Staying onboard during ship relocation?

[Sim1979]

The question might sound weird, but i'm currently looking on doing the Alaska cruise on the Joy starting from Seattle on September 28th (roundtrip Sept. 28 to Oct. 5th), BUT then, i would also like doing a pacific coastal cruise and there is one on the Joy, but it's sailing from Vancouver on October 6th.

 

So basically, the Joy will reposition in the night of October 5th from Seattle to Vancouver... is there any way to stay onboard overnight (i'm guessing not since there would be nothing operating, like no restaurants, bars or whatever)?

[Georgia_Peaches]

Interesting question. You’re probably not the first to wonder this. But wow, how eerie to be on a mostly empty ship. Following...

[Sirtate]

Interesting question. You’re probably not the first to wonder this. But wow, how eerie to be on a mostly empty ship. Following...

IKR?

Sounds like the basis for a horror movie...

Announcer; " Harold thought it would be simpler to stay on board for a repositioning cruise. He was wrong!" (Scary music, etc)

I'd call the concierge about staying on board.

They would still have a galley or two working because staff still needs to eat.

You may not get the level of service you get during 'Prime Time', but if you hide in your room...

Sent from my LG-H933 using Tapatalk

[goldfada]

You would embark in Seattle and disembark in Los Angeles without an intervening distant foreign port. Not allowed.

[Sirtate]

You would embark in Seattle and disembark in Los Angeles without an intervening distant foreign port. Not allowed.

Is the Joy foreign registered?

If so, cabotage rules apply.

Although, they could silly-bugger-it to show the repositioning as its own trip.

As long as OP clears customs in Canada, it'd be ok.

Sent from my LG-H933 using Tapatalk

[ColinIllinois]

There will be no passengers onboard.

[www3traveler]

Will be a staff only cruise--- end of the season staff party.

[hallux]

The Bliss did a similar repositioning this Spring, but in the opposite direction.  They actually need to do that repositioning because of the PVSA, otherwise they would just board passengers in Seattle and cruise down the coast to LA.  As a result - no passengers allowed between Seattle and Vancouver.

[timf2001]

They could sell a one day Seattle-Vancouver cruise if they wanted to (and some cruise lines do), but they choose not to in order to give their crew a day off.  However, you would still not be allowed to book it in conjunction with Vancouver-LA.  To avoid these kind of violations, it's easier to just sail empty.

[Sim1979]

But... Vancouver is a foreign port... so in my understanding, stopping in vancouver or start sailing from vancouver is the same right, it's not against the rule?

[Paul Bogle]

The PVSA requires foreign vessels carrying passengers between USA ports to call on a distant foreign port  in between. Under the act a distant foreign port is one outside of North America and its islands. The act also considers where you board the ship and where you last depart the ship as your itinerary irrespective of how the cruise is marketed to you by the cruise line. This is why stopping in Vancouver doesn't help. The US government considers your trip as beginning in Seattle and ending in Los Angeles requiring a stop in a distant foreign port. The nearest qualifying port would be on the Pacific coast of Columbia.

 

[Sim1979]

1 minute ago, Paul Bogle said:

The PVSA requires foreign vessels carrying passengers between USA ports to call on a distant foreign port  in between. Under the act a distant foreign port is one outside of North America and its islands. The act also considers where you board the ship and where you last depart the ship as your itinerary irrespective of how the cruise is marketed to you by the cruise line. This is why stopping in Vancouver doesn't help. The US government considers your trip as beginning in Seattle and ending in Los Angeles requiring a stop in a distant foreign port. The nearest qualifying port would be on the Pacific coast of Columbia.

 

 

OK, but for the Alaska cruise from Seattle, you depart from Seattle then cruise to Alaska (USA), then do a quick stop in Victoria (Canada) and then you finish in Seattle... so it doesn't seem to apply for Alaska cruises for some reasons.

[ColinIllinois]

2 minutes ago, Sim1979 said:

 

OK, but for the Alaska cruise from Seattle, you depart from Seattle then cruise to Alaska (USA), then do a quick stop in Victoria (Canada) and then you finish in Seattle... so it doesn't seem to apply for Alaska cruises for some reasons.

