Queen Mary 2's service life? My son wants to propose on this specific ship and think's she'll be retired.

[JP350]

Hi all, my son has for years expressed his intention to propose to his future girlfriend (despite being 17 he thinks about these kinds of things) on Queen Mary 2, during one of her historic atlantic crossings. He's loved ships and history since his was young, but today he came to me with the realization that his proposal, which could be 15 years in the future (his words 🤣), could outlast the QM2's service life. I've read online that she was built with a 40 year service life, but could any passengers or engineers, report as to how this ship is faring. Thanks all for enlightening my weird request 😉. 

[Poole Boy]

Queen Mary 2 was launched in 2004, so is 20 years old. In theory she would still be sailing in 15 years time.  But who knows what is going to happen the end of this week, let alone the next 15 years. All we can hope for, is you son get to realise his dreams.

[Pushpit]

A bit early in the morning still for me, so I originally read the title as being "service lift", as in "service elevator". So I was wondering starting to worry about your son's plans and the plausibility of the outcome.

 

It sounds like he hasn't got a specific option in mind yet, but I don't think he needs rush around. QE2 was operational, let us say, for 39 years, and one could argue 41 years, there were a lot of problems with the ship after the launch. She also had a massive switch from coal to diesel, which on the one hand prolonged her life, but ideally one would not have ideally wanted to do this retro-fit, the end result was an expensive ship to operate. But I would say 20 + 15 years is a safe bet, and more boringly, the Carnival company's published annual accounts suggests that would be the expected outcome. 

[david,Mississauga]

2 hours ago, Pushpit said:

... She also had a massive switch from coal to diesel, which on the one hand prolonged her life, but ideally one would not have ideally wanted to do this retro-fit, the end result was an expensive ship to operate. 

...

 

"Coal"?  I know what you mean, though.  One of our crossings was just after the conversion from a steam plant to diesel and I was surprised by two things.  It had often been said that diesel ships had more vibration than steamships and that diesel power was slower than steam turbines.  I noticed no more vibration than before and the speed was brisk - still five day crossings until a sixth day was added to save on fuel costs.  

 

[WantedOnVoyage]

Ships are aged more by market and marketing than anything else.  Although mechanically, one can argue that much of QM2's uniqueness and capabilities have already been compromised with the dismal 7-day crossing rather than 6 days she was meant for, let alone 5 days.  That is the speed of a CAMPANIA c. 1900.  If she loafs along like that, she'll last forever but all that expensive gas turbine fit is largely wasted now.

 

If you ever had the pleasure... the thrill... of crossing the North Atlantic in five days on the steamship QUEEN ELIZABETH 2... now that was special.  A real crossing.  Not an Atlantic cruise. Oh and yes... three formal nights, too. And jacket and tie the others. So there!

[BklynBoy8]

She is suppose to go thru a half life refit in 2025 which should give her more years of her life delighting all and continue sailing.

 

 

[exlondoner]

11 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Ships are aged more by market and marketing than anything else.  Although mechanically, one can argue that much of QM2's uniqueness and capabilities have already been compromised with the dismal 7-day crossing rather than 6 days she was meant for, let alone 5 days.  That is the speed of a CAMPANIA c. 1900.  If she loafs along like that, she'll last forever but all that expensive gas turbine fit is largely wasted now.

 

If you ever had the pleasure... the thrill... of crossing the North Atlantic in five days on the steamship QUEEN ELIZABETH 2... now that was special.  A real crossing.  Not an Atlantic cruise. Oh and yes... three formal nights, too. And jacket and tie the others. So there!

And very few balconies, and no forward view, except at the start, and a part open bridge, and some open life boats, and Bibby corridors, etc, etc. I loved her too…then, but I doubt I would now.

[3rdGenCunarder]

11 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Ships are aged more by market and marketing than anything else.  Although mechanically, one can argue that much of QM2's uniqueness and capabilities have already been compromised with the dismal 7-day crossing rather than 6 days she was meant for, let alone 5 days.  That is the speed of a CAMPANIA c. 1900.  If she loafs along like that, she'll last forever but all that expensive gas turbine fit is largely wasted now.

 

If you ever had the pleasure... the thrill... of crossing the North Atlantic in five days on the steamship QUEEN ELIZABETH 2... now that was special.  A real crossing.  Not an Atlantic cruise. Oh and yes... three formal nights, too. And jacket and tie the others. So there!

