It's Official: Cunard Re-flags Ships in Bermuda, Launches Weddings at Sea

[Whitemarsh]

So while I am sad to see the name "Southampton" disappear from the stern of the ships (in spite of the negative connotation and eyeroll from many New Yorkers when hearing about any of the "Hamptons" on this side of the pond).

 

Southampton is on Long Island; I thought that area of Long Island was quite salubrious. Why then would Southampton induce negative connotations?

[Whitemarsh]

Yes that is the heart of the problem for me. I would never do another cruise on that ship, but perhaps a transatlantic crossing because for a crossing there are suitable facilities for the ship at each end of the journey. I think that there are people who have only done crossings who have not done cruises, so they would not know about this problem. They have not experienced the nightmare at some of the container ports.

 

Also, the ship carries too many passengers for smooth embarking and disembarking in foreign countries. In some countries such as China the immigration officials only allow passengers to disembark at a snail's pace. Others require a personal inspection before you can leave the ship. With so many passengers on board it can be ages before you can leave the ship. Most of the morning might be gone before you can leave the ship.

 

I think in reality all the Cunard ships have too many passengers to be convenient for a world cruise, because even if QV and QE can get into more passenger ports, the large number of passengers will still have the embarking and disembarking/immigration problems in processing so many people on and off the ship in good time in each foreign port.

 

You would enjoy a transatlantic crossing on QM2. As you mentioned, the port facilities are perfectly adequate for the QM2. I'm about to do a "container port" tour on the QM2; but I don't mind - I love that ship.

[Louise D]

You would enjoy a transatlantic crossing on QM2. As you mentioned, the port facilities are perfectly adequate for the QM2. I'm about to do a "container port" tour on the QM2; but I don't mind - I love that ship.

 

I do sincerely hope it goes well for you. If you are mainly going around Australia, at least you will not have many immigration hassles at the various ports. I would also try to avoid wanting to be early off at each of the ports. It would be better to hang back a bit and let the rush of passengers go on ahead if you can manage it.

[balf]

Obviously the dismay of many Cunard loyals is being heard loud and clear at Cunard headquarters.

 

This was just posted on Facebook by Cunard:

 

We understand people's concern but we remain the Cunard that so many of you, as valued guests, have enjoyed over many years.

 

Well you are certainly not the Cunard that I enjoyed some years ago, that's for certain.

 

David.

[balf]

Take a Cunard cruise yourself and make up your own mind regarding the current Cunard experience. If I'd listened to the 'Cost-cutting' & 'It's not as good as the QE2" brigade then I would not have enjoyed the wonderful transatlantic crossing I took, or booked a further 22 night voyage.

 

You are in the fortunate? position of having nothing to compare with your cruising experience.

 

I can only say that yes, she creaked a bit, the aircon was a joke and the stairways confusing. But there was an atmosphere aboard QE2 that I had hoped to get with QM2 but have never have. I think that only those of us who were lucky to have sailed aboard her would understand.

 

David.

[Whitemarsh]

You are in the fortunate? position of having nothing to compare with your cruising experience.

 

Well yes that certainly true; however I have travelled pretty extensively around the world and recognise good food and service when I experience it.

 

After my fast approaching second voyage :D, I am planning to try Celebrity to see how that compares.

 

I can only say that yes, she creaked a bit, the aircon was a joke and the stairways confusing. But there was an atmosphere aboard QE2 that I had hoped to get with QM2 but have never have. I think that only those of us who were lucky to have sailed aboard her would understand.

 

David.

 

I take everyone's word for it that there was this wonderful clubby atmosphere on the QE2; it sounds lovely and I'm glad you all got to enjoy it. But QM2 is a different, larger and more modern ship, it's not going to have the same atmosphere. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Cunard has gone downhill, or standards have slipped, or we're all going to hell in a hand-basket.

 

Just because some don't like QM2 (based on their preference for QE2) doesn't mean that it's a 'less than' experience and that others (like me) can't and don't enjoy it.

