Latest QE2 news, if you want to call it that

[JollyJackTar52]

Thank you for sharing. Very nicely written.

[pepperrn]

Hi Rotterdam,

 

We are all entitled to our personal, deeply-held opinions ("the world is flat", "man didn't walk on the moon", "my bus will arrive on time", "England can win the "World Cup" again" etc).

Indeed many persist in their beliefs in the face of overwhelming documentation provided by experts, or even the evidence of their own eyes. Some do this to be contentious, some enjoy being eccentric, and some truly believe.

The QE2 is the last of a generation of OCEAN LINERS ...

I totally agree, she certainly was last of her generation in that she was initially powered by steam (the last Cunard vessel so engined), and that there was a long gap from 1969 until the next liner was built in 2003.

... Anyone that appreciates the design of the QE2 and that era knows and sailed in her know her uniqueness ...

Each of the preserved/museum great ships are, almost by definition, unique. That could be why they have been preserved. SS Great Britain, RMS Queen Mary, HMY Britannia, USS Intrepid etc. But preserving a vessel the size of QE2 or the SSUS is hugely expensive. Will the money be found to preserve both/either? Time will tell, but I doubt it, sadly.

... QM2 is a very large CRUISE SHIP ...

With respect, you are mistaken. QM2 is as much of a liner as was QE2, or put another way, QE2 was as much a cruise ship as is QM2.

As has been said many times, as was said at the time of QE2's launch, and is is well documented, QE2 and QM2 are hybrids; both liners and cruise ships. I said previously "SS France was the last "pure" major liner constructed, and she turned out to be a financial white elephant for the French Line and Government". However, QE2 and QM2 are either BOTH liners than can cruise, or BOTH cruise ships that can do line voyages on a regular basis. They were BOTH built with the same end in mind; to serve equally well as liners on the north Atlantic, and as cruise ships in the winter months. That is the genius of their design. You cannot separate one from the other. Had QE2 not been constructed as a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship, but built as a pure liner, she would have gone the same way as the France after twelve years; she didn't 'cus she wasn't. The proof of this is almost 40 years of service. QM2 was designed the same way, dual-purpose liner/cruise ship. Don't forget, Cunard came very close to copying the huge mistake made by the French Line by ordering a "pure liner" themselves in the early 60s. Thankfully they saw sense and ordered a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship instead; QE2".

... There will be more QM2s but no more QE2! ...

QM2 may very well be the last transatlantic liner ever built. But they said that about QE2 and were proved wrong. I know I won't be around to find out!

... When QE2 was modified to do more cruises it extended her life - the FRANCE was bought by NCL & operated as a successful/unique cruise ship for many years ...

What extended both ship's lives was huge rebuilding; in the case of QE2 to replace her troublesome steam plant with reliable diesels (she was already totally suited to cruising), in the case of France/Norway, to convert her from a liner unsuited to cruising, to a successful cruise ship (she lost one engine room and two propellers in the process).

... I hope to see QE2 again one day and walk her decks - even if she is permanently tied up as a museum.

Is a ship, permanently tied up to shore (for power/sewerage etc) a "ship" or, as in the case of QM, officially a building?

Indeed, talking of her, if one wishes to walk the decks of a pure ocean liner (tied up to shore) one can do so on board the Queen Mary in Long Beach.

 

I do realise that you are, along with many, many others, inordinately fond of QE2. Just as previously passengers were devoted to the original queens or the Aquitania etc, who saw the QE2 as no replacement for those grand old ladies, those "ships of state".

I hope that you come in time to appreciate QM2 for what she is, a modern reinterpretation of the transatlantic liner, just as QE2 was in her time; again a reinterpretation (in 1969) of a liner.

 

I'd strongly recommend getting hold of a copy of "British Superliners of the Sixties" by Philip Dawson.

 

Many happy sailings for the future; like you I feel there are few things finer than walking the decks of a mighty ship on the North Atlantic :)

 

An early "Happy New Year" to you.

Edited December 30, 2015 by pepperrn

[jimmybean]

Hi Rotterdam,

 

We are all entitled to our personal, deeply-held opinions ("the world is flat", "man didn't walk on the moon", "my bus will arrive on time", "England can win the "World Cup" again" etc).

Indeed many persist in their beliefs in the face of overwhelming documentation provided by experts, or even the evidence of their own eyes. Some do this to be contentious, some enjoy being eccentric, and some truly believe.

