I would like the new ship to have....

[rafinmd]

Ships the way they were 40 years ago

 

No stabilizers?

Rigid class system?

Open lifeboats?

 

Roy

[kohl57]

Well they had stabilizers 65 years ago....!

[eroller]

After the accident the positioning of, and ensuring swift embarkation thereof the 'Mega' double deck lifeboats in large passenger vessels being newly built is def now in the statute book.

One can look up the regulations both pre and post CC.

.

 

 

 

Some regulations may have changed after the Concordia accident, but passenger ships are still permitted to have the traditional lifeboat arrangement of the boats raised above the promenade deck with a nice wide walkway under the boats. As I mentioned earlier we have brand new ship designs with this arrangement (Crystal, Disney, and Viking). Revenue is the primary driver of placing boats directly of the deck, which will be the case with the Cunard K-dam.

 

Interesting about your experience with Virgin. I work for a major US airline and have for 25 years. Ships have always been my hobby though.

[lenquixote66]

No stabilizers?

Rigid class system?

Open lifeboats?

 

Roy

 

First class entertainers . Great food .

[Germancruiser]

I really don´t see the need of " rushing" over the atlantic ocean which 30 something knots- 25 are doing quite nice. I rather enjoy 2 more days on board this beautyfull ship.

 

I am not sorry to have missed the old QE2 rushing over! I sailed her once- THAT WAS QUITE ENOUGH! She may have had her days- but when I sailed her in 2008 she was like a tired old lady wearing way to much make up which could not discquise the real age! And the layout- my my! Not everything about the past is perfect!

 

I am really surprised she finaly ended up as Hotel- Ship- I was sure se would end up in Alang- well all the better now!

[Shuffleboard Dude]

Our (Mr Branson's) motto was Virgin Atlantic, ''4 engines for Long Haul''

 

Nowadays the motto is ETOPS. Engines turn or passengers swim.

The A330 made its first flight in 1992 - I think Mr. Branson was comparing 4 engine aircraft with 3 engine aircraft such as DC-10 or Tristar.

 

Every form of transport has an optimum speed in terms of fuel and cost efficiency. For jet aircraft this speed is around 850 km/h. For cars it's around 80-100 km/h and for trains at about 200 km/h.

 

For passenger ships this speed is around 15 kts, although this varies greatly depending on the shape of the hull (block coefficient, etc.).

 

So, yes of course I would like the new ship to be slightly faster than the SS UNITED STATES, in fact I would love to see this ship to be the refurbished UNITED STATES. But then, I wouldn't like to pay the bill.

[rog747]

Nowadays the motto is ETOPS. Engines turn or passengers swim.

The A330 made its first flight in 1992 - I think Mr. Branson was comparing 4 engine aircraft with 3 engine aircraft such as DC-10 or Tristar.

 

Every form of transport has an optimum speed in terms of fuel and cost efficiency. For jet aircraft this speed is around 850 km/h. For cars it's around 80-100 km/h and for trains at about 200 km/h.

 

For passenger ships this speed is around 15 kts, although this varies greatly depending on the shape of the hull (block coefficient, etc.).

 

So, yes of course I would like the new ship to be slightly faster than the SS UNITED STATES, in fact I would love to see this ship to be the refurbished UNITED STATES. But then, I wouldn't like to pay the bill.

 

No, Branson's mantra was against the increasing use of ETOPS twins at the time.

We painted the motto on the side of the aircraft !

 

The DC10 and Tristar were on the way out by then - The newish MD-11 was around, but apart from Air Europe's order no one in the UK bought it and AE went bust in 1991 sadly.

 

Yes, agree, today ETOPS big twins are the way almost all airlines now fly, even across the wide domain of the Pacific - but not too keen on that myself :confused::confused:

The Atlantic is now completely possible to fly on all air routes with an ETOPS aircraft as there are now no no-go zones.

There are plenty of alternate diversion airfields up in or near the Arctic Circle, Frozen North, all pretty remote, plus Gander and St Johns, or the Azores to land in an ETOPS emergency.

