Heidi13

If itinerary is your primary driver then any RCI ship is a poor choice, as they declined to accept permits for Glacier Bay during the last round of negotiations. Princess & HAL would be better choices.

Totally agree, a B2B is a great option out of Vancouver. Having worked entire seasons in Alaska, I can attest to the fact that the weather most often changes every week. Now as a pax, since we are only 30 miles from Canada Place, we don't have to bother with flights, going through the tunnel in Whittier, etc.

Welcome to Cruise Critic. For single cabins on a World Cruise, I suggest checking out Fred Olsen Lines. Before COVID they used to have single cabins on at least some of their ships. They have sold a couple of the older ships, so not aware what is currently available. They operate out of UK and at least pre-COVID, had 1 ship that completed a World Cruise.

In Alaska we mostly book inside cabins for a couple of reasons. If sailing during, or close to the summer solstice, it can be daylight for up to 20 hrs and the other 4 hrs are twilight. Spent too many months on ships in Alaska working shiftwork and trying to sleep during the day or evening. An inside cabin is perfectly dark at night. Alaska scenery is generally on both side, so we are normally up on deck, checking out both sides. Sitting on a balcony, unless it is aft facing, misses 50% of the scenery.

Since they are owned by Carnival, there is no way on Earth I would work for them. Spent 40 yrs at sea, fortunately none of them with a Carnival brand. Unfortunately, our son was not so lucky.

In Jan/Feb, you could have smooth seas, but it is most unlikely. The last 2 - 3 days before and after Southampton are likely to be rough, as you navigate the Channel, Western Approaches and Bay of Biscay. From Miami, the shortest direct courses take you well up into the Northern Atlantic, which has more potential for heavy weather than a more southerly route. From Southampton, you are more likely to take a more southerly routing, so once clear of the bay of Biscay, it could be smoother sailing. I have done a number of crossings at that time of year and never experienced flat calm, generally moderate to rough seas, with the worst being seas up as high as the Bridge windows.

Probably not unsafe as you are so far from the glaciers, especially the 2nd photo. If that is as close as you got, it confirms what i have read about the NCL ships staying further back. Here are some examples of cruising to glaciers in Glacier Bay - Sun Princess 1980 Alaska Season This is still safe, as we were about 3 cables, or 1/3 ml from the glaciers. Back in those days, we lowered a boat to bring a chunk of glacial ice back aboard. Since I took the boat away every week, I have an even better perspective how far from the face of the glacier the ship was. BTW - I might be old, but personally will never sail with Princess again and I used to work for them.

Bottom end of the Adriatic can also be rather snotty. Had a gangway washed off the Prom Dk of SS Uganda back in '76.

Affirmative, Berth # 93 is at the World Cruise Centre, up by the bridge over to Long Beach.

No need to wait for Shore-ex, most British ports have a great selection of excellent private tours that are generally cheaper and superior to shore-ex. Just takes a little research.

There are only a few people on the ship who know how close the ship gets and they have access to radars. Distance is very deceptive, especially at sea. Back in the 1970's we were much closer than today's ships, but were still about 3 cables (1/3 ml) off and it looked like you could reach out and touch. BTW - inching closer is not prudent navigation, as the Master and pilot normally agree a safe distance, steam to that point and stop. From what I recall of the Norwegian Sun incident, it wasn't the bergy bit that hit the ship, the ship steamed directly into the ice, hitting it with the bulbous bow. I believe it was also navigating in fog, which is a risk many Masters would not accept. Since they hit the ice, they were clearly not steaming at a safe speed, as required by the Collision Regulations.

NCL only started in Alaska this century and I'll suggest having a ship damaged by a bergy bit, operating cruises in October and developing distant berthing locations means they are slow learners and/or have limited experience. Since their ship was damaged, I have read they now do not get as close to glaciers, as the more experienced cruise lines and Masters. I did my first Alaska cruise almost 45 years ago with Princess, who already had 10 yrs experience by then. Since HAL & Princess have 75 & 55 yrs experience respectively, I am justified referring to NCL as the newcomers.

The ships dock in San Pedro at 1 of 2 facilities. Provided they have space, Viking uses the World Cruise Centre, which has 2 berths. Been there many times, both working and as a pax, but have never paid attention to any facilities on offer, as I always headed straight into town. It is a short walk (3/4 ml) into town where they have a number of cafes/restaurants. If the WCC is full, Viking docks at the outer harbour berth # 46. I only know of the Double Tree Hotel at that end of town and it must be about 1.5 mls from the berth. Might be other options, as I rarely went that far from the ship at WCC.

Only you know if you will be bored. We did over 30 sea days in a row with Viking and even on the days with 25 hrs, it was tough finding enough hours to sleep.

