Tracy Arm Fjord or Glacier Bay?

[satxdiver]

The Ruby and Emerald are almost identical ships with minor changes. Both are beautiful ships. When we did the Tracy Arm, we were not able to go all the way in due to the ice floating in the ship. We did not want to do a Titanic cruise!

 

Our DS lives in Seattle so the r/t Seattle trip was very enticing. We tried to get him to join us but he refused. Maybe later he will change his mind. We go to Seattle every August to visit him. At least we got free transfer to the ship and back to our hotel.

[Budget Queen]

The Ruby and Emerald are almost identical ships with minor changes. Both are beautiful ships. When we did the Tracy Arm, we were not able to go all the way in due to the ice floating in the ship. We did not want to do a Titanic cruise!

 

.

 

Wow you are the perfect example of acceptance of not getting up to the South Sawyer Glacier. It has NOTHING to with the "safety" of ice, which people buy, hook line and sinker. :) It is about TIME. I have been on several- tour boats in Alaska, hours among ice, inching toward glaciers.

 

I always say, it's the perfect excuse since it's so readily accepted, but absolutely NOT true.

 

Do you really think- if "safety" were of any issue the ships would be sailing there? Haven't heard of any ships sinking lately. :)

[Keith1010]

I also prefer Glacier Bay.

Keith

[busyone]

When planning our trip to Alaska, friends of ours who once worked Alaska cruises for one of the lines told us be sure to pick a ship that did Glacier Bay. They had worked several different cruises which included the different glaciers and said depending on the weather, the others might not be accessible for good views. We went with their advice and booked an itinerary with Glacier Bay even though it was more expensive than the others. It was spectacular. You get to see more than one glacier, and we were so close to the main glacier that it almost felt like you could touch it. We were also able to view it for a long time. The ship slowly did a 360 degree turn, which was an incredible viewing opportunity if on the top deck. The rangers were on board the ship and gave commentary during our visit. They also set up display tables with literature and offered question and answer sessions during our time sailing in and out of the area. We even saw a glacier with black ice in addition to the ones with the traditional blue ice. I have spectacular photos from our trip, and I definitely felt we had made the best choice for our trip.

[LEtue]

I am in the process of booking an Alaska cruise in July 2017.

 

Both the Emerald and Ruby are sailing out of Seattle with one going to Tracy Arm Fjord and one to Glacier Bay.

 

Is one better than the other? The Emerald is going to the Tracy Arm Fjord and the cost is lower than the Ruby's itinerary.

 

 

You may also want to consider a RT sailing from Vancouver - especially since you may have reasonably priced flights within Canada. Then check out the itineraries offered by Holland America that include Tracy Arm and Glacier Bay.

 

If you still prefer flying in and out of Seattle the transfer to Vancouver relatively easy and you may really enjoy the trip via Amtrak.

 

Have fun choosing!

[Tinknock50]

Wow you are the perfect example of acceptance of not getting up to the South Sawyer Glacier. It has NOTHING to with the "safety" of ice, which people buy, hook line and sinker. :) It is about TIME. I have been on several- tour boats in Alaska, hours among ice, inching toward glaciers.

 

I always say, it's the perfect excuse since it's so readily accepted, but absolutely NOT true.

 

Do you really think- if "safety" were of any issue the ships would be sailing there? Haven't heard of any ships sinking lately. :)

 

If "time" were the issue, why did my Princess cruise take the time to sit there in the channel while our CD flitted about in a small boat to step on the ice.... to a live audio recitation on all she did. She took a LONG time to do all this. A tour boat is not a cruise ship. You can't use that as a basis to discount accessibility to a glacier because of ice.

 

Fear of sinking may not be real, but damage can be done to a ship. Also most ships stop just short of the glacier and you can see it in the distance. How much time would it take to go that much forward?

 

I also did a very early season cruise to Hubbard. There was tons of ice floating around us as we went in. The decision was made not to go the rest of the way because of the huge quantity of ice so we did not get close enough to see the glacier. I have been to all these places many, many times and that was the only time we couldn't get to Hubbard.

[Coral]

If "time" were the issue, why did my Princess cruise take the time to sit there in the channel while our CD flitted about in a small boat to step on the ice.... to a live audio recitation on all she did. She took a LONG time to do all this. A tour boat is not a cruise ship. You can't use that as a basis to discount accessibility to a glacier because of ice.

