Alaska or Mediterranean?

[carrielouhoo]

I see a lot of posts asking for thoughts in picking a cruise, and a lot of posts specifically asking for advice on whether or not itineraries are kid friendly. However, I'm wondering if you'd choose an Alaska or Mediterranean cruise for a family (Mom, Dad, 3 kids (10, 8, 5 at time of cruise)), given the following.

- We are on the East Coast, so travel for either cruise will involve significant travel and recovery from jet lag.
- Our kids are generally easy-going and can handle long days, so long excursions on either/both itineraries wouldn't be concerning. Our youngest is particularly easygoing, so I think she'd do well in either scenario even though she's so little.
- Our kids seem to have equal interest in both locations. Our oldest son is very into soccer and is a huge fan of FC Barcelona, so a Med cruise would definitely incorporate a tour of Camp Nou. He's also explicitly indicated that he'd like to go to Spain. However, the kids are also equally enthralled with the idea of dog sledding in Alaska (and related activities).
- We are likely to take both of these cruises in the next couple of years. It is just a matter of which to do first. Assume we have experience with the Caribbean and wouldn't consider that as an option.

Should we see Alaska first because the glaciers keep shrinking? Should we wait longer for the Med due to hotel occupancy regulations and the potential need for two rooms? I have so many thoughts like this going through my head. What criteria would you use to decide?

 

[havaneselover]

My decision was an either or. I went with Alaska because of the price difference for plane tickets. It's very cheap for me to get tickets to Vancouver from the east coast. Europe is another story. Since that's not a consideration, this probably isn't helpful. Which one do you think your your youngest would get more out of by waiting?

 

[amyg1]

For us, the decision was to go to Alaska.

We looked at a Mediterranean cruise, but there were so many limitations. They only go to cities on the Mediterranean, so we would miss out on a lot of Europe. We would have restrictions needing to be back on the ship, so we couldn't have nice dinners. In the end, it was more restrictive than we wanted. So we decided to take a non-cruise trip to Europe.

Alaska, on the other hand, is really made for cruising. It gives you the ability to get near the glacier. The towns are not accessible otherwise. And it is amazing beauty.

 

[Geomom]

I would pick Alaska first for many reasons. Yes, the glaciers are shrinking, I'd go sooner than later. The ages of your kids--the Mediterranean ports would likely be too much walking/full days for your younger ones. I think they'd like the port adventures better on an Alaskan cruise than Mediterranean at your kids' ages--more nature related vs. museums/architecture/history/etc..

 

[GPaLarry]

We have done both, Med. without kids/grandkids and Alaska with a bunch. I think Alaska is more kid-friendly and simpler to navigate than the Med. cruise. Save the Med. for a couple of years from now, when the kids are older and would appreciate/stand for all the historical and fascinating sites in Italy, France and Spain. Most of the attractions are some distance from the ship and require patience and bus riding. While many are almost over-touristed, they are what they are and are unique in history. Alaska (get a veranda, if possible) is more convenient with the port towns within walking distance of the docks and wildlife fairly easy to view. Either choice is a good one with the mouse. Best of luck!

 

[carrielouhoo]

Thank you all so very much for your thoughts. I had actually planned to do the Alaskan cruise first, followed by the Med cruise in a couple of years, for the very same reasons you all mentioned. However, once my oldest son explicitly mentioned Spain, I started thinking we could do the Med cruise first. But my initial thoughts were confirmed by all. Thanks so much!!

 

[Jason Martin]

They are both amazing trips. We did both, Med this summer, and Alaska the past summer. Went with my DW, and 2 DD (8 and 6). We also traveled to from the East Coast. The airfare was more going to Europe ($1100 vs $600 to Vancouver). The travel was definitely a little harder going to the Med (6 hours ahead vs 3 hours behind on the time difference meant a longer adjustment). The port days on the Med cruise are definitely longer because of the extra distance between the ports and the cities, where in Alaska you could have a more leisurely trip. Both places the waters were very calm.

We spent a couple days in Vancouver and Barcelona before the cruise and both cities were amazing.

 

[Skippyboo]

Alaska is going to be way safer than Europe is especially with the Catalans in Spain clashing with the Spanish government for independence and all the terror attacks recently in Europe.

 

[elvispursley]

I'd probably go for AK first, then the Med. until everyone is a little older and capable of doing a lot of walking! DH and I just got back from doing the WBTA and we did Barcelona for several days beforehand (LOVE this city, btw...your son would love it too, especially if he's already a big FC Barcelona fan) and I ended up with blisters on most of my toes the first day we were there from all the walking we ended up doing. We couldn't help ourselves...and it only got worse from there, a lot of the European ports are just like pp have mentioned...made for walking. We have 2 sons and they are now 13 and 11. We are just about ready to take them to Europe since the oldest is big into history and WWII. We've yet to do AK, it's just been crazy price-wise to do DCL and that's what the kids want to do most. I'm sure whichever you choose, it will be great family memories!

 

[xlxo]

Thoughts...

