Do you look up climate data before planning a vacation?

[unicorn]

I've been interested in a cruise around Indonesia, but most of the ones I see are scheduled to go during their monsoon/rainy season. This one is scheduled to hit Indonesia in early January, at the peak of the rainy season!

https://www.royalcaribbean.com/cruises/itinerary/8-night-bali-adventure-holiday-from-singapore-on-ovation/OV08SIN-349797265?sail-date=2025-12-28&currency=USD&country=USA#step=0

Bali gets 39 cm of rain in January, with rain being present on most days. Why would anyone spend big $$ on flights and cruises when a soggy time is almost guaranteed? This website says it's the worst time to go to most of Indonesia (including Bali and Java):

https://www.selectiveasia.com/indonesia-holidays/weather

I don't get it. Who would book a cruise when one is likely to get drenched? Are there people who just don't look these things up when planning an expensive vacation? Or are there people who don't care about lousy weather?

 

[vinapu]

3 hours ago, unicorn said:

 

I don't get it. Who would book a cruise when one is likely to get drenched? Are there people who just don't look these things up when planning an expensive vacation? Or are there people who don't care about lousy weather?

 

my guess will be what is highlighted from your post plus chances are  that cruises during poor weather periods may be cheapest.

My experience with cruises is very limited , just two ,  but on both I noticed that people are taking those to be on the ship and bask in it's luxuries ratjher  than being interested in any type of land activities be it sightseeing or lazying on the beach. Even in places like Cartagena or Panama only less than half passengers actually left the ship, they were giving us numbers.

[unicorn]

2 hours ago, vinapu said:

my guess will be what is highlighted from your post plus chances are  that cruises during poor weather periods may be cheapest.

My experience with cruises is very limited , just two ,  but on both I noticed that people are taking those to be on the ship and basking in it's luxuries rather  than being interested in any type of land activities be it sightseeing or lazing on the beach. Even in places like Cartagena or Panama only less than half passengers actually left the ship, they were giving us numbers.

I'm curious as to which cruise you were on. I've been on over a dozen with Celebrity Cruises alone (and a few others), and met quite a few fellow passengers (in the past, it used to be the case that there were fixed sittings with large tables, and one would meet more fellow guests than is now the case). Rarely did I meet people who didn't go on shore on port days. Flying half-way across the world just to get to the departure port is either very expensive or very uncomfortable/arduous. Even an economy ticket costs thousands for two people. If people just wanted to experience luxury, they could spend the thousands and stay closer to home. 

I suppose that there are people who take repositioning cruises which are, indeed, quite inexpensive, and have limited port stops. But even those have some ports to explore. I can understand someone going on a cruise close to home, and perhaps only interested in the cruise experience (for example, someone from the US's east coast taking a cruise from Miami, or from the west coast from Los Angeles). But does it really make sense to fly all the way to Singapore just to either stay on the ship or get soaked? Have others gone on cruises in which a majority stay on board when at port? Which cruise lines and which departure ports?

[thaiophilus]

What the "average precipitiation" in that chart doesn't tell you is how the rain is distributed throughout the day. You can plan around a predictable hour's thunderstorm at the same time every day in a way you can't when there's no pattern to the precipitation.

[Keithambrose]

4 hours ago, thaiophilus said:

What the "average precipitiation" in that chart doesn't tell you is how the rain is distributed throughout the day. You can plan around a predictable hour's thunderstorm at the same time every day in a way you can't when there's no pattern to the precipitation.

Such as Bangkok, where it tends to rain for an hour or so around 4pm. 

[vinapu]

10 hours ago, unicorn said:

But does it really make sense to fly all the way to Singapore just to either stay on the ship or get soaked? 

I agree with your reasoning but what makes you thinking majority  of passengers will be from far away places like Europe or North America ? For millions Singapore is not 'all the way ' it's just Singapore,  2 to 7 hours away.

10 hours ago, unicorn said:

I'm curious as to which cruise you were on.

Proletarian ones, Princess out of Miami and Norwegian out of St Juan PR

[floridarob]

21 hours ago, unicorn said:

Or are there people who don't care about lousy weather?

The only weather I care about avoiding is snow....

