Too bad QV and QE don't like like oceanliners

[Cunard Cruiser]

Taking the Disney Wonder I modified to “Cunard colors” giving an impression of what a QV and QE could have been if Carnival spent a little money than using the God ugly Vista class boxes. They would have done it right if they created something similar to the Wonder which is more like a true ocean liner than the current QV.

[Seachase20]

Taking the Disney Wonder I modified to “Cunard colors” giving an impression of what a QV and QE could have been if Carnival spent a little money than using the God ugly Vista class boxes. They would have done it right if they created something similar to the Wonder which is more like a true ocean liner than the current QV.

 

you're right, Wonder looks pretty good in Cunard colors, and is a much better looking ship than either QV or QE. Shame.

[Atomica]

The Disney ships are really well designed - I'm looking forward to seeing what their newbuilds are like.

 

I like the Vista-class ships, but it is a shame Carnival chose the same basic style for Cunard, which I think deserves something more unique. Having been on QM2, I think it'd be tough for me to go on QV and have the same experience...

[bahrain_not_dubai!]

You know I personaly think that if the Vista class had not been implemented on the Arcadia and HAL ships before using them for the Queens it have would been allright. The new Queens are supposed to be cruise ships. A 3 ship transatlantic scheduale simply is not profatible, and spending all the money on building a TA liner to simply crusie with it is also daft. But looks wise I think had it not been used for so many other ships it would have been fine. But it was used, so I belive atleast some alterations could have taken place to give the new Queens a diffrent look. I can only hope the QE is not a carbon copy of the Queen Victoria.

However as much as im not a fan to Carnavalisation of the ships one thing must be said. In the last few years before Carnival purched Cunard the line was struggling to survive as the Cunard Royal Viking Line. The QE2 was the only offical ship under the Cunard Line banner. Had it not been for Carnival Cunard would quite possibly not exist. The QM2 defnitly would be something we can only dream about. Maybe Cunard would become a line like Fred Olsen after they gave up the QE2. Anyone remmber the Countess, Ambassdor and Princess in the 70's? Slated for dilvery to an Italian line prior to Cunard buying out thier hulls and creating the informal Caribbean cruise division? I belive Cunard would be using simmilar ships today while trying to be formal (had they surrvived). Yet Carnival took this line to somewhere you wouldnt have expected them to be in 12 years ago. Carnival has thier faults but for the fact that Cunard is still here not least with a true liner built by man in the 21st century, I think all of us should, even in our spite for some of thier actions remmber that had it not been for Carnival it is very likley Cunard would be a thing we can only reminiscence about while listining to 'Those Where The Days'. Thankfuly it is not so. Yes, Vista was uncreative but thank you Carnival for saving Cunard. And giving us the QM2 to replace the QE2. For keeping oceanic travel alive.

[RobertGraves]

Nice work, 'sea-sea'. Disney ships have wondeful looks and evoke successfully the traditional image of an ocean liner, interpreted in a modern design. The only thing I would personally remark is that I prefer them just as they are, with two funnels.

 

As to Vista Class ships, I understand people are disappointed by their boxy appearance. Perhaps a more elegant stern could do much do to improve this.

 

Otherwise, they are undoubtedly impressive. Many people find Queen Victoria a nice contemporary ship, and I think this is the way we should look her. No comparison to our beloved QE2 can be made - they just belong to a different time-frame.

 

Beyond external appearance, Vista/Spirit Class ships are practical. Credit goes to their designers for allowing so many balcony cabins. And as to interiors, special praise goes to the modifications of the public rooms of Queen Victoria, a significant improvement over the previous design, now P&O's Arcadia.

 

These modifications, and certainly the existence of the 'one-and-only' QM2, prove to my opinion that 'bahrain_not_dubai!' is right in arguing that Carnival has taken special care of Cunard.

[Beyondships]

I think it would have been disappointing if Cunard had tried to make its new ships look like some mythical ocean liner by adding a fake funnel and turn of the century exterior trim like on the Disney ships. It is fine for Disney because make-believe is what Disney is all about. Cunard ships should, as they always have, reflect contemporary maritime design.

[Jim Avery]

I agree, contemporary maritime design but built for crossing the North Atlantic at speed. Otherwise, drop the whole "Liner" schtick. Hell, modern LNG or container ships have better looking hulls than Vickie, the block of flats on a barge.

[x-press]

- Victoria's problem isn't just that she's "not an ocean liner." When I saw her, I honestly thought she may have been the ugliest CRUISE ship I had yet seen (I hadn't seen previous versions of the vista class). I didn't expect another QM2 by a long shot, but I had hoped to see something resembling symmetry and lines.

 

- I generally agree that Cunard ships should be functional-looking, but remember the Titanic and Normandie both had dummy funnels, so they're nothing new. I see nothing wrong with taking some inspiration from the old liners, just as the QM2 did (okay, the fake steam whistle is a bit much).

