bradykenadee

I NEVER said they didn't get closer for no reason. I said that they should not have listed this cruise as a "glacier" cruise if you were never going to get anywhere close to the glacier. I did research, and was told we would be going to the glacier. Not that we would see a spec from so far away that it could have been a snow field.

Exactly, and that is what they should have said in the original advertising!! That is all I am saying, they should have said that because of the size of the ship it would not be going into the glacier. That is not anything an "armchair captain" would be lax in complaining about. When you book a glacier cruise you expect to see the glacier. Glad you have so much time to complain about other posts that have nothing to do with what I said.

I totally agree with the complaint regarding the non-glacier viewing. I was on that same ship at the same time, and there was NO reason why they had to stop a mile out. In fact a Holland America ship passed us by and went all the way in as far as we could see. It had nothing to do with the ice or the weather. It should NOT have been advertised as a glacier cruise when they had no intention of getting us anywhere near the glacier. We have been there 3 times before on Princess and Holland America, and had always been able to go at least to where you could see the calving and hear the amazing crash as it exploded into the sea. This was a patch of white against the rock, and that was all you could see. They had NO intention to get anywhere near that thing, and it should have been disclosed that the ship was too big to see anything at all. False advertising!!