Jump to content

TA - If it was just 4 days ?


Winchester Ranger
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have an 8 day Eastbound TA coming up in November and during my research I discovered that back in the day speed was the priority, and the elite liners of the 1950s and 60s could make a TA in just 4 days - weather permitting.

 

So here's the question, if you had the choice of a TA in 4 days or 8 days for the same price - what would be your preference and why ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've done QM2 crossings in six & seven days, and are now booked on an eight day crossing next month. Seven was better than six. I'm thinking 8 may be too long. If it was our first time, 8 would be great. But we've already explored the ship. I suppose like most vacations it will depend on the weather, who we meet on board and the quality of the entertainment.

 

I would not be in favor of four or five day crossings. Between the flight to England and transportation from NYC back home, the TA would be too short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that if one is in a hurry to cross the Atlantic, an airplane which does the job in seven or so hours makes more sense than a ship taking four or so days: that gives you more time on the side you are trying to get to. On the other hand, if you like to travel by ship, why would you want to cut the experience in half? We are crossing on QM2 in November because we will be coming home to Connecticut from a visit with family in England. I would have preferred a two week cruise, but they all wound up in Florida requiring a flight home, which my wife preferred to avoid.

 

If there were any significant number of people wanting four day crossings (neither quick nor really relaxing), you can be sure such crossings would be provided - Cunard could sell almost twice as many tickets for four day crossings as for seven or eight day crossings, but they are smart enough to realize that the market just is not there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Six or seven days for me (no preference).

 

Certainly not faster or slower (I don't want the crossing to be over far too soon... and slower than seven might mean the ocean overtaking the ship and getting there first! ;) )

Edited by pepperrn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an 8 day Eastbound TA coming up in November and during my research I discovered that back in the day speed was the priority, and the elite liners of the 1950s and 60s could make a TA in just 4 days - weather permitting.

 

So here's the question, if you had the choice of a TA in 4 days or 8 days for the same price - what would be your preference and why ?

Essentially I use a TA as a means of travel for business so in one sense a quicker crossing would be sensible but I may well miss the relaxation potential of a 7 day. It is a bit like the old Concorde days - great if you were in a rush, but often I would prefer a longer experience in First.

 

I wonder how many people use a TA for non vacation travel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eight days for me. I love sea days so the longer a TA the better (my first was eleven days!).

 

Perhaps you should consider the Crystal Serenity, October 15, 2017. Eleven consecutive sea days from Rome to Key West. I'm hoping Cunard will have an Eastbound TA that will work with it.

 

Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that if one is in a hurry to cross the Atlantic, an airplane which does the job in seven or so hours makes more sense than a ship taking four or so days: that gives you more time on the side you are trying to get to. On the other hand, if you like to travel by ship, why would you want to cut the experience in half? We are crossing on QM2 in November because we will be coming home to Connecticut from a visit with family in England. I would have preferred a two week cruise, but they all wound up in Florida requiring a flight home, which my wife preferred to avoid.

 

If there were any significant number of people wanting four day crossings (neither quick nor really relaxing), you can be sure such crossings would be provided - Cunard could sell almost twice as many tickets for four day crossings as for seven or eight day crossings, but they are smart enough to realize that the market just is not there.

 

Much as I love TAs, I'm not retired and therefore have limited vacation time. Two seven day crossings, with another voyage or tour in between, stretch the limit of the continuous vacation time that I can take. I want some wind and speed on a TA. This ain't the Caribbean where a leisurely float between islands may be more appropriate.

 

If longer crossings grow in popularity they can be handled by the Baby Queens with their 17 knot max. QM2, in a perverse sense, suffers from her own popularity. Passengers want to stay on her longer thus her speed and ocean liner breeding - the very things that make her special - will no longer have economic relevance. So those who say "Yes!" to longer crossings unintentionally contribute to her economic demise.

 

QM2 was built for six day crossings. If Cunard did offer one for six days, and priced accordingly, it would be curious to see how many would sign on. But I suspect you are right. When passengers want to stay on her longer and ask about "booking strategies" there are clearly not enough of us willing to pay for what it would cost.

Edited by BlueRiband
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would opt for eight days, even though six or seven is preferable, because four is way too quick. Our first crossing on the QE2 in 1973 was barely over four days because of a half-day late departure. It seemed we had just unpacked and got used to the ship and it was time to pack. I would hope that all eight-day crossings will include Halifax because I would like very much to embark and/or disembark there.

 

In the 1970s and 80s we made crossings of eight and nine days between Montreal and Southampton or Tilbury on the Polish Ocean Line's Stefan Batory. Even though it was a very basic ship compared to the Cunard Queens, the crossings never seemed too long - something I can't explain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am torn between long and short crossings. Let me state, I have not done one yet, but my retirement plans include multiple crossings. So I am thinking it might be ok for a short crossing If I had plans for travel on the other side of the voyage. And if I was just doing a leisure trip, and relaxing, make the voyage last. Right now there are not good choices for short crossings except those dangerous Jet Aero planes. And I have no plans to utilize them ever. I just hope when I do retire, in 20 or so years, there is a liner to utilize. Travel to Europe should be sophisticated. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an 8 day Eastbound TA coming up in November and during my research I discovered that back in the day speed was the priority, and the elite liners of the 1950s and 60s could make a TA in just 4 days - weather permitting.

 

So here's the question, if you had the choice of a TA in 4 days or 8 days for the same price - what would be your preference and why ?

 

I understand the premise of your question, and why you are aksing it, but your premise is fundamentally flawed, since there is no way that the cost of a 4 day crossing would be the same as an 8 day crossing. The additional fuel to go from the 16 knots of an 8 day crossing to the 33 knots of a 4 day crossing is incredible. SeaLand used to have container ships that would do the crossing in under 4 days, and transpacific in under 7 days. However, there is a reason these ships are no longer running (except by the US governement, who doesn't show a profit), fuel cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too prefer an 8-day crossing, since I adore sea days and would hate to see it go back to a 6-day which I did many of before they started the 7-day. If it was 4 days I wouldn't go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 days or more. If one is in a hurry, use the plane, please.

 

We have spent 9 days continuous sailing in the Pacific and it was very sad to arrive at port. We love sea days. (Let alone that the ship will last more this way.:))

 

Not only will the ship last longer, she will continue to operate --- period. Economic operation (which is why QM2 sails at all) drops radically with each knot of increased speed. Why do you think most lines now sail so much slower - at the cost of greatly shortening port calls? Not only do they have more hours during which casinos and shops can be open, they save tremendously on fuel.

 

Just as the Concorde could not operate profitably (at virtually any fare) due to its fuel guzzling, QM2 would be priced out of business were they to attempt to return to 4 day crossings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only done it once, and I think the westbound crossing was six days. I remember thinking I might have liked a five day crossing better, until the QM2 ran into a storm. I was out of commission for most of a day, and it might have been two days if the ship had sailed at a greater speed! I was considerably worse for wear at the CC meet and greet, but had a grand time after things smoothed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...