Is a compact itinerary better than an ambitious multi-stop route?
For a fixed-length family holiday, compare usable holiday time as carefully as money. Our recommendation is to ask the captain to cost and explain both a compact route and the proposed longer route.
- Illustrative arithmetic:
Compact cruising area
- Potential fit
- Swimming, relaxed meals and repeated use of favourite anchorages are priorities
- Evidence needed
- Passage estimates, shelter alternatives and sufficient activity variety
Show the full table
| Approach | Potential fit | Evidence needed |
|---|---|---|
| Compact cruising area | Swimming, relaxed meals and repeated use of favourite anchorages are priorities | Passage estimates, shelter alternatives and sufficient activity variety |
| Longer multi-stop route | The family consciously values the destinations enough to accept transit | Leg-by-leg time, fuel estimates, operational constraints and a fallback route |
| One-way charter | Different embarkation and disembarkation points serve the wider holiday | Delivery/redelivery charges, permission, positioning and onward-travel contingency |
Illustrative arithmetic: an 84-nautical-mile passage takes seven hours at a constant 12 knots, or 4.2 hours at 20 knots. That excludes manoeuvring, restrictions, weather and delays; it is not a navigational estimate for a real route.
Do not turn the time saving into a fuel-cost claim without the yacht’s consumption data. Request consumption at the proposed cruising speed, generator use, tender activity, fuel-price assumptions and expected port charges.
Northrop & Johnson’s first-time charter guide states that itinerary changes remain subject to the captain’s discretion and dockage availability. A sales itinerary should therefore be treated as a proposal for operational review, not a guarantee of every stop. (api.northropandjohnson.com)