I totally agree, she certainly was last of her generation in that she was initially powered by steam (the last Cunard vessel so engined), and that there was a long gap from 1969 until the next liner was built in 2003.

Each of the preserved/museum great ships are, almost by definition, unique. That could be why they have been preserved. SS Great Britain, RMS Queen Mary, HMY Britannia, USS Intrepid etc. But preserving a vessel the size of QE2 or the SSUS is hugely expensive. Will the money be found to preserve both/either? Time will tell, but I doubt it, sadly.

With respect, you are mistaken. QM2 is as much of a liner as was QE2, or put another way, QE2 was as much a cruise ship as is QM2.

As has been said many times, as was said at the time of QE2's launch, and is is well documented, QE2 and QM2 are hybrids; both liners and cruise ships. I said previously "SS France was the last "pure" major liner constructed, and she turned out to be a financial white elephant for the French Line and Government". However, QE2 and QM2 are either BOTH liners than can cruise, or BOTH cruise ships that can do line voyages on a regular basis. They were BOTH built with the same end in mind; to serve equally well as liners on the north Atlantic, and as cruise ships in the winter months. That is the genius of their design. You cannot separate one from the other. Had QE2 not been constructed as a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship, but built as a pure liner, she would have gone the same way as the France after twelve years; she didn't 'cus she wasn't. The proof of this is almost 40 years of service. QM2 was designed the same way, dual-purpose liner/cruise ship. Don't forget, Cunard came very close to copying the huge mistake made by the French Line by ordering a "pure liner" themselves in the early 60s. Thankfully they saw sense and ordered a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship instead; QE2".

QM2 may very well be the last transatlantic liner ever built. But they said that about QE2 and were proved wrong. I know I won't be around to find out!

What extended both ship's lives was huge rebuilding; in the case of QE2 to replace her troublesome steam plant with reliable diesels (she was already totally suited to cruising), in the case of France/Norway, to convert her from a liner unsuited to cruising, to a successful cruise ship (she lost one engine room and two propellers in the process).

Is a ship, permanently tied up to shore (for power/sewerage etc) a "ship" or, as in the case of QM, officially a building?

Indeed, talking of her, if one wishes to walk the decks of a pure ocean liner (tied up to shore) one can do so on board the Queen Mary in Long Beach.

 

I do realise that you are, along with many, many others, inordinately fond of QE2. Just as previously passengers were devoted to the original queens or the Aquitania etc, who saw the QE2 as no replacement for those grand old ladies, those "ships of state".

I hope that you come in time to appreciate QM2 for what she is, a modern reinterpretation of the transatlantic liner, just as QE2 was in her time; again a reinterpretation (in 1969) of a liner.

 

I'd strongly recommend getting hold of a copy of "British Superliners of the Sixties" by Philip Dawson.

 

Many happy sailings for the future; like you I feel there are few things finer than walking the decks of a mighty ship on the North Atlantic :)

 

An early "Happy New Year" to you.

 

I really enjoyed reading this detailed and informative post, Pepper. Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge with us!

 

While DH and I had the opportunity to sail on the QE2, we didn't realize the urgency and other voyages (on other ships) seemed better choices at the time…. I find people's passion for the QE2 very interesting. I probably feel similar devotion to the QM2 (without the in-depth knowledge base, unfortunately). I don't really follow things like "pod-talk" with great understanding, but my heart sings at the sight of the QM2 (inside or out, and often just from your lovely photos).

 

I agree: what a pleasure to sail on the QM2!

[david,Mississauga]

If the link to these recent photos has been previously posted I apologise for missing it. Those who remember the QE2 may enjoy these interesting, yet sad, photos.

 

http://www.cruisearabiaonline.com/Golden-Age/2015/05/21/EXCLUSIVE--Cruise-Arabia---Africa-s-photo-tour-of-Cunard-s-QE2-in-her-current-state-in-Dubai

[Conte Di Savoia]

I said previously "SS France was the last "pure" major liner constructed, and she turned out to be a financial white elephant for the French Line and Government".

