Sharm or Hurghada

I've been to Sharm many times now, I was thing of Hurghada is the diving
better or worse than Sharm.
What can we expect.


Darren

"Darren Forward" <Darren_NO_SPAM@SecurityDesigners_.Com> wrote in message
news:3f6e9ba3_2@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net...
> I've been to Sharm many times now, I was thing of Hurghada is the diving
> better or worse than Sharm.
> What can we expect.

I think the diving out of Sharm is better for day operations but the crowds
are practically obnoxious. If one could dive Sharm with a 3rd of the boats
usually on those sites it would be quite nice. Hurghada on the other hand is
closer to the areas that suffered the Crown of Thorns infestation a few
years back and the many of those sites suffer the result.

I just don't think the Red Sea is worth diving from a land based operation
at either Sharm or Hurghada. Consider a liveaboard that heads south of
Hurghada at least as far as The Brothers but preferably further. I don't
believe you would be disappointed in any degree.

"Jatniel Juran" <nosp@m.com> wrote in message news:<y4Hbb.33$Y82.33044@news.uswest.net>...
> "Darren Forward" <Darren_NO_SPAM@SecurityDesigners_.Com> wrote in message
> news:3f6e9ba3_2@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net...
> > I've been to Sharm many times now, I was thing of Hurghada is the diving
> > better or worse than Sharm.
> > What can we expect.
>
> I think the diving out of Sharm is better for day operations but the crowds
> are practically obnoxious. If one could dive Sharm with a 3rd of the boats
> usually on those sites it would be quite nice. Hurghada on the other hand is
> closer to the areas that suffered the Crown of Thorns infestation a few
> years back and the many of those sites suffer the result.
>
> I just don't think the Red Sea is worth diving from a land based operation
> at either Sharm or Hurghada. Consider a liveaboard that heads south of
> Hurghada at least as far as The Brothers but preferably further. I don't
> believe you would be disappointed in any degree.

Sorry to disagree Jantiel. Your comments are typical of those
fortunate few that are either married/attached to fellow divers,
single, or persuesive enough to manage to get out on a livaboard for a
week. Apart from the cost involved, there are certain logistical
problems involved in doing this for many divers.

Many divers simply don't have the luxury of being able to leave our
partners or Children for this length of time. Do you suggest that we
might as well just give up diving? Many sites accessable on a daily
basis from Sharm are excellent, pretty much anywhere in Ras Mohammed
and to a lesser extent Tiran straits. There may be *better* sites or
less crowded diving available to those with the money, inclination
and/or opportunity to go liveaboard, but that does not make the day
diving poor. As for the *obnoxious* crowds.... these are your fellow
divers you are talking about. What makes diving affordable in these
places is the fact that putting 12 people on a boat costs pretty much
the same as putting 4 on the same boat. Would you prefer to pay $30
for a days diving or $90 for the same dives? I can afford one but not
the other.

Personally, I have always enjoyed the company and camaraderie of
diving in a middle sized group of 10 to 15 divers. Everyone sees
something differen on a dive, and everyone, from whatever background,
black/white/yellow/gay/straight/Muslim/Jew/Christian/child/adult, will
talk for hours about a dive. Thats all part of the appeal to me.

I cannot comment on Hurgada as I have only dived there when I was
doing my open water so didn't take in the sights much (and was to
excited during the dives to care about quality of what I saw).

"Mike_Scollan" <mikescollan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:734a446d.0309250439.690117a0@posting.google.c om...
> "Jatniel Juran" <nosp@m.com> wrote in message
news:<y4Hbb.33$Y82.33044@news.uswest.net>...
> > "Darren Forward" <Darren_NO_SPAM@SecurityDesigners_.Com> wrote in
message
> > news:3f6e9ba3_2@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net...
> > > I've been to Sharm many times now, I was thing of Hurghada is the
diving
> > > better or worse than Sharm.
> > > What can we expect.
> >
> > I think the diving out of Sharm is better for day operations but the
crowds
> > are practically obnoxious. If one could dive Sharm with a 3rd of the
boats
> > usually on those sites it would be quite nice. Hurghada on the other
hand is
> > closer to the areas that suffered the Crown of Thorns infestation a few
> > years back and the many of those sites suffer the result.
> >
> > I just don't think the Red Sea is worth diving from a land based
operation
> > at either Sharm or Hurghada. Consider a liveaboard that heads south of
> > Hurghada at least as far as The Brothers but preferably further. I don't
> > believe you would be disappointed in any degree.
>
> Sorry to disagree Jantiel.

