Port of Stockton CA-Royal Caribbean

[travelplus]

I was wondering if Royal Caribbean could build a port in the Port of Stockton on the Delta as its close to San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento and parts of Northern Oregon? Perhaps cruise ships could run through the Delta channels like the Cargo ships do  or perhaps open a port in Oakland.

 

I would love to see cruise ships along the West Coast through the Panama Canal and on to Hawaii/Australia// Alaska etc.

Could a large ship like the Harmony go through the Delta to Stockton?   The land there must be less expensive and there is Amtrak, ACE to San Jose and is located near Highway 5 and 99? 

 

For location its about 90 minutes from San Jose an hour to Sacramento and San Francisco, close to the East Bay, 7 hours to Los Angeles, 6 hours to Northern Oregon, 3 hours to Lake Tahoe , 4 hours to Reno.  Napa is about 90 minutes away for  a Tour.  

 

Would be a perfect location for Royal Caribbean to build up to make it a viable city with nice hotels and a destination River Walk.  Potential crew could fly in and out of SFO/OAK or SAC or even into Stockton Municipal Airport.

 

I was coming up with a plan in my head with how the terminal could look like and hopefully with the proposed High Speed Rail would be cool. It would be nice to move the train station to the Port  for all trains in and out of Stockton. Currently Amtrak has two stations and the Ace Train could stop at the Port of Stockton with bus connections to Downtown/Airport. A bus terminal for Greyhound, Amtrak Thruway Buses, Royal Caribbean Buses etc.

 

If Royal Caribbean has success perhaps Princess and others would add Stockton if San Francisco is busy.  For shore excursions its not a long way to Stockton and they could even add UC Berkely and Berkley as one excursion and some to Fioli Gardens etc. 

 

Ships could overnight at Stockton as well.  

 

What are your thoughts? 

Edited August 8, 2019 by travelplus

[Sobro]

It's 80 miles inland. It would take more than 5 hours to reach international waters, at such point Royal could open the Casino and not follow California liquor laws. 

 

Never going to happen.

[Ourusualbeach]

If they can’t keep a ship on the West coast for more than a couple sailings a year they are certainly not going to invest in building a pier.  

[mayleeman]

And Stockton is not really a tourist mecca compared to the Bay area. How many foreigners have even heard of it--or Americans, for that matter? 

[time4u2go]

Why would they go to the expense of building a new port in California when they hardly use the existing California ones?  They've determined that basing their ships in other locations is more profitable.

Edited August 8, 2019 by time4u2go

[ReneeFLL]

I'm just curious, but why would you really think that Royal would spend the money for a port so far inland when there are so many better options on the west cost? I have been to Stockton several times when we lived in Silicon Valley and definitely wouldn't want to see it as a port.

[Ashland]

San Pedro works just fine...just unfortunately not fine enough for RCI.

[Thorben-Hendrik]

11 hours ago, travelplus said:

I was wondering if Royal Caribbean could build a port in the Port of Stockton on the Delta as its close to San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento and parts of Northern Oregon? Perhaps cruise ships could run through the Delta channels like the Cargo ships do  or perhaps open a port in Oakland.

 

I would love to see cruise ships along the West Coast through the Panama Canal and on to Hawaii/Australia// Alaska etc.

Could a large ship like the Harmony go through the Delta to Stockton?   The land there must be less expensive and there is Amtrak, ACE to San Jose and is located near Highway 5 and 99? 

 

For location its about 90 minutes from San Jose an hour to Sacramento and San Francisco, close to the East Bay, 7 hours to Los Angeles, 6 hours to Northern Oregon, 3 hours to Lake Tahoe , 4 hours to Reno.  Napa is about 90 minutes away for  a Tour.  

 

Would be a perfect location for Royal Caribbean to build up to make it a viable city with nice hotels and a destination River Walk.  Potential crew could fly in and out of SFO/OAK or SAC or even into Stockton Municipal Airport.

 

I was coming up with a plan in my head with how the terminal could look like and hopefully with the proposed High Speed Rail would be cool. It would be nice to move the train station to the Port  for all trains in and out of Stockton. Currently Amtrak has two stations and the Ace Train could stop at the Port of Stockton with bus connections to Downtown/Airport. A bus terminal for Greyhound, Amtrak Thruway Buses, Royal Caribbean Buses etc.

 

If Royal Caribbean has success perhaps Princess and others would add Stockton if San Francisco is busy.  For shore excursions its not a long way to Stockton and they could even add UC Berkely and Berkley as one excursion and some to Fioli Gardens etc. 

 

Ships could overnight at Stockton as well.  

 

What are your thoughts? 

Sounds like a nice plan! But I doubt there is enough money in it!🤔

[AlanF65]

11 hours ago, travelplus said:

Could a large ship like the Harmony go through the Delta to Stockton?   The land there must be less expensive and there is Amtrak, ACE to San Jose and is located near Highway 5 and 99? 