 

It really would be a shame if anyone has visited these boards, with the intention of researching to see if a Cunard voyage would be for them, and decided not to book because of all the negative comments. Some of which are really based on a preference for a different ship, from a bygone age, which is no longer extant (as a cruising option).

[KenC]

............

I take everyone's word for it that there was this wonderful clubby atmosphere on the QE2; it sounds lovely and I'm glad you all got to enjoy it. But QM2 is a different, larger and more modern ship, it's not going to have the same atmosphere. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Cunard has gone downhill, or standards have slipped, or we're all going to hell in a hand-basket.

 

Just because some don't like QM2 (based on their preference for QE2) doesn't mean that it's a 'less than' experience and that others (like me) can't and don't enjoy it.

 

It really would be a shame if anyone has visited these boards, with the intention of researching to see if a Cunard voyage would be for them, and decided not to book because of all the negative comments. Some of which are really based on a preference for a different ship, from a bygone age, which is no longer extant (as a cruising option).

 

I completyely agree and for the record - I sailed PG class on QE2 in 1989 and again in 2005 - both times I was completely underwhelmed and disappointed. I for one am extremely happy that Cunard now has more modern ships to carry on and improve their unique offering and I will continue to sail on the three new 'Queens' and look forward to a fourth when she comes along!!!

 

Ken

[Leucothea]

You are in the fortunate? position of having nothing to compare with your cruising experience.

 

I can only say that yes, she creaked a bit, the aircon was a joke and the stairways confusing. But there was an atmosphere aboard QE2 that I had hoped to get with QM2 but have never have. I think that only those of us who were lucky to have sailed aboard her would understand.

 

David.

 

I completely agree. If you haven't experienced it, you just don't know what the fuss is about.

 

 

 

 

<<<In Hong Kong the QE2 had two gangways in operation and, because I was very young and often mistaken for crew, I was wrongly directed down the crew gangway and ended up lost in the crew areas. (Louise D)>>>

 

When I wore my black trowser suits I was often mistaken for crew. Until just a few years ago I think the majority of Cunard passengers were over 60 or so.

[oceanic9]

Or to be fair, your main reason for disliking QM2 is the container ports she uses on world cruises. Would that be correct? It's nothing to do with the ship herself, the amenities, how she handles etc etc. Am I on the right track?

 

It's part of the overall management of the brand which is not where it should be. Docking at container piers is far less expensive for Carnival to use than standard passenger piers. This practice has not gone unnoticed..I felt abit bad for those on QM2 one time when were on the Marina and at either Limassol or Haifa QM2 came by and docked furter up at a freighter terminal. What was even more sad for her portside passengers the view was not of the harbor as we had. Rather a freighter that was partially burnt out and listing...with more than enough space for QM2 where were docked. Again, cost cutting is very evident at Carnival.

[Leucothea]

Well yes that certainly true; however I have travelled pretty extensively around the world and recognise good food and service when I experience it.

 

After my fast approaching second voyage :D, I am planning to try Celebrity to see how that compares.

 

I take everyone's word for it that there was this wonderful clubby atmosphere on the QE2; it sounds lovely and I'm glad you all got to enjoy it. But QM2 is a different, larger and more modern ship, it's not going to have the same atmosphere. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Cunard has gone downhill, or standards have slipped, or we're all going to hell in a hand-basket.

 

Just because some don't like QM2 (based on their preference for QE2) doesn't mean that it's a 'less than' experience and that others (like me) can't and don't enjoy it.

 

It really would be a shame if anyone has visited these boards, with the intention of researching to see if a Cunard voyage would be for them, and decided not to book because of all the negative comments. Some of which are really based on a preference for a different ship, from a bygone age, which is no longer extant (as a cruising option).

 

If Cunard hadn't changed its registry to Bermuda, we probably wouldn't be discussing this. But this is the end of an era for Cunard. So I think it's only natural and appropriate that we should say some words of mourning for the lady (QE2) who for many had represented what Cunard was about.

