Opinions on best ship to Antarctica

I would like to plan a cruise to Antarctica in the near future. I'd love to hear recommendations from people who have been. I'm most interested in ships with the best naturalists, most landings (although I realize this is dependent on the weather), and success with seeing wildlife (again, I realize this is difficult to predict).

What do you recommend?

Thanks in advance!

Haven't been yet but after much research we are booked for Jan '08 with Regent. We have cruised with them before and they are just terrific. This will be a different ship then the ones we have been on because they lease Explorer II for this trip. Abercrombie & Kent do the same. So, near as I can tell there is little difference between those two. They are luxury travel. One may get more naturalists on a National Geographic trip but we enjoy good food and wines and great service with our information so for us this looks ideal. All the reviews I read were unanimous that Antarctica was the best trip!

Let us know what you decide.

My partner & I were on the marvelous 18-day cruise on the Hanseatic this past January/February. Even though we are loyal Regent cruisers, we chose the Hanseatic over Explorer II because it is a dramatically better cruise for the $$$. The standard cabins on the Hanseatic are much larger than those on Explorer II and the bathrooms about twice as large. The service and cuisine on the Hanseatic were both excellent. On our 18-day cruise, we had 14 zodiac landings and 4 zodiac bay tours. The Hanseatic engages some of the best Antarctica specialists, including David Fletcher, who is probably the most renowned expedition director on any Antarctica cruise. Regent (then called Radisson) used to charter the Hanseatic for a couple of cruises each year but has switched, unfortunately, to Explorer II. Our guess is that Hapag-Lloyd (cruise company that runs the Hanseatic) decided to keep all the tidy profits to themselves and not charter the ship for the prime Antarctica cruises. Unless you speak German, you must be sure to book on one of the English-language cruises on the Hanseatic. This year, there were two. Good luck on finding a cruise. We'd take the Hanseatic again in a second. It was the best cruise we've taken. Cheers, Fred

... whether you want to go on a big ship or a small ship. Can't help with the larger ships, but for a small ship (48 pax) perspective, you can read my extensive review if you are interested.

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=531528

I'm more interested in a small ship. H2SO4, I read your review and found it be extremely helpful.

Are Regent and Hanseatic small or large ships?

Regent charters the Exploer II which has 300 or so capacity but only takes 198 pax to Antarctica. I would call that a medium ship with small passenger load? The BIG ships do not make any landings, they just cruise on by. Join us, we can talk about Manhatten where I grew up and the law which I practice in Los ANgeles ;-)

While the 100+ passenger ships have their advantages, I would recommend going with a ship with 100 or less pax. You don't have to take turns landing that way. For us that was one of the key ingredients in our decision; we wanted the most landings and as much time possible on land to make the most of our trip.

That said, regardless of the conveyance you choose, I'm sure you'll have a terrific time.

We just booked for an Antarctica trip last week after much research on size of ship and length of trip! If at all possible, choose the longer trip, they run about 18 - 21 days, from Ushuaia. They all pretty much follow the same itinerary and locations, based totally on weather and ice conditions deciding whether you go ashore or not.

We found that for Antarctica trips, "small" ship is under 100 pax, "large" is 100-150 and anything over that becomes 'luxury'. But highly recommended, choose a ship under 100 since the limit is 100 people ashore at any one time. On the larger ships you can end up taking turns going ashore and that can limit your exploring time.

The 2008 season seems to be rapidly closing for reservations so if you are interested I would highly recommend booking very soon. We are going on the M/S Andrea.

We just booked for an Antarctica trip last week after much research on size of ship and length of trip! If at all possible, choose the longer trip, they run about 18 - 21 days, from Ushuaia. They all pretty much follow the same itinerary and locations, based totally on weather and ice conditions deciding whether you go ashore or not.

 

We found that for Antarctica trips, "small" ship is under 100 pax, "large" is 100-150 and anything over that becomes 'luxury'. But highly recommended, choose a ship under 100 since the limit is 100 people ashore at any one time. On the larger ships you can end up taking turns going ashore and that can limit your exploring time.

 

The 2008 season seems to be rapidly closing for reservations so if you are interested I would highly recommend booking very soon. We are going on the M/S Andrea.

I see a few different tour companies use the M/s Andrea..Do you mind saying what company you are using and why? I keep researching this trip and the choices are becoming overwhelming! Also, what time of year? I think beginning of Jan. ?????

Antarctica's weather is very fickle. That said, January seems to be prime time to visit the area (and the higher prices prove it) - we had good luck with our weather for most of the trip and the wildlife was great - lots of chicks running around that time of the year. Seeing chicks chasing parents for a bit of regurgitated krill is one of the many fond memories we have of our visit.

