No stop in Victoria replaced with Prince Rupert

[judyjudy56]

We are booked on the Ruby in September and the dock schedule for Victoria shows it cancelled but Prince Rupert shows the Ruby as there all day the same day we should be in Vancouver all day. No change listed on our booking. The cruise prior to ours shows the same. Anyone recently on the Ruby that skipped Victoria?

[suekel]

I'm on her in 2 weeks and we were notified about a month ago that we were going to Prince Rupert.  

[judyjudy56]

Is this a replacement for Victoria on an Alaskan cruise?  We are on a coastal cruise out of San Francisco. Thanks for your response. 

[masterty]

On Ruby currently. We are going to Prince Rupert in a couple of days. No Victoria. Not too bummed. I never liked Victoria. Prince Rupert is a new port for us so willing to look around even if not much is going on there. 

[Guest ldtr]

13 hours ago, judyjudy56 said:

We are booked on the Ruby in September and the dock schedule for Victoria shows it cancelled but Prince Rupert shows the Ruby as there all day the same day we should be in Vancouver all day. No change listed on our booking. The cruise prior to ours shows the same. Anyone recently on the Ruby that skipped Victoria?

Was on the Ruby 2 weeks ago.  That cruise was always scheduled for Prince Rupert.

 

What date?  All of the 10 day cruise dates for the Ruby remaining for this year show Prince Rupert?

 

What times did you have for Victoria?

 

Considering the itinerary and the distances for Ketchikan, if the ship did go to Victoria it would not get there until pretty late in the day.  

 

For example I am on another cruise at the end of August.  We have to leave Ketchikan at noon and do not make it into Victoria until 8pm.

 

So the cost of making it into Victoria is a very shortened stop in Ketchikan and a very short stop from 8pm until midnight in Victoria, the last night of the cruise.  I would rather have the schedule that I had on the Ruby with a full day in Ketchikan, a full day in Prince Rupert, than half days, as the worst times morning for one, late evening for the other (making it difficult to do much of anything) on my upcoming cruise.

[Cruise Raider]

We were on the Ruby last month and stopped at Prince Rupert instead of Victoria for the day.  It was actually a very welcomed stop for us as we've been to Victoria many times in the past.  It might be disappointing for those that have never gone to Victoria as there is so much to do and see there.  But, we made the best of our time in Prince Rupert and actually enjoyed the stop there.  We are returning again this month and planning on walking the Rushbrook Trail while there.  It look beautiful.  If we have time, we will also stop in the museum in town.  It's very small but something we still want to do.  Also, check out the Sunken Gardens.  It's such a beautiful place, but is also small.  

There are some excursions there that might be of interest but think they are very pricey, especially when compared to ones you can do in Victoria.  

[Cruzinnana47]

Our Alaskan Cruise on the Ruby in May was the 1st sailing that deleted Victoria and substituted it with Prince Rupert.  We had never been to Victoria and were very much looking forward to it (especially seeing Butchart Gardens).  The people in Prince Rupert were very friendly and we made the best of it.  There were only a couple of excursions available, and we chose a visit to the Musuem of Northern BC.  That walk uphill from the port was pretty steep, but the Musuem had some interesting artifacts and we also saw a demonstration of local Tsimshian heritage & traditions by young local children and teens.  Although we enjoyed the museum, we still were disappointed in the swap of ports.

[SiliconCruiser]

14 hours ago, judyjudy56 said:

We are booked on the Ruby in September and the dock schedule for Victoria shows it cancelled but Prince Rupert shows the Ruby as there all day the same day we should be in Vancouver all day. No change listed on our booking. The cruise prior to ours shows the same. Anyone recently on the Ruby that skipped Victoria?

It looks like all of the Ruby stops in Vancouver/Victoria have been or are being changed to Prince Rupert.  We were on the Ruby a few weeks ago, but our itinerary already had Prince Rupert on it.  I don't know the veracity of what I was told, as it came from a Princess employee, but the change was related to Canada invoking limitations to ship traffic due to potential impacts on the marine life in those waters. There hasn't been any changes to those ships that are embarking or disembarking in Vancouver.

[judyjudy56]

I’m assuming from this that our stop in Vancouver will be cancelled. The Prince Rupert stop is now on Wednesday the same day we should have been Wednesday. I wonder when Princess will let us know. 

[Thrak]

Warning!!!

 

If you frequent the casino you need to take your money out before the last day of cruising. The ship won't go out to sea far enough to allow the casino to open on that last day and, if you haven't pulled your money out before that, you will have to wait for Princess to mail you a check. On our cruise in May we received no advance notice this would happen. There was nothing in the Patter. (I had counted on that money to be able to tip my steward and some other staff but I ended up with no money at all and had to wait for a check. I was stuck waiting for Princess to send me a check for the $750 in my casino account.)