 

In fact the last "pure" major liners constructed were the Italian Line twins, Michelangelo and Raffaello both introduced in 1965, three years after the maiden voyage of the France. Of the two, the Raffaello is technically THE last, having her maiden voyage in August, 1965, three months after the Michelangelo. Both ships were recognized as anachronisms upon their introduction. They were constructed as three class vessels, unlike the Rotterdam,, France and QE2. Initially both the Michelangelo and Raffaello were used exclusively for transatlantic liner service. When they were eventually used for cruising, the line sold only the First Class and Cabin Class cabins. The tourist class cabins and public rooms were empty. They were configured as liners, not cruisers and very unprofitable. I had the privilege of sailing on both ships on transatlantic crossings as well as cruises and also on the France (transatlantic) and QE2(transatlantic and cruises).

[pepperrn]

In fact the last "pure" major liners constructed were the Italian Line twins, Michelangelo and Raffaello both introduced in 1965, three years after the maiden voyage of the France. Of the two, the Raffaello is technically THE last, having her maiden voyage in August, 1965, three months after the Michelangelo. Both ships were recognized as anachronisms upon their introduction. They were constructed as three class vessels, unlike the Rotterdam,, France and QE2. Initially both the Michelangelo and Raffaello were used exclusively for transatlantic liner service. When they were eventually used for cruising, the line sold only the First Class and Cabin Class cabins. The tourist class cabins and public rooms were empty. They were configured as liners, not cruisers and very unprofitable. I had the privilege of sailing on both ships on transatlantic crossings as well as cruises and also on the France (transatlantic) and QE2(transatlantic and cruises).

Hi Conte Di Savoia,

 

Thank you :) , I was forgetting the attractive Italian sisters :o .

So that makes three "pure" liners that were hugely unprofitable; Cunard were correct in their decision not to build their own, Q3, but to build a dual-role liner/cruise ship instead, thank goodness. Wise heads prevailed and QE2 was the result.

Thank you again, happy sailings for the future.

[balf]

"

 

 

 

 

 

I personally think that it is marvel that Micky Arison and Carnival actually approved her being built.

 

.

 

 

More I think, it was a hard headed business decision. And boy hasn't it payed off. It probably ensured Cunard's survival long term.

 

Still, I feel privileged also to have experienced QE2, still beautiful, externally anyway, though I fear a sad ending.

 

David.

[BlueRiband]

Thanks you for reminding us of Michelangelo and Raffaello. The Michelangelo incident was one example that Stephen Payne presented to Carnival's board to justify QM2's steel and liner construction rather than build her as an enhanced cruise ship.

[pepperrn]

... I feel privileged also to have experienced QE2, still beautiful, externally anyway...

Well said :)

... though I fear a sad ending

Me too :( (well, sadder than 2008).

[pepperrn]

The Michelangelo incident was one example that Stephen Payne presented to Carnival's board to justify QM2's steel and liner construction rather than build her as an enhanced cruise ship.

Thank you BlueRiband for reminding me of this terrible, awful accident... and of Stephen Payne's wise advice to build QM2 as a liner (the height of the lifeboats above the waterline was a unique exemption made by SOLAS for QM2 as a north Atlantic liner I believe, cruise ships have to have them much lower I understand?). The almost central placement of the QM2 engine room and funnel is another link to QE2 and her engine/funnel position (unlike cruise ships where they tend to be placed further aft). Thanks again. Edited January 7, 2016 by pepperrn

[ovccruiser]

I was watching the cycle tour of Dubai today and caught a glimpse of QE2, looking very sorry for herself, much of the paint on the funnel was flaking off, sad indeed.

[DWhit]

I realize it's not Cunard, but I thought the people reading this thread might be interested....I read where Crystal Cruises has a purchase option on the SS United States. It would be amazing to travel on a restored version of that ship.

 

The link was https://gcaptain.com/crystal-cruises-purchases-historic-ss-united-states/#.Vre2DfBOKK0

Edited February 7, 2016 by DWhit

[FennoExpress]

If the link to these recent photos has been previously posted I apologise for missing it. Those who remember the QE2 may enjoy these interesting, yet sad, photos.

 

http://www.cruisearabiaonline.com/Golden-Age/2015/05/21/EXCLUSIVE--Cruise-Arabia---Africa-s-photo-tour-of-Cunard-s-QE2-in-her-current-state-in-Dubai

 

How saddening to see those photos :( I'm not sure when they were taken, the interior seems to be in too good shape considering the news that her A/C is turned off. She would be so good as a museum and hotel in Southampton or London.