M.L. - Although you will get a dozen different opinions regarding what is "small" vs. "large" vs. "luxury", there is no real standard for such comparisons. The Antarctic is a totally different cruise environment. I agree with the posters who suggested taking a longer cruise with lots of landings. My partner & I were on the marvelous 18-day cruise on the Hanseatic in January/February and found it to be the best cruise we've taken. We had 14 Zodiac landings and 4 Zodiac bay cruises. In addition, the ship is by far the most luxurious of the expedition ships and has food and dining service (fine crystal and china at all meals) which compares quite favorably to the other small luxury lines (Regent, Silversea, Seabourn). Although we did go ashore in two shifts (we were 180 passengers), we were always ashore at least an hour and a half or more (about as much as anyone wanted). Thus, I would not make a decision on a ship based on the passenger load being less than 100 people.

Further, the Hanseatic engages some of the best expedition leaders and naturalists, including David Fletcher (one of the most honored expedition leaders and lecturers on the subject of Antarctica). One caveat regarding the Hanseatic - be sure to book on a cruise designated "Bi-lingual", unless you are fluent in German, as most of the Hanseatic cruises are all German. We would go on the Hanseatic again in a moment - the ship is excellent, the cuisine superb, the expeditions truly memorable.

It is a great shame that Regent no longer uses the Hanseatic for its Antarctic cruises and has moved to Explorer II. We assume that change was because Hapag-Lloyd - the managing company of the Hanseatic - recognized that due to the enormous popularity of its Antarctic cruises, it did not make sense to charter the ship to another line for the best cruises of the season. Our cruise sold out within two weeks of its being announced, as the 18-day itinerary is so desirable. The South Georgia stops were the great draw of the cruise, rightly so.

If you'd like any other info about our Hanseatic cruise, feel free to email me at: fvs98282 at wavecable.com.

Cheers, Fred

Well,

My hubby and I want to go to Antartica that way we will have set foot on all the Continents.......;) (such a goal).

Anyway, we did some EXTENSIVE research on what ship to take. Ultimately, we choose the BIG one.....the Star Princess in January, 2008. Our second choice would have been the Marco Polo (Orient LInes).

Because the weather is so fickle and landings are not guaranteed, we went with the luxury and "known quantity" of a Princess ship. The Regent line is a little out of our price range and the smaller Russian ships are "old" and I don't know what maintentance standards are used for these ships...and again...you mentioned how small the rooms were.

We may never set foot on Antartica soil, but we will have "lived the experience" in the style and price range which fit our needs.

hello, slotl,

I too considered all levels of cruising--small expedition boats, large cruise ships, mid-level ships. I factored in the fact that I would like to have some Zodiac landings, go to South Georgia and the Falklands, cost, and the experience on the ship. I decided upon the Discovery because it seemed the middle way, with features of both small and large. I contacted Princess and Celebrity, but with no landings on their cruises, they were not an option for me. I also had read some recent reviews of the Discovery cruises, and decided to go with them. I didn't want it to be just about the landings. Sailing solo, I also had to figure that into the mix.

Please post your review of the Star after you return. I plan to do that with the Discovery. We'll be down there about the same time and our ships may pass one another! [Are you doing any pre-cruise time in Argentina?] Have a great cruise!

We have cruised with Norwegian Coastal Voyages in Norway and like their product. I've read some reviews about the 2 ships they use in Antarctica and was curious if anyone has cruised with them along with any other line in Antarctica.

Are there any ships/lines that cross the Antarctic Circle. Looks like everybody gets close, but don't cross it.

We're looking at the 2008/2009 season.

Some of the operators have an itinerary that "attempts" to cross the circle; it all depends on ice conditions, so they may or may not make it. I know Quark had one for the 2006-2007 season. Check their website for the upcoming season to see if they are offering it.

Thanks - I saw a TV doc about a small russian ship crossing, but that's

the only one so far.

It would just be fun to cross all the "lines".

Arctic Circle, International Date Line, Prime Meridian, Equator and Antarctic Circle.

PaulWN, there are several threads on the "Other Cruise Line" forum about NCV cruises to Antarctica. Here is the link for one of them: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=436847

PaulWN, there are several threads on the "Other Cruise Line" forum about NCV cruises to Antarctica. Here is the link for one of them: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=436847

Thanks, I've read most of those. Since this thread is just for Antarctica I was checking to see if anyone was reading it that hadn't read/posted on the other cruise line thread.

I appreciate your response.

The Quark cruises look interesting. Much smaller than the NCV ones.

