World Cruise Reviews

[katydyd]

DH and I have started tossing around the idea of doing a world cruise in a few years once our familial responsibilities lighten up a little. I've started looking around at the lines that do these cruises, and we've become very interested in Radisson. Are there any reviews from folks who have done the full World Cruise? I did a search, but really didn't come up with much. Thanks to anyone who can help me out...:-)

 

Kate

[dougburns]

Marcie(petlover) has a good review from last year's Voyager world cruise. It's not on this site. You can backchannel me at dougburns1@cox.net and I'll tell you where to get it.

[jhp]

Doug, I was wondering how to do that! Marcie had a great time, and I think you will enjoy her journal!

[katydyd]

Thanks guys....Doug I dropped you and email, since I've been unable to find it on my own...:-)

[petlover]

Katydyd, please feel free to ask any specific questions as several of us who check in with CC were on this trip. What I wrote was not a review but more of a diary but it will give you a feel for what a fabulous trip we had. Feel free to email me too. marciematassa@adelphia.net

[katydyd]

Thanks for all of the help. I've really enjoyed checking out all the information that Doug pointed me to. I think a RSSC is definitely in our future. DH and I are discussing next fall to celebrate 10 years together.....I can't wait!

[jhp]

Kaydyd, I would suggest that you find a perfect little "shorter" cruise to try out this line first. Much as I love it, we all have our own personal likes and dislikes. Marcie had already known that she loved Radisson, as do I. Just doesn't hurt to check out a line if you are going to be onboard for a long time.

[katydyd]

Thanks jhp- DH and I are thinking the same thing. We're hoping to maybe be able to get a 1-2 weeker in next fall. Right now, the itineraries aren't working out great with our schedules.....but where there's a will....there's a way.

[gdlamberth]

One "shorter" trip I might suggest is a Panama Canal transit. Timing might not work for you as RSSC's are normally around Christmas and in the Marchish time frame. But:

- they are easy travel (to or from LAX and FLL)

- have several sea days (I would think something to try before a world cruise)

- the canal itself is fascinating(IMHO)

Alternatively, RSSC frequently runs "circle the Pacific" and "Circle South America" itinereries that have 12-19 day segments.

Greg

[A J Theodore]

As several earlier posts have indicated, the short cruise is a good idea. The shorter cruise will let you see whether you actually like the ship, its atmosphere, activities, food, personnel, etc. No one cruise line is right for everyone and there is nothing worse than three months of being on the wrong ship at these prices. More to the point, whether this is the right line for you is very much a personal matter based on what each cruise line offers and what it is you specifically want from a cruise (taking into account such things as food, activities, “atmosphere,” etc.). A short cruise will give you some idea.

 

But, please keep in mind that a short cruise will not give a fully accurate flavor of a long cruise for at least two reasons. First, on a world cruise there will be far fewer port days so that on the world cruise you will have to entertain yourselves on board rather than exploring onshore. Ships have a very different “feel” on the days that they are in port compared to sea days. Therefore, before booking a world cruise, be very careful to review the activities and amenities offered by the cruise line to see if they are to your liking - including lecturers, musical programs, entertainers, etc. – and compare them carefully to other lines you are considering.

 

Second, the passenger profile on a world cruise is very different from that on a short cruise. I would estimate the average age at about 60 for most of Radisson's cruises. It is easily above 75 on the world cruise. (The longer the itinerary, the older the average passenger.) Radisson's passengers are generally well-heeled business people, late career professionals, and retired persons. This passenger profile will reflect itself in the types of shows and performances, the lecturers and the subjects of their lectures, the music played in the lounges and for dancing, food styles and preparation, the merchandise in the on-board shops, etc.

Your original question, however, deals with finding information specifically on world cruises. While there are numerous professional and personal reviews, I know of none that address world cruises specifically. Unfortunately, most of the professional reviews describe the ships and itineraries in generalities, with very little useful commentary on the quality of the actual cruise, specifically including both the pros and cons of a particular cruise line or particular ship. There are professional reviews on this site, on other sites, and in a number of cruise books. But, watch out for out-of-date editions and watch out for travel sellers masquerading as reviewers. I also find individual reviews to be generally unreliable because they seem to come from individuals in either of two camps. First, there are the individuals who are a line’s dedicated cruisers, i.e., those for whom that cruise line provides exactly the right product. Second, there are those who have some type of grudge.