The poster did not condition his inquiry for spouses, children or costs. He
simply asked what Hurghada was like in comparison to Sharm and I answered
per my experience.

And whether one has a spousal issue, children or budget concerns doesn't
change my opinion that Red Sea is worth diving only from a liveaboard. I can
think of other land based ops to spend money at that are considerably better
than Red Sea land based diving. So if money is a concern and land based is
the only way one can go, Red Sea doesn't make much sense. I assumed he was
considering a diving trip rather than a trip that would have some diving
included.

> Your comments are typical of those
> fortunate few that are either married/attached to fellow divers,
> single, or persuesive enough to manage to get out on a livaboard for a
> week. Apart from the cost involved, there are certain logistical
> problems involved in doing this for many divers.
>
> Many divers simply don't have the luxury of being able to leave our
> partners or Children for this length of time. Do you suggest that we
> might as well just give up diving? Many sites accessable on a daily
> basis from Sharm are excellent, pretty much anywhere in Ras Mohammed
> and to a lesser extent Tiran straits. There may be *better* sites or
> less crowded diving available to those with the money, inclination
> and/or opportunity to go liveaboard, but that does not make the day
> diving poor. As for the *obnoxious* crowds.... these are your fellow
> divers you are talking about. What makes diving affordable in these
> places is the fact that putting 12 people on a boat costs pretty much
> the same as putting 4 on the same boat. Would you prefer to pay $30
> for a days diving or $90 for the same dives? I can afford one but not
> the other.
>
> Personally, I have always enjoyed the company and camaraderie of
> diving in a middle sized group of 10 to 15 divers. Everyone sees
> something differen on a dive, and everyone, from whatever background,
> black/white/yellow/gay/straight/Muslim/Jew/Christian/child/adult, will
> talk for hours about a dive. Thats all part of the appeal to me.
>
> I cannot comment on Hurgada as I have only dived there when I was
> doing my open water so didn't take in the sights much (and was to
> excited during the dives to care about quality of what I saw).

<big Snip>
>
> The poster did not condition his inquiry for spouses, children or costs. He
> simply asked what Hurghada was like in comparison to Sharm and I answered
> per my experience.
>
> And whether one has a spousal issue, children or budget concerns doesn't
> change my opinion that Red Sea is worth diving only from a liveaboard. I can
> think of other land based ops to spend money at that are considerably better
> than Red Sea land based diving. So if money is a concern and land based is
> the only way one can go, Red Sea doesn't make much sense. I assumed he was
> considering a diving trip rather than a trip that would have some diving
> included.
>
<more snipped>

Jatniel,
I would be interested in those sites you feel are better quality/value
compared to the Red Sea Land based operations. Note I cannot go
liveaboard.

Unfortunately (?) for me, my wife cannot dive (medical condition) and
holidays tend to be organised around my diving but with consideration
to her needs from the holiday. She tends to be happy just lying
around the pool (or preferably beach) with a good book, so her needs
are minimal. Any off-gassing days tend to be lazy days with perhaps
some sightseeing if any is available.

Red Sea is good for me as a 4 or 5 hour flight seems reasonable, and
the weather is good all year round (Kids not an issue for me so we
tend to go out-of-season). Tried Bali but the diving was not for me,
I felt that the diving was not as colourful. Tried the Carribean
(Tobago) and loved it, but the 9 or 10 hour flight was dreadful. Found
the Med (Malta) cold.

If you can come up with something you think is better I would be very
interested. I'm from the UK and can fly from any of the major
airports.

