Antarctica Has Long Started By Ship in Ushuaia. Does It Have To?

For most expedition travellers, Antarctica still begins in Ushuaia. Its location, port, airport and established tourism infrastructure have made the Argentine city the natural hub for ships heading across the Drake Passage to the Antarctic Peninsula. The crossing itself has become part of the experience, marking the transition from South America to Antarctica and offering everything from a remarkably calm Drake Lake to the much-discussed Drake Shake.

Increasingly, though, expedition operators are looking for other ways to get their passengers south. HX Expeditions has announced that it will begin Antarctic voyages from Stanley in the Falkland Islands in 2028, while Punta Arenas and Puerto Natales in Chile already play important roles in fly-cruise operations. As a result, the gateway itself is becoming part of the choice travellers make when selecting an Antarctic expedition.

Ushuaia works well, exceptionally well, as an Antarctic gateway.

Travellers can fly in, spend a night in the city and join their ship without complicated onward connections, while operators have access to an established network of port services, provisioning and logistics.

What Ushuaia cannot change is distance. Crossing the Drake generally takes around two days in each direction, depending on the ship and conditions. For a traditional Antarctic Peninsula voyage, those days are part of the journey, but for travellers with limited holiday time they can represent a significant proportion of the trip.

That has encouraged operators to explore alternatives.

The industry's restart after the Covid pandemic showed how quickly the established pattern could change. For the 2021/22 season, AE Expeditions moved Greg Mortimer to Punta Arenas, with Chile's high vaccination rate among the factors behind the decision. Silversea and HX Expeditions also shifted Antarctic operations from Argentina to Chile amid uncertainty surrounding border restrictions and cruise arrangements.

The circumstances were exceptional, and much of the industry subsequently returned to Ushuaia, but the period demonstrated that Antarctic gateways are not fixed by tradition. What was then largely a crisis response is now happening for very different reasons, as operators consider whether alternative gateways can better use expedition time.

The most established alternative is the Antarctic fly-cruise. Instead of sailing across the Drake Passage, passengers fly from southern Chile to King George Island in the South Shetlands and join their expedition ship there.

Antarctica21 pioneered the model from Punta Arenas, while Lindblad Expeditions now offers Antarctica Direct itineraries using Puerto Natales, including voyages that sail the Drake in one direction and fly the other. Secret Atlas is also using Puerto Natales for its 36-guest Aureum fly-cruise programme.

These journeys give travellers a choice that barely existed in the traditional Antarctic model. They can sail the Drake both ways, fly across it, or combine the two, keeping the experience of a Southern Ocean crossing while reducing transit time.

HX's decision to operate from Stanley introduces another variation. Rather than flying passengers directly into Antarctica, it moves the expedition's starting point to the Falkland Islands.

This is particularly relevant for voyages combining the Falklands, South Georgia and Antarctica, where the distances involved commonly result in itineraries approaching three weeks. Starting in Stanley lets you spend more of the available time on those three destinations rather than travelling from South America to the first.

It also demonstrates how the gateway can influence the expedition itself. Where you join the ship affects how much time you spend at sea, which destinations you can realistically combine, and how long the overall journey takes.

Not everyone will regard removing sea days as an improvement. The Drake Passage has become an important part of Antarctic travel, and arriving by ship provides a sense of distance, expectation and transition that flying cannot reproduce. Not dissimilar to the classic appeal of an ocean liner's approach to Manhattan Island as it rises in the distance.

The crossing also provides wildlife opportunities and gives expedition teams time to introduce the history, science and wildlife of Antarctica before the first landing.

Flying brings different uncertainties. Antarctic aviation is highly weather dependent, particularly around King George Island, so avoiding rough seas does not remove the possibility of disruption.

The choice is therefore less about finding a better route than deciding what kind of journey you want. For some travellers, maximising time around the Peninsula will be the priority. Others will want the experience of sailing south and seeing Antarctica gradually appear ahead.

Ushuaia is unlikely to lose its central position in Antarctic expedition cruising, but it increasingly sits within a wider network of gateways. Punta Arenas established the fly-cruise model, Puerto Natales is becoming another base for Antarctic flights, King George Island functions as an aviation gateway on the continent itself, and Stanley will once again become the starting point for a major expedition operator.

For travellers, this adds another consideration when comparing Antarctic expeditions. Alongside the ship, passenger numbers, and itinerary, it is worth considering where the journey starts, how you reach the vessel, and how much available time is spent travelling between destinations rather than exploring them.

A shorter itinerary is not necessarily a lesser expedition if the days have been removed from transit rather than Antarctica. Equally, efficiency is not everything when the journey itself is part of the reason for going.

The question is no longer simply what you want to see when you reach Antarctica, but how you want to get there.