Should you wish, as many other individuals on these boards will do, I would be glad to share with you my views of the Radisson world cruise product based on my experience on a recent segment on a world cruise. While there was much to like on that cruise, there were other aspects in which I felt that Radisson fell short.

[joannapvb]

Which segment (s) were you on? we were on two Sydney to Singapore - have you posted a review?

[jhp]

AJTheodore, I would love to hear your thoughts on your segment. Which one were you on? I was on the Auckland-Sydney leg 2 and had a wonderful time. You are right about the passenger mix on the WC. For the most part, it is much older than the shorter cruises. However, I also met people in their late 40's and many in their 50's and early 60's. Again, would love to hear your thoughts, as it is nice to have reviews from different perspectives.

[joannapvb]

I neglected to say we were on for 34 days and had the very best time - but I think you are right some ships are a perfect fit for people and this was our case last Jan/Feb! The older folks were some of the youngest at heart I'd ever met - lots of fun!!

[petlover]

AJTheodore, I would love to read your review. Did we meet (hard to know with screen names)?? I met some of the best people ever.

[katydyd]

Wow...you guys have all been incredibly helpful....if only I could get on the boards more frequently to reply....LOL. DH and I have 10 cruises under our belts already, and I can definitely relate to the sentiment that not all cruise lines are for everybody! The bulk of our sailings have been on RCCL, but we did branch out to Disney (no more character cruises...thank you very much) and Carnival (ack...that's all I can say...just ack). We find that we prefer smaller more "laid back" ships when it's just the two of us sailing (one of our favorite trips was on the Nordic Empress), and bigger ships with more high-intensity activities when we're sailing with our kids.

 

Reading all the reviews I can find (I have to admit, I am a bit of a review junkie), and taking all opinions with a grain of salt, I think RSSC might be a great fit for us...now we just have to find a schedule that works. I own my own optometric practice and find that the times I can reasonably take off are very restricted (the good news is, my "boss" always approves my vacation time...LOL); and I don't think we'll be able to make 2006 work with RSSC.

 

However, I think a Bermuda trip might be a nice option for DH and I for our first RSSC cruise. We've been to Bermuda on the Nordic Empress, and would love to get back. RSSC's website only has one Bermuda trip currently listed, does anyone know if more trips will be added later (ie. not all itineraries released yet)?

 

Thanks for all of the input!!

[A J Theodore]

Thanks for the kind words and for the “encouragement” to post a review.

 

First. We were on the Asia segment of the 2004 Circle Pacific on the Voyager, March 2004, ending in Tokyo. (Have not cruised since – can’t seem to get away from work.)

 

Second. I have not prepared a formal review, although I did prepare a draft shortly after that cruise. I will try to edit it now (read: make it brief and to the point). I will also try to be objective and let you know my biases and expectations so that you can judge it for yourself. I will try to post sometime the beginning of next week.

 

Third, Petlover, unfortunately, I do not believe that we met on that cruise. You’re absolutely right when you say that you meet some very wonderful people on these trips.

[petlover]

I look forward to reading it. I was on the 2005 so we missed each other by a year! We are in hopes of repeating the WC in 2007. One of the gals we became good friends with will be turning 50 in April, 2007 so there's about 20 of us that are hoping to celebrate this occassion onboard somewhere out in the deep blue.

[petlover]

AJTheodore, which one do you mean? The 2004 Circle Pacific was on the Mariner not the Voyager..........The World Cruise was on the Voyager.

[Live to cruz]

AJTheodore, which one do you mean? The 2004 Circle Pacific was on the Mariner not the Voyager..........The World Cruise was on the Voyager.

Marcie, the 2004 world cruise was on the Voyager but it really was a 94 Circle Pacific Cruise from LA back to LA.:)

[petlover]

Oh, got it. I learn so much here! Thanks Live to Cruz!

[A J Theodore]

The review of my March 2004 segment of the Circle Pacific on the Voyager was submitted yesterday for the member reviews section. It is not yet posted by Cruise Critic. I am copying it below. I apologize for the length and wordiness - I just did not have an opportunity to edit it down.