For the Pacific there is nowhere between Hawaii and the US mainland and after that you have Wake and Midway island plus some others. (think amelia earhart here LOL):o

[ew101]

This might have been answered elsewhere, but if they needed a fourth ship why not build another QM/QV class hull? The plans are on the shelf? Was the idea to use the newer HAL platform driven by having more cabins and other revenue space available?

[jburton59]

I certainly have pride in QM2 and I think Cunard does too, but from a Carnival corporate standpoint I’m not so sure. I question if they are seeing the payoff expected, and she is not doing the fast crossing like she was designed for. Was it really necessary to spend all that extra $$ on a power plant that rarely if ever is used to its full potential? An absolutely wonderful ship, but a bit of a failure in regards to how she is being utilized with that impressive and expensive power plant.

For what she's asked to do, that extra power us crucial, even if not used regularly. On a transatlantic schedule, delays due to bad weather can't be made up by skipping a port like they are on cruises. Nice as they may be QV and QE wouldn't work on 20+ tranatlantics a year. Look at the delays into NYC the QE has had off season.

 

Sent from my SM-J700T using Forums mobile app

[eroller]

This might have been answered elsewhere, but if they needed a fourth ship why not build another QM/QV class hull? The plans are on the shelf? Was the idea to use the newer HAL platform driven by having more cabins and other revenue space available?

 

 

I would say you hit the nail on the heard. The K-Dam is basically an evolution of HAL's Signature Class, which includes QV and QE. Before that was the Vista Class, and now we have the Pinnacle Class which is the latest interpretation of this platform. Each class is very similar to each other, but with each new class the efficiency, technology, and revenue potential increases. So Carnival Corp. would not want to go back to a 2008 design when they already have a 2016 evolution of that design that is far more efficient.

[eroller]

For what she's asked to do, that extra power us crucial, even if not used regularly. On a transatlantic schedule, delays due to bad weather can't be made up by skipping a port like they are on cruises. Nice as they may be QV and QE wouldn't work on 20+ tranatlantics a year. Look at the delays into NYC the QE has had off season.

 

Sent from my SM-J700T using Forums mobile app

 

 

There is some truth to this of course, but I know for a fact the gas turbines that give QM2 the additional speed are rarely used, and require special permission from Carinval Corp. to even use them. They are basically collecting cob webs for the most part. Based on that I'm guessing Carnival did not really get a good return on that investment. There are other attributes though that make QM2 ideal for a schedule of crossings. The thickness of the hull, the hull design, the bow design, 4 stabilizers, the superstructure, and of course the lifeboat placement which required special permission. She is a true ocean liner IMO. I think she is a gem, but I'm sad she is not used to her full potential.

 

My first cruise on QM2 was actually a Caribbean cruise. 8-days out of NY just months after she entered service. In 8-days we made it all the way down to Martinique and QM2 was at full speed, with the gas turbines fired up. It was pretty cool. An 8-day Caribbean cruise out of NY to the Southern Caribbean today is unheard of. I'm glad I got to experience it.

[kohl57]

I'd like to see documentation (and you won't) of the gas turbines being used to make up speed... did she not have a delayed crossing just recently and there's no evidence they used them to make up the delay. Or she wouldn't have been late. We are talking about 1-3 knots extra speed here not just fractions.

 

I guess the good thing is that she was indeed designed with this new concept of "plug and play" power plants so that you can just put entire blocks of machinery off line. But it does seem a huge waste of plant and potential to me.

 

One supposes the numbers crunched to justify it but Cunard is, in effect, losing the equal of two 12-day cruises (or more crossings) per year by adding a day to the crossing. These gas turbines must sure use a lot of fuel to cost more than that lost potential revenue.

[Host Hattie]

Our posters onboard suggest that they were used for some of the time

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2682814

[Shuffleboard Dude]

Our posters onboard suggest that they were used for some of the time

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2682814

 

I may add: I saw them in use when leaving Southampton in January, there was a considerable cloud (of steam) ab deck 13 and the captain explained via PA that this was due to the gas turbines running.

 

Of course I cannot tell you whether the electrical energy was needed for propulsion or just to keep the power system stable while 1000 in-stateroom kettles were put on simultaneously.

 

EDIT: The Chief Engineer once stated that 90% of the ship's energy consumption goes into propulsion.

