help with ship decisions

My daughter and I have started planning for an Antarctica cruise in the next few years. As usual, CC has a wealth of outstanding information, so thank you to everyone who posts here.

What I can't figure out is what size ship to go on. Seems as though a smaller ship would toss around more in Drake's Passage, but we'd have more time on land in Antarctica. How much of a problem is it going on a ship like the Fram and having to split into groups while in Antarctica? And is there a difference going through Drake's Passage on a 100 passenger or 300 passenger ship?

Have any of you been on both - a 100 or so passenger ship and one for about 300? Does the 300 passenger ship have a smoother sail?

We definitely want to go on an expedition with Antarctica landings (and from what I read, by the time we go, expedition ships will be the only option). I like the pricing for the Fram, but worry there will be limited time on shore.

Is there anything else you suggest we consider in making a decision?

Thanks for your help!

My daughter and I have started planning for an Antarctica cruise in the next few years. As usual, CC has a wealth of outstanding information, so thank you to everyone who posts here.

 

What I can't figure out is what size ship to go on. Seems as though a smaller ship would toss around more in Drake's Passage, but we'd have more time on land in Antarctica. How much of a problem is it going on a ship like the Fram and having to split into groups while in Antarctica? And is there a difference going through Drake's Passage on a 100 passenger or 300 passenger ship?

 

Have any of you been on both - a 100 or so passenger ship and one for about 300? Does the 300 passenger ship have a smoother sail?

 

We definitely want to go on an expedition with Antarctica landings (and from what I read, by the time we go, expedition ships will be the only option). I like the pricing for the Fram, but worry there will be limited time on shore.

 

Is there anything else you suggest we consider in making a decision?

 

Thanks for your help!

The key to smooth sailing is selecting a ship that has stabilisers fitted. This boils down to the choice between an ice-breaker and an ice-strengthened ship. The smaller ships such as the Polar Star, Kapitain Kleb (on it's last season to Antarctica) are or were designed to be ice-breakers, take the smallest number of passengers, and do not have stabilisers. They tend to do the most pitching and rolling at sea.

The Fram, Clelia, Prince Albert, Le Boreal, NG Explorer etc all have stabilisers, and having been on three different ships (NGExplorer, Nordkapp (predecessor of the Fram) and Minerva, they all provide a smooth ride in calm conditions and a pretty good one in rough conditions.

In terms of landings, I have been on ships were there were less than 100 passengers, so that everyone could land 'at once', in groups of 10, or on ships with 200 passengers in staggered landings. It doesn't make that much difference. Most of the landing sites in Antarctica are small, so most people run out of things to do on a 2 hour landing!

The biggest question then is how many people you are comfortable traveling with, and the level of luxury you want in the ship, given that most are offering pretty similar itineraries.

Cheers

Thank you - this is exactly the information I was looking for. Luxury is not as important as a stable ride and time on land. Now I'll watch the travel dates and price!

I went on Prince Albert II and made a complete review in appropriate location here in CC. Everything was perfect. The only odd was the length of 17 days. I would prefer 20 days as Lindblad options. Next July I am travelling with Lindblad to the Arctic and then, a new review will be posted and sure i will make a comparison between the two companies.

My daughter and I have started planning for an Antarctica cruise in the next few years. As usual, CC has a wealth of outstanding information, so thank you to everyone who posts here.

 

What I can't figure out is what size ship to go on. Seems as though a smaller ship would toss around more in Drake's Passage, but we'd have more time on land in Antarctica. How much of a problem is it going on a ship like the Fram and having to split into groups while in Antarctica? And is there a difference going through Drake's Passage on a 100 passenger or 300 passenger ship?

 

Have any of you been on both - a 100 or so passenger ship and one for about 300? Does the 300 passenger ship have a smoother sail?

 

We definitely want to go on an expedition with Antarctica landings (and from what I read, by the time we go, expedition ships will be the only option). I like the pricing for the Fram, but worry there will be limited time on shore.

 

Is there anything else you suggest we consider in making a decision?

 

Thanks for your help!

We did a cruise on the Nordkapp which is owned by Huttrigen and carried about 300 people. The 100 people on shore limitation did not present a problem. We never felt rushed.

DON

We did a cruise on the Nordkapp which is owned by Huttrigen and carried about 300 people. The 100 people on shore limitation did not present a problem. We never felt rushed.

 

DON

I've been on the MS Fram in Antarctica in Feb2009 and I fully agree with that. There were about 200 people on board and the landing rotation was a very smooth and efficient process. You can do and see many things during one hour ashore, and the time that you spend on the boat while the others are landing is not lost anyway, there are always beautiful landscape and wildlife to be seen around the boat.

One of my best memories is around Detaille Island (just below the Antarctic Circle). It was a grey and rainy day when we went ashore, and the view was rather limited by a dense fog. It actually started clearing when we came back on board, and while we were waiting for the others to land, the cloud started lifting up and the landscape appeared. I remember running around the ship like a crazy person to see from every angle the ocean of icebergs we were moored in, and the mountains appearing, higher and higher. It was astonishing. I really didn't feel cheated! :)

Greetings, we were on the Polar Star over the Christmas holidays! absolutely loved the ship, it was 'somewhat' spacious, well laid out and generally very comfortable. I chose it because it was an ice-breaker and took under 100 passengers. I find that however much time is allotted to a landing, it is not enough for me! This was my second trip to Antarctica and we are planning to go another time - it is an incredibly addicting place!

(ps - there was some rough weather on the Drake, and i took preventative meds, and was completely fine)

One day, we literally went through a pretty deep ice field and could only have done that on an ice-breaker - it was awesome! Hope this helps......Heather

We loved the Minerva, but it no longer does Antarctica. The stabilizers made the cruise smooth! With 200 people, we took turns. The weather changes quickly, so the two groups had different experience. I would prefer a ship with only 100 passengers!