 

Considering the luxury experience and the six-star rating it advertises and considering the high prices it charges, we expected only the best from Radisson (and had enjoyed ourselves very much on two prior, one-week Radisson Mariner cruises). Flaws that can be accepted from mass-market cruise lines should be the rare exception on a luxury line. When measured against these standards, on the whole, Radisson and Voyager did not measure up on this cruise. While many aspects of the cruise met at least a five-star standard and some were easily six-star standard, the overall cruise did not provide a truly luxury cruise experience – I would only give it four stars overall. The overwhelming shortcomings to this cruise were the senior on-board hotel staff, the arbitrary changes to an exciting itinerary, and the inconsistent dining.

 

Let’s start with my expectations and biases. A cruise line (or anyone else) should provide the product advertised. While some “puffery” is to be expected, and while there can be quibbling over the quality of any aspect of a cruise, the product as a whole should measure up to the advertising. On a “luxury line,” I expect (a) consistently excellent continental cuisine, (b) a responsive staff prepared to provide a luxury experience at all levels and to deal with problems quickly and professionally; © modern and clean staterooms, © well-appointed public areas; (d) unobtrusive service; (e) high quality lecturers, activities, and musical programs; (f) efficient boarding, cabins ready at embarkation; (g) no lining up and waiting for tenders, etc. Where I have not commented here, this ship and line met those expectations fully (e.g., cleanliness, efficient and easy boarding, etc.).

The Positive about this cruise.

(1) This ship. It is well-designed, new, clean, comfortable, and quite attractive. It is very much in the mold of the new cruise ships (multi-story atrium, etc.) It is clean and very well maintained. The cabins are unusually large and well designed, including a walk-in closet (maid service is excellent). Cabins below the penthouse level are larger and more comfortable than similar accommodations on other lines. The public spaces are attractive and, with a couple of minor exceptions, comfortable and functional.

(2) The junior staff (waiters, room stewardesses, bar attendants, etc.) were competent, pleasant, and conversant in English (staffing changes in the last few months may have put this into question). They generally knew what they were doing and worked hard to please. The maintenance staff likewise seemed generally competent, although several requests for repairs (including a ventilation problem) went unanswered for more than 36 hours.

(3) The Tour Office staff was exceptional. The three people did an outstanding job of handling ship’s tours and private tour arrangements, with unfailing good humor, efficiency, and accuracy. This was particularly difficult in the face of a constantly changing itinerary (see below).

(4) Single seating dining and open seating dining are big pluses. The single-seat dining provides much more relaxed, enjoyable dining. While passengers seem to settle in to an individual table after a day or two (a few of them did try to lay claim to window tables), it is nice to have the option of sitting where you want and with whom you want. Service is usually well-paced and there is no pressure to finish so that the next seating can be set up.

(5) The inclusion of wine in the dining room in the cruise price is e welcome touch. It is nice not to be nickel-and-dimed and it is nice not to have to worry about signing the chit every night. (The downside, one waiter confided, is that the policy of including wine and drinks seems to consistently attract a certain type of passenger who overdoes the alcohol, especially on cruises of less than 14 days. We did see a couple of instances.)

(6) The port lecturer.

(7) Latitudes Restaurant. It was too small and crowded for the number of passengers they seated the one night I was able to eat there. This is an almost trivial comment because - although contrived - the theme concept was very well carried-out. The credit for that goes to the exuberant, young, and completely charming serving staff. They made us feel like they were putting on a private theme dinner party for a group of close friends, that they really cared that it be a complete success, and that they did everything possible to make it so. The food, too, was very enjoyable. This was one of the few occasions on this cruise that I felt that I was having a truly good time and that the cruise line really wanted me to have that good time.

(8) The advertised itinerary for this trip, Singapore to Tokyo, segments of the 2004 world cruise (actually “Circle Pacific” Cruise), was exciting and enticing.

The Negative:

 

(1) RSSC chose to disregard that exciting itinerary. One port (Hong Kong) was extended by a day, two port days were changed altogether, two port stops were shortened (one of them by about 12 hours and one by about 5), and one stop was eliminated altogether. (One additional port was missed because of bad weather.) There were NO weather problems and there were NO terrorism concerns to justify any one of those unexplained changes.

