buchanan101

24 minutes ago, Poole Boy said:

In my opinion long and narrow , from what I have seen similar to a balcony just longer, I feel the bathroom is very cramped but the shower is a big plus, also lacking in wardrobe space I will post some pictures later

As I expected… still wondering about bidding for potential Q5/Q6 upgrade…

still you have 2 TVs, and a much better sofa than balconies. And better deck chairs… and, bottled water.. and a coffee machine…

11 minutes ago, Poole Boy said:

Price for the maiden is the same as the next 2 week cruise we paid £4k each for P2 for 7 days the next cruise to the Canaries was also £4k each in the same cabin , for  2 weeks, so we have paid a significant premium to be on the cruise , to add to some other comments regarding speed of service, you are not alone, Princess grills was just as bad, for both food and drink, to forever to get even the basics.

Though £8k for P2 for 14 days is good value (PG seems to be roughly £5.5k a week when cruises are put on sale.. in my very limited experience…)

what are PG cabins like as in one in 7 weeks? 

27 minutes ago, tacticalbanjo said:

Well it’s 20 mins until dinner and no sign of my cases. The steward says none of the cases in my area have come up yet. So the question is do I just front my day clothes out in Britannia or slum it in the buffet even though I’d never normally eat there in the evening. 
 

Also stepped on a small shard of metal which was embedded in the carpet so not off to a great start!

Wear your day clothes - you have an obvious excuse. 

1 minute ago, NE John said:

I’m certainly not looking backwards for ship design ideas and I do find much of the design on QA pleasing. My maritime comments stem from Cunard’s unique connection to their maritime heritage that is apparent on their present ships. In the very limited videos I have seen, the ship looks more like a boutique hotel vs a Cunard ship. Again, not a bad thing but pictures and vids of QA could easily show a ship from several other premium lines. Luckily, as @exlondonerstates, there seems to be a connection to the sea and that is important to many of us. The QA is no mall at sea.
On a separate note, there seems also to be little attention given to the Royal family; other Cunard ships have artwork and busts of present and former Royalty. Maybe those on board can check that out and report back. 

Thought I saw some royal portraits in Chris Frame's tour?

1 minute ago, Solent Richard said:

The early bird catches the Bright Lights….

 

Is that a half decent "app" now? (Last experience, 18months ago)

2 minutes ago, alc13 said:

Same for us.  I'm preparing for that wall-facing seat in October.  I'm hoping that at least those banquette tables are spaced far enough apart that you're not sharing your meal with the next table.

You do share a table effectively with the next table in QM2 QG - or maybe it's just the bot where they put the first timers. Luckily neighbouring tables were good company, and you didn't have to make conversation, so almost perfect set up...

3 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

That inside cabin had two single beds together in the middle. Were they made up as a double, there would be slightly more from down the sides. Were they actually being used as two singles, they would probably be against the walls, leaving a larger space in the middle.

The plugs would be in a strange place if beds at the side...

If you book an inside you know what you are getting - and aren't expecting to be spending much time in there. There's a reason why they are cheap and you get everything else the same as 80% of the rest of the passengers.

The other cabins are no different in size to Vista cabins AFAIK

3 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Not all ships can be QM2, much as you would like otherwise!

 

But of course they can.... if a business builds what its customers want. The best result here is that I forsee QA spurring bookings for QM2, QV and QE among regular Cunard passengers. And that is a good thing indeed. Customers buy what they value not what a business tells them they should because it makes them more money.  Just as the Queens Grill diners staring at the blank wall or the person trying to saddle around the bed in the min inside cabin.  

Only one ship is QM2, and you are being disingenuous again: I was referring to the passenger/volume ratio. AGAIN.

And picking an inside cabin and a section of the QG restaurant as your criticisms when those do not affect 95%+ of passengers...

. 

Just now, exlondoner said:

As tonnage is a measurement of volume, don’t QM2’s very high ceilings on Decks 2 and 3 give an extra possibly illusory amount of spaciousness. After all, you can’t hover up there. However I must say she always does seem very spacious, except the lifts.

Yes Gross Tonnage is a volume measurement - but the high ceilings (only 2 decks that are 4.5m compared with 3.5m I think) can't make the difference between mid30s and mid 40s

1 minute ago, buchanan101 said:

I said "not dissimilar" - maybe something like 34 compared with 36 (with QM2 at 45). The numbers are on cruisemapper and elsewhere. And it can't be a 100% accurate science - a slightly larger ship may be able to get away with a slightly lower density; there could be efficiency of scale in some non passenger areas - so that's why I say 34 and 36 are similar

 

And the comparison with other cruise ships was in the passenger/volume ratio - re-read my message

 

Not all ships can be QM2, much as you would like otherwise!