Mike

mikescollan@hotmail.com (Mike_Scollan) wrote in message news:<734a446d.0309260004.4b2377c6@posting.google. com>...
> <big Snip>
> >
> > The poster did not condition his inquiry for spouses, children or costs. He
> > simply asked what Hurghada was like in comparison to Sharm and I answered
> > per my experience.
> >
> > And whether one has a spousal issue, children or budget concerns doesn't
> > change my opinion that Red Sea is worth diving only from a liveaboard. I can
> > think of other land based ops to spend money at that are considerably better
> > than Red Sea land based diving. So if money is a concern and land based is
> > the only way one can go, Red Sea doesn't make much sense. I assumed he was
> > considering a diving trip rather than a trip that would have some diving
> > included.
> >
> <more snipped>
>
> Jatniel,
> I would be interested in those sites you feel are better quality/value
> compared to the Red Sea Land based operations. Note I cannot go
> liveaboard.
>
> Unfortunately (?) for me, my wife cannot dive (medical condition) and
> holidays tend to be organised around my diving but with consideration
> to her needs from the holiday. She tends to be happy just lying
> around the pool (or preferably beach) with a good book, so her needs
> are minimal. Any off-gassing days tend to be lazy days with perhaps
> some sightseeing if any is available.
>
> Red Sea is good for me as a 4 or 5 hour flight seems reasonable, and
> the weather is good all year round (Kids not an issue for me so we
> tend to go out-of-season). Tried Bali but the diving was not for me,
> I felt that the diving was not as colourful. Tried the Carribean
> (Tobago) and loved it, but the 9 or 10 hour flight was dreadful. Found
> the Med (Malta) cold.
>
> If you can come up with something you think is better I would be very
> interested. I'm from the UK and can fly from any of the major
> airports.
>
> Mike

I can't comment about sharm as I have never been there but Hurghada
twice staying at the Hilton Resort. I too have a wife who doesn't dive
add she was OK here. All the diving is day boat stuff out at about
08:30 and back again at 16:30ish so any partner will be on their own
for most of the day. However most of the operators let partners join
the boat for a small charge. The diving is pretty easy but lots to see
they also offer the possibility of a couple of nice wreck dives
further away but these are depended on numbers and can be a bit
pricey. Hurghada itself is a pretty grotty resort (personnal) and
there is little to see, if you want the sights then Luxor is a 4hr
coach drive away and they do a day trip but its a LONG day. I didn't
see any two day trips which would be better I believe that this is
because they convoy the coachs with a police escort. The actual Hotel
if fine with two pools and they are used to single women around the
pool with the partners away and look after them, my wife liked the
service. The hotel also has a leisure centre attached which offers
beauty treatments and massages.
Recently returned from Marsa Alam this was a liveaboard but saw a
little of the shore based stuff. Here you can do half day dive in
morning and back to the hotel. You can get out to Elphinstone but this
can be "interseting" depending on the sea conditions. We were in a 38m
boat when we were there and some of the smalled stuff was being thrown
about a lot. The general shore diving here is reported to be better
than further North as its still not up to speed. What we did notice
was that the hotels were very remote and you were stuck in them unless
you had taxi's available. Also nice trip to Dolphin reef possible to
swin with spinner dolphins if they are there (normally they are) so
any partners can do that one as its snorkelling with them.

"michael2" <colinpjenkins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d55d3342.0309260820.4a3a7706@posting.google.c om...

> if you want the sights then Luxor is a 4hr
> coach drive away and they do a day trip but its a LONG day. I didn't
> see any two day trips which would be better I believe that this is
> because they convoy the coachs with a police escort.

Yes, it is a military escort at the head and tail of the convoy, which
leaves at specified times each day (last time I was there the convoy left 3
times per day each way). If you get there in time you can make the trip...if
you don't, you have to wait until the next convoy starts out. There is an
Oasis stop and the entire convoy stops together and starts back out again
together, and on the order of the military. There are no flights from
Hurghada to Luxor direct (the shortest route is connecting thru Sharm) so
the drive makes some sense, but not for a day. There is a lot to see in and
around Luxor and I can't imagine someone riding for 8 hours for a few hours
of touring. That sounds brutal. The best way to go is private van rather
than tourist bus. It isn't that much more expensive. Once in Luxor there are
a few nice hotels in Luxor, I happen to like the Winter Palace most.

