Just One Thing To Say

[Richard Schmidt]

Molly,

 

I didn't say that Ian has been captain on QE2 for twenty years, but he has SERVED in the ship for around twenty years. I've known him since he was Second Officer and junior watchkeeper. I don't doubt that he loves his job or that he is an excellent shipmaster. I'm sure every shipmaster in the Princess fleet loves their job and are good at it too. If he is a good master then he will also be a good master on a Princess ship and I'm equally certain that whoever Princess sends to the QE2 will also be a good master.

 

I find it rather doubtful that the team of Brits in management at Princess have a 'personal prejudice' against British tradition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes, Princess did move the office to California and sure they did let a lot of people go. Absolutely no difference from a few years ago when the new President/CEO of Cunard suddenly closed the New York office, moved to Miami and dumped all the New York employees. Well, there is one little difference. Cunard has been moved to California because it is a waste of money to run a full office for the operation of TWO ships. It makes perfect sense to absorb Cunard operations into the Princess office. When the President of Cunard moved everything to Miami it was simply because HE didn't fancy working in New York.

 

No I have not noticed that Princess do not have a clue about anything. What I do know is that last year I had a totally bad experience with Cunard over a booking. They made a complete mess of it. When I tried to contact one of the former Cunard employees asking for assistance, she still being employed within the Carnival group, I was told bluntly, " I'm not interested and I don't work for Cunard any more." I then went to Princess with the problem and over the course of about three days the matter was professionally and competently resolved.

 

Stephen

 

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, Stephen. EVERTHING is better under Princess!

 

Richard

[wotec]

Princess has made it's way into the bathroom in more ways than the toilitries. in our Q3 stateroom on part of 2005 World Cruise I noticed the chrome toilet paper cover had the Princess logo imprinted in the chrome.

[Richard Schmidt]

Now then, I think we're exaggerating a bit here!

 

 

Believe me, I would hardly be satisfied to say the least with the situation you describe above. Fortunately, I do not expect that Cunard passengers will be encountering reggae bands mid-Atlantic any time soon. I don't think even the Princess "cruise barges unfit for the open sea" have reggae bands outside of the Caribbean.

 

And don't tell me that I've "never known anything about Cunard". Actually, I know quite a bit about Cunard. I also think that it's rather silly to leap to outlandish conclusions when nobody knows the whole story yet.

 

Dear Doug,

Wish you had been right about my predictions of mid-Atlantic reggae bands on Cunard's once proud trans-atlantic liners. Sadly, you were dead wrong, and it took only two months for my prediction to come terribly true. Below is a post from a passenger on a recent QM2 trans-atlantic crossing. Guess what they were playing on deck 8 as QM2 began her stately procession toward Southampton?

"Ciaobella,

 

I agree. When we departed for our June 9 eastbound, the band was playing raggae music on Deck 8 aft. I was hardly offended by it, but it struck me as out of character, and we did not have any interest in hanging around that area. We instead went to the starboard side of Deck 7 to watch the tugs where we did not even notice the music anymore. Some other type of music would be more appropriate for a crossing than the standard island music. At lease on the eastbounds, I think it would be fun to hear some British standards and anthems as we set off for England.

 

Will you be writing a review of your trip ????

 

Paul"

 

The Queen is Dead, Doug. Sadly, we are left with (the) Princess. Break out the ganja and the rum, 'cause 165 years of trans-Atlantic tradition has been thrown overboard by Ratcliffe and the frat boys running Princess/Cunard.

 

Richard (I Told You So) Schmidt

[guernseyguy]

The Queen is Dead, Doug. Sadly, we are left with (the) Princess. Break out the ganja and the rum, 'cause 165 years of trans-Atlantic tradition has been thrown overboard by Ratcliffe and the frat boys running Princess/Cunard. Richard (I Told You So) Schmidt

 

Richard,

 

What would you have them play departing New York - 'Rule Britannia'? Oh, but then I forget New York was loyal.....;)

 

So, I guess you've cancelled your next crossing....what are you going to sail on now?

 

Peter

[Richard Schmidt]

Richard,

 

What would you have them play departing New York - 'Rule Britannia'? Oh, but then I forget New York was loyal.....;)

 

So, I guess you've cancelled your next crossing....what are you going to sail on now?