 

It's kind of scary for a lot of people the way things we have relied on just seem to slip away without warning, and have kept doing so rapidly over the past decade or so, especially with this lousy economy. It makes everything feel out of control, and these times have been so out of control anyway with terrorism and plummeting stock markets. There seems to be little sense of security and continuity. At the same time, there seem to be many who have profited and become very wealthy during this economy, and the discrepencey itself leads to feelings of uncertainty, confusion, and frustration about having little control of events around you,

 

So we need to pay tribute to dear QE2, and then "just get on with it". I'll still enjoy crossing the Atlantic on QM2, and there are so many things about her that I like. I usually have a terrific time on QM2. It's certainly a great way to get to the other side.

[bobby1119]

Late this afternoon I watched Celebrity's newest ship Silhouette depart in a brilliant sunset on her maiden Caribbean voyage. She's not Queen Mary and nowhere near QE2, but quite impressive. My Kerry Blue Terrier was unimpressed. LOL. Looking forward to my upcoming sailing on Silhouette. She was flying the flag of Malta. Although I lament the Cunard re-flagging, I am glad Cunard will be flying the flag of Bermuda.

[Salacia]

partial quote

 

... Looking forward to my upcoming sailing on Silhouette. She was flying the flag of Malta. Although I lament the Cunard re-flagging, I am glad Cunard will be flying the flag of Bermuda.

 

Isn't Malta a member of the EU (unlike Bermuda)?

[guernseyguy]

Isn't Malta a member of the EU (unlike Bermuda)?

 

Yes, but Malta is not part of the Red Ensign Group.....so in my book a worse option than Bermuda....

[Cruachan]

It's part of the overall management of the brand which is not where it should be. Docking at container piers is far less expensive for Carnival to use than standard passenger piers. This practice has not gone unnoticed..I felt abit bad for those on QM2 one time when were on the Marina and at either Limassol or Haifa QM2 came by and docked furter up at a freighter terminal. What was even more sad for her portside passengers the view was not of the harbor as we had. Rather a freighter that was partially burnt out and listing...with more than enough space for QM2 where were docked. Again, cost cutting is very evident at Carnival.

 

It may not be as clear cut as a simple exercise in minimising berthing fees. QM2 has a very deep draft for her size, so the fact that there was "space" at the berth you were on may not have been the deciding factor - it's much more likely to have been about the depth of water under the keel.

 

Just for the sake of comparison: Oasis of the Seas at 225,282 gross tons draws 31 feet, whereas QM2 at a "mere" 151,400 gross tons, draws 32 feet.

 

J

[oceanic9]

It may not be as clear cut as a simple exercise in minimising berthing fees. QM2 has a very deep draft for her size, so the fact that there was "space" at the berth you were on may not have been the deciding factor - it's much more likely to have been about the depth of water under the keel.

 

Just for the sake of comparison: Oasis of the Seas at 225,282 gross tons draws 31 feet, whereas QM2 at a "mere" 151,400 gross tons, draws 32 feet.

 

J

I brought this up to an officer over morning coffee and he informed me for QM2 it was a matter of less expensive berthing. The berth wasn't that far from us at all but what an experience her passengers must have had. A burnt out freighter on one side and shipping containers four and five stories high on the other. While the rest of us were berthed at the passenger terminal.

[Cruachan]

I brought this up to an officer over morning coffee and he informed me for QM2 it was a matter of less expensive berthing. The berth wasn't that far from us at all but what an experience her passengers must have had. A burnt out freighter on one side and shipping containers four and five stories high on the other. While the rest of us were berthed at the passenger terminal.

 

That's interesting. I'll bear that in mind when making decision about future cruises. I may have to do more on QM2 :D:D

 

J

[Salacia]

Yes, but Malta is not part of the Red Ensign Group.....so in my book a worse option than Bermuda....

 

Why?

