Antarctica Silver Explorer vs Silver Cloud

[kimanjo]

I know the Silver Explorer is smaller than the Silver Cloud, both in size and passenger count.  What are the logistic differences with the landings/zodiacs between the 2 ships??  Even though the passenger count listed for the Silver Cloud is 254, does this ship sail "full".  How much waiting happens for a landing? How are the landings organized for the bigger ship?

 

How much of a different experience would the two be???

 

I really want the smaller Explorer, but the dates that work best for us,  the Silver Cloud doing that sailing.  

 

[bennett2005]

I would select the cloud.  That said only go to Antarctica cruise if it includes South Georgia 

there is a great cruise in early Jan 2020

[Fletcher]

Kimanjo - The two most important things about a cruise to Antarctica are (1) the weather and (2) the ship you choose.  You can do nothing about the weather and if it's bad the choice of ship can be critical.  

 

I have made several trips on expedition vessels with 100 passengers and next month I'm on Silver Galapagos.  These ships are perfect for getting up close and personal but because they are small they are slow, they do not handle well in heavy seas, they have limited deck space and can be claustrophobic if everyone is confined indoors.  Now, I went to Antarctica and South Georgia a year ago on the Seabourn Quest which had 400 passengers and I think I made a great choice.  It did the Drake in a day, we landed everywhere, it handled well in rough seas, there was acres of deck space,  there was room for everyone inside in the various lounges and bars. I could go on.

 

The main practical difference between a traditional expedition ship and a larger ship is this: visitors are limited to landing groups of 100 people.   An expedition ship will land everyone in one location in the morning and do it again at another location later in the day. A bigger ship will stay put for the entire day.  Personally, one landing a day was enough for me - the amount of clobber you have to wear is considerable and quite a hassle.  On the whole I much preferred gawping at the scenery to trudging through penguin colonies.  But of course, if landings are impossible because of the weather or the ice, you can do zodiac rides from both a small ship and a big ship.  And the scenery will always be better from the observation deck on a big ship.

 

I'd choose the Cloud from your two selections.  I agree with bennett2005 above, take a cruise that includes South Georgia.  It was the highlight of our trip - the old whaling stations are incredible and the wildlife quite stunning.

 

By the way, the Seabourn trips start and end in Santiago or Buenos Aires so you get the Chilean fjords thrown in as well.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Fletcher

[Bill B]

12 hours ago, kimanjo said:

Even though the passenger count listed for the Silver Cloud is 254, does this ship sail "full".

 

In Antarctica, no. The number pax are limited to 200.

[FauxNom]

We were on the Cloud last September in the Arctic, with something like 189 passengers. Zodiac trips were organized by groups (I think each group was about 1/4 of the passengers). They called a new group about every 15-20 minutes. So the wait once you went down to the embarkation point was minimal.  Logistically, it didn't seem much different from the Explorer, but we were not in wild Arctic conditions on the Explorer--South American coast instead. Both ships are great!

[PaulMCO]

On 1/5/2019 at 8:44 AM, Bill B said:

 

In Antarctica, no. The number pax are limited to 200.

Not true.   The limit is 100 passenger landing.   Some areas may have even smaller restrictions.

SS limits the Cloud to 200 for manageability.  Seabourn will have 400+ passengers meaning only one landing per day.

We have done the Explorer 3 times.  If you want to maximize the number of stops (2 per day) and maximize the amount of time you spend on shore, I would chose Explorer.

Edited February 22, 2019 by PaulMCO

[jpalbny]

I will be able to make a direct comparison next January when we go back to Antarctica (and South Georgia) on the Cloud... The Explorer experience (2009, when it was PA II) was great and we loved it so much that we have been back on Explorer 3 more times since then.

 

I am expecting that Cloud will feel a little bit different with a few more pax, but the extra amenities aboard Cloud will make up for it. We have also been on Cloud 3x before it was converted to an expedition ship, and we love the ship, so we are really looking forward to seeing it after the makeover.

 

If the dates work better for Cloud, I think it will be a fine choice, and that is coming from someone who really loves Explorer. Our next two expedition cruises are booked on the Cloud.

 

Re Pax numbers, both Bill B and PaulMCO are correct, as I understand it. The actual "rule" per IAATO is 100 pax per landing group. SS and other lines adhere to this. SS has  decided to limit Cloud to 200 pax per voyage for Polar expeditions, despite the ship's higher capacity, in order to only need 2 landing groups to get everyone on shore.

 

Explorer has 130 or 140 pax, so Explorer also needs to have 2 landing groups. Thus on both Cloud and Explorer, you can do two different landing sites per day if you want. Big plus.

[gogo65]

I agree with Jpalbny, your choices really are:

-Less than one hundred passengers, so all can be off the ship at the same time

-Less than 200 passengers, so there are two groups of passengers that rotate. In reality its not like 100 get off, wait for that hundred to get on then the next 100 get off, more like a continuous movement of passengers, one zodiac brings passengers in, the next loads up etc we did Antarctica with Ponant also only 199 passengers we I’d two landings a day utilising this method, and were off for 1-1.5 hours each time, assuming SS is very similar regardless of cloud or explorer because they both fit into this group.

-more than 200 but less than 500 (such as Seaborn) where its more likely only one landing per day

-or the big drive by ships that you dont get off