I've been on 100+ cruises and worked 1 contract on Princess when I stopped working, for the fun of it. People do stay onboard, especially when it's a frequent cruiser and they've been t the ports before, maybe several times or is a shitty port, Progreso Mexico for example. The ship is amazing and more so when most people are on shore.... a quiet paradise.

This itinerary has only 3 ports for 8 days, so I'm sure most will get off in those ports for sure. Bring an umbrella....

Book the specialty restaurants early, but the package and eat every night in them if you can... RCCL main dining room food is meh, Specialty restaurants are well worth the little extra, sooo much better than the MDR. Celebrity is on par with Princess the MDR is good as well as the service.

 

 

4 hours ago, vinapu said:

Proletarian ones, Princess out of Miami

Princess doesn't use Miami, they sail out of Port Everglades, Fort Lauderdale.


 

[vinapu]

3 hours ago, floridarob said:

Princess doesn't use Miami, they sail out of Port Everglades, Fort Lauderdale.
 

Right , it was out of Fort Lauderdale, I was even in talks  with member living there about meeting but there was not much time between flights and ship. 

[unicorn]

13 hours ago, thaiophilus said:

What the "average precipitiation" in that chart doesn't tell you is how the rain is distributed throughout the day. You can plan around a predictable hour's thunderstorm at the same time every day in a way you can't when there's no pattern to the precipitation.

With 39 cm (over 15 inches) of rain over 19 days, is it really possible that the downpours happen over just an hour or two? This forum has a lot of Thai members, so maybe their experience would be helpful. It looks as though Bangkok's rainiest month is September, with 34 cm of rain over 18 days during that month. Does the rain usually last only an hour or two in September? If so, how are the roads after the rain? That the travel website I looked at/linked above called January a "poor" month to visit Bali and Java suggests weather has a significant impact on the travel experience. 

3 hours ago, floridarob said:

... People do stay onboard, especially when it's a frequent cruiser and they've been t the ports before, maybe several times or is a shitty port, Progreso Mexico for example. The ship is amazing and more so when most people are on shore.... a quiet paradise...

The fact that the ship is a "quiet paradise" even when docked in a shitty port suggests most people do go on shore when at port. Maybe some people just go on a cruise to say they've "been there," even when they can't really experience a place. There's a travel vlogger by the name of Noel Philips who "documented" his trip to say he's been to all 50 states, showing him take a train from Washington DC to Wilmington, Delaware and back. To him, the fact that he'd passed a sliver of Maryland and Delaware meant he'd "been there." I'm not sure I'd agree he can say he's "been there." 

When I say I've been to all 50 states (and have visited all Canadian provincial capitals), the only one I feel I cheated on a little is Kansas, because my extent on visiting that state was a dinner I ate in Baxter Springs. OK, also my extent to visiting Kentucky was a dinner in Covington. But at least I did get a look at the place and have a meal there. 

 

He especially misses out with Wyoming and South Dakota, since there are a lot of fascinating places in those states. 

[floridarob]

4 minutes ago, unicorn said:

even when docked in a shitty port

was an "or" in there 😉

[vinapu]

3 hours ago, unicorn said:

Maybe some people just go on a cruise to say they've "been there," even when they can't really experience a place.

quite possible.

For that reason for my personal use I classify country as  ' been there " only if :a/ I spent the night there and b/  spent there some of local currency, even as little as to buy chewing gum or newspaper.

Using this logic I never been to France and Netherlands even if I visited Paris and Amsterdam ( day trips only ) nor in Japan even if I spent the night there ( but not any money courtesy of airline)

[Mavica]

Yes, I always look up weather reports / history for destinations I travel to.

[Mavica]

On 1/6/2025 at 12:26 AM, unicorn said:

I suppose that there are people who take repositioning cruises which are, indeed, quite inexpensive, and have limited port stops. But even those have some ports to explore. I can understand someone going on a cruise close to home, and perhaps only interested in the cruise experience (for example, someone from the US's east coast taking a cruise from Miami, or from the west coast from Los Angeles). But does it really make sense to fly all the way to Singapore just to either stay on the ship or get soaked? Have others gone on cruises in which a majority stay on board when at port? Which cruise lines and which departure ports?