 

Seeing that Cunard lion in the aft pool always makes me wonder why they haven't painted one on the QM2. It would look so cool!

[Yoshikitty]

The QE2 hull paint looks much better that that from QM2 at the moment :D

[Transatlantic Tom]

Hi Rotterdam,

 

With respect, you are mistaken. QM2 is as much of a liner as was QE2, or put another way, QE2 was as much a cruise ship as is QM2.

As has been said many times, as was said at the time of QE2's launch, and is is well documented, QE2 and QM2 are hybrids; both liners and cruise ships. I said previously "SS France was the last "pure" major liner constructed, and she turned out to be a financial white elephant for the French Line and Government". However, QE2 and QM2 are either BOTH liners than can cruise, or BOTH cruise ships that can do line voyages on a regular basis. They were BOTH built with the same end in mind; to serve equally well as liners on the north Atlantic, and as cruise ships in the winter months. That is the genius of their design. You cannot separate one from the other. Had QE2 not been constructed as a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship, but built as a pure liner, she would have gone the same way as the France after twelve years; she didn't 'cus she wasn't. The proof of this is almost 40 years of service. QM2 was designed the same way, dual-purpose liner/cruise ship. Don't forget, Cunard came very close to copying the huge mistake made by the French Line by ordering a "pure liner" themselves in the early 60s. Thankfully they saw sense and ordered a dual-purpose liner/cruise ship instead; QE2".

 

Pepperrn:

 

You are entirely correct with regard to QE2 and QM2. Choose to phrase it however one wants - "both are ocean liners that can do cruise service" or vice versa - BUT it is clear that the intent was to provide hybrid service.

 

I loved QE2 as much as anyone, but when people say she was the last liner I say "no".

 

I think structure and design are the key factors. You can have an ocean liner cruise the Med, Norwegian fjords, or the South Pacific; you can't have a cruise ship make a transatlantic crossing at 28 knots and/or cross in rough weather and maintain the voyage.

 

QE2 and QM2 are Transatlantic liners, conceived to provide dual service.

[david,Mississauga]

As for the last real ocean liner, the RMS Windsor Castle of the Union-Castle Line might be the last liner (or maybe second to last) that never did anything as frivolous as a cruise. Its entire career (1960 - 1977) was spent on the "Cape Mail run" between Southampton - Canary Islands - Cape Town - Port Elizabeth - East London - Durban. To my knowledge it never deviated from that route.

 

I had the pleasure of being on the last run from Port Elizabeth to Southampton and to this day it remains my favourite voyage.

 

The RMS St. Helena, built in 1990 for the UK - St. Helena - South Africa route, might be the last true liner, but I'm not aware if that ship ever did a cruise in addition to its liner route. Any comments are appreciated.

[Chunky2219]

I'm a mere mid-50s old but reading this thread I feel like I'm from some new age where I just don't understand the attraction of something bygone that, dare I say it, is viewed through lenses of a rather rosy hue. The Morris Minor was a super little car and the Rover P90 somewhat better, but I'll happily stick with my modern car that is more comfortable, more reliable and has aircon, thanks very much.

 

No-one today would build a ship full of wooden paneling and asbestos, more importantly with very few balconies even for the Atlantic run. By today's standards few people could afford to voyage on such a vessel and although I love silver service rather than having my food dished up in today's manner, the reality is that no one is willing to pay for it.

 

So we have QM2, which may or may not be a cruise ship, may or may not be entirely at ease with the rigours of the North Atlantic but the bottom line is that she is what people want and therefore is profitable. I would also say reliable, but that's the point where someone jumps in and tells us why steam was so much better than electrical power and AC motors, why being shoved about by a tug was so much better than having azipods. Even when one is broken she can do 20 kts+ so it's hardly a problem.

 

I don't want to sound cynical but some things are best remembered fondly and then it's time to move on. Not long ago I bumped by chance into an old girlfriend from school days and with hindsight I would have been happier with the memory instead of the up to date experience. QE2 is never coming back and there will never be a replacement, just as the Chinese Titanic 2 will be all wrong and will sink (financially) if ever completed. Anyone who was fortunate enough to enjoy QE2 has memories to fall back on but please, don't assume the past was better. It wasn't. Just different.