[SiliconCruiser]

46 minutes ago, Thrak said:

Warning!!!

 

If you frequent the casino you need to take your money out before the last day of cruising.

Do you mean the day of disembarking or the last day at sea (the casino was open on our last night on the Ruby.)  The casino was opened on the first night as soon as it was far enough from shore.

 

[Thrak]

1 minute ago, SiliconCruiser said:

Do you mean the day of disembarking or the last day at sea (the casino was open on our last night on the Ruby.)  The casino was opened on the first night as soon as it was far enough from shore.

 

 

I mean the last day at sea. When they leave the last Canadian port before the final disembarkation port the ship doesn't go out to sea far enough to allow opening the casino.

 

We stopped in Victoria on May 13, spent part of the day there, and then sailed for Vancouver. We were due to disembark in Vancouver on May 14. Normally I would pull my money out of the casino during the final sea day after leaving the last port before disembarkation day. We went to the casino to cash out and found it was closed. The explanation from guest services is that they weren't going far enough out to sea to allow the casino to be opened. (That has been confirmed by other folks here on CC who, through past sailings, were aware of the issue.)  I should have pulled my money out on May 12 while out to sea and headed for Victoria. It's a lesson I won't forget.

 

Note: Princess mailed me a check about 4 weeks later so I did get the money.

[wheezedr]

58 minutes ago, judyjudy56 said:

I’m assuming from this that our stop in Vancouver will be cancelled. The Prince Rupert stop is now on Wednesday the same day we should have been Wednesday. I wonder when Princess will let us know. 

Without any evidence that I can show, but understanding the practical nature of cruising I am going to suggest that you are over thinking what is likely a Paperwork glitch at the Princess HQ.  It is a fact that Princess replaced Victoria with Prince Rupert for all of its 10 day Alaska's out of SF on the Ruby.  Someone probably took the easy way out and instead of going cruise by cruise to cancel, they just hit a cancel all button and thus at the other end someone in Victoria put that in for all the Ruby arrivals.  

Lets be practical for a second.  It is 470 nautical miles from PR to Vancouver and 570 NM to Seattle. You are suggesting that princess would spend all day at 20KPH to reach PR and then have to essentially turn around to get back to SF on time. NOT going to happen.  Could Princess elect to skip Victoria?  Yes but unlikely although the PVSA is satisfied by the stop in Vancouver.  If we were on the cruise together I would bet you a drink, but that will not work as I am on the 9/17 coastal and I've got the drink package anyway.

I'm not worried about the itinerary and do not think you should worry either

[SiliconCruiser]

26 minutes ago, Thrak said:

 

I mean the last day at sea. When they leave the last Canadian port before the final disembarkation port the ship doesn't go out to sea far enough to allow opening the casino.

 

We stopped in Victoria on May 13, spent part of the day there, and then sailed for Vancouver.

That would explain everything.  If it were one of the ships that was going back to San Francisco or L.A. they would be far enough out to open the casino.  Victoria and Vancouver would not have any international waters. 

But I'm still trying to figure out why it takes a cruise ship an entire night to go from Victoria to Vancouver, when BC Ferries can do it in 1.5 hours? 😂🤣

[Guest ldtr]

18 minutes ago, wheezedr said:

Without any evidence that I can show, but understanding the practical nature of cruising I am going to suggest that you are over thinking what is likely a Paperwork glitch at the Princess HQ.  It is a fact that Princess replaced Victoria with Prince Rupert for all of its 10 day Alaska's out of SF on the Ruby.  Someone probably took the easy way out and instead of going cruise by cruise to cancel, they just hit a cancel all button and thus at the other end someone in Victoria put that in for all the Ruby arrivals.  

Lets be practical for a second.  It is 470 nautical miles from PR to Vancouver and 570 NM to Seattle. You are suggesting that princess would spend all day at 20KPH to reach PR and then have to essentially turn around to get back to SF on time. NOT going to happen.  Could Princess elect to skip Victoria?  Yes but unlikely although the PVSA is satisfied by the stop in Vancouver.  If we were on the cruise together I would bet you a drink, but that will not work as I am on the 9/17 coastal and I've got the drink package anyway.

I'm not worried about the itinerary and do not think you should worry either

Actually I expect the change was intentional and has to do with the distances involved.  To get from Ketchikan to Victoria  the next day the ship would need about 28 hours.  By stopping in Prince Rupert the ship can stay a full day in Ketchikan.  If it goes to Victoria it would need to leave around noon or 1 and not get into Victoria until late in the day around 6 or so..

 

As I mentioned earlier I was on the Ruby a couple of weeks ago and did Prince Rupert.  

 

In 3 weeks I will be on the HAL Eurodam. That ship is going to Victoria.  But to get there it was originally scheduled to leave Ketchikan at 1 pm and would get into Victoria at 6 pm the next day.

