Alaska 2021 - Inside Passage Route for Serenade?

[2travelcats]

I see on a cruise dot com site the attached map of the route the Serenade of the Seas will follow for Alaska cruises this year from Seattle.

 

Obviously this is not info sent out by RC but they never seem to show any maps of their cruises.

 

I would be thrilled if this is the route they follow as I’d love to avoid sailing out and around Vancouver Island into the open sea.

 

How likely is this route correct?  Possible?  Probable?

 

Thanks for your input - Johnette

[Ashland]

I miss the old RCI maps that showed the route. Celebrity has nice ones. I wish RCI would bring these back online.

[Fairsailing]

Possible?  Sure.  Probable?  No.  Almost every departure from Seattle in the past went out to the open ocean and I don’t see why that would change.  I wouldn’t trust a third party website for the exact route.  Heck, I wouldn’t trust RCI’s website.  
 

I wish it were different.  The inside route is worth the extra hassle and money of flying into Vancouver.  If they went inside from Seattle it would be the best of both worlds

[Hoopster95]

As close to zero chance as you can get. That's sailing through Canadian waters.

 

Btw, are you talking about 2021? Serenade is right now in the Bahamas. I guess you believe that RCG will take her through the Panama Canal (no passengers at a cost of about $400,0000 + fuel + to get her to Seattle for only 2 months.... then redeployed where exactly? And at what cost? Has she had a test cruise in order to actually sail yet? I wouldn't be the least but surprised that her deployment will change. I'm hoping I'm wrong for all of you booking on Serenade since the announcement.

[2travelcats]

After the plan for the Serenade to do Alaska cruises in July, August and September 2021, she is scheduled to do cruises from Sydney, Australia starting in October and continuing through February 2022.  Then in May 2022 she returns to cruising in Alaska.

 

So, perhaps it is worth bringing her through the Panama Canal sometime during the next month and a half.  At least I hope so!

 

And, I don’t believe she has to do a test cruise as all passengers are required to be fully vaccinated.

[HicksRA]

1 hour ago, Hoopster95 said:

As close to zero chance as you can get. That's sailing through Canadian waters.

Is Canada not even allowing ships in their waters?  They’re not stopping at any land ports. 

[Jimbo]

27 minutes ago, 2travelcats said:

After the plan for the Serenade to do Alaska cruises in July, August and September 2021, she is scheduled to do cruises from Sydney, Australia starting in October and continuing through February 2022.  Then in May 2022 she returns to cruising in Alaska.

 

So, perhaps it is worth bringing her through the Panama Canal sometime during the next month and a half.  At least I hope so!

 

And, I don’t believe she has to do a test cruise as all passengers are required to be fully vaccinated.

They better get cracking then, because they don't even have a full crew yet.

 

 

Only 200 onboard right now as of May 28th........they still need to get atleast 800 more in the next month......meaning some of those July sailings are not going to go.......More cancellations for sure.....

 

So now you are saying it's going all the way to Alaska for only 7 to 10 sailings? why bother, just send it somewhere else. Forget about Alaska this year?

Edited May 31, 2021 by Jimbo

[darwinsrule]

26 minutes ago, HicksRA said:

Is Canada not even allowing ships in their waters?  They’re not stopping at any land ports. 

Bingo (not just a game on a cruise ship).  The order isn't port related,  it's a complete ban on cruise ships operating in Canadian waters.  

[allieic95]

20 hours ago, Jimbo said:

They better get cracking then, because they don't even have a full crew yet.

 

 

Only 200 onboard right now as of May 28th........they still need to get atleast 800 more in the next month......meaning some of those July sailings are not going to go.......More cancellations for sure.....

 

So now you are saying it's going all the way to Alaska for only 7 to 10 sailings? why bother, just send it somewhere else. Forget about Alaska this year?

 

Not sure what your rationale or logic is here. It's 2 months away and with J&J they could vaccinate the crew within 2 weeks. Clearly they are bringing back crew to the ship, as evident in the video above. No need to be negative since these sailing were just announced and almost all of them are selling out, along with the Alaskan bill being signed. Should be good to go at this point.  

[chengkp75]

22 hours ago, Hoopster95 said:

As close to zero chance as you can get. That's sailing through Canadian waters.

 

21 hours ago, HicksRA said:

Is Canada not even allowing ships in their waters?  They’re not stopping at any land ports. 

 

21 hours ago, darwinsrule said:

Bingo (not just a game on a cruise ship).  The order isn't port related,  it's a complete ban on cruise ships operating in Canadian waters.  

No, it is not a complete ban on cruise ships operating in Canadian waters.  The wording of the order acknowledges the rule of "innocent passage", and allows cruise ships to transit Canadian waters.  The concept of "innocent passage" allows any ship, of any nation, of any type, to transit a nation's waters (in this case, Canada) as long as the vessel does not engage in "prohibited activities", which are defined as things like stopping for any reason (whether anchoring or docking), fishing, and similar activities.  "Innocent passage" is one of the foundations of "freedom of the seas" that Canada has embraced for as long as it has been a nation.  If the order banned cruise ships from Canadian waters totally, then no cruise ship could sail out of Seattle, since the outbound section of the international vessel traffic separation scheme is within Canadian waters, and all outbound ships from Seattle must use this pathway.

