Why doesn't Cunard run a fast ocean liner Transatlantic service anymore?

[Colin_Cameron]

14 minutes ago, Francophile said:

It would be interesting to understand how many people take QM2 to get across the pond ...

While not a scientific analysis, on every crossing we have been on (QE2 & QM2) there has been someone at out table that was using the ship for transportation. So I suspect the number is higher than most people realise.

[Colin_Cameron]

On 1/3/2020 at 9:39 AM, babs135 said:

At a guess:

 

Slower crossing = more time on board = more spending on board

I’ve heard this argument before but I think it misses a point.

 

In a thirty day month, it doesn’t matter if you slice it into six five-day crossings, five six-day crossings, or even three ten-day crossings. It’s still thirty days.

[hilcadon]

I think the real answer is that there is absolutely no demand for a quicker crossing.  

[Underwatr]

3 hours ago, Colin_Cameron said:

I’ve heard this argument before but I think it misses a point.

 

In a thirty day month, it doesn’t matter if you slice it into six five-day crossings, five six-day crossings, or even three ten-day crossings. It’s still thirty days.

six five-day crossings have six changeover days. three ten-day crossings have three changeover days. Changeover days are low-profit for the bars and the shops (and wear down the crew).

Edited January 5, 2020 by Underwatr

[rog747]

5 day to 7 and 8 day crossings nowadays was all about saving Fuel costs.
The extra days spent on board count for extra guest revenue spending...

I for one would love to see more crossings with Le Havre, or Cherbourg calls, plus some more calling in at one of Cunard's spiritual homes Halifax which is a lovely port of call at anytime. 

[Yoshikitty]

In addition to what has been previously said, it‘s convenient that the ships leave and arrive on the same day of week.

 

Embarkations during the week ( which will happen on a 6day timetable) may not be booked so well because not convenient.

 

Against using the ship on full speed speaks, that for most of the time, one or two engines are out of service for maintenance. You can‘t let ships run on high speed all the time.

Edited January 5, 2020 by Yoshikitty

[ABoatNerd]

I would love to sail on QM2 at high speed.

 

In fact, I just emailed Cunard HQ asking them to organize a couple of TA's to this end.

 

Do a per diem pricing because the typical fares would be too high for the reduced number of days and then add a fuel surcharge to account for the increased fuel consumption. This would show guests how much they pay to go faster.

 

It would be totally awesome experience - and give Cunard a marketing opportunity and press attention.

 

I would take my in hull balcony for sure!

 

Will let the board know if Cunard HQ responds!

[chengkp75]

And the fuel surcharge is per passenger, so if the ship is undersold, each pax pays more.  Good luck.

[NowVoyager2]

Back in the 1970's, 1980's we took 5 day crossings on both QE2 & FRANCE. It was wonderful being on those ships for the purpose they were built for.  Mostly as transport for longer European holidays but we also did 5 day crossings w 2 or 3 days in London and flew one way. The QE2 was spectacular as she cut through the Atlantic ocean even in the. Winter.  One year I did the first leg of the world cruise on her ...the ship just listed a bit & then sped/ cut through the Atlantic Ocean & all that it gave her.  The FRANCE was more of a roller but we loved her also.

Sorry to say there is nothing like them today...even QM2 is more cruise ship than oceanliner.

My favorites were the old Italian Line😊😋😘🌎🗽🌁🚢🚢🚢

 

[IB2]

Two reasons.

 

Firstly, the ship uses four diesel engines for its core power, which can be supplemented by two gas turbines linked to electric generators.  To achieve max speed, all of this is required - but it is a lot more economic to just run on the Diesel engines.  So the trip is planned on the basis of a cruise speed well below maximum speed, and the gas turbines kept for contingency.

 

Secondly, Cunard prides itself on its Transatlantic service never being late; the slack built into the schedule makes this easier to achieve and provides contingency to divert course in the event of storms or the not infrequent need to meet up with a rescue helicopter to airlift off sick passengers.

 

Whether there is a third factor arising from the economics of the cruise industry, for those people doing the crossing as a cruise rather than a crossing, I don’t know.  

[navybankerteacher]

On 1/3/2020 at 9:35 PM, foodsvcmgr said:

Nonetheless a shame for a ship with near 30 knot capability to not at least operate one or two high speed crossings a year for the enthusiast crowd willing to pay for the thrill (assuming there is such a demographic),

Somewhat like owning a Porsche yet never driving faster than 50 mph.