 

Fear of sinking may not be real, but damage can be done to a ship. Also most ships stop just short of the glacier and you can see it in the distance. How much time would it take to go that much forward?

 

I also did a very early season cruise to Hubbard. There was tons of ice floating around us as we went in. The decision was made not to go the rest of the way because of the huge quantity of ice so we did not get close enough to see the glacier. I have been to all these places many, many times and that was the only time we couldn't get to Hubbard.

 

It is purely about time. I did a small boat trip from Juneau (Adventure Bound). There was a a ton of ice, the cruise ships did not even venture in that day. We navigated so far into Tracy Arm and the Captain asked if anyone had to be back at a certain time. Two of us were on a cruise ship and had to be back to catch the ship. Because of that, the Captain decided to turn around. If it had not been for us, he would have gone forward.

 

There was a Cruise West ship (under 100 passengers) and they continued on and got to see Tracy Arm. For them, it was on their schedule and they had the time to do it.

 

The ironic thing is that Disney seems to have a larger percentage rate of seeing Tracy Arm (and not skipping it). They (at least used to) allow more time for seeing it vs the other cruise lines.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Coral

[sherryf]

 

Fear of sinking may not be real, but damage can be done to a ship. Also most ships stop just short of the glacier and you can see it in the distance. How much time would it take to go that much forward?

 

I disagree. "Most" ships do not stop just short of the glacier. I've been to Tracy Arm 3 times and only got close to the glacier once. The other two times we were WAY back and only had a glimpse of the glacier at a distance.

 

[Budget Queen]

It is time- it takes more "time" to sail through ice, all ships DO have to go slow. Some cpts. don't even want to bother. It is VERY common for cruise ships to turn around at Sawyer Island.

[Budget Queen]

If "time" were the issue, why did my Princess cruise take the time to sit there in the channel while our CD flitted about in a small boat to step on the ice.... to a live audio recitation on all she did. She took a LONG time to do all this. A tour boat is not a cruise ship. You can't use that as a basis to discount accessibility to a glacier because of ice.

 

Fear of sinking may not be real, but damage can be done to a ship. Also most ships stop just short of the glacier and you can see it in the distance. How much time would it take to go that much forward?

 

I also did a very early season cruise to Hubbard. There was tons of ice floating around us as we went in. The decision was made not to go the rest of the way because of the huge quantity of ice so we did not get close enough to see the glacier. I have been to all these places many, many times and that was the only time we couldn't get to Hubbard.

 

Yes it is, all about time. Your ship, had the "time" to wait out, the cpt simply chose to WAIT there. You do NOT see ships- getting "behind" arriving in Juneau or Skagway from Tracy Arm- or leaving "early" either. There are schedules, and ice slows down ships, some cpts don't want to bother navigating through ice. You seem to think- the time wasn't allotted for, in your case. Were you late in your next arrival? Do you know all the details of the plans that day? I'd say not. There is so much you are assuming in your particular case. So unless, you lost out on your next port time, or skipped a port- the "time" was available for that cpt choice.

[Tinknock50]

It is time- it takes more "time" to sail through ice, all ships DO have to go slow. Some cpts. don't even want to bother. It is VERY common for cruise ships to turn around at Sawyer Island.

 

So it does get back to ice then doesn't it? :)...ice and the time it takes to get through it.

[Tinknock50]

Yes it is, all about time. Your ship, had the "time" to wait out, the cpt simply chose to WAIT there. You do NOT see ships- getting "behind" arriving in Juneau or Skagway from Tracy Arm- or leaving "early" either. There are schedules, and ice slows down ships, some cpts don't want to bother navigating through ice. You seem to think- the time wasn't allotted for, in your case. Were you late in your next arrival? Do you know all the details of the plans that day? I'd say not. There is so much you are assuming in your particular case. So unless, you lost out on your next port time, or skipped a port- the "time" was available for that cpt choice.

 

Again, it gets back to the ice. It is not irrelevant to what the ship does. That was my point. You said it was just time and discounted ice factors.

 

I didn't say time wasn't allotted for in Tracy Arm. It would take the same amount of time to do either. (You just said so yourself).

Edited December 13, 2015 by Tinknock50

[Tinknock50]

I disagree. "Most" ships do not stop just short of the glacier. I've been to Tracy Arm 3 times and only got close to the glacier once. The other two times we were WAY back and only had a glimpse of the glacier at a distance.

 

 

I agree I should not have said "most".