[not-enough-cruising]

21 hours ago, HicksRA said:

Is Canada not even allowing ships in their waters?  They’re not stopping at any land ports. 

 

21 hours ago, darwinsrule said:

Bingo (not just a game on a cruise ship).  The order isn't port related,  it's a complete ban on cruise ships operating in Canadian waters.  

Nope

Wrong

Transit in Canadian waters is allowed

[Cruise crazi]

On 5/31/2021 at 1:15 PM, 2travelcats said:

I see on a cruise dot com site the attached map of the route the Serenade of the Seas will follow for Alaska cruises this year from Seattle.

 

Obviously this is not info sent out by RC but they never seem to show any maps of their cruises.

 

I would be thrilled if this is the route they follow as I’d love to avoid sailing out and around Vancouver Island into the open sea.

 

How likely is this route correct?  Possible?  Probable?

 

Thanks for your input - Johnette

 

[Cruise crazi]

Just now, Cruise crazi said:

 

I just booked this cruise for myself, my husband and 3 teen grandaughters. This is definately the route they are following.

Lesley

[Blizzard54]

It is possible that they will take the inside passage.  One of the reasons that sailings from Seattle have traditionally taken the westside of Vancouver Island is time.  The inside route must be traveled slower.  With the revised ports and eliminating Victoria, it is possible that time is not a factor.  The unofficial map I have seen for the Ovation shows inside one direction and outside the other. 

 

I am sure the plan is to bring the Serenade over for the short season.  Why else would they have rescheduled it's sailings by one day?

Edited June 1, 2021 by Blizzard54

[Hoopster95]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

No, it is not a complete ban on cruise ships operating in Canadian waters.  

 

Interesting.... thx for the correction. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-canada/news/2021/02/government-of-canada-announces-one-year-ban-for-pleasure-craft-and-cruise-vessels.html

The information I gleaned was from the federal government website. I believed the Covid19 emergency one year ban order trumped any previous maritime laws. I quote:

"Cruise vessels carrying more than 100 people are still prohibited from operating in Canadian waters."

I still don't believe anyone will see a cruise ship in Canadian waters, period... stopping or not stopping... until this order is lifted.
 

I also understand the Juan de Fuca Strait is divided in half... one half Canadian waters, the other 1/2 US. I've researched somewhere, and I cannot find that link or source of the info at this time, that there are agreements within the Juan de Fuca Strait relating to international vessel traffic (staying on "the right side of the road" so to speak) amongst likely many other variables I can't possibly know about regarding vessels entering/departing for ocean waters. 

[Hoopster95]

1 hour ago, Blizzard54 said:

The unofficial map I have seen for the Ovation shows inside one direction and outside the other. 

 

Ovation cannot sail through the British Columbia Inside passage... per Capt. Hendrik (Capt's corner)

[chengkp75]

Here is a link to the actual interim order, not the press releases:

 

https://tc.canada.ca/en/ministerial-orders-interim-orders-directives-directions-response-letters/interim-order-no-5-respecting-passenger-vessel-restrictions-due-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19

 

Under "Exceptions":

 

5 (1) Sections 3 and 4 (my note:  these sections list the prohibition on cruise ships) do not apply to

(a) a vessel that is in distress or providing assistance to a vessel or person in distress;

(b) a vessel that is forced to navigate, moor, anchor or berth to avoid immediate danger;

(c)a vessel that is engaged in research and that is operated by or under the authority of the Government of Canada, or at its request, or operated by a provincial government, a local authority or a government, council or other entity authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group;

(d) a vessel that carries

(i) employees of the Government of Canada or a provincial or territorial government, or

(ii) peace officers who require a transportation service in the course of performing their duties or functions;

(e) a foreign vessel in the territorial sea of Canada that is exercising the right of innocent passage in accordance with international law and article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, done at Montego Bay on 10 December 1982; and

(f) a vessel that is not in service.

[Hoopster95]

47 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

(e) a foreign vessel in the territorial sea of Canada that is exercising the right of innocent passage in accordance with international law and article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, done at Montego Bay on 10 December 1982; and

 

 

Got it... and just read it this section. Thanks chengkp. Big loophole I did not know about.

I wonder if RCG would actually push this and sail through the BC inside passage (Serenade & Summit)?

I guess we shall see

[deliver42]

From Seattle, all ships go up via the Pacific, and come back via inside. The difference will be no stopping at Victoria.

[chengkp75]

38 minutes ago, Hoopster95 said:

 

Got it... and just read it this section. Thanks chengkp. Big loophole I did not know about.

I wonder if RCG would actually push this and sail through the BC inside passage (Serenade & Summit)?

I guess we shall see

There's no "pushing this" since it is a written exception based on international law.

[Blizzard54]

2 hours ago, deliver42 said:

From Seattle, all ships go up via the Pacific, and come back via inside. The difference will be no stopping at Victoria.

Not true, normally, most if not all ships out of Seattle travel both ways on the Pacific side. 

[2travelcats]

Thanks so much for your input - I learned a lot from you all!

 

I’m hoping Hoopster’s original 0% chance is wrong and not-enough-cruising, Blizzard54, cruise crazi and chengkp75 are right!

 

“Time will tell” but that is getting harder to handle the longer I’m stuck on land!