 

Peter

 

Being the only game in town isn't the same as being the best game in town, Peter. Just because Princess now owns the only ships on the Great Circle Route doesn't mean they get immunity from criticism for their bastardization of the trans-Atalantic experience. Surely you aren't suggesting otherwise. My next crossing will be on QE2, and I'll try hard to overlook any signs of Princessification. As to music, I am certain you can suggest some tunes less out of place on a departure from Manhatten than "No Woman No Cry" or Yellow Man's classic "Unda Ma Fat Ting". How about some Gershwin? Have an Irie weekend, mon.

[Goldryder]

I have been reading through this thread with great interest. I used to sail alot on the original Queens...QE1 and QM1, spent many days sailing on QE2 and watched QM2 rolling about like a rollercoaster in the Solent aswell as having a wander around on her. Also had great experiences on the original Oriana and Canberra too.

 

Next week I am going on a brand new, fresh out of the paintshop liner Norwegian Jewel for one of her shakedown cruises, I have my reservations about her. I am not a huge fan of shopping malls on water and I much prefer the character and intimacy of the smaller ships, but as ever I shall judge her when I have been on her for a couple of days.

 

In December I have decided to have a Christmas/New Year cruise. I had two choices. Regal Princess or Norwegian Crown. I have chosen the Crown as she is small, some might say 'old fashioned' but she has character and she resembles the way cruising used to be, something with style all of its own. Yes she is part of an American fleet but she still maintains that certain something about her that ships like QM2 sadly lack. QM2 might not have been built in the far east but she does nothing to encapsulate the traditional cruiser. She is everything that traditionalists hate....garish and just too big. She is Las Vegas on water which is exactly what Carnival have already. Carnival have stamped their own style upon QM2 imo, she is fine if you like that sort of ship, but when she was being built she was hailed as traditional, but she is along way from being Cunard traditional.

 

The Princess ships, Carnival ships and now sadly the Cunard ships have all changed their character. The original Carnival ships were fun palaces but far more subtle than the ships they operate today.

 

NCL have new big and brazon ships but they have kept their older fleet as near to how they were as they can, apart from the dining style but even then you can choose to be formal should you wish to. That is why I chose Crown, she is a mere baby in the size stakes, but she oodles the comfort and charisma that so many of the new ships have managed to lose over the yrs.

 

To me, Cunard had charisma and character, the crews were the best in the world and they continued the traditional style of cruising from the days of White Star. That little bit extra care, that willingness to please and that old fashioned feeling of being treated like royalty when you stepped aboard one of their ships. It has been brushed away and turned into a brash and battery farm mentality. That is a great shame and a great loss to cruising imo.

 

When you stepped upon an old Cunard or P&O ship you felt like you were going somewhere in style and that you would be pampered and cared for and made to feel special. Those days are long gone, for now the ships are too big and packed to feel that individual care and attention.

 

And that is the greatest tragedy of all.

[mufi]

Yes, but if Cunard had built the ship you yearn for she would be sailing quarter full and running at a loss. The world has changed and ocean liners have had to change too. They stopped putting starting handles on cars years ago.

 

David.

[Goldryder]

Yes, but if Cunard had built the ship you yearn for she would be sailing quarter full and running at a loss. The world has changed and ocean liners have had to change too. They stopped putting starting handles on cars years ago.

 

David.

 

 

Service standards and charisma are ageless. High standards and charisma are what made Cunard stand out from the other lines, since it has changed hands, that has been lost. Times might well move on but that does not mean things get better.

[mufi]

Agreed.

 

David

[guernseyguy]

Service standards and charisma are ageless. High standards and charisma are what made Cunard stand out from the other lines, since it has changed hands, that has been lost. Times might well move on but that does not mean things get better.

 

I'm sorry, but is anyone seriously arguing that Cunard is WORSE under Carnival than it was under Trafalgar House (1971 - 1995) or Kvaerner (1995 - 1998)? At least its now owned by a shipping company, not a Property or Engineering firm. I fear there is a 'mythical' Cunard out there against which any line run by mere mortals would be bound to fail. And historically, Cunard did NOT have the best reputation for comfort (White Star), food (CGT) or service (take your pick). You're falling for Carnival propaganda.....

 

Rail against the hiring of younger policemen all you like - but I fear they will go on hiring them....

 

Peter

[KenC]

I have been reading through this thread with great interest. I used to sail alot on the original Queens...QE1 and QM1, spent many days sailing on QE2 and watched QM2 rolling about like a rollercoaster in the Solent aswell as having a wander around on her. .....

