Bailey - Answered a Question by Whitehead (14 Mar 18 19:43)

I would have thought so. Does that answer your question?

- Was this comment useful or 3 of 7 found this useful
Comment | Report
Reed - Answered a Question by Whitehead (14 Mar 18 13:45)

Yes. What would you like to know?

- Was this comment useful or 1 of 5 found this useful
Comment | Report
Whitehead - replied to Reed (15 Mar 18 11:13)

Does it allow time ashore at various habitations round the coast.Is the scenery as stunning as Norwegian Fjords? Is weather generally dry?

- Was this comment useful or 0 of 0 found this useful
Comment | Report
Fairhurst - Answered a Question by Whitehead (18 Mar 18 12:31)

We went last year and it was our best cruise ever - great scenery, excellent weather - not as cold as expected and not much rain, lots of sunshine. Plenty time to visit ashore, fjords possibly better than Norway due to glaciers. Icebergs awesome. Marco Polo is an excellent, friendly ship. We are mid 50's and despite reviews almost half the passengers were younger than us, additionally they were not all British. I would go again....

- Was this comment useful or 2 of 2 found this useful
Comment | Report
Whitehead - replied to Fairhurst (19 Mar 18 12:04)

Thanks for the informative response.We also like Marco Polo.Have never found the need to gamble,rock climb or eat all day while on a ship.

- Was this comment useful or 1 of 1 found this useful
Comment | Report
Moore - Answered a Question by Whitehead (22 Apr 18 20:53)

I just posted a review of our 2017 Marco Polo cruise to Greenland. I would say the majority of people were in their late 40s-late 60s with some younger (not by much) people and several older people in mostly good shape, unlike some reviews that suggest the ship is full of geriatrics. The shore excursions contained a lot of hiking or long walks. The scenery is beautiful, but can't compare it to Norway is I haven't been there. All towns were very foot friendly and the coastal scenery was superb, especially when sailing from Kangerlussaq and Narsarsuaq. From a scenery standpoint, the only disappointment was Kangerlussuaq, which was very dusty and mostly devoid of vegetation. Some of the smaller towns were quaint but, if going by cruise, one visit and you're done with it; however some of those smaller towns were (according to my pre-cruise research) good jumping off points for overnight or multi-day excursions if you had the time (which of course won't apply to a cruise). We were blessed with generally good weather -sunny and warm (low 20s). One very windy day in Ilulissat which caused a problem for returning excursions (tender port) and Kangerlussuaq was not just barren but also windy, both due to geography. Otherwise the only other bad weather we had was on the trip from Greenland back to Iceland - rough seas for a lot of people. There was plenty of shore time adequate for port with the exception of Nuuk, which was about 5 hours, but docked not tendered.

- Was this comment useful or 0 of 0 found this useful
Comment | Report