While the schedule changes were bad enough, Radisson compounded the problem. Passenger questions/complaints about these changes were given short shrift by senior staff. As one senior official in the hotel department said to me when I asked what was going on, and this is a direct quote, “We can do whatever we want."

While several of the changes were decided by Radisson management days in advance (including changing of two port days), none of them were announced until the last minute. As a result, several passengers missed out some on private sight-seeing that they had arranged. Personally, we missed the opportunity to see a former colleague and friend who only had one day available to see us.

Passengers deserve the cruise paid for. When Radisson elected not to deliver that cruise, we deserved two things. First, we deserved prompt notification of the changes. Second, we deserved a clear and compelling explanation for divergence from the schedule or some form of restitution and/or apology. Radisson provided neither.

(2) Senior staff problems and attitudes were not limited to the attitude about the schedule. Several of the senior staff on the hotel side, newly promoted to their positions, neither knew nor were prepared for their new jobs and at least one did not seem to care. Senior staff members were not respected by junior staff, although junior staff members were clearly terrified of several of them. Senior staff was generally inaccessible - no response to phone messages, not in their offices or on deck, etc.; the only time that the Hotel Manager’s office door was ever open were the days that the President of the company was on board. This is also true on land – Radisson’s customer relations person in Florida did not return any one of my four post-cruise telephone calls. Any request other than the most routine was frowned on (and I am not talking about Travel Spies nonsense) and, from what I saw, was not acted on.

(3) The overall impression was that the ship was not being run with passenger satisfaction as the goal, but rather that it was run for the convenience of management. Note that I did not have this impression of Radisson on two prior cruises on Mariner. This is the first and only cruise on which I felt that I was merely along for the ride.

(4) Dining room food quality and service were inconsistent, lurching from very good at some meals to very mediocre at others. Some nights the dining room was excellent in all respects but, on just as many other nights, it was no better than “good” overall. There were too many lapses – some main dishes were tasteless, particularly meat and poultry (tasteless grilled salmon one night). Oddly, the dining room was consistently better at lunch than at dinner. The service on several nights was painfully slow - 25 minutes wait for the order to be taken one night with no head waiter or maitre d’ in sight and bickering waiters another night. While an occasional mistake or oversight is to be expected, the mistakes were too frequent for a luxury cruise (and the ship was no more than about 60 percent full during this segment).

(5) Of the two nights I ate in Signatures Restaurant, one night was truly very good. The food was well-prepared and attractively and attentively presented and service was perfect. The food on the other night, unfortunately, even with the identical menu, arrived bland and overcooked.

(6) There is far too much vibration on this new ship, particularly in the aft portion when the ship is trying to go fast (above about 20 knots) – unfortunately very noticeable in my cabin. It took four days of requests to be moved to a vacant cabin of the same category. Several other passengers also said that they asked to be moved because of it.

Once again, when I first asked what was happening and whether the problem would be fixed or whether we could be moved, the same senior staff member simply dismissed me: “All ships vibrate.” The bottom line is simple, if you go on the Voyager, do not get a cabin in the aft portion of the ship.

(7) The dance floor in the Lounge is too small - you can't dance on a postage stamp regardless of whether you prefer rock or ballroom. Forget about line dancing.

(8) The art auctions. The quality of the "art" was poor (aside from there being just too many mediocre prints of famous pictures) and was too “mass market.” It clutters up, cheapens, and detracts from otherwise enjoyable and usable public spaces. Please, let's get rid of art auctions . . . and not just on this ship and this line.

(9) Entertainment. Maddeningly inconsistent. The Broadway reviews, comedians, etc. were interchangeable with any other line. The music at the shows was always too loud. There was one very fine classical performer.

(10) Passenger evaluation cards are insufficient. They are not designed to uncover deficiencies in performance but seemed designed to elicit favorable reviews. Radisson needs to ask about quality issues, including staff attitudes and responsiveness and knowledge of their jobs, not just about such things as timeliness of baggage handling and whether the bartender smiled. None of the questions on the evaluation picked up the staff problems or the itinerary problems noted above. Second, evaluation cards must be anonymous to be valid. Third, if evaluations are to be taken seriously, there should be a section not just for “comments,” but there should be a meaningful attempt to elicit specific praise, complaints, and suggestions for improvement (examples, “Please tell us what you liked about the entertainment” “Please tell use how we might improve the entertainment?” “Please tell us what you disliked on this cruise?” “Please give us three suggestions for things you would like to see on our cruises or activities you would like us to add. Please tell us three things we should eliminate.”).

