ace2542

No Chart Room. Big con.

3 hours ago, jaywoods678 said:

I've traveled most all cruise lines - from budget to semi luxury, and actually on a per diem basis Disney is more expensive than the premium lines and sometimes as much or more than the semi luxury lines. I love Disney Cruises, but it is completely ridiculous.

It is also the only game in for that kind of a cruise with the characters etc

6 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Cunard appear to think so.

I haven't looked at the Queen Anne so I don't know where it is going but QM2 is spending weeks without T/A's in the summer time next year. So ergo there musn't be demand for the T/As in the Summer of 2024 and that is before the move from Australian markets. I would be love to be wrong but something has to give.

5 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

At a cursory reading this seems to refer to a couple of fjords.

But once the ban comes too many ships elsewhere in Norway and so on. Something has to give and not just for Cunard. So back again to the question of is there enough demand for 4 cunard ships?

14 minutes ago, NE John said:

While I share some concerns for the cruise industry (mega ships taking over docking space from Cunard size ships along with local backlash of mega ships descending on smaller port calls) we need facts please in terms of your above statement of closing cruising forever in both Norway and Alaska. Some restrictions in Norway we see but these sweeping speculative statements for maybe happenings three years from now carry little weight without sources and facts. 
I’ll (and many others) would be glad to revisit this statement when accompanied by reputable sources. 
Any links to this info you can provide about post-2026?

https://thenorwayguide.com/there-could-be-a-stop-to-popular-fjord-cruises-in-2026/?utm_content=cmp-true

30 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Haven’t we been here before?

From 2026 Norway is banning all cruise ships with a few execptions aren't they without Bergin and the Fijords Norway is over. Queen Anne will NOT qualify to travel neither will any other cruise ship? They use 4 MILLION KWH per day btw. Which is more power than all of Bournemouth uses in a day.

1 hour ago, david,Mississauga said:

I am sympathetic to those who will lose the QE in their area, but delighted that it will remain on the Alaska run. A few years ago Cunard had said the QA would replace the QE on the Alaska cruises in order to provide more capacity.  It seems they don't need the extra capacity, probably because of the competition of a huge number of ships doing these cruises. There are often three a day from Vancouver.

 

We have taken an Alaska cruise on the QE on each of the three seasons (2019, 2022, 2023)  and look forward to more.

Alaska like the Fijords will close forever to cruise ships in a few years. Norway is closing FOREVER to cruise ships in 2026 ships are banned in Olso and Bergen as well from then.There no point to Cunard getting the Queen Anne with the fijords ban and Australia withdraw.

8 T/As with my father including the big band cruise 2016 in which he sang in the choir they formed. Also carol singing Christmas 2017 westbound T/A ❤️❤️. Memories to be cherished forever.

And of course the chart room best bar at sea.

Just booked on QM2 for August 23rd eastbound the last Cunard for a long while I think till the 200 year mark. I am in my 40s I will make it .

They are doing less T/A next year than in previous years I think. I am struggling to understand the future fleet deployments. They have the Anne and yet QM2 is doing UK/Norway for good few weeks of June/July next year during the summer break not the T/A they have done previously.

32 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I'm sorry to hear of your father's passing as I did get the impression you were close.

 

QM2 doesn't figure in any of our future plans, but enjoy her whilst you can. You never know what's around the corner. 🙂

I know it is  a number of years away yet and as you say you never know what is round the corner but I hope all 4 queens make it to the 200 year mark that will be a good celebration to be part of.

18 hours ago, LittleFish1976 said:

Yes, unfortunately they've clearly stated they are removing themselves from Asia as well as Australia/New Zealand and area (Oceania). It does seem odd - I agree with you.

 

Such a shame as the Japan itineraries are as you say, interesting, and Cunard is (has been) a very good alternative to the other Western lines in the region.

 

Let's face it; all decisions are financially based so Cunard must believe they can make more money by concentrating in certain geographical areas. I doubt the cost of fuel is a factor if they're willing to send a ship or two here in passing on a World Voyage.

 

Which begs the point of having the Anne in the first place. Then again the Anne was bought and paid for before Covid.

1 hour ago, Victoria2 said:

The term 'Cunarder' with regards to people has for me, unfortunate connotations to do with inflexibility or at the very least, disdain for the evolving nature of Cunard, moving forward.

 

As a Cunard regular, with five cruises booked going forward to '25 and will be booking until our travel insurance 'runs out', I consider myself very loyal to the brand but not, a Cunarder. 🙂

I think I have got 1 more QM2 left in me in honour of my father then I will leave the brand probably until the 200 year mark that will be a piece of history but that is for the future.

21 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

not a Cunarder, I'm a Cunard regular

What is the difference between a "Cunarder" and a "Cunard regular" then?

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

So, if I follow you correctly, the other lines all know what they are doing, but Cunard (or rather Carnival with its Cunard hat on) hasn’t got a clue. And yet, whenever I get a vague idea of looking at booking an extra cruise near the last minute, they either seem pretty full or vastly expensive. Strange that.

So why does the Anne appear to be slow selling? I am going by what has been posted here on that statement.

8 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

So, if I follow you correctly, the other lines all know what they are doing, but Cunard (or rather Carnival with its Cunard hat on) hasn’t got a clue. And yet, whenever I get a vague idea of looking at booking an extra cruise near the last minute, they either seem pretty full or vastly expensive. Strange that.

I would love to be wrong but I don't think there is demand for all of these ships currently operating in all lines. Was is QM2 to do when Anne does it's first world cruise?

