Alaska cf. Reykjavik-Copenhagen?

I know that a number of you have done both itineraries, so I'm hoping that you can cast some light on the most distinct differences. I assume that the biggest difference is that Alaska has all the marvelous glaciers and fjords, all that breath-taking scenery. We've been to Alaska several times and have enjoyed it very much (except that we don't enjoy cold, damp weather-- but, yes, it was worth it).

How does the other itinerary compare? Both will be cold or cool weather I assume. (I know that Alaska this past season had some pretty terrific clear and warm weather.) Is the scenery wonderful in all those Norwegian ports? Is it as dazzling as the scenery in Alaska? Or does one visit that area for other reasons? What are the main attractions of that kind of cruise? The cruise is more expensive than the Alaska cruises, and of course much farther away for us than Alaska is. (I'm not sure that we can cope with that long a flight at this point, but maybe....)

I know that some of you have remarked in the past how much you liked the Norway and Denmark ports (we know Copenhagen fairly well, but not at all the others). All input very much appreciated.

and its a tough choice!

I'm assuming you are looking at the 11 July 2016 cruise on Voyager, Reykjavik to Copenhagen, which is nearly identical to a cruise we took in 2012. One substantial difference for our trip was that it included Geiranger and Flam which meant trips up two major Norwegian Fjords. The 2016 trip appears to be much more coastal.

That said, I'd say that Alaska has the edge between the two cruises when it comes to scenery and wildlife. The R to C cruise will be much more of a cultural experience with very good scenery versus amazing scenery and not much culture (I probably just offended every Alaskan out there!).

So, let me conclude by saying that both cruises are ones that we've done in variant forms more than once and would like to do again. And, if you opt for the R to C cruise, plan on going in early and spending some pre-cruise time in Reykjavik and inland Iceland (think volcanoes and glaciers via super-jeeps) as this is better done off the ship. IcelandAir is also quite reasonably priced and provides nice service (especially in "Economy Comfort" class) if you do your own air.

We have done both, and I concur with what Portolan said. Since you are not going to Geiranger or Flam, the alaskan scenery is going to be better. If you go to Iceland, you really need at least 2 days pre cruise to see the sites there. We drove ourselves around in a rental car, but there are tour companies. Iceland is really beautiful and easy to drive in.

One thing I will say though is that the flight to Iceland is not very comfortable. There are only a couple of airlines that fly there. For us in North America, Icelandair is really the only choice, and their "business class" seats are the same as what you would get on a regular domestic flight (not a transcontinental) in F on AA or Delta. So minimal recline, definitely not anywhere close to lie flat and not a lot of extra room. We love Iceland, but avoid night flights to there because of this.

I've done both, but the cruise from Iceland went up to North Cape. Its a shame the Iceland to Copenhagen doesn't go further north, but it is what it is. Given that you have done Alaska before, I would recommend the Iceland- Copenhagen. Iceland its such an interesting place, and you have 3 ports there! As others have said, I would suggest you spend a day or two extra days there.You'll still see beautiful fjords and other ports in Norway.

We have done both (Alaska twice) with our R to C including Geiranger and Flam. Agree with Portolan that scenery and wildlife is better in Alaska. We also liked the Alaska excursions better. Having said that, we really liked the R to C. Ports were more varied/different than ports in Alaska, especially in Iceland and sailing across from Iceland to Norway. Agree that a few days in Reykjavik is a good idea. We are talking about a third Alaska cruise now that the Mariner is back. Our flight (Icelandic Air) to Reykjavik was comfortable in the upgraded seats. Not as comfortable as what we are used to in business class to Europe, but the offset is it's not as long a flight.

I much appreciate the replies.