My recollection was correct, as was my statement comparing with other cruise ships

QE - 36

QA- 34

Anthem - 35

Britannia - 33

Last two at random. Feel free to check - I expect most 100,000 ton to 200,000 ton cruise ships will be mid 30s

9 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Repeating it doesn't make it true.  There are several posts here which define--. in real measurement ie sq. ft. of sample grade cabins and passenger to tonnage and passenger to crew ratios which are the traditional metrics to judge the density of passenger ships--- that QA is, based on these criteria, a more "densely populated" vessel. She just is.  And the videos shows the effect visually... from the Queens Grill restaurant to the min inside cabin. 

 

As for QA for being "not that dissimilar to most other cruise ships," that is the more damning comment I've seen of her... most Cunard regulars had hoped she would be a Cunarder not "most other cruise ships." And those trying her out who have never sailed with Cunard which we keep being told is what makes her so wonderful, might come away and not know what all the fuss is about if she is "not dissimilar to other cruise ships."

I said "not dissimilar" - maybe something like 34 compared with 36 (with QM2 at 45). The numbers are on cruisemapper and elsewhere. And it can't be a 100% accurate science - a slightly larger ship may be able to get away with a slightly lower density; there could be efficiency of scale in some non passenger areas - so that's why I say 34 and 36 are similar

And the comparison with other cruise ships was in the passenger/volume ratio - re-read my message

Not all ships can be QM2, much as you would like otherwise!

Just now, Victoria2 said:

As one of your 'some people', the Vistas QG restaurants are light and airy and even most of those not sat directly at the window, had a view out.

Now I'm pretty sure we will have a window table and the window tables will be fine for those who are lucky enough to be seated there but at the expense possibly of a few Q. Griller's having to face a wall?

 

Would you be happy to be sat facing a wall?

 

I wouldn't.

I usually have to face the wall dining with my partner...doesn't bother me in restaurants as my view is just lovely (!), it may do at sea when there is a different sort of view. 

I'm not expecting a great table in PG as it'll be only our second Cunard. Last time in QM2 QG we were in the area away from windows, though the views in QM2 QG aren't as good.

Any tips for getting a good table? Turn up at embarkation day lunch and be nice to the maitre'd? I mean we aren't first-timers...

Anyway, apologies, I was just trying to point out the trade off that I assume they made; more window seats- and the facing the wall tables are not the best I agree, but either a space saving measure (get more tables in that way) or misguided design

3 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Sorry, I’m being very stupid. It wasn’t the wedge that stopped you seeing the sea, but other furniture.

I'm just imagining these two fat people being wedged. Are they still there now?

12 hours ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

I'm not loving the PG cabin. It doesn't look much different from Club. Same balcony and same balcony furniture. The room is a little longer, but I'd like to see what the closets are like. And the sink in the bathroom is ridiculous--I just know that's going to be splashy. Shower appears to be a nice size and I think I saw a wand as well as an overhead shower, so something positive there.  

 

What's with that wallpaper around the mirror? Looks like '60s pop art!

 

Supposedly people disliked the wedge-shaped cabinet that divided the two parts of the PG room on the Vistas, but I did like it. Even a little separation between living area and sleeping area is nice and it broke up the visual of the very long space.

Looks better than I expected actually. The loungers on the balcony are a grade or two up from the ones in the BC videos, though it's the same size balcony, but at least they are reasonably deep. The bathroom sink is typical hotel fare now and is supposed to be a the next step up from the inbuilt ones in the Britannias. I quite like it - lookwise anyway. I'd prefer a rainfall shower but I doubt any cruise lines use them due to ater consumption and headroom.

I guess the closets are very similar to Britannias given similar dimensions; as long as I can put stuff away I am not too bothered, though a lot of the VLOGS seem to focus on storage -key for longer voyages I guess

Prefer the QG look, but on the fjords voyage I'm saving £2k and going PG

A Chris Frame walk through

1 hour ago, Germancruiser said:

It is with great interest that I read all the comments about the new " Cunarder". I sailed on board about 25 different ship with different lines. Cunard beeing my favorite at the moment.

Every new ship has some parts that one likes- some less so. That´s quite usual - each has ones own taste.

