Alaska or Med

[DisMommyTX]

Alaska was our least favorite cruise so far. We were on a great ship with top notch ports and excursions, but we still found ourselves bored a lot. We prefer to stay busy on our vacations. The highlight of our Alaska cruise was sitting on our balcony watching ice melt. Literally. We also did some great whale watching and explored each port. It was a very nice cruise, but no desire to ever go back. We learned two things from this:

1) Alaska is really far from south Texas. The flights took forever. We knew this when we booked it, but I didn't realize how much the extended travel time would raise my expectations for the rest of the trip. If I am going to fly 13+ hours, I'd rather be in Europe.

2) We prefer tropical vacations. Cold/cool weather is nice for a weekend, but there is a reason we live in a warmer climate. I prefer beaches and tropical islands to glaciers.

So, think about what kind of vacation you want, including the required travel time. For people in the North West, Alaska may be an easier getaway vs flying to Europe. Would you prefer to vacation someplace warmer or cooler? Do you want an action packed trip taking in lots of cultural sights, or do you want to spend the week relaxing staring at nature? Two very different vacations!

 

[ilovebassets]

As for the location, with a 1 year old and a 77 year old, I would want to stay closer to home with Alaska just based on any medical emergencies that could arise. Simpler while at home.

Just wanted to point out that with the exception of Juneau and maybe Ketchikan for minor stuff, you would not have easy access to healthcare facilities on an Alaska cruise for the three days at sea (for a typical 7 day Alaska cruise) or in Skagway. For a port intensive med cruise, you would actually be closer to healthcare facilities the entire time although there is the anxiety of being in a foreign country. Still, it is Europe, not like being in some places around the world.

 

[IrishEye]

OP - depends on what you like. We have done 4 Med cruises, Baltic and British Isles as well as Alaska, and currently planning our upcoming Northern Europe cruise (these on DCL). Our first Med the youngest were 9 and older 62, now 16 to 69, everyone loves the Med. We did Alaska at the end of August and most people were in coats, gloves and stocking caps while on the ship, wrapped in blankets sitting in deck chairs or staying inside (most not all). In the Med we do mostly private tours and have been able to adjust with the weather. I do not recall Rome being "hours" away from port, seems our van picked us up at port and we met our Vatican guide in Rome about an hour later. Germany was just over an hour on a private train that DCL had arranged with provided snack box, girls slept on return trip. In Alaska on the trip up to the Yukon on the train almost no one was out on the platforms taking pictures since it was so cold, the stoves were on inside the cars (steam train) but some were still complaining about the cold. Depending on where you are from this experience will differ, we are from a colder climate so while people were in coats and gloves we were either wearing shirts or perhaps a light jacket or sweater.

Depending on what you like both are good cruises, Alaska more scenery and nature, Med more historic and structure.

 

[babycatsy]

I just recently went to Alaska in May and about to to Med in May. Alaska was amazing and I loved it, but Med was a little cheaper (we booked the same room for both ships).

 

[Yokelridesagain]

Personally, I don't favor the Mediterranean itineraries since a cruise ship is far from the best way to see Rome, Florence, Nice, etc.--you're a long way from the actual cities and time is obviously very limited. Plus, I've been to all those places already.

But if the older members of your party have not been to Europe, seeing them on a port excursion is much better than not seeing them at all, IMO.

Alaska on DCL is perfectly fine (we've done it twice), but it is a very different type of cruise. Less strenuous, for sure.

 

[havaneselover]

I just recently went to Alaska in May and about to to Med in May. Alaska was amazing and I loved it, but Med was a little cheaper (we booked the same room for both ships).

Alaska cruise fare is definitely more expensive for us but plane tickets more than make up for it (about $1,000 per person more to fly to Barcelona than Vancouver).

 

[cruiser21]

Alaska was our least favorite cruise so far. We were on a great ship with top notch ports and excursions, but we still found ourselves bored a lot. We prefer to stay busy on our vacations. The highlight of our Alaska cruise was sitting on our balcony watching ice melt. Literally. We also did some great whale watching and explored each port. It was a very nice cruise, but no desire to ever go back. We learned two things from this:

1) Alaska is really far from south Texas. The flights took forever. We knew this when we booked it, but I didn't realize how much the extended travel time would raise my expectations for the rest of the trip. If I am going to fly 13+ hours, I'd rather be in Europe.

2) We prefer tropical vacations. Cold/cool weather is nice for a weekend, but there is a reason we live in a warmer climate. I prefer beaches and tropical islands to glaciers.

So, think about what kind of vacation you want, including the required travel time. For people in the North West, Alaska may be an easier getaway vs flying to Europe. Would you prefer to vacation someplace warmer or cooler? Do you want an action packed trip taking in lots of cultural sights, or do you want to spend the week relaxing staring at nature? Two very different vacations!

I have to disagree that Alaska is about staring at nature and the Med is action packed. In Alaska we went white water rafting, dog sledding, whale watching, hiking and did some trail running. I guess it depends on your fitness level, but there's lot of adventurous things to do in Alaska. The Med is about culture and history, but I don't think I'd exactly call it action packed.

OP if your looking for a little nature, beauty and history I would consider Norway, Iceland or a Baltic cruise. Best of both worlds.

 

[babycatsy]

Alaska cruise fare is definitely more expensive for us but plane tickets more than make up for it (about $1,000 per person more to fly to Barcelona than Vancouver).

Ah that is true - I fly standby so I have an added savings (but more stress!)

For Alaska, we got to Vancouver 3 days before the cruise date (hoping to do the same for Barcelona) but our luggage was super delayed. In fact - my sister's luggage didn't land until 1230 before our boarding time and we ended up boarding closer to 3 pm instead of 12!