 

- As far as "crossing the atlantic at speed," I love it, but I don't know if that's going to be an apt description if the trend toward seven-day trips continues in 2010. According to wikipedia, that was a blue riband time . . . around the 1880's!!! :eek:

 

JPS

[bahrain_not_dubai!]

I think it would have been disappointing if Cunard had tried to make its new ships look like some mythical ocean liner by adding a fake funnel and turn of the century exterior trim like on the Disney ships. It is fine for Disney because make-believe is what Disney is all about. Cunard ships should, as they always have, reflect contemporary maritime design.

 

100% agree. When Cunard built the ocean liners they where not made to look like that they had to look like that to be functional. The QV looks much worse than the HAL vista ships (bar Eurodam) as the other Vista ships have more hull than the QV. The problem with the QV is that their is so little hull and so much superstructure. Yet it is functional cruise ships Thats what theyre meant to be. Thats what they where designed to be. And thats what they are. When Cunard built thier old cruise ships they where built to the most contemporary cruise ship design. They are not meant to be atlantic liners so making them look like one is simply not Cunard.

 

 

The Cunard Princess was built in the 70's and was a contemproary cruise ship for the Caribbean. Built to the best of thier understanding (back then). That is Cunard, making the best of what theyre trying to make. Not wanna be liners.

[Cunard Cruiser]

If they are not meant to be atlantic liners then Cunard should not be marketing them as "oceanliners."

[Highlander0108]

100% agree. When Cunard built the ocean liners they where not made to look like that they had to look like that to be functional. The QV looks much worse than the HAL vista ships (bar Eurodam) as the other Vista ships have more hull than the QV. The problem with the QV is that their is so little hull and so much superstructure. Yet it is functional cruise ships Thats what theyre meant to be. Thats what they where designed to be. And thats what they are. When Cunard built thier old cruise ships they where built to the most contemporary cruise ship design. They are not meant to be atlantic liners so making them look like one is simply not Cunard.

 

 

 

The Cunard Princess was built in the 70's and was a contemproary cruise ship for the Caribbean. Built to the best of thier understanding (back then). That is Cunard, making the best of what theyre trying to make. Not wanna be liners.

 

The HAL ships are the same exact hull forms except for the slight approximately 14 foot stretch from the first Vistas. The illusion is all in the paint job and where the black of the HAL ships transitions to the white superstructure. QV has that god awful fake sheer of the QE2 painted on her.

 

KenM

[guernseyguy]

If they are not meant to be atlantic liners then Cunard should not be marketing them as "oceanliners."

 

There are many more liners than 'Atlantic' liners......'liners' crossed the seven seas....and having disembarked from Queen Victoria crossing the Atlantic in January.....Cunard have a very fine ship.....and a very stable one.....but Cunard have not needed more than one express liner since the mid-1960s.....so why should they build more now?

[TBirdFrank]

The fact that modern ship architecture see a need for penthouses but no fantail with its natural shelter and sternwise views is why I shall slowly but gracefully withdraw from cruising.

 

I don't pay my hard earned to travel on an accountant's dream. I pay it to travel on something that when I disembark and look back, I don't shudder and think - "Godawful lump"

 

A few years ago I strolled off the Marco Polo in lisbon and sitting on the coach to Commerce Square thought - that apartment block is close to the container terminal.

 

The apartment block was a HAL Vista - can't remember the name, and am not really interested either.

 

The blogs from last weeks QV crossing report her as being comfortable and the crossing fun, but seven days to cross, virtually heaving to in any real sea - its not progress in my book even if it does make for more on board spend.

[bahrain_not_dubai!]

The fact that modern ship architecture see a need for penthouses but no fantail with its natural shelter and sternwise views is why I shall slowly but gracefully withdraw from cruising.

 

I don't pay my hard earned to travel on an accountant's dream. I pay it to travel on something that when I disembark and look back, I don't shudder and think - "Godawful lump"

 

A few years ago I strolled off the Marco Polo in lisbon and sitting on the coach to Commerce Square thought - that apartment block is close to the container terminal.

 

The apartment block was a HAL Vista - can't remember the name, and am not really interested either.

 

The blogs from last weeks QV crossing report her as being comfortable and the crossing fun, but seven days to cross, virtually heaving to in any real sea - its not progress in my book even if it does make for more on board spend.

 

TBird, it is ashame you are thinking about leaving cruising. I also have one question, in your opinion is the QM2 a apartment block? Because unfortunatly as heartbreaking as it is to see the ''real'' ships slowly but surely dissapear, the new ships are the new desings and one has to live with that. Those new vessels are not designed to cross the Atlantic just like a Car Ferry is not designed to cruise. They cannot do this as they where never meant too. It is a shame that ocean liners are no longer populer but passenger shipping is now much more profitable in the areas of cruising. The world works by profit. The old transatlantic liners where, I am afraid to say, not works of charity but where designed to the best of their understanding at the time of building the best design to make more money. It is just as we advance our accountants find new ways ontop of the old.