• the kids will be so high on pixie dust.... they won't know the difference.
• Alaska welcomes US currency, no need for exchanges
• Alaska speaks your language, no need for translation
• you get to explore Canada.... it's worth extra days

 

[ludari]

I enjoyed sailing to both locations. The ports in the Med are so much more interesting but the beauty of Alaska is something I truly loved. If given a choice I would suggest you do the Alaska cruise. I'm sure whatever you decide you will still have a wonderful cruise filled with great memories.

 

[anricat]

Thank you all so very much for your thoughts. I had actually planned to do the Alaskan cruise first, followed by the Med cruise in a couple of years, for the very same reasons you all mentioned. However, once my oldest son explicitly mentioned Spain, I started thinking we could do the Med cruise first. But my initial thoughts were confirmed by all. Thanks so much!!

We are going this route. We did Alaska last year (August 2016) and we are going to the Mediterranean next year (June 2018). I think Alaska first is the right call. With three ports, it's definitely not as port intensive, which I think is nice for younger kids (well, and adults at some point - ports are tiring). With our Med cruise we only have one sea day and I'm actually a little concerned that my daughter (who had just turned 8 in Alaska and will be just shy of 10 in Europe) will start to tire of looking at old buildings. I think for smaller ones, nature is maybe more engaging than history? Definitely depends on the kiddos, but think it's similar for most.

 

[GPaLarry]

...and Alaska has ptarmigans...who knew??

 

[TestingH2O]

We did Alaska last year when DD was 5. We will do the Med summer 2017. For us, Alaska was a “test run” for her on excursions. We actually had an Eastern booked that we changed to a Med after we saw how great she did in Alaska. (Saved enough money on the cruise to pay for airfare... Fantasy upcharge.) Can’t wait to show Europe to my daughter for the first tome!

 

[Ray4Fun]

My Opinion:

Your children would not get the information from visiting a Mediterranean port right now. Large expense for limited gain. Barcelona is great. Odd, fun, and a bit on the be careful side. The rest of the Med is , well, NJ once you get beyond the wow factor. OK, I lived in UK and traveled extensively throughout so my view is jaded i suppose. Its old cities, old churches and funky food.

Alaska is what you read above. Its totally different that the East coast. Promise,, Take the older ones Fishing. For real an adventure. Skip the Wale watching. Alaska is USA after all. Canada too. LOL.

Whatever you choose,, you'll be giving the kids a great adventure, as long as your with them. They will never forget!

 

[cruiser21]

We are going this route. We did Alaska last year (August 2016) and we are going to the Mediterranean next year (June 2018). I think Alaska first is the right call. With three ports, it's definitely not as port intensive, which I think is nice for younger kids (well, and adults at some point - ports are tiring). With our Med cruise we only have one sea day and I'm actually a little concerned that my daughter (who had just turned 8 in Alaska and will be just shy of 10 in Europe) will start to tire of looking at old buildings. I think for smaller ones, nature is maybe more engaging than history? Definitely depends on the kiddos, but think it's similar for most.

Teenagers get tired of looking at old buildings too.....come to think of it so did I. I think natural interest has more to do with it then age. I'll take nature over history any day. My kids tend to be like me.
I wouldn't assume they're going to hit this magical age and appreciate history.
It's good to expose them to everything. I'm sure your son will have fun. We did the med before Alaska. I think everyone in my family agrees Iceland and Norway was the best cruise. Don't forget to put that one on your bucket list.

 

[anricat]

Skip the Wale watching

For me, this was probably one of the most amazing parts of the vacation. There's something for everyone, I suppose!

 

[anricat]

I think everyone in my family agrees Iceland and Norway was the best cruise. Don't forget to put that one on your bucket list.

It's definitely on ours. In fact, it was our plan to go next year but then Disney flip flopped the dates that they had originally had. We need to go in June (due to my daughter's gymnastics competition season schedule) and they had been running Norway in June and Med in July/August. They switched them for 2018 and so Med it is. We'll get there some day. Hopefully Disney will switch them back, otherwise we're waiting until my daughter either quits gymnastics or moves into a level that has a different competition schedule.

 

[lexlaw69]

Med is amazing...especially on Disney. There are potentially 2 or 3 brutal ports as they entail a long drive from the port. Rome, Florence and maybe Amalfi. That being said, totally worth it. Can't imagine going anyplace but the Med in summer.

 

[cruiser21]

It's definitely on ours. In fact, it was our plan to go next year but then Disney flip flopped the dates that they had originally had. We need to go in June (due to my daughter's gymnastics competition season schedule) and they had been running Norway in June and Med in July/August. They switched them for 2018 and so Med it is. We'll get there some day. Hopefully Disney will switch them back, otherwise we're waiting until my daughter either quits gymnastics or moves into a level that has a different competition schedule.

I was planning on the Baltic next year, but was also disappointed by the flip. The prices in May/early June haven't been to bad. July and August prices are more then I want to pay. Not just for the cruise, but airfare and hotels are also at peak price. I'll probably look at the Baltic on another cruiseline for 2019 if they keep the same schedule as 2018. We're sailing to Quebec next year. I'm looking forward to sailing through the fjords in Eastern Canada.