 

Regardless of the rule definition, NCL is not taking passengers for the one night repo. 

[Paul Bogle]

14 minutes ago, ColinIllinois said:

 

Regardless of the rule definition, NCL is not taking passengers for the one night repo. 

 

The reason why is obvious. NCL could sell the trip as a one night cruise but no one on the following cruise could go.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Paul Bogle

[timf2001]

35 minutes ago, Sim1979 said:

 

OK, but for the Alaska cruise from Seattle, you depart from Seattle then cruise to Alaska (USA), then do a quick stop in Victoria (Canada) and then you finish in Seattle... so it doesn't seem to apply for Alaska cruises for some reasons.

 

If your cruise ends at the same port it started at, you only need to visit any foreign port, not a distant foreign port.  That's how most cruises departing from the US operate.

[nwcruiselover]

It’s quite easy to get from Seattle to Vancouver by train or bus should you still want to do the Pacific Coast cruise from Vancouver.  

[JohnIreland]

6 hours ago, Sim1979 said:

But... Vancouver is a foreign port... so in my understanding, stopping in vancouver or start sailing from vancouver is the same right, it's not against the rule? 

 

The problem is allowing someone do Seattle -> Seattle -> Vancouver -> LA

 

They could allow Seattle  ->  Seattle -> Vancouver

[ed01106]

Even if they won’t let you stay on board, ask if they will let your luggage stay on board, then take an overnight bag and catch a bus.

[BillB48]

1 hour ago, JohnIreland said:

 

The problem is allowing someone do Seattle -> Seattle -> Vancouver -> LA

 

They could allow Seattle  ->  Seattle -> Vancouver

 

Exactly!  The problem is that so few people would or want to take advantage of the SEA to YVR only, they could probably use the time for deep cleaning or other maintenance that is difficult with passengers.

 

Regardless of how the cruise was offered, embarking at Seattle and disembarking the ship at LAX would put the ship afoul of the PVSA

 

 

[Sim1979]

Thanks everyone for your time... it seems too much hassle to get off, catch a bus/train with all luguages, cross border, redo all the check-in process... etc...

 

I think i'll do the Alaska one from Vancouver instead on the Jewel, with all disavantages (older ship, cost is higher, don't go in glacier bay) but i can do the back-to-back with the pacific coastal (ending in LA) afterward...

Edited July 4, 2019 by Sim1979

[ed01106]

2 hours ago, Sim1979 said:

Thanks everyone for your time... it seems too much hassle to get off, catch a bus/train with all luguages, cross border, redo all the check-in process... etc...

 

That is why I suggested asking the line if they would let you leave your luggage on board.  Particularly if you can get the same cabin for both cruises, it would not be too bad.

[bonvoyagie]

A few years ago they used to end the AK season with a Sea to Vancouver cruise - then they could do the Vancouver to LA without violation. They also started the season with the LA to Vancouver and then Vancouver to Seattle.

 

In 2017 the Pearl ran from New Orleans to Seattle via the Panama Canal which met the PVSA.

 

However the crew probably could use a break !

[Paul Bogle]

4 minutes ago, bonvoyagie said:

A few years ago they used to end the AK season with a Sea to Vancouver cruise - then they could do the Vancouver to LA without violation. They also started the season with the LA to Vancouver and then Vancouver to Seattle.

 

In 2017 the Pearl ran from New Orleans to Seattle via the Panama Canal which met the PVSA.

 

However the crew probably could use a break !

The issue with Seattle and Vancouver is all about where you start and where you finish. You cannot start in Seattle or an Alaskan port and end in a different USA port on the west coast. Vancouver becomes a mandatory break point. You can start there and end in an American port or start in an American port and end in Vancouver. Otherwise you must end in the American port where you began.

 

On the Panama Canal transits they all make at least one stop in an ABC island or a port on the South American mainland. Any of these qualify as a distant foreign port allowing a foreign flagged vessel to carry passengers from one American port to a different American port.

 

I wish this ancient protectionist law would just go away. It has managed to protect American passenger shipping into non-existence. 

[bonvoyagie]

OK I see where my post could be mistaken - I meant that the last AK cruise started in Seattle - through AK and ended in Vancouver BC. A valid cruise for the PVSA.