NYCcruiser65 Posted February 7, 2014 #1 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Hi - trying to decide between two Baltic cruises: 1) NCL Star, an older ship, and a 9-night cruise that does go through the archipelago 2) Royal Princess, a new ship, and an 11-night cruise that adds Oslo, but doesn't cruise the archipelago Others have said that the archipelago is a must… really beautiful, but, and excuse my ignorance, I'm unsure why. Can anyone tell me why cruising through the archipelago is so great? Just curious. It might be a deciding factor. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitkat343 Posted February 7, 2014 #2 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Wow - I'm trying to decide this too! In addition to the fact that cruise critic members have reported that the archipelago is beautiful, you also will be tendering at Nynashamn which is 36 miles south of Stockholm. For my family, there is no question that we would strongly prefer docking directly in Stockholm although we have greatly enjoyed traveling with princess in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted February 7, 2014 #3 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Wow - I'm trying to decide this too! In addition to the fact that cruise critic members have reported that the archipelago is beautiful, you also will be tendering at Nynashamn which is 36 miles south of Stockholm. For my family, there is no question that we would strongly prefer docking directly in Stockholm although we have greatly enjoyed traveling with princess in the past. We opted to cruise with RCI and enjoyed both the archipelago and docking directly in Stockholm...amazing experience and the best choice for us...might be worth considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Thule Posted February 7, 2014 #4 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Others have said that the archipelago is a must… really beautiful, but, and excuse my ignorance, I'm unsure why. Here is an earlier discussion about the topic: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1124128 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskanb Posted February 7, 2014 #5 Share Posted February 7, 2014 This cruise is mostly about towns and cities so the Stockholm Archipelago provides a change to natural beauty instead of cultural beauty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeHeartCruising Posted February 7, 2014 #6 Share Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) Here are the pictures from my cruise which cruised the archipelago and docked in Stockholm. You'll see water pictures at both the beginning and end of the picture set. These water pictures are representative of what you would see during the cruise in/out of the archipelago. It's a very nice waterway to cruise through with lots to see along the way. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickchapman/sets/72157631740646665/ Edited February 7, 2014 by MeHeartCruising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ2002 Posted February 7, 2014 #7 Share Posted February 7, 2014 We were on the Star Baltic Capitals cruise last year, and going through the archipelago was great. We had an aft cabin, which made it even more enjoyable. The Star is indeed an older ship, and is a little worn around the edges in the cabins. You really wouldn't notice it much, however, in the public areas. The ship is well maintained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare John Bull Posted February 7, 2014 #8 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Here's some you tube video, decide for yourself ;) JB :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desdichado62 Posted February 7, 2014 #9 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Here is an earlier discussion about the topic:http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1124128 Here are the pictures from my cruise which cruised the archipelago and docked in Stockholm. You'll see water pictures at both the beginning and end of the picture set. These water pictures are representative of what you would see during the cruise in/out of the archipelago. It's a very nice waterway to cruise through with lots to see along the way. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickchapman/sets/72157631740646665/ Also see reply #10 in this topic: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1979939 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkkapp Posted February 7, 2014 #10 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Just my "two cents--- We have been on two Baltic cruises, 2010 and 2013. In 2010 we missed Stockholm all together due to a ship malfunction. We went directly to Helsinki and had an extra half day there. Last year we were all set to sail up the archipelago but high winds on the sail out were predicted and the ship was not allowed to come up to Stockholm. Thankfully, we docked at Nynashamn and we were able to get to Stockholm by shuttle, although we didn't have as much time there as we would have liked. Just be thankful if you can get there at all:). <<<Karen>>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giantfan13 Posted February 7, 2014 #11 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Hi - trying to decide between two Baltic cruises: 1) NCL Star, an older ship, and a 9-night cruise that does go through the archipelago 2) Royal Princess, a new ship, and an 11-night cruise that adds Oslo, but doesn't cruise the archipelago Others have said that the archipelago is a must… really beautiful, but, and excuse my ignorance, I'm unsure why. Can anyone tell me why cruising through the archipelago is so great? Just curious. It might be a deciding factor. Thanks! Maybe I can shed another bit of light onto this. The archipelago is a wonderful sail. Is it a cruise breaker, definitely not. I'd be more concerned about not docking in Stockholm proper than sailing thru the archipelago. I was going to put up more pix from our sailing, but you have a great idea of what it is and what to expect. On a side note, I see you are from NY, or where from NY. We are from Long Island. Not to make light of the archipelago, but if you have ever sailed thru or visited the 1000 Islands in upstate NY, they it is very similar. We have done this several times and sailing thru the archipelago was very similar. Personally, if all things being equal, I would take the extra 2 days instead. But that is just MVHO. Cheers Len Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoralReef Posted February 7, 2014 #12 Share Posted February 7, 2014 I would take the extra two days and Oslo. We were looking forward to the archipelago, but our ship was diverted to Nynashamn due to high winds, which I hear often happens. We ended up missing the archipelago and only having a couple of hours in Stockholm. It was nice, but I'd rather make plans with better odds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCcruiser65 Posted February 8, 2014 Author #13 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Thanks all! These photos and videos are all very helpful. As are the anecdotes about not being able to go through the archipelago due to weather. Although it looks beautiful, I think I'm leaning toward the 2 extra days and Oslo as who knows when I'll get to this part of the world again. Still thinking about it though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now