[MarkBearSF]

I'd like to see documentation (and you won't) of the gas turbines being used to make up speed... did she not have a delayed crossing just recently and there's no evidence they used them to make up the delay. Or she wouldn't have been late. We are talking about 1-3 knots extra speed here not just fractions.

 

I was on that voyage. Yes she was delayed - BUT this was due to an extraordinary set of circumstances.

 

 

• Upon departure from SOU, she dawdled in the Bay of Biscay because following her usual course would put her directly into TS Helene's path. After the storm passed, she went way south, almost to the Azores to get south of it and continued on this southern route.
  
• On Day 5, a passenger took a turn for the worse in the infirmary and needed to be evacuated to Canada. This necessitated a diversion from a far southern path to a location a day away up north, with extra time used for the medevac operation itself (a further 6.5 hour diversion). The gas turbines were used.
  
• The night before arrival, the turbines needed to be turned off in the early AM. (Possibly because the water supply was being worked on - there was no water to the passenger cabins or bars from 1-5 AM, and I surmise that the curtoff also affected the systems to cool the gas turbines).
  

If it weren't for both of the first two occurrences in combination, there would not have been a problem.

They DID use the turbines to make up speed. But they could only do what they could do.

 

Complicating the delayed arrival, was the last point AND the semi-annual Coast Guard inspection in NY. So, a scheduled three hour delay stretched to twice as long - and was furthered by a longer than usual time to clear inspection.

[VintageCCG]

There is some truth to this of course, but I know for a fact the gas turbines that give QM2 the additional speed are rarely used, and require special permission from Carinval Corp. to even use them. They are basically collecting cob webs for the most part.

 

Well, when I was aboard QM2 4-5 weeks ago, I chatted with several of the officers including the Deputy Captain and the Chief Engineer. As they described it, the turbines are ready to be put on line during all docking / undocking evolutions in case extra power is required (and of course in the rare event that a conventional propulsion generator trips offline).

The turbines are required to supplement the bow-thruster / azipod combination when winds exceed 25 knots, which enables the ship to manoeuvre effectively without the assistance of tugs.

And, as reported by other commenters above, the turbines are available for any occasions when the ship has to make up time, such as the recent diversions to avoid weather and to carry out a medevac.

 

As far as requiring the "permission" of the parent corporation's administration to fire up the turbines ... well that's simply not how ships operate.

The Captain might well have to justify their use after the fact, but there will be a set of standing instructions for their use with well-understood criteria (both routine and extraordinary scenarios), including such typical language as "nothing shall preclude the discretion of the Master/OOW to take such action as they deem necessary to maintain the safety of the ship, crew and passengers".

And any corporate entity that interferes with the safe operation of their ships in this era of Safety Management, will find themselves in severe legal jeopardy should any damage or injury occur.

 

PJ

[eroller]

Well, when I was aboard QM2 4-5 weeks ago, I chatted with several of the officers including the Deputy Captain and the Chief Engineer. As they described it, the turbines are ready to be put on line during all docking / undocking evolutions in case extra power is required (and of course in the rare event that a conventional propulsion generator trips offline).

The turbines are required to supplement the bow-thruster / azipod combination when winds exceed 25 knots, which enables the ship to manoeuvre effectively without the assistance of tugs.

And, as reported by other commenters above, the turbines are available for any occasions when the ship has to make up time, such as the recent diversions to avoid weather and to carry out a medevac.

 

As far as requiring the "permission" of the parent corporation's administration to fire up the turbines ... well that's simply not how ships operate.

The Captain might well have to justify their use after the fact, but there will be a set of standing instructions for their use with well-understood criteria (both routine and extraordinary scenarios), including such typical language as "nothing shall preclude the discretion of the Master/OOW to take such action as they deem necessary to maintain the safety of the ship, crew and passengers".

And any corporate entity that interferes with the safe operation of their ships in this era of Safety Management, will find themselves in severe legal jeopardy should any damage or injury occur.