 

Lucky you to have sailed on QM and QE - wish people would take those two as the benchmark of a the ' classic' transatlantic liner. However, the rollercoaster QM2 is twice as stable at sea as QE2 (i.e. in seas that make QM2 roll 5 degrees, QE2 will roll 10 degrees) and way more stable than QM (supposedly notoriously bad roller) and QE.

 

Next week I am going on a brand new, fresh out of the paintshop liner Norwegian Jewel for one of her shakedown cruises, I have my reservations about her. I am not a huge fan of shopping malls on water and I much prefer the character and intimacy of the smaller ships, but as ever I shall judge her when I have been on her for a couple of days. .....

 

Why? When from what you write you are obviously not liking it before you get on. Anyway, ships apart - don't you find Norwegian a culture shock even after what you claim is 'Princessified' Cunard.

 

.... I have chosen the Crown as she is small, some might say 'old fashioned' but she has character and she resembles the way cruising used to be, something with style all of its own. Yes she is part of an American fleet but she still maintains that certain something about her that ships like QM2 sadly lack. QM2 might not have been built in the far east but she does nothing to encapsulate the traditional cruiser. She is everything that traditionalists hate....garish and just too big. She is Las Vegas on water which is exactly what Carnival have already. Carnival have stamped their own style upon QM2 imo, she is fine if you like that sort of ship, but when she was being built she was hailed as traditional, but she is along way from being Cunard traditional. .....

 

Wait a minute, where did it say that the largest, longest, most advanced technologically etc QM2 was going to be 'traditional' ? The designers have taken 'elements' of traditional ocean liners and blended them cleverly with modern requirements that the vast majority of people taking cruises today look for.

 

What is traditional Cunard anyway? QM or QE? They were 'modern art deco' inspired ships with their share of glitzy cocktail bars and grill dining rooms / night clubs to tempt the US dollar. QE2? She was an attempt to cast off the past and was crammed with everything the 'elegance and style challenged' late 1960's could muster with lots of plastic and chrome, red / brown / orange colour schemes and the crew all dressed in 'Beatles' jackets (no doubt with bell bottoms and platform shoes - remember those!!!). Today after umpteen facelifts the QE2 purports to look like the traditional, classic ocean liner but its all a facade - just as the QM2 is another facade, but a more elegant and better designed one.

 

I haven't noticed anything that I would call garish on QM2, there's no more chrome per square foot that QE2, there's no more carpet patterns per square foot than QE2, there are no more bright colours per square foot than QE2??? As far as size is concerned, Cunard traditionally boasted the largest and fastest liners on the Atlantic - so apart from QE2, their transatlantic liners traditionally got bigger! QM2 is 80% bigger than QE, but carries only 20% more pax - surely an improvement????

 

 

.....The Princess ships, Carnival ships and now sadly the Cunard ships have all changed their character..........NCL have new big and brazon ships but they have kept their older fleet as near to how they were as they can, apart from the dining style but even then you can choose to be formal should you wish to. ......To me, Cunard had charisma and character, the crews were the best in the world and they continued the traditional style of cruising from the days of White Star. .

 

Yes, unfortunately time change, markets change and products change to meet them. We all hanker after 'the good old days' and yes there is a lot that has been lost, but that loss has been facilitated by society of which we are all a part. Educational standards, work ethics, values, common courtesies etc. have all been eroded by various changes in the past 30 years and unfortunately we have to live with the consequences. So go blame those who have governed our lives in the recent past, there lies the cause of the loss of ..."your little bit extra care, that willingness to please and that old fashioned feeling of being treated like royalty when you stepped aboard one of their ships."

 

Those days are long gone, for now the ships are too big and packed to feel that individual care and attention........And that is the greatest tragedy of all.

 

The days of great service are long gone on many lines but that is down to other reasons than size of ship. I'm sure you would agree that the level of service onboard the first Queens with a pax capacity of 2,200 was probably far better than anything we can expect today .... and that is the greatest tragedy of all.

 

Regards

 

Ken

[Goldryder]

I lived on the Isle of Wight for many years. I watched QM2 leave Southampton Water several times in not too pleasant weather from my garden, which was 50ft from the Solent and commanded unobstructed views. She rolled very badly when turning and appeared topheavy.

 

The big ships do not have the character of something like the Crown at under 35000 tons. The max tonnage should never have gone over 75000 ihmo. Above that is too bulky and just does not do the industry any justice. I am going on Jewel (93000 tonnes) by invitation from my TA so I decided to go and have a good look round her, just out of curiosity.