 

TBird, if you do not want to be 'nickled and dimed' on a cruise ship or be on a ship designed only for providing luxury I reccomend you try one of the luxury lines (bar Crystal).

 

It is an unfortunate truth that ships where always, and will always will be built for a return profit. It is simply that as we advance more we come up with more ways to come up with that profit.

[TBirdFrank]

The QM2 is an apartment block first and foremost, built on a proper liner hull but with a decent fantail stern that just saves her from being as bad as most new builds.

 

I always remember swinging in from the north above Southampton and seeing her at the berth for the first time - ugly ugly ugly - and so she always will be.

 

My immediate impression when standing on the observation wing below the bridge and looking back over the balconies was just like looking at rows of battery hens - its not my idea of ambience.

 

Her service level is adequate, but nothing special - certainly not as good as QE2 and her public rooms just too big to be intimate.

 

Six out of ten in my book

[ovccruiser]

The QM2 is an apartment block first and foremost, built on a proper liner hull but with a decent fantail stern that just saves her from being as bad as most new builds.

 

I always remember swinging in from the north above Southampton and seeing her at the berth for the first time - ugly ugly ugly - and so she always will be.

 

My immediate impression when standing on the observation wing below the bridge and looking back over the balconies was just like looking at rows of battery hens - its not my idea of ambience.

 

Her service level is adequate, but nothing special - certainly not as good as QE2 and her public rooms just too big to be intimate.

 

Six out of ten in my book

 

I guess you can't please all the people all the time, I think the QM2 is a wonderful liner and would give a much higher score than 6/10, nearer 9.5/10, and I still cant see why people still compare a 1960's ship with the current ships. In the 1960's there was very much a class seperation onboard and steerage were not allowed anywhere near 1st, much more than there is today. I can walk along corridors of QG and PG, although I am not allowed in their dinning room, I can look through the windows:D:D. I really don't see how anyone can compare QE2 to QM2, it is like comparing a 1967 Rolls against a 2009 Rolls, I know which I would prefer

[TBirdFrank]

Have you seen a 2009 Roller? - looks like something out of the Lego factory!

 

The same is true of a QE2 - QM2 aesthetic comparison

 

The sixties T series and the QE2 have grace and style that will always show through.

 

The Volkswagen Roller and QM2 are visually simply monuments to excess - sorry - but the king has no clothes and I am prepared to say it

[ovccruiser]

Have you seen a 2009 Roller? - looks like something out of the Lego factory!

 

The same is true of a QE2 - QM2 aesthetic comparison

 

The sixties T series and the QE2 have grace and style that will always show through.

 

The Volkswagen Roller and QM2 are visually simply monuments to excess - sorry - but the king has no clothes and I am prepared to say it

 

Maybe a Rolls was the wrong comparison, how about a 1967 Ford Cortina and a 2009 Mondeo:D:D and as regards the king not having any clothes, I always regard Queens in the old fashioned sense as females, and many females look better without clothes:D

[TBirdFrank]

The magnificent 1600E was a 1967 design - tight, sporty - would show a Mondeo some class!

 

No argument on the rest

[Highlander0108]

Have you seen a 2009 Roller? - looks like something out of the Lego factory!

 

The same is true of a QE2 - QM2 aesthetic comparison

 

The sixties T series and the QE2 have grace and style that will always show through.

 

The Volkswagen Roller and QM2 are visually simply monuments to excess - sorry - but the king has no clothes and I am prepared to say it

 

Hi Frank,

 

Correct me, but I thought BMW wrestled the Rolls nameplate from VW in the buyout and VW ended up with the Bentley nameplate and BMW got Rolls and severely uglied it up. I love my VW's, especially my current GTi and find that Rolls revolting in excess. :eek:

 

I too have always had a hard time with the look of QM2. I remember how disappointed I was to see her rendering for the first time. From certain angles, she is not very attractive, unlike our beloved QE2, which there was not a bad angle to be found in viewing and photographing. :D On the otherhand, I cannot wait to experience her and will take the advice not to compare. Not sure how that will be possible, though.

 

KenM

[x-press]

Hi Frank,

 

I too have always had a hard time with the look of QM2. I remember how disappointed I was to see her rendering for the first time. From certain angles, she is not very attractive, unlike our beloved QE2, which there was not a bad angle to be found in viewing and photographing.

KenM

 

I like the look of QM2, overall, but I agree that she does have some "bad angles." I guess I just find it refreshing that Cunard/Carnival/Whoever they are TRIED to make QM2 look graceful/symetrical, and undoubtedly made her faster than any other large passenger ship.

 

I personally think QE2, while more stylish and graceful overall than any ship out there today (QM2 included), looked a bit "clunky" in the forward superstructure compared to her predecessors and, personally, QM2. That curved, symetrical bridge screen looks great, I think.

 

I know, blasphemy . . . I'll miss her, too.