My husband and I have always had "romantic" visions of a Cunard crossing. Does anyone have any experience doing this? I realize there are no ports of call so it'll be six straight days on the ship. Too much? Does it get boring? Also, is the British "class" we hear about associated with this ship too stuffy for modern American tastes? We love Britain but wonder about the potential for the "prim & proper" life on board.<BR><BR>We're planning a week or so before the crossing in London and the midlands.<BR><BR>Thank you in advance.<BR>

I think you aren't getting responses to your question because so many of us here don't like cruises. I would suggest you repost on the cruise board. I personally couldn't relax on the ship for more that an hour or two and they'd probably have to carry me off (bored to stiff to walk) at the end, but that's me.<BR>I have friends who do a trans Atlantic cruise every year, often two a year when they "reposition" the cruise ships from the Carribean to the Meditteranean and they love it.

I used a Cunard liner from NY to Calais one time, and back, from Southampton to NY ... and it was a terrific way to travel. A bit over five days each way ... and just a lot of excitement and fun. If you can afford it, certainly do it. This was my first venture to Europe, and it was just a wonderful way to do it - have never forgotten the feeling. I had the teeny cabin on C or D deck (under the water, to be sure). Really loved the trip and feelings. Caio, L

Marsha, my husband and I took the Leonardo da Vinci (no longer in service) from NY to Genoa on our honeymoon 25 years ago. We thoroughly enjoyed the trip across, but unless you have plenty of time on your hands, I would recommend flying. We spent too much time on the ship and not enough in Italy (the crossing took 10 days due to engine trouble). <BR>It really wasn't boring--we would sleep late, go up to the bar and have expresso and fresh peach daiquiris for breakfast with our favorite Italian bartender (remember--we were in our 20's!) Then hang out by the pool, catch a movie, walk around the deck, or whatever--eat and drink lots, stay up late in the disco... Now I'm sure there's even more to do than there was then (no casino, no big shows, etc). So if what you want is a relaxing week at sea, I say go for it! But leave plenty of time to explore your destination too!

About two weeks before the French Concorde crashed, my mother and stepfather flew to London on the Concorde, spent a week, then returned on the QEII. It was a fabulous trip. I've seen similar trips with standard airlines for the flight leg (at a reasonable cost, too), and would certainly consider it myself. They enjoyed the QEII. They do take more "standard" luxury cruises (yes that is a nonsequitor) and QEII is far less flamboyant, but not at all stuffy.

Thank you all

Marsha -<BR> In 1998, a good pal of mine and his father, both men British-born but residents of Canada for 40+ years, took the reverse of the trip that Diane's parents took (QEII NYC-Southampton, Orient Express Southampton-London, Concorde London-NYC). They both enjoyed themselves immensely! My friend used the exercise facilities, he and his dad participated in some of the group activities, they took in some movies in the evening, and they raved about the food, the appiontments in the dining and public areas, the excellence of the service, etc. If you have the time, I think you shoul go for it.<BR>ja