The project involves adding a 102 ft. extension in the mid-section of the ship, and extending the fore and aft sections on deck 8. This work will increase the amount of premium accommodation by providing more cabins and suites with balconies and will increase the capacity of the ship from 727 to 977 (an additional 250 passengers). Extra public space includes a bar designed on the concept of a British pub.

In addition to further balcony suites, the new deck 8 space will accommodate a new restaurant along with an Observatory Lounge similar to those found on other Fred. Olsen ships. There will also be plenty of extra deck space, and a second swimming pool which will also have an area for children to play safely.

Mike Rodwell, Managing Director for Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines, said: "This project to lengthen Braemar has been on the drawing board for several months, and I am delighted that we are now able to announce it will be going ahead. There will be no disruption to schedules as we had pencilled in this period in our 2008 itinerary planning in anticipation that this work would be carried out." He continued: "Fred. Olsen intends to maintain its strong position in the UK cruise market and this additional capacity will allow us to grow our market in keeping with the increasing demand for cruise holidays."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
I appreciate that few cruisetalkers share my opinion: but I do find it a little sad when a company which specializes in small ships announces that they are lengthening two of them!

---

Both Black Watch and Boudicca were stretched BEFORE Fred Olsen bought them.

FOCL are stretching Balmoral before putting her into service, and have decided to stretch Braemar.

So the only UNstretched Olsen ship will be Black Prince.

Which is unlikely to remain in service for much longer anyway.

And in any case, even in their stretched forms, Black Watch, Boudicca, Balmoral and Braemar are still small compared to the ships being built and operated today by Carnival and RCI.

This is not the case with the Braemer and Balmoral, the show lounge will not be getting bigger, the reception will be the same size etc. and they were built specifically to accommodate a certain number of pax, also the style of crusing on FOCL is very traditional, it almost dictates the flow of pax from one area to another, for instance after dinner it is showtime etc. More people will mean less seats available etc. and thus a poorer experience. In this regard Malcolm is correct. The NCL twins were good examples of high density ships becoming even more so with a corresponding drop in the amount of usable space at specific times for specific cruise activities. One ship that seems to have avoided this is RCI's Enchantment OTS, already a big ship with large spaces, extra seats were added in the theatre etc. and thus it seems that the project has succeeded, it is my understanding that other Vision class ships do not lend themselves as much especially the Legend and Splendour.

So in respect of the 2 newer FOCL ships it strikes me that this is being done purely for profit purposes (nothing wrong with that of course) but this time at the detriment of the service and experience. AND not getting rid of the horrid ghastly gym extension above the bridge not only compounds the mistake of putting it there in the first place but damns FOCL further as they are putting it and the profit factor before good taste. Their new ship will not only be their biggest - it will be their uglyist.

Sadly, the awful gym will not be removed - didn't they annouce that this will be done?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pascal:
I wonder something about these lenghtenings. Will the ship be able to sail at the same speed ? A lenghtened ship would be heavier than before... It may require extra power to propel her. Some hints about this ?

---

Sometimes, provided the new hotel energy requirement will not reduce the initial power affected to propulsion and the drought does not change, this is the exact contrary that occurs.
Due to a then more favorable lenght/width ratio (so the hull's Froude number changes too), the new speed is higher (usually1 to 2 knots) than the old one, even if it may take a bit more time to reach the previous max speed and of course even more the new one.
Not always the case but the new fuel consumption may be better than the old one at a given speed too.

[ 07-06-2007: Message edited by: Vaccaro ]

Also, eventually they will be getting rid of the Black Prince - perhaps lengthening existing ships (with new cabins and all) will help keep the revenue stable?

[ 07-06-2007: Message edited by: Rex ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rex:
But she's so narrow - won't lengthening her affect her stability?

[ 07-06-2007: Message edited by: Rex ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:
[QB]

So in respect of the 2 newer FOCL ships it strikes me that this is being done purely for profit purposes (nothing wrong with that of course) but this time at the detriment of the service and experience. AND not getting rid of the horrid ghastly gym extension above the bridge not only compounds the mistake of putting it there in the first place but damns FOCL further as they are putting it and the profit factor before good taste. Their new ship will not only be their biggest - it will be their uglyist.