[Lepine]

<<<

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Schmidt

The Queen is Dead, Doug. Sadly, we are left with (the) Princess. Break out the ganja and the rum, 'cause 165 years of trans-Atlantic tradition has been thrown overboard by Ratcliffe and the frat boys running Princess/Cunard. Richard (I Told You So) Schmidt

 

 

 

Richard,

 

What would you have them play departing New York - 'Rule Britannia'? Oh, but then I forget New York was loyal.....;)

 

So, I guess you've cancelled your next crossing....what are you going to sail on now?

 

Peter

>>>

 

 

Small changes don't seem offensive to some---but that's how it's done, slowly, bit by bit, dismantling one small tradition after another until there is nothing left. We therfore don't notice it TOO much, and many, like you, will say it's no big deal. Sloooow is much better when one is trying to make major changes that so many don't want.

 

I suppose those who don't like it are just going to sit back and submit, because what the hell can they do anyway right? Or will the light finally dawn and the entranced awaken and speak up? Right now it looks as though Richard may well be right, and it's goodbye forever to Cunard as we have known it.

[KenC]

<<<Small changes don't seem offensive to some---but that's how it's done, slowly, bit by bit, dismantling one small tradition after another until there is nothing left. We therfore don't notice it TOO much, and many, like you, will say it's no big deal. Sloooow is much better when one is trying to make major changes that so many don't want.

 

I suppose those who don't like it are just going to sit back and submit, because what the hell can they do anyway right? Or will the light finally dawn and the entranced awaken and speak up? Right now it looks as though Richard may well be right, and it's goodbye forever to Cunard as we have known it.

 

Oh my God - there's a conspiracy theory now!!!! Why would 'they' be trying to foist changes on people if so many don't want them - that is commercial suicide and it appears as if QE2 is doing better than she did for years ????

 

I sailed Cunard in the late 80's and early 90's and it wasn't much to write home about - it took QM2 to get me to go back and for all it's niggling faults, it is a far better product now than it was then. So its goodbye old Cunard and hello better one!!!

 

Ken

[mufi]

Some people never seem to get it- reality. Cruise ships like hotels, supermarkets, cars etc. etc. are created to make a profit. Read that again - to make a profit. If they are not expected to do that they don't get built. The QM2 is a liner of it's age. Having said that and having sailed on her I can say that she is a wonder of her age. There is no other ship in the world that can compete at her speciallity of crossing the north Atlantic, but to survive Cunard needs to fill the ship each crossing. John Major longed for the England of yesterday with warm beer and cricket on the village green. And look what it did for him. It's over let it go.

 

David.

[KenC]

I lived on the Isle of Wight for many years. I watched QM2 leave Southampton Water several times in not too pleasant weather from my garden, which was 50ft from the Solent and commanded unobstructed views. She rolled very badly when turning and appeared topheavy..

 

All ships roll when they turn - on QM2 you hardly notice. Haven't you sailed on QE2 doing a tight turn - very unpleasant.

 

The big ships do not have the character of something like the Crown at under 35000 tons. The max tonnage should never have gone over 75000 ihmo. Above that is too bulky and just does not do the industry any justice. I am going on Jewel (93000 tonnes) by invitation from my TA so I decided to go and have a good look round her, just out of curiosity.

 

Perhaps they should have stuck to wooden hulls and paddle wheels too???? Perhaps if your imagination doesn't extend beyond 75,000 tons, don't think others can't!

 

Ken

[guernseyguy]

The max tonnage should never have gone over 75000 ihmo.

 

I agree - no true liner was ever that big - just trash like NORMANDIE, QUEEN MARY and QUEEN ELIZABETH....floating malls, the three of them......:rolleyes:

 

Peter

[Lepine]

John Major longed for the England of yesterday with warm beer and cricket on the village green. And look what it did for him. It's over let it go.

 

David.

 

Well, I'm afraid many who are traditional crew (including senior officers) strongly disagree with this "it's over, let it go" viewpoint (let what go, British traditions?).

 

We are not trying to bring back the England of previous decades, just to maintain that which is good about current British traditions. Why should some keep their cultural tradtions, but if you're British, forget about it?!

 

And it's not about being right or left, Tory or Labor.

 

I find it unpleasant and worrisome, also, that the administration of a cruise company should pay absolutely no attention what-so-ever to the feelings and wishes of the crew (not to mention the customers!), who have been on these ships long before these American "frat boys" (as another poster called them) came along and started "calling the shots". It's arrogant I think, and not untypical of the corporate demeanor in general in the US.

