tragedies. Each has had profound impacts in various ways, leading to changes in the manner by which each type of transportation is managed. The example of the Cascades route was chosen as support because it is directly related to the subject matter here: the Cascades corridor goes from Eugene, Oregon, to Vancouver, British Columbia, and includes the train service that passengers going to and from cruise vessels in Vancouver would utilize. In each case, the carrier involved engaged people with expertise in crisis management. All of these incidents support my proposition that bad things can happen. I dislike making judgment as to future patronage of a company based on a single incident--even incidents that are tragic--and instead I prefer to separate the good companies based on ther ability to respond properly when things do go wrong. As to the choice of media, Trains magazine is both politically neutral and factual in its reporting, and hardly a better news source exists for accurate reporting of railroad incidents. It is not a matter of sympathy, but rather the reliability of the report. The prior person posting said, "some people who used the train . . . seemed pleased with it." I responded by directly asserting the contrary, that some people have not been pleased. This is a proper form of argument. Someone who makes an argument should state the proposition that is being argued, following it with supporting statements. That fact that an argument might be emotional to some people does not obviate the need to state the proposition and provide its support. In this case, whether it was those who were, themselves, tragically injured, those affected by those injured, or simply those people who lost transportation service in the aftermath, many people were not pleased. I see not a "joke" here but only an argument; I feel sorry for those people who see the tragedy as a joke. Yes, some people might react emotionally to tragedy. Where I presently reside there remains much emotion surrounding the use of multiple passenger aircraft as missiles to attack the World Trade Center, the result being 3,000 people murdered. Should the fact that people died render the subject unspeakable? Of course not! We use that tragedy routinely to support or oppose all sorts of policies and arguments. Doing so does not diminish the lives of those who were lost. To the contrary, not engaging in argument would diminish their lives.