[QB]

---

Mike,

it's quite easy to say these things from the sidelines without knowing exactly what is being done in far as stretching the ships and knowledge of added public spaces is little grey blocks on a deck plan.

With the Balmoral stretch, they are adding two dining rooms AND a rather large night club. Adding the Coral Club on Lido Deck aft, and another large lounge space (Morning Light Lounge) mid-sips on the Lounge Deck. They will absorb a large portion of guests, aleviating strain on the showroom.

As built, the Neptune Lounge is the primary evening space on the ship with the Casino and the adjacent Monte Carlo Court serving as the secondary.

In theory, the addition of the new lounge spaces is greater than the added capacity and the ship will have a better flow and the ship should feel less crowded.

As for the gym and spa, the removal was planned prior to the stretch but that space must now be allocated for the new night club. And while many pundits and purisits damn that space for changing the ship's profile, it's a far superior space to the former gym and spa which had no views.

Contrary to the demographics here in this little online forum, most people pay precious little attention to how it has affected the ship's profile AND the greater number of passengers will spend exponentially more time in the gym and spa than they will in the observation lounge during daylight hours.

Form must follow function and had FOCL still decided to remove it during the stretch, far more people would be grousing about a lack of entertainment or public spaces.

FOCL doesn't pay their bills or remain profitable because they operate ships with exterior profiles that online ship enthusiasts find pleasing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:

If they want bigger ships - fine, don't bugger up 2 relatively good ones (bar the lump) - build them. With their deep pockets they have no excuse, there are plenty of build slots available in the Far East who build very good ships.

---

Easier said than done! It's well known that FOCL has newbuild ambitions, but it can easily take 24-36 months just to finalize a design concept BEFORE you tender it out to yards for bidding.

Don't forget, for FOCL to access those deep pockets, they have to be able to produce and show subbstantial profits and sustainable growth. For the time being, the only way to do that is through organic growth - adding capacity to and through existing tonnage.

FOCL is at a pivotal stage where they are morphing from a small, niche player into a major player. They've managed to acquire first-rate second-hand tonnage thus far, but the prospects for further acquisitions are dim at this point. Thus, the very wise and conservative approach as they build up towards ordering newly-built ships, is to stretch the Balmoral and Braemar.

It also helps them accomplish a very critical second component and that is to transition from a fleet centered on 500-800 pax ships, to one that is centered on operating 900-1400 pax ships.

When FOCL orders new ships, they won't be smaller than 1200 pax, more likely 1300-1500, and they won't be built in the Far East.

The Far East builds good ferries, but are otherwise highly inexperienced in building cruise vessels (which are much more complex) for that sector. Certainly, the Japanese built the Crystal Harmony - but Crystal never returned to build another ship in Japan. And Princess has the Diamond and Sapphire built there as well - but have not returned. That speaks volumes to the experience the owners had in building ships there.

FOCL will likely pull the trigger on a newbuild order in the 3rd or 4th quarter of 2008 for delivery in 2012 and 2013 - possibly earlier delivery dates if they can get a yard to build the hulls and have them finished out at Lloyd Werft a la Norwegian Sky and Sun.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
I appreciate that few cruisetalkers share my opinion: but I do find it a little sad when a company which specializes in small ships announces that they are lengthening two of them!

Even when they add an extra public room or two, surely the increased passenger numbers will always put pressure on those rooms that remain un-modified. For example, people tell me than Dreamward became more crowded when she became Norwegian dream.

---

Malcolm,

a company that remains stagnant and does not grow is one that withers and dies. Personally and professionally, I have tremendous faith that FOCL and their designers will do a great job with stretching the ships. In fact, as much as I love the ex-Crown Odyssey, I feel that she will be a much better ship once stretched - just as the Westerdam nee-Homeric was a far superior ship post-stretching.

As for the Dream and Wind, I also found them nicer post-stretch and felt they had a better flow once they were enlarged.