 

Sure, improve a company, but have some heart and soul---and tact. The "winning" mentality in the US, in terms of the corporate culture (which has kind of permeated the entire culture) is (like sports here) "win at all costs", and "knock the other guy down". They may win, but in fact, at WHAT cost?

[Lepine]

The tragedy is that THE classic liner voyage is being dumbed down and sold off to the lowest bidders.

 

David.

 

When should we expect Paris Hilton and Ashlee Simpson onboard?

 

It seems the dumbing down is an inevitable result of Americanization. Too bad, it doesn't have to be that way.

[guernseyguy]

It seems the dumbing down is an inevitable result of Americanization. Too bad, it doesn't have to be that way.

 

Not that the cousins need my defence (and ignoring for the moment that they have come (albeit somewhat belatedly) to Britain's defence, twice, in living memory), but lets not forget that Cunard was founded by a North American (he would have called himself British, from North America) and has long been a line AIMED at Americans. The 'Americanization' of Cunard was alive and well in 1936 in the first Queen Mary.

 

Peter

 

P.S. To the Cousins - don't worry about all this 'we hate America' stuff - I'm affraid it goes withe being 'top dog' - it was our turn 100 years ago, now its yours, soon enough it will be China's!

[KenC]

Well, I'm afraid many who are traditional crew (including senior officers) strongly disagree with this "it's over, let it go" viewpoint (let what go, British traditions?)..........

 

How do you know this???

 

I find it unpleasant and worrisome, also, that the administration of a cruise company should pay absolutely no attention what-so-ever to the feelings and wishes of the crew (not to mention the customers!), who have been on these ships long before these American "frat boys" (as another poster called them) came along and started "calling the shots". It's arrogant I think, and not untypical of the corporate demeanor in general in the US.....

 

What gives you the right to be so rude and patronising about things American?

 

You actually make it sound as if you are defending a bunch of spoilt petulant individuals who don't want to play any more because they can't get their own way.

[dougnewmanatsea]

Wish you had been right about my predictions of mid-Atlantic reggae bands on Cunard's once proud trans-atlantic liners. Sadly, you were dead wrong, and it took only two months for my prediction to come terribly true.

I have to admit that this is surprising and unfortunate.

 

As I said, I don't even think Princess' own ships have reggae bands in, say, Alaska or Europe. (Maybe they do now, but they didn't a few years ago.)

 

However, I do not think we can take this one disappointing change as being the end of the world. Heck, if enough people complain loudly enough, we may see the reggae musicians sent back to the Caribbean where they belong.

 

The Queen is Dead, Doug.

Cunard died in 1972, Richard.

 

Do you really think things were better under Trafalgar House? Kvaerner? Do you really think the management of those companies cared about Cunard tradition?

 

For all the bashing that has been done of Carnival, let's not forget that Kvaerner, the company that they bought Cunard from, did not even want to own Cunard, in fact they threatened to completely dismantle Cunard if it did not become profitable by 2000 (and then proceeded to refuse to invest the money that would have permitted that to occur).

 

Had Carnival not swooped in and saved the day, there may well have not been any Cunard or any regular transatlantic passenger service at all.

 

QM2 might not have been built in the far east but she does nothing to encapsulate the traditional cruiser. She is everything that traditionalists hate....garish and just too big.

I am sure that plenty of people thought that the original QUEENs were too big as well!

 

Mind you, personally I prefer something a lot smaller, as cruise ships go... But for a liner, I see nothing wrong with big. Liners have always pushed the envelope of size.

 

The big ships do not have the character of something like the Crown at under 35000 tons.

But the original QUEENs were much larger than that...

 

long before these American "frat boys" (as another poster called them) came along and started "calling the shots".

P&O Princess' CEO and thus presumably in your and Richard's view "head frat boy", Peter Ratcliffe, is British.

 

It seems the dumbing down is an inevitable result of Americanization.

Considering that a very large portion of QM2's pax are American, I think some "Americanization" is inevitable. Cunard have been catering for Americans and have been mindful of American tastes since the very beginning.

[Richard Schmidt]

Lucky you to have sailed on QM and QE - wish people would take those two as the benchmark of a the ' classic' transatlantic liner. However, the rollercoaster QM2 is twice as stable at sea as QE2 (i.e. in seas that make QM2 roll 5 degrees, QE2 will roll 10 degrees) and way more stable than QM (supposedly notoriously bad roller) and QE.