I live adjacent to a cruise departure port and have taken just one cruise a couple of years ago ... because it was departing close to home (40-minute drive).  No travel to another city required.  It was a cruise to Mexican ports, etc. and I went solo, took no $150 excursions, no expensive drink packages (but brought a couple of bottles of wine with me).  I'm interested in the repositioning cruises from Florida, though; might do one.  However, IMO cruises (generally) are one of the most expensive modes of transport / travel for a solo traveler (departing from the USA).

[unicorn]

3 hours ago, vinapu said:

...

For that reason for my personal use I classify country as  ' been there " only if :a/ I spent the night there and b/  spent there some of local currency

...

Yes, by those criteria, I would not have been to Kansas or Kentucky since, while I ate and spent money there, did not spend the night. At least it's a little less ridiculous than Noel Philips' assertion that he's "been to" Maryland just because spent an hour crossing over a thin sliver of the state (and even less of Delaware, for which he passed only a few km). Staying overnight is a bit of a tough criterion, though. I've twice driven across Nebraska, taking 7.5 hours each way, and have seen the entire length of the state and eaten 4 meals there, so I feel quite comfortable saying I've been there (I've never counted changing planes in an airport as being there). Idaho's another state where I've spent quite a few hours on different occasions, stopping at various sights, but have never actually spent the night. 

I've also visited quite a few sights in New Hampshire and had quite a few meals there over the years. I've been to the top of Mount Washington, the highest peak in New England (and the windiest place in the US), visited Franconia Notch State Park, lunched in Portsmouth, and hiked Flume Gorge. I feel confident in saying I've visited the place, but it's always been in the context of a wider New England trip, either travel from Maine to Vermont, or Massachusetts to Maine, or Vermont to Massachusetts. Never spent the night, though (might be going from Ogunquit, ME to Woodstock VT, for example). 

Very commonly, a lot of people stay in West Yellowstone, Montana, when visiting Yellowstone National Park, which is primarily in Wyoming. They might even spend several days visiting the park, although their accommodations are in a different state. 

[unicorn]

11 minutes ago, Mavica said:

...cruises (generally) are one of the most expensive modes of transport / travel for a solo traveler (departing from the USA).

True, for the single traveler. Few cruise lines accommodate single travelers well. For couples, it's not that expensive, especially when one considers that the price includes transportation, food, and lodging. With the better cruise lines, that includes gourmet meals, which are frightfully expensive. The best part of cruising is the absence of packing and unpacking, which one does on trips with rail, bus, car, or air travel. My husband and I are taking a Mediterranean cruise in May, leaving from Tarragona. Prior to the trip, we're going to spend a few nights in Barcelona, including a day-trip to Andorra. While we will not spend the night there, we will be having lunch there and visiting the city, and I will definitely count that as having visited Andorra. Our cruise ship will also stop in Malta, and, although we'll spend several hours there, not spend the night. I will consider myself down to three unvisited European countries: Belarus, Bosnia, and Moldova. We do have plans for Moldova next May (2026). I'm not sure if I'll be able to visit Belarus until Lukashenko dies...

[vinapu]

4 hours ago, unicorn said:

 I'm not sure if I'll be able to visit Belarus until Lukashenko dies...

funny thing, just few minutes ago I received message from European friend and she said the same about USA and Trump, lol  

On serious note , yes , Americans seem to be better served if not travelling to  unpredictable,  post-Soviet, Russia friendly sphere until things settle down.

[Keithambrose]

On 1/7/2025 at 1:51 PM, unicorn said:

True, for the single traveler. Few cruise lines accommodate single travelers well. For couples, it's not that expensive, especially when one considers that the price includes transportation, food, and lodging. With the better cruise lines, that includes gourmet meals, which are frightfully expensive. The best part of cruising is the absence of packing and unpacking, which one does on trips with rail, bus, car, or air travel. My husband and I are taking a Mediterranean cruise in May, leaving from Tarragona. Prior to the trip, we're going to spend a few nights in Barcelona, including a day-trip to Andorra. While we will not spend the night there, we will be having lunch there and visiting the city, and I will definitely count that as having visited Andorra. Our cruise ship will also stop in Malta, and, although we'll spend several hours there, not spend the night. I will consider myself down to three unvisited European countries: Belarus, Bosnia, and Moldova. We do have plans for Moldova next May (2026). I'm not sure if I'll be able to visit Belarus until Lukashenko dies...

Let's hope Moldova is not part of Russia by then, as part of the Trump master plan!