You make some interesting points. I am still concerned however that in this instance the stretch may not be in best interests of the pax. Having only done 1 FO cruise in my time (and only because it seemed I was the youngest by far on board but the product was very good by and large) I was very struck by how the pax use the ship, it is very regimented but by the pax themselves, show time for instance I found the rest of the ship to be virtually empty, after the show many then went to bed, the gym was perhaps the most underutlised gym I have ever seen. So the key rooms on board need to be large enough to seat everyone as the majority do use it that way, this cannot now be done and FO do not alternative shows etc on offer - and if they had to introduce them it puts their costs up. The pax are VERY traditional and they expect FO to deliver them just that - they will not be impressed by not being able to get their seat in the theatre or attend the cocktail party without queuing to shake the captains hand for half an hour and they will expect to sit when the get past him NOT stand, fine they add some extra rooms and no doubt they will be used but it is the key main lounges that these pax will not all be able to use at the same time that I feel will impact the experience. I grant you and agree with you on the financial aspects of growth etc. all right but that is not my point.

The Princess Japanese builds I have been told by officers who have worked them are at least as good as the Italian builds in terms of quality, I believe the main issues against building them is price as Carnival get various incentives to keep building at Fincantieri and that it takes longer to build a ship there at present. However the quality of the finished product would seem to be as good, and the extra cost to FO would probaly not be as significant and becuase they could get a building slot quicker the extra build time would not be as problematic.

In this case it is as Malcolm says a shame that 2 ships (bar the gym lump issue) that are well suited to the brand values of the line may while becoming more profitable also become less suited/true to those same brand values that has made them what they are.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:
Tim
[...]The pax are VERY traditional and they expect FO to deliver them just that - they will not be impressed by not being able to get their seat in the theatre or attend the cocktail party without queuing to shake the captains hand for half an hour and they will expect to sit when the get past him NOT stand, [....]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tim in 'Lauderdale:
Personally and professionally, I have tremendous faith that FOCL and their designers will do a great job with stretching the ships.

---

Tim you are probably right. My comments were not based on 'business sense', just emotion!

I like having a choice of small ships and big ships. Here in the UK we are very lucky that we have many 20-30K ships on offer and next year more ships in the 90-160k range visiting our shores.

I just find it a little sad when a small ship is made bigger, even if it's only by 5k. It's a bit like having a vintage car and then modifying it, to me.

Of course as was said earlier by Greybeard the stretched Olsen ships will still be small compared to most other lines.

It is interesting how most lines now feel that they can offer an upscale, intimate and personal experience on a increasingly bigger scale. The Celebrity and Seaborne newbuilds particularly springs to mind.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage: Tim you are probably right. My comments were not based on 'business sense', just emotion! I like having a choice of small ships and big ships.

---

Malcolm,
I think most of here on CT (and Liner's List to an even greater extent) make comments based on our emotional attachment to ships. Surely most of us know the economic realities of running a successful cruise line, but it doesn't mean we have to embrace every decision made by them.

We are a different breed here on CT. We are not the casual cruiser that wouldn't know the difference between CARNIVAL PRIDE and QM2. Most of us take cruises not just because we like the vacation concept of a cruise, but because we love and embrace ships ..... their technology; how they look; how fast they go; their dimensions, etc., etc. That is what makes us different than the average cruiser.

So while we must accept the business realities of operating a cruise line, I hope we all continue to express our likes and dislikes with the decisions made. We are a small group, but we have a loud voice!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
[...]

It is interesting how most lines now feel that they can offer an upscale, intimate and personal experience on a increasingly bigger scale. The Celebrity and Seaborne newbuilds particularly springs to mind.

Maybe they can? Maybe they can’t?

---

This is not new. 'Upscale' cruise ships of the past were in this size range - the SAL ships, the NAL ships, the Royal Viking ships, the Europa(s) - and this has not been discontinued: Crystal, the larger Silverseas ships or Regent Seven Seas come to my mind.
No need to worry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pascal:
I wonder something about these lenghtenings. Will the ship be able to sail at the same speed ? A lenghtened ship would be heavier than before... It may require extra power to propel her. Some hints about this ?

---