A real ship buff ( which I am) might stick to QM2. It is good that new ship has modern feel- and still remains elegant- acording to the pictures and the video I saw so far. I am not overly impressed with the QR either but all the other lounges look really nice and elegant. My favorite is the Commodore Club. I also like that most lounges are outside with big windows- which makes a real Cunarder- connected with the seas at evey twist and turn.

Nobody would dare to call that walkway around the ship a Promenade Deck. I expected it to be that way. I sailed on board Nieuw Statendam,  which is also Pinacle Class and did not like it one bit. Glad they customized QA to be a Cunarder- different maybe- but still a Cunarder.

Excellent comments. Suspect the QR will look better in the flesh (though renderings always looked a bit underwhelming). And the promenade deck is no big deal for me as most days we will be on shore. Can still walk round it. Can still sit out on (other) decks.

I think QA had to be a bit different - they’ve added 45% more bed capacity to their fleet; they have to expand the target market. 

15 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I think the only real clunker I can immediately see and which can't be changed, is the design of the QG restaurant but then to be fair, that has no effect for the majority of passengers. Hopefully, we won't be on any of the naughty steps.

 

I might have to carry a cushion around with me if the chairs around the ship are as uncomfortable as they look but apart from that, not too bad at all.

The QG restaurant is long and thin so it runs the full length of the windows. Seems that some on here would rather have a restaurant where fewer people have window seats? They could have done this by putting Grills Lounge alongside QG restaurant both by window. Would people have preferred that? Probably not..
 

Twice as many people in PG so the restaurant is same length but twice as wide. I’d still rather be in the QG restaurant as more chance of window seat… but we will be in PG in… checks…51 days! 

4 hours ago, NE John said:

As a fellow armchair critic, there are some really nice things I’ve seen so far along with a couple clunkers. However, the main thing I see missing is a sense of being at sea and being at see on a Cunard ship. QA has a nice boutique hotel look (maybe Azamara-like) and that’s great but I’m looking for a maritime experience. 
I eagerly await the reports on the nearby “Live” thread regarding tomorrow’s maiden voyage. Based on what I see, I’m sure one can have a good experience on QA - but will it be a Cunard experience?

Agree with the look comments but why should how a ship looks give a maritime experience? Genuinely interested; why is an interior that could have been on ships decades or even a century ago (as the other Queens) be synonymous with a maritime experience?

Pretty sure there were elements of decades old ships that I’d rather not experience…

3 hours ago, deck chair said:

I have long had the opinion that the QA is going be an overcrowded mess.  Too many passengers and not enough space.  Just look at the smaller cabins, small Royal Court Theatre and no real promenade deck and mediocre seating in the premium Grills dining rooms as examples. Stephen Payne must be horrified. The bean counters at Cunard have really screwed this one up.  I will stick with QM2, a beautiful ship on which I have experienced 40+ sailings since 2006.  

Passenger/volume ratio almost identical to QV and QE and probably not that dissimilar to most other cruise ships. Cabins no smaller to Vista cabins. Not sure what Payne has to do with it: QA nor any other ship is the QM2. Don’t know why you are comparing anything to the QM2 

9 minutes ago, RJChatsworth said:

There seems to be a lot more people sitting facing walls in QG than PG.  Must remember not to tick upgrade box when in PG!  Why would the design people think passengers would want to look at wall when the sea is in the opposite direction?  I just don’t get it.  You pay all that money in the best restaurant on the ship to look at a wall.  Or to even look at it 50% of the time if you swap seats!  Was it asking too much to consider turning the tables through 90 degrees?

Fit more in if you think about footprint of table and two chairs

1 minute ago, exlondoner said:

It would be difficult to think of anything more calculated to annoy the bulk of the passengers than fitting a shower curtain in the grades below club. 😀 Perhaps issuing them with oars, but even then I’m not sure.

Got to differentiate somehow...

4 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

But the layout is the same. A coffee machine is neither here nor there, except its absence creates a little more space to put things down.

Layout same, trim may be a bit different, and bathroom may be slightly lower spec (but I assume no shower curtain)

Just now, TowandaUK said:

Chris Frame has done a vlog of a Britannia balcony. 

I think all the vloggers were put in BC, not standard balconies

Just now, exlondoner said:

Well, aren’t the Britannia Club the same as other balcony cabins?

No, you get a coffee machine... and I suspect the trim may be a bit different... though probably a lot closer than BC>PG>QG

21 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Have any of these vloggers ventured into the cheap seats of the insides and ocean views?

Britannia Club is the lowest they've got. So they've covered maybe 25% to 30% tops of all cabins...