 

A few months ago HAL changed the schedule and shortened the stop in Ketchikan by 1 hour to 12 and delayed arrival to Victoria to 8pm.  So there may be some validity to the comment about Canada changing some cruise ship speeds off the west coast.  HAL made the change about the same time as Princess did with the Ruby.

 

A stop from 8pm to midnight in Victoria  really not of much use.  Especially not on the last night of the cruise with an arrival into Seattle at 7am the next morning.

 

 

[Thrak]

In May we had a full day at Victoria and got into Vancouver very early in the morning.

 

 

[wheezedr]

6 minutes ago, ldtr said:

Actually I expect the change was intentional and has to do with the distances involved.  To get from Ketchikan to Victoria  the next day the ship would need about 28 hours.  By stopping in Prince Rupert the ship can stay a full day in Ketchikan.  If it goes to Victoria it would need to leave around noon or 1 and not get into Victoria until late in the day around 6 or so..

 

As I mentioned earlier I was on the Ruby a couple of weeks ago and did Prince Rupert.  

 

In 3 weeks I will be on the HAL Eurodam. That ship is going to Victoria.  But to get there it was originally scheduled to leave Ketchikan at 1 pm and would get into Victoria at 6 pm the next day.

 

A few months ago HAL changed the schedule and shortened the stop in Ketchikan by 1 hour to 12 and delayed arrival to Victoria to 8pm.  So there may be some validity to the comment about Canada changing some cruise ship speeds off the west coast.  HAL made the change about the same time as Princess did with the Ruby.

 

A stop from 8pm to midnight in Victoria  really not of much use.  Especially not on the last night of the cruise with an arrival into Seattle at 7am the next morning.

 

 

If you read both the Op’s and my post you will see that we are both on 7 day California coastal and Pacific Northwest cruises. We are not going anywhere near to Alaska. That is why a stop in PR would make no sense at all. It is entirely logical for an Alaskan cruise. The northern most port on our cruise is Vancouver so an additional 470 NM to PR is senseless.

[wheezedr]

Apparently many of you are unable to recognize the inherent difference between a coastal cruise with stops in Astoria and Seattle, and an Alaskan cruise.  What happened on your cruise to Alaska has no bearing on what happens on a coastal. 

[wheezedr]

18 minutes ago, SiliconCruiser said:

That would explain everything.  If it were one of the ships that was going back to San Francisco or L.A. they would be far enough out to open the casino.  Victoria and Vancouver would not have any international waters. 

But I'm still trying to figure out why it takes a cruise ship an entire night to go from Victoria to Vancouver, when BC Ferries can do it in 1.5 hours? 😂🤣

They cruise veeeeery slowly.  They are just using Victoria as another port of call so that cruisers can have an additional stop.  Unless overnighting is a part of the schedule, done in a few ports, cruise ships do not like to be in port from about 8:00PM to 6 or 7 in the morning.  There are many other locales where a ship spends 8-10 hours to go only a limited distance 

[Guest ldtr]

26 minutes ago, wheezedr said:

If you read both the Op’s and my post you will see that we are both on 7 day California coastal and Pacific Northwest cruises. We are not going anywhere near to Alaska. That is why a stop in PR would make no sense at all. It is entirely logical for an Alaskan cruise. The northern most port on our cruise is Vancouver so an additional 470 NM to PR is senseless.

I was talking about the Alaskan  cruises.  

[wheezedr]

1 minute ago, ldtr said:

I was talking about the Alaskan  cruises.  

Which is not what the OP has concerns over and is not what I was addressing for him.

[23golf]

5 hours ago, masterty said:

On Ruby currently. We are going to Prince Rupert in a couple of days. No Victoria. Not too bummed. I never liked Victoria. Prince Rupert is a new port for us so willing to look around even if not much is going on there. 

If you didn’t like Victoria, you’re sure as #$&* not going to like PR!!!!

[donaldsc]

Stopping at Prince Rupert is a plus.  It is a great place to visit.  We spent 3 days there on the way back home on one trip to AK.

 

DON

[DallasGuy75219]

10 hours ago, ldtr said:

A stop from 8pm to midnight in Victoria  really not of much use.  Especially not on the last night of the cruise with an arrival into Seattle at 7am the next morning.

Most people on an Alaskan cruise aren't really interested in Victoria.  Princess would skip it if they could but they have to stop (and given passengers a reasonable opportunity to debark) in at least one foreign port on a closed loop cruise from a US port (Seattle) with a foreign flagged ship.  There are 11 excursions available on the last night of my Crown cruise later this month, none of which I care to do at that time of night on the last full day of the cruise.

 

Vancouver may not be an option because of the ships homeported there.

Edited August 2, 2022 by DallasGuy75219