Affirmative, when the ship was rolling and/or pitching excessively, the galley ceased providing hot meals, as it wasn't safe to cook. Wind speed was easier to determine, most of the time. On one ship the wind was so strong it blew the business end of the anemometer away.

Since we don't have instruments to measure wave height and there are also 2 common metrics, it is a very subjective subject. Those that publish wave heights, usually use significant wave height, which is an average of the highest 1/3 of the waves (from trough to crest). Therefore, published significant wave heights are lower than actual max wave heights. Frankly, when you are hove-to in a storm, it is irrelevant whether the waves are 75' or 100', they are all still huge.

I received the 65+ 'Flu shot and COVID booster last week. They only had Moderna, which they advised upon checking in. Since I had Astra Z first and all subsequent have been Moderna, it works for me.

The most experienced cruise lines in Alaska are Princess & HAL, while NCL probably have the least experience. With a child, Princess are probably your best bet. Time of Year - Overall, May is generally the driest month and you will still have some snow atop the mountains. May is the beginning of the peak whale season. Salmon can start showing up in May and run through Sept. Having worked a couple of Alaska seasons, my personal preference is early/mid June - lots of daylight and good chance of seeing whales and salmon running. Seattle - ships departing this port must operate R/T cruises, so you normally don't get up to College Fjord. They also steam up and down the Pacific Ocean, west of Vancouver Island, so you spend most of the week in open ocean. You also have greater potential for rougher seas. Seattle is also about 100 miles further from Alaska than Vancouver and those ships must also stop in a Canadian Port, normally a few hours late evening in Victoria. Therefore, the Seattle ships normally spend less time in the Alaskan ports than Vancouver based ships. Vancouver - ships departing Vancouver can operate R/T cruises, or alternating 1-way cruises to Seward/Whittier, which cruise through the spectacular Prince William Sound. You will spend more time in the Inside Passage and normally have longer times in port.

I assume you are considering one of the Phillip's cruises out of Whittier. During one of our R/T cruises out of Vancouver, we booked the 26 Glacier Tour during the day we were in Whittier. It was a great day, seeing lots more than we did the previous day from the ship.

With only a couple of hours, I suggest checking out Creek Street. Probably don't have the time to take the funicular up to Totem Park. On the Front Street, another vote for Annabelles. We also have visited Burger Queen a few times, which is popular with the crew, but it might not open early enough.

That's the benefit of employing risk analysis, as when determining mitigations, you often have more than 1 tool/option available, so you can select the one(s) that best meet your needs. The same solutions don't work for everyone, which is when developing policies & procedures, the finite risk assessment is completed at each vessel/class of vessel, and the vessel specific procedures incorporated into a level 3 ship specific manual.

If you understood risk management, you would know that a fire extinguisher is a normal risk mitigation tool in a home. As a mariner, I have also received extensive fire fighting training, been involved in a number of fires and have used extinguishers both onboard ships and in a home. Completing a risk analysis identifies the tools you require to mitigate the risks, so you are prepared. You may never use those tools, but they are available.

In the past, they are stopping selling the product, but will continue honouring those policies already sold. At least that is how the Viking/Tripmate plan worked, when they ceased selling to Canadians.

You forgot to mention those of us that don't wish to have one of those infernal cell phones. Having had to live with one 24/7/365 during my working life, using well > 1,000 mins per month, I haven't used one of them since I retired 11 years ago. Managed to go around the World 3 times, complete a couple African safaris + lots of other travel, all without a phone. Rather than being swayed by a single incident, a more effective strategy is to complete a risk analysis, looking at the big picture, to determine needs. Weighing the potential consequences with the frequency of occurrence. The potential consequence is missing the ship and being stuck in Haifa, until finding a flight out. Haifa does have an international airport so potentially no need to travel to Tel Aviv. Since it is not IDLH, at worst the consequence is moderate. Regarding probability, thousands of port calls are made, even in Israel, without incident, so the frequency is very low. Based on comparing the frequency and potential consequences, the risk is low. With a low risk, I see no need for purchasing a mobile phone. If you wish to mitigate the low risk, other equally effective strategies are available. This could include only using shore-ex or a local tour operator. For your phone to assist in recalling you to the ship, you had to provide the number to the Purser's Office, well it is just as easy to provide the name and contact details of the tour company, as all guides carry one of those infernal phones. We all make choices and since I am trained in risk analysis and have used it for many years as an operational Master, based on a very quick analysis, I see no requirement or benefit, of carrying a phone. The roaming charge for Americans may be $10/day, but that is not consistent for all nationalities, as some of us could incur hundreds of dollars in roaming charges, should phones be turned on.

I guess if they didn't know the ship's name, it is too much to expect them to know contact details for the Port Agent, should they miss the ship.