Antarctica Bridge?

[Karen13]

I have just been reading about the new Silversea ‘fly cruise’ to Antarctica, that will enable you to fly there in less than two hours, rather than two days sailing across the Drake passage.

My husband and I did this trip twelve years ago, and although I suffer badly from seasickness, I resolved that if necessary I would spend two days in bed to see this incredible continent. 

As it turned out, we had the ‘Drake Lake’ on the way out, and the two day sea journey crammed with expert lectures about the birds, wildlife, sea life and history of the land we were about to experience only served to heighten our anticipation and enrich our experience,

I vividly remember the Captains prize of a bottle of champagne for the first passenger to sight an iceberg, our first sight of an albatross, and our first sight of penguins, whose flights peppered the sea like machine gun fire. We also ran into an incredible pod of over 20 humpback whales feeding around our  ship, which even had our Captain out on deck with his camera.
On the return journey we did have rough seas, but with medication I was fine, and we all felt as though we had truly been on an ‘expedition’, and we never actually felt in any danger. In the museum in Ushuaia  you will see a boat the size of tiny boat Shackleton and his colleagues crossed it in. Truly amazing! 

i appreciate there are people who lead busy lives, but if you cannot afford to devote more than six days to Antarctica, I think you will be missing a big part of the experience, which is very sad.

[RachelG]

I agree.  Crossing the Drake is part of the experience.  And it gives you appreciation for those early explorers.

[jpalbny]

I'm with both of you. The Drake is a warm up for the journey and allows you to get into the mindset of where you're going, and makes you appreciate how special it is. It would be weird for me without it.

 

However there is probably a big demographic who want to visit Antarctica, but won't brave the Drake. So I think SS knows that if they don't make a play for them, someone else will. 

 

I took a quick look at the itinerary back in December when SS first broke the news. Does it actually save much time? I thought at most, it saved 2 days. Not much in the scheme of things. 

 

Now, if they did this flight bridge, so that we could spend 10 days on the ship AND go further south...then I'd seriously consider it. Hm...

[Stumblefoot]

1 hour ago, jpalbny said:

...if they did this flight bridge, so that we could spend 10 days on the ship AND go further south...then I'd seriously consider it.

Exactly!  When one really evaluates the new voyage option you find you get to spend a lot more dollars for very little incremental time on the ship and go to basically the exact same places.  Yeah, sorry, not for me.  If SS wants to attract former passengers to this new option, they’ve got to change the actual voyage itself.

[jpalbny]

9 minutes ago, Stumblefoot said:

If SS wants to attract former passengers to this new option, they’ve got to change the actual voyage itself.

 

Agree. I don't think that they want/need to attract former pax. I'd go again without this. My guess is that they want to attract the ones who haven't done Antarctica because they don't want to (or can't) do the Drake.

Edited February 2, 2020 by jpalbny