Will Iphone work on sea days since we are close to the coast of CA?

[World Gallery]

We leave in 11 days for our first coastal CA cruise. It seems like the ship will be very close to the coast the entire time. Is it likely that we will be able to pick up a single and use the 4G on our Iphone?

We have sailed out of New Orleans many times and as soon as we are close enough to the river or sailing up the river, we get a single.

[CruiserBruce]

No. Highly unlikely. The ship's tower will be the dominant signal, and other than entering a port, chances are you will never be closer than 20 miles to the coast.

[BruceMuzz]

in many parts of the world, international cruise ships need only stay more than 12 miles off the coast in order to keep the casino and duty free shops open.

 

It used to be that way in California.

 

Then California passed that law about burning very expensive low-sulphur fuel when in California waters.

So the ships ensured that they were always more than 12 miles away.

 

Then California decided to extend their jurisdiction to 24 miles.

The UN says that is illegal, but they are doing it anyway.

 

So the cruise ships decided to stay at least 25 miles off California.

Now California is extending jurisdiction to 45 miles.

 

Your ship will stay 50 miles off the coast most of the time, to avoid California's costly green laws.

 

Since the horizon - at sea level - is around 15 miles, you will not see much of the California coast.

Mobile telephone coverage rarely makes it past the horizon.

Plan on using the ship's satellite telephone service most of the time.

[goose30]

If you plan on using your 4G service while at sea, plan for a shocker of a bill when you return.

[CantanaLobo]

... Your ship will stay 50 miles off the coast most of the time, to avoid California's costly green laws. ...

 

Burning more fuel to get out there. At least it's "clean" fuel for those additional miles that they would not have otherwise sailed :rolleyes:. The law of unintended consequences strikes again.

[World Gallery]

Thanks. This all makes sense. I guess we won't be using our phones. I know about how high the bills can be with when we are not tapping into a land signal.

[Keith1010]

As others said, it will not work using your cellulars network.

 

Keith

[sassyredhat]

My IPhone only worked in port. I was sending pix and messages home from Alaska which cost me more than $200.00.

I knew that it would be costly, but wanted to do it. :)

Pat

[marsda]

Thanks. This all makes sense. I guess we won't be using our phones. I know about how high the bills can be with when we are not tapping into a land signal.

I left my phone on accidentally when we got back on board in Jamaica last week. On our second sea day my phone rang while we were in the champagne bar. Caller ID said it was my maid service at home, so I didn't answer. My carrier had flipped over to "cellular at sea", and I didn't realize it would do that! I don't think I was charged for the call, but I also received some text notifications from Facebook games and CVS pharmacy. I honestly don't know if there will be a charge for that or not. My advice? Keep your phone turned OFF unless you are in port.

[Quince]

We did the coastal cruise last week. The first night, from San Diego to Santa Barbara, my husband kept his phone on to download a radio show. We figured we were in America, not a foreign country, so no roaming charges. Wrong. T Mobile texted him the next day to say he had $160 in data charges. After that, we kept the phones on "airplane mode" unless the ship was tied up to a dock.

 

P.S. He was able to get them to cancel the charges, pleading the "idiot card".

[World Gallery]

Wow! Was there any indication that he was not on his normal network?

[SadieN]

My IPhone only worked in port. I was sending pix and messages home from Alaska which cost me more than $200.00.

I knew that it would be costly, but wanted to do it. :)

 

Pat

 

Which carrier? Were you in Canada at the time?

We had no problems with AT&T.

[runnerodb83]

Which carrier? Were you in Canada at the time?

We had no problems with AT&T.

 

Same thing here with verizon. While you will be listed as "roaming data" its with a preferred provider in Alaska that, at least Verizon, has an agreement with so there was no additional charge.

 

When sailing to SF, i didnt get reception till we nearly sailed under the golden gate...might have been able to get reception if i was on the south side of the ship a bit earlier since I bet the cell coverage in the rural parts of the marin headlands is pretty weak.

[Gail & Marty sailing away]

It will cost more on the ship ..

[Thurston Howell lll]

If you plan on using your 4G service while at sea, plan for a shocker of a bill when you return.

 

 

Last year I was on the NCL Pride of America sailing on the cliff side of the big island and my $9.95 Virgin cell worked just fine, I called home in California and there were no roaming charges, just another normal call. With Virgin if you can make the call, it is a regular call. No roaming to worry about. You could buy a cheap phone and a $20.00 card to use and toss it in the trash when you get home and be way ahead cost wise. My non-plan is 18 cents per minute flat rate. They use the Sprint Network.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Thurston Howell lll

[Princess Patches]

Wow! Was there any indication that he was not on his normal network?

 

Yes, on my phone screen it normally shows "Verizon Wireless" in the upper left hand corner on the screen. However, when you are connected through the expensive ship's satellite service it will state either MCP, which means Maritime Communications Partners or it will show "data" or "data roaming" depending on whether you have a GSM or CDMA phone. Any time that it does not show your normal carrier name on the phone screen, you should assume you are in for some hefty charges.

 

I have been on the coastal cruise twice and we we were always on the ship's satellite service except while docked or getting very close to the dock.

[MauiLvrs]

Then California decided to extend their jurisdiction to 24 miles.

The UN says that is illegal, but they are doing it anyway.

 

So the cruise ships decided to stay at least 25 miles off California.

Now California is extending jurisdiction to 45 miles.

Leading to the question of how California cold ever enforce its laws in international waters?

[BruceMuzz]

Leading to the question of how California cold ever enforce its laws in international waters?

 

The California officials were very candid, telling us that if they found we were circumventing their regulations by sailing so far off the coast, they would make things very difficult for our ships when we called at California ports. They unfortunately did not realize that they were already making things difficult for us in many other ways.

 

They thought we needed them more than they needed us.

They said, "Take it or leave it".

We left it.

The governments of Australia, China, Japan, and Canada are very grateful to the California State Government for the huge financial windfalls sent their way.

[MauiLvrs]

We left it.

The governments of Australia, China, Japan, and Canada are very grateful to the California State Government for the huge financial windfalls sent their way.

Also explaining why a very similar cruise out of FL is noticeably less than CA?

IF you can enforce them ... blackmail and regulate you out of the state ... like so many other businesses. :(

[Smokeyham]

Then California decided to extend their jurisdiction to 24 miles.

The UN says that is illegal, but they are doing it anyway.

 

So the cruise ships decided to stay at least 25 miles off California.

Now California is extending jurisdiction to 45 miles.

 

Your ship will stay 50 miles off the coast most of the time, to avoid California's costly green laws.

 

I'm interested in learning more about this. Could you tell me which California agency is claiming this, or where I might find this law?

 

I checked the California Coastal Commission's and the State Coastal Conservancy's websites, and did not find any reference to this extended jurisdiction, but I could have missed something.