 

Yes, for ship geeks (yes, that's me), the power and speed of QE2 were awesome. Back when she changed from 5 to 6 days for a crossing, many of her fans complained that it was "taking it easy." One poster replied "But if she takes 6 days, you get an extra day on her." I'm not sure anyone had an answer for that!

[WantedOnVoyage]

When I crossed on FRANCE in August 1974 (50 years ago!) she was loafing along on a 6-day crossing not 5 to save fuel. It didn't save her and one missed quadruple screws churning out 29 knots!  But at 16, I still thought she was pretty "neat" even as a slow coach.

[exlondoner]

1 minute ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

When I crossed on FRANCE in August 1974 (50 years ago!) she was loafing along on a 6-day crossing not 5 to save fuel. It didn't save her and one missed quadruple screws churning out 29 knots!  But at 16, I still thought she was pretty "neat" even as a slow coach.

She was sold off because the French government used the money which had been subsidising her to subsidise Concorde. I’m not sure how well that worked out, really.

[Clewgarnet]

Bear in mind that, back in the day, the purpose of much of the extra power was to allow ships to keep to schedule, even if they were hit by circumstances. Sure, it was something of a marketing coup to hold the Blue Riband, but it was far more important to the lines to keep a regular, reliable service. (Of course, the power also came in useful for military roles, hence the government support.)

 

Sadly, we've seen on the past few crossings that QM2 doesn't have that extra tiger in the tank at the moment. Or, if she does, Cunard aren't willing to spend the cash to release it.

 

(I'd much prefer a leisurely 7/8-day crossing to a thrilling 5/6-day crossing. If I wanted speed across the Atlantic, I'd take a plane. I want to spend time on board my favourite ship.)

[exlondoner]

1 minute ago, Clewgarnet said:

Bear in mind that, back in the day, the purpose of much of the extra power was to allow ships to keep to schedule, even if they were hit by circumstances. Sure, it was something of a marketing coup to hold the Blue Riband, but it was far more important to the lines to keep a regular, reliable service. (Of course, the power also came in useful for military roles, hence the government support.)

 

Sadly, we've seen on the past few crossings that QM2 doesn't have that extra tiger in the tank at the moment. Or, if she does, Cunard aren't willing to spend the cash to release it.

 

(I'd much prefer a leisurely 7/8-day crossing to a thrilling 5/6-day crossing. If I wanted speed across the Atlantic, I'd take a plane. I want to spend time on board my favourite ship.)

Actually, for me the greatest benefit of the extra speed was on the cruises, allowing a wider range of more scattered ports in a limited time.

[Clewgarnet]

6 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Actually, for me the greatest benefit of the extra speed was on the cruises, allowing a wider range of more scattered ports in a limited time.

That certainly makes more sense to me than wanting to speed across the Atlantic!

[WantedOnVoyage]

Me, I'd like a proper trans-Atlantic service back... so shorter crossings and more of them, more frequently.  It is all but impossible to use QM2 as a liner for any kind of practical overseas trip with two weeks used just over and back and so few crossings.  It's pleasure but of little purpose.  "Getting There is Half the Fun" yes... but I'll like to get back, too, in less than a month or more, thanks very much. 

[JP350]

9 hours ago, Poole Boy said:

Queen Mary 2 was launched in 2004, so is 20 years old. In theory she would still be sailing in 15 years time.  But who knows what is going to happen the end of this week, let alone the next 15 years. All we can hope for, is you son get to realise his dreams.

Thank You, and if only we could predict the future, life would be a lot easier. 😂

[JP350]

7 hours ago, Pushpit said:

A bit early in the morning still for me, so I originally read the title as being "service lift", as in "service elevator". So I was wondering starting to worry about your son's plans and the plausibility of the outcome.

 

It sounds like he hasn't got a specific option in mind yet, but I don't think he needs rush around. QE2 was operational, let us say, for 39 years, and one could argue 41 years, there were a lot of problems with the ship after the launch. She also had a massive switch from coal to diesel, which on the one hand prolonged her life, but ideally one would not have ideally wanted to do this retro-fit, the end result was an expensive ship to operate. But I would say 20 + 15 years is a safe bet, and more boringly, the Carnival company's published annual accounts suggests that would be the expected outcome. 