The one we would really like to take is the 66 day NCV one from Iceland to Antarctica. We're hoping the response to the one this year is good enough they do it again in 08. That would take care of Iceland (high on my wife's list and Antarctica at the same time.

Good day!

My girlfriend and I decided it was time to plan our Antarctica trip for January 2009, so we just started researching. I wanted to see what others had to say and this turned out to be a good message board. I believe we're interested in the smaller ship. I found a site www.antarcticconnection.com that has a dozen or so different itineraries. I think the ships are mostly russian. One of the choices allows for spending a night on the tundra (weather permitting), while another promotes ice climbing. Has anyone researched any of these smaller groups?

KANDS, I for one have not. I think I hesitate to go with such small ships because one's compatability with the other pax is much more "front and center". Not that DH and I are not agreeable people but I find my tolerance for idiots and other people's foibles has diminished with the years! So a larger group expands our opportunities to make friends while also allowing us to go our own way if we find that we don't care for the company. So for us the choice was between Hanseatic (hi Freddie) and Explorer II either with Regent or A&K. At one point we were actually booked on the Marco Polo but then I read such dreadful things on these boards about the ship that I decided that the difference in price while substantial was just not worth the risk of a bad trip. The choices are out there and what sounds good to you, may not to someone else so all you can do is see what other people are saying and then just go for it! Let us know what you decide to do.

We went on ExplorerII to Antarctica and had an amazing time. For us it offered the best of both worlds: a ship larger than the Russian ships but that would also allow us to enjoy regular Antarctic landings and be close to the wildlife. I posted a review at the time; here is the link:

http://www.cruisereviews.com/RadissonSevenSeasCruises/ExplorerII1.htm

This is such a special experience: All of you who will be venturing to Antarctica are in for the trip of a lifetime!

My wife and I spent 19 nights on the Polar Pioneer in January 2007 and had a brilliant time. The ship carries about 55 passengers and is run by Aurora Expeditions, our tour was led by Greg Mortimer and his partner Margaret and their enthusiiasm and interest in the region is a pleasure we will never forget. We were blessed with excellent weather and seas with only one bad night on the water.

The company is Australian and therefore the passengers are mostly from there with a few Americans and a few Europeans all in all a great bunch.

We were able to land a lot of times, sometimes as many as four in the one day. The Polar Pioneer crew are very interested too and make detours to see whales etc.

Please feel free to look at our photos on the links below, this tour is not cheap and needs to be booked well in advance, the boat is not luxurious and the food is nothing like cruise in terms of quantity (quality is excellent) but it is the most exciting and wonderful trip we have ever had or are likely to have again.

http://www1.snapfish.co.uk/share/p=810281172686286850/l=246795659/g=88318523/cobrandOid=1001171/otsc=SYE/otsi=SALB

http://www.photobox.co.uk/album/5107424

I use to work for Quark Expeditions in the CT office, so I'm familar with them. Feel free to email me & I can answer questions for you.

They have cruises on Russian icebreakers, so where a regular cruise ship can't go...they can.

If anyone is considering this, be aware, the icebreakers don't have stabilizers.

What is the website for Hanseatic?

ML

I would like to plan a cruise to Antarctica in the near future. I'd love to hear recommendations from people who have been. I'm most interested in ships with the best naturalists, most landings (although I realize this is dependent on the weather), and success with seeing wildlife (again, I realize this is difficult to predict).

 

What do you recommend?

 

Thanks in advance!

I am unable to recommend a particular vessel sailing to Antactica however I want to advise you of our rather poor experinces aboard MV Discovery.

The ship was not launched in 2003 but rather in the 60s, she has had several names including Island Princess.

We found the food less than satisfactory our fish repeatedly arrived dry

and tough, and was sent back.A "vegetarian soup" was served that contained shrimp (to which my wife is allergic) . The dining room manager was quite rude and insolent. I contracted a bacterial stomach infection on the seventh day out.

They advertise three landings but only made two one of which was almost dark as we landed.They advertise three Zodiac cruises but they only conducted two. As a positive the crew that took care of getting you into the Zodiacs for the trip ashore (what there was of the trips) was excellent as well as the crew members including an retired Coast Guard Captain on the Antarctic shore itself who was first rate.

The first night out the generators failed and the ship had to return to port for several hours.(see opening sentence about true age of the ship)

On our trip they booked well over one hundred passengers of a single enthnic group that the ships staff decided to keep together which resulted in many disruptions of landing schedules.(the reason we and other groups were pushed back and landed in the evening)

The masseuse was terrible and yet she added on an automatic tip.

The entertainment was sub standard and a crew effort for supposed Philippine culture was in very poor taste.

The staterooms are quite small and there is little or no room for baggage unless it is small enough to be stowed beneath the beds.