Something will have to give at some point for a lot of firms

17 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Again, ace, facts matter, and reading comprehension matters.  You are the only one who has mentioned emissions regarding cruise ships, and there are no "more stringent" emissions requirements (New Zealand has within the last couple of years adopted the "world wide" emissions standards that ships must meet everywhere else in the world, so no compliance problems are created).  The environmental requirements that may have caused the ships to leave the Oz/NZ market are those dealing with biofouling of the hull (i.e. the need to clean the hull prior to entering territorial waters), not emissions.

Yet the other lines don't seem to be withdrawing from the Australian market. Emission issue or no doesn't change the fact that their MIGHT not be the demand for FOUR cunard ships in the American/Carrbbean//Northern/Western/Eastern Europe markets particuarly as has been stated the anne might not be selling well.. Princess have put a waterslide or something on the new ship for the first time anyones guess why they have done that and MSC has the Good Ship murder TV Series filmed on the new Virtuosa which seems to be doing well. They know what they where doing allowing that. Perhaps the traditional Cunard brand is struggling. Like I have said I  one more QM2 left in me. It will be hard to draw me back after that.

13 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I expect Cunard have thought about that. Why no mention of Alaska?

That is only a half season though. But ok Alaska too still begs the question if demand is the issues with sales poor on the Anne as people say they are. Is their demand for 4 Queens? Of course the 4th Queen was commissioned before the pandemic and the effect that has had on the industry in many repsects

My father passed away back in June. We where supposed to be on the cancelled westbound crossing April 23rd. I feel the need to go on QM2 on more time but beyond that I probably won't go Cunard again after the next one.

8 hours ago, maggielou362 said:

So now I have heard it straight from the horse's mouth.

I have just received an email from Cunard stating that:

"...However, in 2025/2026, Queen Elizabeth will explore new shores as part of an exciting programme across our four Queens we will be launching next year. Rest assured, Australia and New Zealand will continue being important destinations for Cunard on our World Voyages offering close to home sailings on a Cunard Queen."

I was hoping it wasn't so!

Looks like we will only be able to join in as "add-ons" to part of any World Tours, which might head to our region, probably relatively infrequently.

So disappointed!

If it is not because of emissions issues - which very few ships would meet if QE doesn't I am sure - then you have to wonder why they are doing it. If it is a demand issue then the question and I think an honest question is there demand for 3 -4 queens in Western Europe/Eastern Med/East Coast of the USA?

1 minute ago, exlondoner said:

But I have read that the problem with tidal power is its inconsistency, with so much of the tidal movement being in the middle two hours of the tide. Does that make sense?

I seem to recall claims where made that have since been abandoned that Everton's new ground would be powered by the tidal waves of the Mersey estuary. That talk has dampened down somewhat in favour of the solar option

12 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Again, facts matter.  Remember, that when in port, QE will use about 8 Mw of power (simply the hotel load), or about 64Mw-h for the entire port stay.  Do you think they continue to run all the engines while at the dock, just to burn up more fuel?  And, how do they get rid of the excess power, since the generators will only generate (burn enough fuel) to match the usage (8Mw)?  Juneau uses around 600-1000Mw-h per day.  Alaska gets about 33% of its power from renewable sources.

We are using the word gig differently.  1 GIG is ONE BILLION KWH but to uk trained energy brokers using the phrase GIG every day in conversation they are talking about 1 million kwh for one gig. They don't use the word megawatt when perhaps we should.

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

No, you don't use shore power to "charge up" a ship, no more than the city of Southampton wants to provide shore power to "charge up" commercial ships in port.  It is for in port power usage by the ship, so that the ship's generators are shut down while in port.  In port pollution is the major complaint against cruise ships, not their total GHG emissions.  However, many small ships that will use fuel cells, have battery banks to store the power generated by the fuel cell, and these could be charged during port operations.  And, in port, even the largest cruise ship only uses 9-10Mw of power, not gigawatts.  If cruise ship pollution is so important to you, surprised you haven't read up on shore power,  considering that Southampton has installed shore power at the two cruise terminals, which have been used to allow ships to shut down their generators 42 times in 2022.  And, yes, that power can charge the ship's batteries.

During the backstage tour on QM2 I was told it used 4 gig a day and that was more power than the city of Southampton. I used to be an energy broker so I asked the question.

Something you might enjoy to look at. Google UK power generation. As of 30 minutes ago I think if I am reading it right the UK is using 34.733 GW either per minute or per second. The figure increased by 5gw in an hour or so because I checked it 10.30am and it was 29gw.

2 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I am sure there are many problems, but I would tend to pay attention to those who are accurate in the data they present, like chengkp75, above.

But QE uses more power in a day than Skagway or Ketchikan or Juneau alone or even combined? Southampton uses several gig per day in power usage. And that is larger than all 3 of those combined?

Just now, exlondoner said:

I am sure there are many problems, but I would tend to pay attention to those who are accurate in the data they present, like chengkp75, above.

I don't think there is demand for Cunard in the  Caribbean for a whole season out of New York, Miami, Boston? I would love to be wrong. Perhaps we will see.

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

And, who would shut the Caribbean down, given that the term "the Caribbean" encompasses many different nations?  Would they all need to agree to ban cruise ships?

You  would only 1 or 2 to ban to create a real problem?

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Who and why would Alaska be shut down?  Alaska is far more likely to implement shore power for cruise ships than a total ban

You can't shore power? You can't charge up a ship that use 4 GIG a day like charging up car in the driveway? You would need a proper power plant no?