"Jatniel Juran" <nosp@m.com> wrote in message news:<Ks%cb.648$kb5.23262@news.uswest.net>...
> "Mike_Scollan" <mikescollan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:734a446d.0309260004.4b2377c6@posting.google.c om...
>
> > Red Sea is good for me as a 4 or 5 hour flight seems reasonable, and
> > the weather is good all year round (Kids not an issue for me so we
> > tend to go out-of-season).
>
> Then I would continue to go there were I you, because it seems to suit your
> desire that travel time stay within a 4 or 5 hour window. My comments were
> based upon my own experiences and my own dictates. I don't have a problem
> flying an extra hours for what I consider to be better diving. For Caribbean
> diving for instance I can hit Cayman, Bahamas, Turks & Caicos, Cozumel,
> Belize etc from Denver in about 6 hours total travel time. Bonaire takes a
> few hours more, but I like Bonaire better so I spend the extra time on
> travel. Once there the added travel time makes little difference to me. I
> love Galapagos, but the travel there is a real pain from Colorado, still I
> hit it about once every two years because once there the quality of diving
> and touring makes the travel hassles or time disappear. The way I look at
> diving is that the location takes precedence over most other considerations.
> I know that's not for everybody, but it is the way I look at it and
> therefore my comments reflect that same perspective.
>
> I, like you, do not enjoy 18 to 42 hour travel times to diving locations,
> but how else to I reach PNG, Thailand, Red Sea, Mabul etc. To me it is just
> a necessary evil.

Jatniel,
Your comments make more sense now I realise that you are from the
States. The Red Sea must be a real pain for you to get to, and with
the Carribean about the same time for you as the Red Sea is for me, I
can understand why you would prefer them. Personally I would be
prepared to go the extra mile (or couple of hours) to get to better
diving, but my wife may not agree ;)
Mike

"Mike_Scollan" <mikescollan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:734a446d.0309290342.64051e79@posting.google.c om...

> Jatniel,
> Your comments make more sense now I realise that you are from the
> States. The Red Sea must be a real pain for you to get to, and with
> the Carribean about the same time for you as the Red Sea is for me, I
> can understand why you would prefer them. Personally I would be
> prepared to go the extra mile (or couple of hours) to get to better
> diving, but my wife may not agree ;)
> Mike

Actually I do not prefer the Caribbean to the Pacific, Indian or Red Sea.
Indeed I dive the Caribbean only once a year anymore and that is always
Bonaire. None of the other Caribbean locations appeal to me anymore
specifically because there is much better diving in other parts of the
world. This year my trips have been Mabul, Wakatobi and Galapagos and I
still have PNG next month and Bonaire for Christmas. Next year I start out
with Thailand in January. There is no way anything in the Caribbean (at
least anything I have ever seen) measures up to those locations, so I spend
the time and money to make those trips. Plus, Denver to the Caribbean can
sometimes be a real pain in the ass. Instead of going to the Caribbean for
diving I usually head down to Mexico for a few days on the beach. I
generally feel that is a better expenditure of time and money, and we get
great deals out of Colorado to certain parts of Mexico...as I imagine you do
to the Red Sea.

And yes, were I you, I too would drop down to the Red Sea at least a couple
times per year. The last time I was there, July 2001, a couple from London
who joins us on many trips took a direct flight out of Hurghada right back
to Gatwick. I don't know what it was, maybe a 4 or 5 hour flight, but I know
they were home for lunch. I went on to Luxor and met my wife for some
touring, but had I left at the same time I wouldn't have gotten back to home
for a day and a half because of Cairo and New York stops and delays.

As far as wives go, mine long ago decided she would rather not travel with
me on these types of trips. She just doesn't care for some of the discomfort
long trips and third world locales inevitably generate. I generally meet up
with a group of people at a boat dock. Most of us have never seen each other
anywhere else but in some far flung diving location or boat.