SUMMARY – The cruise overall was very mixed. Those things that were done well were exactly as one would expect from a luxury line. However, in my mind, they were overshadowed by the negative – and, what is worse is that there was absolutely no need for any of the negative to have occurred.

Itinerary changes where necessary because of weather or security – and when reasonably announced in advance – are a part of cruising. However, I cannot accept either the arbitrary changes on this cruise or the disdainful attitude of the senior staff and management on this and other issues.

[petlover]

Thank you for sharing such a detail review. I too would have been very disappointed with the itinerary changes for no apparent reason!

I was surprised to read about the senior staff being unapproachable.On our 2005 WC it was almost the opposite. Most (not all) seem to mix well with the passengers and were very approachable especially the Captain, the Hotel Director, the Food & Beverage Manager and the Dining Room Manager. I think this may have a lot to do with their dispositions & personalities and little to do with Radisson.

 

Thanks for sharing!!

[PaulaJK]

Marcie, I understand your point but I am not certain that

a cluster of personnel and their impact upon your cruise

experieince can be so easily waved off. For the individual cruiser this

can make a significant difference, as AJ notes. [AJ, thank you for your balanced & interesting review.] And since Radisson hires the personnel and Radisson conveys line expectations and since the cruiser purchases the Radisson luxury cruise experience,the buck will stop there.

 

We are booked for 2 segs of the upcoming WC. For us, it represents a

significant time away from work, travel[ Hong Kong-Dubai], emotional &

financial investment. I have been reading reviews with a standard deviation graph in mind [trying to disregard those who seem to blindly love or blindly hate]. My sense is that concerns are increasingly being expressed about

service and dining [cuisine + service] .....and this is disconccerting.

[Live to cruz]

:) A.J., I was on the 2004 Circle Pacific cruise and I would like to disagree with you on some aspects of the cruise. If my memory serves me correctly, 2 ports of call were shortened due to the tides. The stay in Honk Kong was extended because the cruise line had to omit the stop in Taiwan because of problems there. I found the hotel directors door was open frequently as I had several exchanges with him. As far as the food was concerned, one can find inconsistency at times in the best restaurants. Although I enjoyed all the restaurants, I thought in the evening La Verandah had the best selection of any ship for casual dining and I loved the special dinners served in Latitude.

 

On the positive side, I know of no other cruise line that would give ALL their passengers the wonderful overnights in Bangkok and Beijing that we were fortunate to have had. Captain Dag always was approachable to listen to a passenger's comment and I am sorry that you didn't contact him regarding your problems. I am sorry that you had some disappointing experiences on the Voyager but I hope that you will try it again and see what a great staff and crew they have on the ship.

 

Hope you don't mind my comments but I wanted people who read this to know that I think the Voyager is a special ship with a special crew.

[A J Theodore]

Live to Cruz--

 

I am very glad that your experience was better than ours.

 

In response to your comments, please permit me several additional clarifying remarks on the itinerary. There was no problem with Taiwan - the days in the two ports in Taiwan were changed by Radisson (in fact, the Captain referred me to hotel staff about this question). The port in Okinawa, which was a technical stop so that the ship would not go from Taiwan to China without an intermediate stop, was eliminated. Saigon was late by five hours and I was informed by an officer on the engineering staff that this was because the ship could not go fast enough to get in at the time scheduled, not because of the tides. Shanghai was cut short by 12 hours becuase the Chinese required the ship to "sail with the tide." Since high tides are approximately 12 hours apart, this could hardly have been the real Chinese motivation. The Chinese authorities apparently required this because of displeasure that the ship had gone directly from Taiwan to China (that is, it eliminated the Okinawa stop), something that the Chinese have prohibited since 1949, and which had made Chinese television. In both cases, very valuable port time for the passengers who wanted to spend time ashore (including us) was lost.