 

PJ

 

 

My source is a bit higher up than yours, and what I was told is that QM2 has no itineraries that require the use of the gas turbines (at least not for any extended period) and that is the way they are purposely designed. Also QM2 (and every Carnival Corp) ship is in constant contact with one of the Carnival Corp fleet operation centers that constantly tracks the vessels, provides weather updates, and even optimal course suggestions. I think there are three or maybe four of these operation centers right now. I was advised this is where "permission" so to speak is granted to utilize the gas turbines. For instance if due to some kind of weather setback, or emergency where a faster speed is required to meet a schedule. This operation center would assist in coordinating all that and determine if the gas turbines should be used. I was told the way QM2's itineraries are designed today, there is even a buffer built in to make up time if needed without using the turbines. We are talking slow speeds and port schedules optimized to use as little fuel consumption as possible. Now of course it goes without saying that safety always comes first, and if the turbines are needed on a whim for safety reasons of course they are going to be used no questions asked, and the Captain/Commodore always has ultimate authority in that regard. I'm talking about logistical non-safety related instances where they coordinate with the operations control center. Big brother is always watching these days, and this was a direct result of the Costa Concordia incident. Even the Captain/Commodore answers to someone, and his crew and the control center are supposed to be more of a collaborative effort instead of an unquestionable authority. Again a result of Costa Concordia.

 

I was not advised that the gas turbines are needed in certain maneuvering operations but it's not something we discussed. It seems a little odd to me since there are larger cruise ships with more powerful thrusters than QM2, and they certainly don't required gas turbines for extra power, and of course don't even have them. If this is required of QM2, and it may very well could be, it seems like a bit of a design flaw to me. Of course when she was designed the intent was to use the gas turbines quite regularly, especially with some of her more daring itineraries that first year of service. So it probably wasn't thought of as a big deal when she was being designed. Times have certainly changed. QM2 is now a slow boat like every other cruise ship out there.

Edited October 4, 2018 by eroller

[kohl57]

It appears that QM2 is not much different than UNITED STATES or FRANCE or RAFFAELLO being designed to be express trans-atlantic liners (QM2 is of course "dual purpose" but almost all of the extra cost and design consideration that distinguished her were with the express crossing capability in mind) that performed their intended function brilliantly. But didn't make money, or in the case of the first highly subsidised liners lost more money than was intended.

 

QM2 joins an elite group. But not her compatriots QUEEN MARY (36) and QUEEN ELIZABETH (40) which were, by any standards, among the most profitable and successful liners ever built through the 1950s at least. As such, they remain better conceived, designed and realised than QM2 at least to date.

 

I remember heaving an enormous sigh when it was announced QM2 was going to 7-day crossings. It was not a matter of more hours for the crossing, it was a realisation it was no different from FRANCE going from a 5-day to a 6-day crossing in her last year in service. And that Carnival had a hunch that QM2's trans-atlantic market was, in reality, more of a niche cruise one than the traditional Atlantic Ferry clientele of old. Getting There is Half the Fun replaced by Being Aboard is Most of the Fun. So far, Carnival has been spot-on correct. They just could have saved a whole lot of money, time and effort coming to the realisation years ago.

[Germancruiser]

Oh yes- the old liners of 1936- and 1940 were a huge money maker in the 50´s and maybe early 60´s after that they brought their owners to brink of ruin- thats why one endet up in Long Beach and the other burned out in Hongkong- besides they were dated and worn out- technical!

 

Who would wants those liners back? Who really wants speedy crossings- if i want speed i fly over the Atlanic. The whole purpose of the Transatlantic crossings in our days is time- takeing time- enjoying time...! I might have been a waste of money while building the ship- but as was said- QM2 was built from scratch not from an existing Hull. Micky Arrison was on board my last crossing - back to back- when asked what he would like to be different on board the QM2- the answer was- he would love to have her to have more cabins...! The obvious answer from the chairman of Canrival and son of the founder!

[eroller]

 

Who would wants those liners back? Who really wants speedy crossings- if i want speed i fly over the Atlanic. The whole purpose of the Transatlantic crossings in our days is time- takeing time- enjoying time...

 

 

Obviously even in 2004 Micky and his executives at Carnival Corp. felt that a fast (well faster) crossing would still be desirable. Enough so they spent quite a bit of money to equip QM2 to be the fastest cruise ship/liner afloat. That was a miscalculation for sure, and a lot of money could have been saved based on QM2's current leisurely crossings and cruises.

