Repaired in about 1.1/2 hours.....
But am left with the feeling that
ships should be designed so that the elderly passengers in this and adjoining cabins should not have to undertake this hassle........

Repairs at Auckland

Height from water line

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: bmajor ]

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: joe at travelpage ]

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: Johan C ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CGT:
there is a REASON that windows in the hull were traditionally PORTHOLES and NOT PICTURE WINDOWS!!!!!!

---

Aurora designed for mainly sails in Med!!??
So P&O installed too many cabins in the forward section on the F deck.

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: Ocean Liners ]

Glad to see your safe back home bmajor and look forward to seeing a full review sometime

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:
Are you sure this is the 2nd time? It was Oriana that had a freak wave smash 6 windows midships, which the various TV documentaries have forever since portrayed.

Glad to see your safe back home bmajor and look forward to seeing a full review sometime

Pam

---

You are probably right. I have read the investigation report but probably just got the ships names mixed up. The point being, that this is the second time that P&O has had this happen, and Aurora and Oriana are near sisters. Both were designed with large picture windows were in the old days portholes would have been, and both have blown out!

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: CGT ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:
No-one's disputing the fact that it may have to with the larger picture windows as against portholes.
I don't however think it has anything to do with Aurora & Oriana being "near" sisters. The windows smashed are in quite different places.
Vision of the Seas and Horizon are 2 other ships ISTR this has happened to in recent years. On Vision I think it may have even been a porthole? I can't remember the details, and Horizon was a forward facing window.
Pam

---

Okay let me make things pefectly clear:

A)The reason Oriana and Aurora have had this problem is because they have picture windows where portholes ought to be.

B) My mention of them being "near sisters" was NOT stated as a reason the windows broke out. It was stated as a reason that I got the NAMES mixed up. You misundertood what I wrote except for the fact that I got Aurora mixed up with Oriana.

This sentence:

"The point being, that this is the second time that P&O has had this happen, and Aurora and Oriana are near sisters."

...is the confusing sentence, sorry.

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: CGT ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by gohaze:
CGT...on the old liners there were only portholes below the "weatherdeck" allowed, and they All had to have 'Deadlights' fitted.
On the Western Ocean in the winter these were quite often damaged.

....peter

---

Yeah, they didn't have picture windows so low, and no one had picture windows as low as Aurora.

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: CGT ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CGT:

Yeah, they didn't have picture windows so low, and no one had picture windows as low as Aurora.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ocean Liners:
Deuchland has Large Window

---

[ 02-21-2004: Message edited by: Ocean Liners ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CGT:

Okay let me make things pefectly clear:

A)The reason Oriana and Aurora have had this problem is because they have picture windows where portholes ought to be.

---

Many feel the same circumstances are present on QM2, and to an even greater degree. Rather then just having cabin windows close to the water line, QM2 has large lounge windows. It will be interesting to see how well they hold out when QM2 really hits rough weather.

BTW, I read the report on ORIANA and the problem was determined to be how the window was fitted into the frame. It was installed improperly or too small for the frame if I remember correctly.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

Many feel the same circumstances are present on QM2, and to an even greater degree. Rather then just having cabin windows close to the water line, QM2 has large lounge windows. It will be interesting to see how well they hold out when QM2 really hits rough weather.

BTW, I read the report on ORIANA and the problem was determined to be how the window was fitted into the frame. It was installed improperly or too small for the frame if I remember correctly.

Ernie

---

Yes I agree with you about QM2, the only difference being that QM2's are so much higher in general. Doesn't mean she couldn't have problems though, nessecarily.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Green:
Oh Dear! More and more I think of my QM2 Cat. C3 Guarantee on Deck 4 - do I have a porthole or a window?...the cost of which cannot be considered 'cheap'!

Cunard is being very cagey about discriptions of this class of cabin and I've not yet found a picture. My balance payment is not due until July - can anyone shed some BRIGHT light on this? P-L-E-A-S-E

---

All category C3's have a single picture window. They are also larger then the standard 194 sq feet cabins as they incorporate the balcony space into the interior of the cabin. The closer to midship, the better and larger.

If you get upgraded to C2 or C1 you stand the chance of getting a cabin with just a single porthole. Some of C2's and C1's have a single picture window, and some have a single porthole. You are better off picking an actual cabin in these categories rather then a guarantee if you are concerned about getting a cabin with just a porthole. It's also unlikely you will get upgraded to a balcony if that is your hope. Cunard is not very generous (for the most part) when it comes to upgrades.

If you need information on a specific cabin let me know.