 

 

 

Why? When from what you write you are obviously not liking it before you get on. Anyway, ships apart - don't you find Norwegian a culture shock even after what you claim is 'Princessified' Cunard.

 

 

 

Wait a minute, where did it say that the largest, longest, most advanced technologically etc QM2 was going to be 'traditional' ? The designers have taken 'elements' of traditional ocean liners and blended them cleverly with modern requirements that the vast majority of people taking cruises today look for.

 

What is traditional Cunard anyway? QM or QE? They were 'modern art deco' inspired ships with their share of glitzy cocktail bars and grill dining rooms / night clubs to tempt the US dollar. QE2? She was an attempt to cast off the past and was crammed with everything the 'elegance and style challenged' late 1960's could muster with lots of plastic and chrome, red / brown / orange colour schemes and the crew all dressed in 'Beatles' jackets (no doubt with bell bottoms and platform shoes - remember those!!!). Today after umpteen facelifts the QE2 purports to look like the traditional, classic ocean liner but its all a facade - just as the QM2 is another facade, but a more elegant and better designed one.

 

I haven't noticed anything that I would call garish on QM2, there's no more chrome per square foot that QE2, there's no more carpet patterns per square foot than QE2, there are no more bright colours per square foot than QE2??? As far as size is concerned, Cunard traditionally boasted the largest and fastest liners on the Atlantic - so apart from QE2, their transatlantic liners traditionally got bigger! QM2 is 80% bigger than QE, but carries only 20% more pax - surely an improvement????

 

 

 

 

Yes, unfortunately time change, markets change and products change to meet them. We all hanker after 'the good old days' and yes there is a lot that has been lost, but that loss has been facilitated by society of which we are all a part. Educational standards, work ethics, values, common courtesies etc. have all been eroded by various changes in the past 30 years and unfortunately we have to live with the consequences. So go blame those who have governed our lives in the recent past, there lies the cause of the loss of ..."your little bit extra care, that willingness to please and that old fashioned feeling of being treated like royalty when you stepped aboard one of their ships."

 

 

 

The days of great service are long gone on many lines but that is down to other reasons than size of ship. I'm sure you would agree that the level of service onboard the first Queens with a pax capacity of 2,200 was probably far better than anything we can expect today .... and that is the greatest tragedy of all.

 

Regards

 

Ken

 

Ken,

Relax and have a drink, or a Valium. People are actually entitled to be so presumptious as to think the "cruise-ship-in-a-tuxedo" that is QM2 does not meet up with their conceptions of a traditional trans-Atlantic liner. The rabid response to any criticism of the Princessification of Cunard that I see from some on this board is unwarranted. I'd listen, if I were you, to the opinions of someone who had firsthand experience on the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth. By the way, I do not find that a ship with less roll than QE2 is more appealing. Quite the opposite. The manic and misguided attempt to make QM2 vibration and "roll" free shows how little her makers appreciate the attractions of a trans-Atlantic passage. My worst crossing was one September when the sea was dead calm, my best one December with ten and twelve meter waves. These days you go to sea to be "at sea". If I wanted a flat calm I'd fly.

 

Richard

[mufi]

Can assure you that the majority of pax do not want sea sickness, broken crockery and broken limbs (four in one day aboard on the last rough day we sailed) when they go on a modern cruise ship

 

David.

[KenC]

Ken,

Relax and have a drink, or a Valium. People are actually entitled to be so presumptious as to think the "cruise-ship-in-a-tuxedo" that is QM2 does not meet up with their conceptions of a traditional trans-Atlantic liner. The rabid response to any criticism of the Princessification of Cunard that I see from some on this board is unwarranted. I'd listen, if I were you, to the opinions of someone who had firsthand experience on the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth. By the way, I do not find that a ship with less roll than QE2 is more appealing. Quite the opposite. The manic and misguided attempt to make QM2 vibration and "roll" free shows how little her makers appreciate the attractions of a trans-Atlantic passage. My worst crossing was one September when the sea was dead calm, my best one December with ten and twelve meter waves. These days you go to sea to be "at sea". If I wanted a flat calm I'd fly.

 

Richard

 

Richard

 

I don't think people are so much defending the so called Princessifacation of Cunard on these boards as responding to your high handed, smug and self righteous responses to changes you seem to perceive will spoil your cosy little Cunard world. You probably resent that cruising and crossings are now available to the masses and hanker after a time when only the lucky few could afford it. I think its time for YOU to relax, have a valium (that is so insulting) and get used to the fact that these ships are there for everyone not just the deluded.