Harmony is way to big for Port of Stockton.

https://www.portofstockton.com/deepwater-channel-info

With the tide and bridges and power restrictions it just wouldn't work.

Air quality restrictions would be tougher than San Pedro or SF because of all the pollution from the Bay Area that blows into the valley, the pollution controls are stricter.

 

I don't think there are any river cruises anymore.

 

The only good thing is I could get there in 40 minutes.

 

 

 

[Wanderista]

I agree that it looks too far inland for that type of ship. It looks like an area for river cruising though. River cruising is catching on again in other parts of the US such as the Mississippi River. There are companies that are expanding in that area including in Oregon.

 

It sounds like RCI has specifically decided not to invest in CA at this time, but that can always change. Tastes and interests change so keep an eye out for itineraries that interest you. 

 

As an East Coaster, I'm glad to have options in the Atlantic, but in catering to so many people, cruises need to follow the trends of large groups of people including out here. As demographics and tastes change, options for cruises will likely change as well. I guess for me, it is just one type of travel albeit an enjoyable one.

 

[Teeara]

Someone obviously has plenty of time on their hands to think of this ;o)

 

You want to cruise out of the Bay Area, go to San Francisco.  Princess sails out of SF to Hawaii (RT), Vancouver and Mexico.  RCI seems to have pretty much given up on the West Coast with a few exceptions.  You want Panama Canal?  RCI sails out of San Diego and L.A.  They do have repositioning cruises up the coast before/after the Alaska season I believe (usually with Radiance).  I think most Australia cruises start out of Hawaii or Vancouver for RCI.

 

No way could they do something in the Delta (can you imagine the environmental impact studies, etc. to try to get that to fly?).  And no way would I consider Stockton as a desirable tourist destination.  Much better to simply stay with San Francisco. 

[Glide_Path]

Logistically speaking, no way.  They need to be close to either Canada or Mexico.  As is, Port of San Francisco and Long Beach works just fine.  Carnival Panamora and NCL Joy/Bliss are coming to the west coast though.

[PCWalton1]

I stop in Stockton for gas and move on. That's all it's good for. 

[travelplus]

Well at least you confirmed why it won't work!

[AlanF65]

4 hours ago, Wanderista said:

It sounds like RCI has specifically decided not to invest in CA at this time, but that can always change. Tastes and interests change so keep an eye out for itineraries that interest you. 

The primary reason they aren't in California is the environmental restrictions when they are in port. (have to connect  to port power because of air quality issues).

[bonsai3s]

Travelplus...nice try......but Stockton?

Let me quote John McEnroe again: "You cannot be serious!" 😏

[Wanderista]

1 hour ago, AlanF65 said:

The primary reason they aren't in California is the environmental restrictions when they are in port. (have to connect  to port power because of air quality issues).

 

Thanks for the info. 

[zeppgirl]

I live just north of there so that would be amazing, but Stockton's not really a place I'd suggest anyone visits....I would be really happy with more west coast sailings, especially leaving out of SF.  

[chengkp75]

16 hours ago, AlanF65 said:

Harmony is way to big for Port of Stockton.

https://www.portofstockton.com/deepwater-channel-info

With the tide and bridges and power restrictions it just wouldn't work.

Air quality restrictions would be tougher than San Pedro or SF because of all the pollution from the Bay Area that blows into the valley, the pollution controls are stricter.

 

I don't think there are any river cruises anymore.

 

The only good thing is I could get there in 40 minutes.

 

 

 

Yes, draft restrictions (difference between vessel draft and river depth, or "under keel clearance") would not work for a ship of Harmony's size, and the three bridges before Stockton would stop most large cruise ships.

11 hours ago, AlanF65 said:

The primary reason they aren't in California is the environmental restrictions when they are in port. (have to connect  to port power because of air quality issues).

There are exemptions from the shore power regulations, if the company has fewer than a given number of California port calls per year, they don't have to plug in when docked.  And, it is up to the port authority to provide shore power infrastructure, which is far more complex and costly for a single cruise ship than for an entire port full of cargo ships.

 

Cruise lines don't make investments in port cities, other than partnerships with port authorities for terminals, don't understand where they would be interested in building hotels and riverwalks.  As for crew joining/leaving, the crew visa requires that they be escorted by bonded security at all times from the airport terminal to the ship, so adding this 80 miles is a further cost detriment.  And, I'm sure that flights into Stockton airport would not have the "bundle package pricing" that foreign crewing agencies use to get discounted merchant mariner fares.

 

With a major port near the coast, that you have to sail past to get to Stockton, why invest in another port that takes 6-8 hours more to get to, with attendant fuel burned, etc.  Why are there limited numbers of ships sailing out of New Orleans and Baltimore?  Time to get to the open ocean.