When on a ship like QM2, running at 30+/- knots is in no way like driving a Porsche at 80 or 90.  Sure, there is noticeably more wake and wind over the deck - but forget the speedboat  “thrill” concept.

 

 Coming up from the Caribbean after back-tracking about 10 hours to get within helicopter range of San Juan for an emergency evacuation just over a week ago, we made up most of the about 20 lost hours by running fast — but there was no “thrill” involved.

[navybankerteacher]

On 1/4/2020 at 6:57 PM, JT1101 said:

QM2 is not doing this cruise ship style - if she were she would not be using the northern route which is where the wilder weather resides. She would go via Bermuda across the South Atlantic like others do. 

Any ship going from Southampton to New York is going to follow a great circle route  and not go via Bermuda - in hopes  (often unrequited) of better weather— burning significantly more fuel due to increased distance.

[JT1101]

16 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Any ship going from Southampton to New York is going to follow a great circle route  and not go via Bermuda - in hopes  (often unrequited) of better weather— burning significantly more fuel due to increased distance.

 

I looked it up. Aside from Cunard no one I could find does the straight Southampton - New York run on the northern route. They either go south and stop at places like Ponta Delgada or they run up by Iceland and then visit Greenland - again not out in the middle of the North Atlantic. 

[navybankerteacher]

28 minutes ago, JT1101 said:

 

I looked it up. Aside from Cunard no one I could find does the straight Southampton - New York run on the northern route. They either go south and stop at places like Ponta Delgada or they run up by Iceland and then visit Greenland - again not out in the middle of the North Atlantic. 

That’s because other ships make ports of call- on repositioning cruises, or trans-Atlantic cruises - like HAL’s Voyages of the Vikings.  Any ship going between Southampton and New York without ports of call will take the great circle route - QM2 may be the only passenger ship on that run - but many cargo ships do — and the shorter route is the one they follow - rather than seeking some calmer, more southern route, as your earlier post claimed.

 

The fact is: that “where the wilder weather resides” comment applies generally to the whole North Atlantic (with the possible exception of the even-wilder Bay of Biscay) - which passenger ships regularly cross rather than making wide runs to avoid.  Passenger ships may change course to evade particular storms - but they do not pick longer routes in hopes of avoiding generalized “wilder weather”.

[foodsvcmgr]

NavyBankerTeacher - We will have to respectfully agree to disagree on this point. While you may have noticed little difference in higher speeds and not found it particularly thrilling, I found sailing QE2 at 28+ knots and QM2 at 26 a far different and more exciting sensation than the current 20-22.

[navybankerteacher]

9 hours ago, foodsvcmgr said:

NavyBankerTeacher - We will have to respectfully agree to disagree on this point. While you may have noticed little difference in higher speeds and not found it particularly thrilling, I found sailing QE2 at 28+ knots and QM2 at 26 a far different and more exciting sensation than the current 20-22.

Agreed - there is a distinct perception of speed when QM2 pushes to make up time and makes more than her usual 18-20 knots - but my concept of “thrill” of speed is reserved for something like a destroyer making 34 or so, and the main deck is perhaps 10 to 12 feet above the waterline.

[john watson]

On 1/6/2020 at 10:45 PM, NowVoyager2 said:

Back in the 1970's, 1980's we took 5 day crossings on both QE2 & FRANCE. It was wonderful being on those ships for the purpose they were built for.  Mostly as transport for longer European holidays but we also did 5 day crossings w 2 or 3 days in London and flew one way. The QE2 was spectacular as she cut through the Atlantic ocean even in the. Winter.  One year I did the first leg of the world cruise on her ...the ship just listed a bit & then sped/ cut through the Atlantic Ocean & all that it gave her.  The FRANCE was more of a roller but we loved her also.

Sorry to say there is nothing like them today...even QM2 is more cruise ship than oceanliner.

My favorites were the old Italian Line😊😋😘🌎🗽🌁🚢🚢🚢

 

 

It would make sense to me if Cunard had a smaller capacity ship which during the Transatlantic season sailed in the opposite direction to permit extended stays in NY or London. It could possibly avoid Hamburg and do a second stop in Dublin.

 

Regards John

[JT1101]

I'm sorry but QM2 is ocean liner through and through. It meets every criteria.

 

1) Higher freeboard? Check.

2) Narrower for its length (block coefficient)? Check.

3) Strong construction? Check.

 

It also has the ambiance of a classic liner and is one of the best weathering ships out there - it is famous for that. 

