What if Harmony of the Seas had a baby with a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier?

Fantasy engineering" question here, why do they build cruise ships with their sides going "straight up from the bottom":

..instead of arching out wide from the bottom, the way aircraft carriers are built?

It seems like it would open up a lot more space in the middle where the Promenade and other activities are located?

Is a "cruise ship carrier" just an impossible engineering feat?

*forgive my rudimentary photoshop skills

Probably kidding about this.

All has to do with weight. An aircraft carrier has very little weight up high or out to the sides. Most of the weight they carry is down low.

My 6 year old has a book on different kinds of transportation, and it includes a cruise ship and an aircraft carrier. He wanted to know why we can't cruise on an aircraft carrier. We told him there's no pools lol.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Forums mobile app

Aircraft carriers also go straight up from the water line to the flight deck when looked at from the stern, just like the stern pic of o class

Nimitz class carriers are only about 50 feet wider than an Oasis class cruise ship. And the reason for that width is because it's what required for landing airplanes. The draft of the Ford is about 40 feet vs 30 feet for the Oasis class ships.

The ships are designed for different things and what works on one doesn't necessarily work for the other. Cruise ships are designed for comfort and aircraft carriers for... well... other things. :cool:

Aircraft carriers also go straight up from the water line to the flight deck when looked at from the stern, just like the stern pic of o class

I'm not a marine engineer, but this is what I mean:

Maybe aircraft carriers can get away with this design because most of their weight is on the bottom?

Nimitz class carriers are only about 50 feet wider than an Oasis class cruise ship. And the reason for that width is because it's what required for landing airplanes. The draft of the Ford is about 40 feet vs 30 feet for the Oasis class ships.

 

The ships are designed for different things and what works on one doesn't necessarily work for the other. Cruise ships are designed for comfort and aircraft carriers for... well... other things. :cool:

But the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers have a beam that is 256 ft compared to 155 ft on the Harmony of the Seas. An extra 100 ft would sure be nice to have, probably impossible due to physics, but one can dream. :cool:

I'm not a marine engineer, but this is what I mean:

Maybe aircraft carriers can get away with this design because most of their weight is on the bottom?

Same answer, you are comparing 2 different views, look at a carrier from the back and it's straight up

Same answer, you are comparing 2 different views, look at a carrier from the back and it's straight up

Rear view looks pretty similar to me? ...an upside equilateral triangle shape:

A hybrid would follow this type of design:

Aircraft Carrier is trying to maximize a flat deck to launch and retrieve aircraft

n

Cruise ship is trying to maximize amout of balcony/ocean view cabins.

Aircraft Carrier doesn't care about the view that the crew experiences in their beds.

Cruise ship just plods along at certain speeds and doesn't have to be highly maneuverable.

Aircraft carrier has higher top end speeds and is more maneuverable

Better to compare a cruise ship to a cargo ship as they are more similar in purpose and execution.

Rear view looks pretty similar to me? ...an upside equilateral triangle shape:

 

A hybrid would follow this type of design:

The carrier does not have very much mass above where the hull flairs out. Below the flight deck is the hanger deck which is mostly empty space if you don't count the aircraft and maintenance items that are stored there. Above the flight deck is only the island which compared to the rest of the ship is quite small, and even smaller on the Ford class. If you were to pile all that mass of passenger decks on top of the flight deck as in your photoshop image without also increasing the beam the ship would be very unstable, i.e. top heavy. The cruise ships get away with such tall profiles by having the heavy machinery, fuel tanks, and water tanks low in the hull and by a generous use of aluminum in the upper decks.

Another thing to consider is the overhang over the docks or piers to which the ship moors. There may be structures near the dock or in the case of a pier such as at St. Maarten, another ship on the other side. The ship still needs to moor with the hull close to the dock or pier so that enormous overhang would need to not interfere with anything else.

The carrier does not have very much mass above where the hull flairs out. Below the flight deck is the hanger deck which is mostly empty space if you don't count the aircraft and maintenance items that are stored there. Above the flight deck is only the island which compared to the rest of the ship is quite small, and even smaller on the Ford class. If you were to pile all that mass of passenger decks on top of the flight deck as in your photoshop image without also increasing the beam the ship would be very unstable, i.e. top heavy. The cruise ships get away with such tall profiles by having the heavy machinery, fuel tanks, and water tanks low in the hull and by a generous use of aluminum in the upper decks.

 

Another thing to consider is the overhang over the docks or piers to which the ship moors. There may be structures near the dock or in the case of a pier such as at St. Maarten, another ship on the other side. The ship still needs to moor with the hull close to the dock or pier so that enormous overhang would need to not interfere with anything else.

Okay, that makes a lot of sense. You sound like a marine engineer! :cool:

What if you put the flight deck on top of the Harmony, instead? That'd be the safest cruise ship in the ocean.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

What if you put the flight deck on top of the Harmony, instead? That'd be the safest cruise ship in the ocean.

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

LMAO :'):'):')

No pirate of the Caribbean would want to mess with the MS Harmony of the Seas! But, probably not worth losing the pool decks...

LMAO :'):'):')

 

 

 

No pirate of the Caribbean would want to mess with the MS Harmony of the Seas! But, probably not worth losing the pool decks...

 

 

 

Now that actually looks more stable than the other way around [emoji3] and no more rain in Central Park and Boardwalk. People on the upper decks might complain a little about the noise, though.[emoji45]

My 6 year old has a book on different kinds of transportation, and it includes a cruise ship and an aircraft carrier. He wanted to know why we can't cruise on an aircraft carrier. We told him there's no pools lol.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Forums mobile app

also no booze, the beds suck and everybody has to man the brooms.

Finally I can book flights for the same day as sail away.

And, no more threads on CC about "Can I make my flight out x airport by n A.M.?" The answer is always "Yes, yes you can make your flight. Just leave yourself 5 minutes time to get to deck 20."

Finally I can book flights for the same day as sail away.

 

 

 

And, no more threads on CC about "Can I make my flight out x airport by n A.M.?" The answer is always "Yes, yes you can make your flight. Just leave yourself 5 minutes time to get to deck 20."

Now that's funny[emoji90]!

Sent from my iPad using Forums