 

It seems to me that each port of registry in the Red Ensign Group has different laws and regulations.

 

 

Quoted from http://www.redensigngroup.org/

The Red Ensign Group is comprised of the United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies (Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey) and UK Overseas Territories (Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, St Helena and the Turks & Caicos Islands) which operate shipping registers. These registers are divided into two categories:

Category 1 - register ships of unlimited tonnage and type.

Category 2 - register commercial ships and yachts of up to 150 gross registered tons (GRT); and vessels which are not operated commercially of up to 400 GRT.

[Cruachan]

Why?

 

It seems to me that each port of registry in the Red Ensign Group has different laws and regulations.

 

It isn't about port of registry, and the differing laws and regulations are, to a certain extent, also irrelevant. Each flag state will obviously have different laws and regulations as they are all able to set their own laws. What does differ is the strictness with which those laws and regulations are enforced.

 

The Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control produces an annual publication in which all flag states are allocate to three lists - White (good), Grey (not so good), and Black (bad!). In simplistic terms, a flag state's position in the great scheme of things is determined by the ratio of the number of port state control inspections to the number of detentions imposed as a result of those inspections. Bermuda, this year, is at the top of the White list with zero detentions from 270 inspections. In that regard, it could therefore be regarded as the best performing flag state. Of interest is the fact that the United States is at the top of the Grey list with 4 detentions from 128 inspections. In the very bottom position on the Black list is North Korea with 17 detentions from 45 inspections.

 

Malta is on the white list, but is in the bottom third, with 200 detentions from 5,569 inspections.

 

J

[guernseyguy]

Why?

 

Hmm....lets see...

 

Bermuda: British: 1609-To Date, Head of State, Queen Elizabeth II

Malta: British: 1814-1964, Head of State, Dr George Abela

 

Jolly noble country in WWII and all that, but remaining links to Britain tenuous...

[Salacia]

It isn't about port of registry, and the differing laws and regulations are, to a certain extent, also irrelevant. Each flag state will obviously have different laws and regulations as they are all able to set their own laws. What does differ is the strictness with which those laws and regulations are enforced.

 

The Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control produces an annual publication in which all flag states are allocate to three lists - White (good), Grey (not so good), and Black (bad!). In simplistic terms, a flag state's position in the great scheme of things is determined by the ratio of the number of port state control inspections to the number of detentions imposed as a result of those inspections. Bermuda, this year, is at the top of the White list with zero detentions from 270 inspections. In that regard, it could therefore be regarded as the best performing flag state. Of interest is the fact that the United States is at the top of the Grey list with 4 detentions from 128 inspections. In the very bottom position on the Black list is North Korea with 17 detentions from 45 inspections.

 

Malta is on the white list, but is in the bottom third, with 200 detentions from 5,569 inspections.

 

J

 

J, do you think the number and types of ships registed has any bearing on the detentions from inspections? To the best of my knowledge, 161 commercial vessels and 255 yachts are registered in Bermuda. Of those Commercial vessels...how many are cruise ships? And as long as we're comparing apples to apples, how many US vessels are cruise ships registered in the US? We are talking about cruise ships, aren't we?* In other words, what does the Paris Memorandum mean in terms of cruise ships?

Salacia

 

*Exception being QM2, which as we all know is an ocean liner

[Cruachan]

...We are talking about cruise ships, aren't we?...

 

No, in the great scheme of things cruise ship numbers don't even register on the meter. We are talking about all ships that have an IMO number. Something of the order, last time I looked, of 50,000+ vessels. Of those only some 6,500 are classed as passenger ships, and the overwhelming majority of those will be ferries rather than cruise ships.

 

But I agree that the more responsible owners are likely to register with the higher performing flag states. There are a few quite surprising listings though, for example, Panama and Liberia (both of which used to have a fearsome repuation for flagging floating heaps of scrap metal) are both now on the white list, whereas Switzerland (a name traditionally associated with high levels of efficiency) is on the grey list.

 

J