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, JT1101 said:

I'm sorry but QM2 is ocean liner through and through. It meets every criteria.

 

1) Higher freeboard? Check.

2) Narrower for its length (block coefficient)? Check.

3) Strong construction? Check.

 

It also has the ambiance of a classic liner and is one of the best weathering ships out there - it is famous for that. 

She definitely is a liner - her hull and, more importantly, the way she handles seas sets her apart from the herd.

[Dranuc2016]

On 1/11/2020 at 2:20 PM, navybankerteacher said:

Any ship going from Southampton to New York is going to follow a great circle route  and not go via Bermuda - in hopes  (often unrequited) of better weather— burning significantly more fuel due to increased distance.

It is possible that ships would go from Southampton to New York via Bermuda. 

Queen Elizabeth 2018 (actually stopped at Ponta Delgada due to rough weather,  skipped Bermuda,  then added Bermuda on the Eastbound crossing at the end of WC)

 

Q802 Westbound Transatlantic Crossing Sun 7 Jan Southampton, United Kingdom

Mon 8 Jan At Sea

Tue 9 Jan At Sea

Wed 10 Jan At Sea

Thu 11 Jan At Sea

Fri 12 Jan At Sea

Sat 13 Jan At Sea

Sun 14 Jan Hamilton, Bermuda

Mon 15 Jan At Sea

Tue 16 Jan New York

Wed 17 Jan New York

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, JT1101 said:

I'm sorry but QM2 is ocean liner through and through. It meets every criteria.

 

1) Higher freeboard? Check.

2) Narrower for its length (block coefficient)? Check.

3) Strong construction? Check.

 

It also has the ambiance of a classic liner and is one of the best weathering ships out there - it is famous for that. 

I know that I tend to rub most Cunard hard liners the wrong way, but I don't know of any "criteria" for an "ocean liner".  And, as for #2, QM2 is 1132 ft long and 135 ft in beam, for a beam to length ratio of 0.119.  Freedom of the Seas (what most consider a "cruise ship") is 1111 ft long and 126 ft in beam, for a beam to length ratio of 0.113, so that Freedom is narrower for its length than QM2.

[d9704011]

Just to nitpick a bit.... the length/beam ratio and the CB (block coefficient) are not the same thing.  A long, skinny hull form in the general shape of a rectangular cube could very well have a CB approaching 1.  The CB of QM2 is about .61 while Freedom’s is about .73.  So, QM2 has ‘finer’ underwater  lines than a typical cruise ship.

[chengkp75]

23 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

Just to nitpick a bit.... the length/beam ratio and the CB (block coefficient) are not the same thing.  A long, skinny hull form in the general shape of a rectangular cube could very well have a CB approaching 1.  The CB of QM2 is about .61 while Freedom’s is about .73.  So, QM2 has ‘finer’ underwater  lines than a typical cruise ship.

Understand that, but the poster I was responding to mentioned "narrower for its length".  And, to nitpick a little more, I don't know that Freedom's CB is .73 or not.  That is the figure given for "most" cruise ships in Wikipedia and the cruise article it links to, but without attribution to any specific ships.  I also wonder how QM2's CB changed when they added the skeg aft, due to the directional instability she experienced with following seas.

[JT1101]

Hi!

 

I put block coefficient in brackets to show I was using "slang" together with the term. The fact is QM2 has a different block coefficient than cruise ships typically do (I gather some newer ones from Seabourn have also gone to finer underwater lines). She also has deeper draft, stronger build (thickness, double hull and framing) and more power. She is famous for being an excellent seaboat.

The skeg was part of the original construction - it was in response to model tests in water similarly to how the elongated bulbous bow is. 

[princeton123211]

1 hour ago, JT1101 said:

She also has deeper draft, stronger build (thickness, double hull and framing) and more power. She is famous for being an excellent seaboat.

At the end of the day a "liner" is any vessel undertaking a line voyage-- more describing regularly scheduled voyages on a set route than the physical characteristics of the particular vessels undertaking them. Atlantic liners are sort of the archetypal "ocean liner" that we imagine and sure, they needed high freeboard due to operating concerns on that route as well as high speed which necessitated certain designs. 

 

But liners were also were built to the specific routes they served-- Orient Line ships, Oracades, Oronsay, and even Oriana, had decks open very low in the hull to aid cooling in hot climates. Not close in speed to their Atlantic counterparts. Still very much liners. 

 

QM2 is a liner, but not because of her particular block coefficient or the fact that she is indeed, a great seaboat.