This is the idea I was hoping for, and to me the QM2’s crossings seem successful enough to continue doing them for as long as she could be in service.

[Classiccruiser777]

9 hours ago, Clewgarnet said:

Bear in mind that, back in the day, the purpose of much of the extra power was to allow ships to keep to schedule, even if they were hit by circumstances.

 

Sadly, we've seen on the past few crossings that QM2 doesn't have that extra tiger in the tank at the moment. Or, if she does, Cunard aren't willing to spend the cash to release it.

 

Which disrupted many of Cunard’s passenger’s travel plans. Due to QM2’s last two late arrivals in NY many had to rebook flights and or stay an additional, unexpected night in NY since space on later flights were not available. We made our 2:00 PM flight by the skin of our teeth. Bad form by Cunard.

[Germancruiser]

Oh nooo- I never would want a 5 day crossing- the longer I can stay on board the better it is. For me that´s the whole point of it.

I do not see it as bad form of Cunard- things happen on the high seas. We also arrived 4 hours late in NY- emergency right at the start and drifting for 8 or so hours in the midst of the North Atlantic, due to some technical problems. Cunards first priority has always been the safety of their passengers - right from the start in 1840. So no not bad form - Cunard- kudos Cunard for taking care of their passengers.

[Germancruiser]

To the OP- well they annonce the end of ship in Service for the company a bit in advance, when the time is right- maybe your son can put the proposal a bit a head- so to fullfill his dream. God god no- the loony bins would overflow when we could tell the future. LOL.

[david,Mississauga]

11 hours ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Ships are aged more by market and marketing than anything else.  Although mechanically, one can argue that much of QM2's uniqueness and capabilities have already been compromised with the dismal 7-day crossing rather than 6 days she was meant for, let alone 5 days.  That is the speed of a CAMPANIA c. 1900.  If she loafs along like that, she'll last forever but all that expensive gas turbine fit is largely wasted now.

 

If you ever had the pleasure... the thrill... of crossing the North Atlantic in five days on the steamship QUEEN ELIZABETH 2... now that was special.  A real crossing.  Not an Atlantic cruise. Oh and yes... three formal nights, too. And jacket and tie the others. So there!

 

Yes, indeed.  My first crossing on QE2 long, long ago was memorable for many reasons, one of which was the speed. Due to a problem which I have forgotten we departed Southampton after midnight, almost a half day late. Yet we arrived in New York on time. I don't know what the top speed was, but it must have been close to 30 knots which combined with a 30-knot headwind was exhilarating on deck. 

 

We were in Tourist Class, so no formal wear but, with the dress code being jacket and tie every night, I wore a dark suit every night.

[ace2542]

I think QM2 will make it to the 200 year anniversary of Cunard in 16 years time but beyond that who knows. Unless cunard intends to launch the replacement ship for QM2 during the 200 year celebrations. That would be a launch to behold.

 

The above statements either way they play out are dependant of course upon Cunard being around in 16 years time and who knows if they will be or not.

[exlondoner]

1 minute ago, ace2542 said:

I think QM2 will make it to the 200 year anniversary of Cunard in 16 years time but beyond that who knows. Unless cunard intends to launch the replacement ship for QM2 during the 200 year celebrations. That would be a launch to behold.

 

The above statements either way they play out are dependant of course upon Cunard being around in 16 years time and who knows if they will be or not.

I didn’t think ships were launched these days.

[ace2542]

2 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I didn’t think ships were launched these days.

The Queen Anne had the launch last month I was there. A great day for Cunard and Liverpool

[exlondoner]

Just now, ace2542 said:

The Queen Anne had the launch last month I was there. A great day for Cunard and Liverpool

That was the naming. Not the same thing. Launching is what happened to QE2, when she slid down a slip way to meet the water for the first time. Now they usually flood the dock.

[ace2542]

1 minute ago, exlondoner said:

That was the naming. Not the same thing. Launching is what happened to QE2, when she slid down a slip way to meet the water for the first time. Now they usually flood the dock.

You know what I meant naming launching same thing to me. I think 3 queens in Liverpool to name the new forth would be amazing. But also sad if QM2 didn't make it.