For two main reasons, and with your help, I now know that I'd choose an Alaska itinerary over next year's R-C itinerary. I remember reading a number of times in the past how handsome Geiranger and Flam are. Since Fjords R Us, it seems a shame to go to that area and miss those fjords. The second strong reason is that I think the flight to Reyk. would be more trying than the flight to Vancouver and maybe even a flight to Anchorage. It's certainly farther away for us (we live in FL). We're much less portable now than in the past: Long trips, and especially trips by air, are tough for my husband, and fairly trying for me (as they are, of course, for most people). Otoh, if we do Alaska, we won't have the nice business upgrade that we've been doing for those Europe cruises. I'm not sure we (mainly my husband) can handle being in planes for a long time in economy.

So I'm leaning (heavily) towards Alaska, though we find that we're not as gung ho as we've been for all our previous cruises. Seven days is too short for a cruise for us (just get settled and then it's good-bye), but I agree with one of the remarks, viz. that sights and excursions in Alaska aren't all that different from one another. Each port is somewhat different, but not nearly as much so as on other itineraries. Also, in order to have shorter flights (Vancouver rather than Anchorage) and be able to be on the ship longer, we'd have to do the 14 day cruise in May. We've read and read about the add-on ports and just can't seem to get awfully interested.

The other main drawback for us is the cold and damp weather. We've found that even in sensible and suitable clothing, those kinds of conditions are increasingly uncomfortable for us.

I know that I tend to go on and on in these posts-- more than anyone needs or cares to know-- but I am very grateful for all the patient and excellent detail that Regent posters have kindly offered over the years.

Happy sails to all!

We are booked on this cruise & we were concerned about the comment about airlines & the not so worth upgraded seats. We booked business class & worry about the price given the not really reclining seats etc. I looked & it seems like Delta, Air France, KLM goes to Reykjavik so thought the comment regarding only real airline to be Icelandic air to be a regional/location issue. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

We are booked on this cruise & we were concerned about the comment about airlines & the not so worth upgraded seats. We booked business class & worry about the price given the not really reclining seats etc. I looked & it seems like Delta, Air France, KLM goes to Reykjavik so thought the comment regarding only real airline to be Icelandic air to be a regional/location issue. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

I would check with your TA to learn if Icelandic Air has a contract with Regent. Icelandic Air only flies out of a couple of U.S. cities so, unless your flight has a stop in New York (for instance), it is unlikely that you would be booked on Icelandic.

When I want to get an idea of which airline Regent will select, I do a search on yapta.com to learn which airlines fly to my destination (it sounds like you may have done this already). Then I take the flight #'s and go to seatguru.com to learn which airplane is being used for the flights and the seat configuration (Note: There can be several similar planes with different seat configurations which is why it is important to input the flight numbers).

At first glance, I would prefer Delta then KLM and lastly Air France. The last time I checked, Air France still had angled seats, KLM was in the process of switching to flatbed and Delta seems to have quite a few planes with flatbed seats.

We are booked on this cruise & we were concerned about the comment about airlines & the not so worth upgraded seats. We booked business class & worry about the price given the not really reclining seats etc. I looked & it seems like Delta, Air France, KLM goes to Reykjavik so thought the comment regarding only real airline to be Icelandic air to be a regional/location issue. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Just did a quick check as the other two times we went to Iceland, Delta did not fly there. But it appears that they do fly from JFK to Reykjavik now, at least in the summer. However it has a 767-300 listed as the aircraft. This is like a domestic 757--the seats are not lie flat or anywhere close. They are just the regular seats that you have in domestic first. So no advantage at all over Icelandair unless you have Delta miles to burn, which we do.

Thank you both Travelcat2 & RachelG for your quick response and suggestions. I may rethink the upgrade to Business class.

Rachel - you're better at this than I -- couldn't find Delta flights out of JFK. It would help if we knew the departure airport!

Rachel - you're better at this than I -- couldn't find Delta flights out of JFK. It would help if we knew the departure airport!

The code for Reykjavik is KEF. I just put in TUL to KEF on the Delta site and it gave me TUL-ATL-JFK-KEF and the reverse on return. I think it may only operate in the summer months--I put in dummy dates in August 2016. We are doing Longyearbyen-Reykjavik on Silversea Explorer in August 2017, so could use Delta miles for the return trip if they still offer that route.