 

By the way, can someone please explain to me why it's so much more attractive to be going head first into heaving great Atlantic waves rather than going around them as (the new) QE did when we crossed the pond? Alton Towers is so much cheaper and more convenient if you want to have your innards juggled around.

 

 

.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Chunky2219
Aggg! another fat-fingered typo

[Germancruiser]

Chunky- I could not agree more. Alls this cry and blah blah about a ship totaly outdated. I have sailed QE2 once- and I am glad I did- but as much as I enjoyed beeing on baord a floading museum- as I call QE2- I must say I never experienced a more confusing layout- everything looked dated and as hard as they tried to keep her up to date- 40 years are 40 years- and it showed!

So let her go in peace - she is a ship of the past and is cherrished as that. As everything and everyone she had her time - but this in the past!

[david,Mississauga]

I'm a mere mid-50s old but reading this thread I feel like I'm from some new age where I just don't understand the attraction of something bygone that, dare I say it, is viewed through lenses of a rather rosy hue.

...

.

 

Some of my friends take the position that everything was better in the past and others claim that everything is better today. I disagree with both extreme positions. I take the middle ground and I certainly don’t look at the past “through lenses of a rather rosy hue.”

 

I’m not much older than the poster I have partially quoted, but I started travelling by ship fairly young in 1972. We made our first Atlantic crossing on the QE2 in 1973. We weren’t overwhelmed at that time because of the décor which seemed far too modern for our taste. This is, of course, subjective because many people were very fond of it. The service and food were excellent and, even in Tourist Class, silver service was the style at all meals. It would be six years before we took our next crossing on this ship and we were fortunate to be able to go First Class (not Queen's Grill which was a sub-division of First Class) and that was far more agreeable. Over the decades – our crossings spanned 35 years – the design of the QE2 changed considerably. By the end the décor was very agreeable with me: she looked more like a traditional liner. Not everyone would agree, of course, so again this is a matter of taste.

 

Ships of that era all operated as First and Tourist in liner service and that was either good or bad: we loved the extra space and amenities offered with this strict class distinction when we were in First, but obviously not so much when we were in Tourist. The current Cunard style of having basically one class with a few areas for the Grills is no doubt better. (We have travelled in all “classes” on the QM2). As we all know, the Britannia Restaurant on the QM2 has a far grander décor than the Grills restaurants although, for food and service, the PG and QG are lovely.

 

Older ships had no balconies and that, naturally, wouldn’t go over well today. They had no wretched lido buffets either, but again there are a huge number of people who love them so it is a matter of taste. As for real wood panelling, I understand why this is not permitted today, but there was nothing like sitting in a library or other lounge with all that rich wood. On one of our QE2 crossings we had a First Class cabin that was panelled in dark wood and it was gorgeous. I admit the fake panelling we get today looks nice (if you don’t get too close.)

 

On the QM2 we always meet at least one person who says the QE2 was better and if it was still in service they would take it rather than the QM2. I don’t agree with them, but I might cross on one each way. I would not say the QE2 was better than the QM2 or v.v. Both are splendid ships but they are a generation apart and realistically cannot be compared.

[outlawuk]

David, you are probably right. I never traveled on QE2, though always wanted to. I remember it as a child before the suites were 'plonked' on top of what I think was an open-air protected sports deck? It looked better then and I actually like ships to be like ships, so would enjoy being in a cabin with portholes. Balconies aren't that important to me. I seem to recall the original few luxury cabins had big (sideways-)oval windows and I'm sure they were perfectly decent. I feel ships these days are very inward-looking, almost as if engineering the sea out of the equation, whereas I like ships to be outward-looking and all about the sea. If the Titanic II ever gets built I would love to travel on that, if I could afford First Class that is! But then in my day I recall on Canberra you could book one of the 4 berths in an inside cabin and take pot luck as to the guys allocated to share with you and as a youngster that was the only way I'd have been able to afford it. Dominic

[Chunky2219]

Let it go. It's gone. They were halcyon days to be known no more.

 

Take solace in the knowledge that our kids will themselves look back on our miserable today as a golden age, before robots took over and technology crushed the common man. Being crammed cheek by jowl into an airliner being run like a bus service will seem like bygone luxury to them.

 

.

[balf]

Anyone for an aircraft carrier? Ex Hermes.

 

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/ins-viraat-to-be-a-luxury-hotel/article8270548.ece

 

David

Edited February 29, 2016 by balf