 

Interestingly enough, another company just a few years earlier would make a similar miscalculation. Royal Olympic Cruises took delivery of the OLYMPIC VOYAGER in 2000 and equipped her to go 28 knots. They felt a 7-8 day Mediterranean cruise that was extremely port intensive, with itineraries that no other cruise ship could match would be immensely popular. They were wrong and the ships were expensive to operate and riddled with problems. A sister ship was delivered and it wasn't long after that Royal Olympic was out of business. Neither ship today operates at its intended service speed.

[Germancruiser]

Oh my- I almost forgot about Olympic Cruises- you are right- wrong decision. During these delays on his crossing Mark informed us- I was wondering why the did not put up speed- to get to New York on time. Even though I also would have loved to sail into New York in broad daylight! I am sure i upsetted many a travel plan at this particular day!

[eroller]

Oh my- I almost forgot about Olympic Cruises- you are right- wrong decision. During these delays on his crossing Mark informed us- I was wondering why the did not put up speed- to get to New York on time. Even though I also would have loved to sail into New York in broad daylight! I am sure i upsetted many a travel plan at this particular day!

 

 

 

Apparently on Mark’s return crossing, the delay happened too far into the crossing. The gas turbines were used but they could only make up so much time. I suppose if they were not used the ship would have been even later. I agree sailing into NY during the late afternoon or early morning would be wonderful.

 

Back in the days of QE2’s 5-day crossings she would often be late. She could do it in 5-days but there was very little buffer built in for any kind of weather situations that required course alterations or a reduction in speed.

 

Well before my time, on liners like QE and QM the ship would never turn around on the same day, always spending at least a day or more in NY before the return trip. The ship was cleaned, refueled, and laundry sent out (sheets & towels) for washing. The crew had a chance to party in NY for a night or two between every NY turnaround. Even before then back when liners ran on coal, I think it was at least five days between sailings. The ship had to be coaled which was a lengthy process requiring everything be covered, then cleaned after the coaling due to all the coal dust. What a mess! Those days are long past. I’m still amazed a ship like Oasis of the Seas with 5000+ pax, a couple thousand crew, 15,000 pieces of luggage off loaded and loaded, and tons of provisions can be turned around in 9-10 hours and with great efficiency.

[eroller]

Peter did the Italian liners like LDV, MIKE, and RALPH also spend a night or two in NY before returning? Or even the FRANCE? I’m curious when or even if liners started turning around the same day for the return crossing home.

[kohl57]

Oh I rather like fast express liners. Although the only true express crossings I've made were on QE2 when she was a five-day proper liner.. I did three of those: 1977, 1979 and 1993. Five days meant you had a nice crossing but also didn't spend forever on a ship and had "the other side" to look forward to. Actually from the UK, it was really four and half days. People used to just call it the boat over and not make such a big deal of crossing as they do now. I guess the novelty of it now changes the perception. And Carnival is banking on folks wanting more time for the experience I suppose.

 

Nothing quite matched a QE2 flat out at 28.5 knots with the wake frothing to the horizon and the funnel smoke flattened astern to almost sea level by the slipstream. Or being blown down the Boat Deck by the wind. In bad weather, the wave action used to chip off the paint on her bows and her superstructure was caked with dried salt spray.

 

It was faster on both ends, too: the express Boat Train from Waterloo right to the quayside and you were aboard in minutes. And on the other side, why Pier 90 was an eight min. cab ride from Penn Station.

 

Those, as they say, were the days. And never to be repeated.

[Germancruiser]

Always almost a wonder how the do these changes in a matter of hours. When i did my back to back last year I wished they would have stayed two days in New York and then " turned around"! That would be the idea- but a day in port is costly so I fear we wont see that happen anytime soon.

 

I envy you your early crossing in the late 70´s kohl - even with the shortend crossing! LOL! I also missed the express - or boat train from waterloo- so convenient!

 

In my early " crusing days" QE2 was the ultimate- the most famous ship. They offered one flight with over with the Concord and back with the QE2- so to have both- the crossing of the olden days and the modern Concord experience!