But your question does remind me of that Titanic 2 project that was supposed to enter service in 2012 (the mystical 100 years celebration of her launch and demise) Does anyone know something, because I haven’t heard anything for several years now. Was that project just a an idea that passed or is/was it for real?

Just suppose If QM2 is turning out to be a major success, then maybe Carnival will resurrect the White Star Line and build a trio of flouting palaces.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DAMBROSI:
Well, all I can say is. I think we have enough tonnage out there.

---

Will it be built - I doubt it (and frankly) sailing around South America on a barge hull scares me...

But if it is - from a size angle - this would rival QM2.

But being a "Community at Sea" and not a liner/cruise ship...is it really a rival..

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keitaro:
I would not be surprised if RCI steps up.

---

I doubt it. I don't think RCI is ready to bet the farm on such a venture.

Plus, I don't know how much more they have to bet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ðraikar:
I think its only natural to build a rival to QM2. I also think P&O could use more tonnage so perhaps they could build one too, maybe a twin to QM2 ???

---

That wouldn't be a rival, it's the same comapny ! Plus the UK strategy of Carnival is centered on Cunard being "higher up" than P&O. That's how they got past the EU and various other anti-trust/anti-monopoly agencies.

From past ships it seem bigger is better and that slogan is coming back, just look how when one ocean liner was built another company quickly put out another that was bigger in the past. I think maybe RCI or there other line like Celebrity could step up and build one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CGT:
Draikar:

Yes, but, there has to be a limit!

---

[ 04-08-2003: Message edited by: Ðraikar ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CGT:
So, what, you think that there is going to be a 200,000 GRT ship? 300,000? At some point, it's just not a ship and not worth it anymore.

CGT

---

Absolutely!! There are already 300,000 ton tankers, and I think cruise ships will reach this point as well, although probably not much larger. There does reach a point where the economy of scale achieved by the larger ship no longer factors into the equation. Once it gets to this point, there is no reason to build a ship any larger. I can't remember the exact tonnage this equates at, but I remember reading something about 250,000 to 300,000 grt. Maybe even a little smaller.

I do think we will see ships break the 200,000 grt sooner rather then later. In fact, it would not surprise me if these ships were being designed as we speak since it usually takes 5+ years to get a new design in the works.... then of course the building process.

There will be larger cruise ships then QM2, but they will not be competitors. QM2 is expensive, with a hull design and speed requirements that are not practical for a cruise ship. She really is being built as an ocean liner, capable of sustaining "line voyages", and in this regard I think she will be unequaled. Building a cruise ship larger though is only a matter of time. It would only take a few adjustments to the current Voyager Class ships to propel them to something larger than 150,000grt. In fact, it would not surprise me if RCI were to build a "mega-Voyager" once the true dimensions of QM2 are unveiled. QM2 is listed as 150,000grt, but I would not be surprised to see her come in at more like 175,000 or ever 180,000grt. Once that happens, competitors can make plans for something larger!

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:
QM2 is listed as 150,000grt, but I would not be surprised to see her come in at more like 175,000 or ever 180,000grt. Once that happens, competitors can make plans for something larger!

---

Hmm... Right now, her official GRT (which is of course an approximation) is 142,200.

CGT

[ 04-08-2003: Message edited by: CGT ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:
Absolutely!! There are already 300,000 ton tankers, and I think cruise ships will reach this point as well, although probably not much larger. There does reach a point where the economy of scale achieved by the larger ship no longer factors into the equation. Once it gets to this point, there is no reason to build a ship any larger. I can't remember the exact tonnage this equates at, but I remember reading something about 250,000 to 300,000 grt. Maybe even a little smaller.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:

I am not quite sure if there is an exact relation dwt/grt? Only rough ideas? 1 GRT = 100cu ft, 1 DWT = 1 long tonne, or 2240lbs laden.
But I have found some examples.
Nissei Maru, 484,442 DWT, 238,517 GRT
Seawise Giant 564,839 DWT then Jahre Viking 260,851 GRT. So a bit less than 50%.
But these tankers wallow with 90+ ft drafts and 13knts or so. I can't imagine something this size being built for passengers. They are 1500' long and one needs a bike to cucle from one end to the other. LOL, can you imagine all pax doing this on a cruise ship?
You could say QM2 relates to a 300,000dwt tanker. Sheesh, equivalent to an ULCC! Universe Ireland was the most famous being the first, a ship I saw regularly. I had better service the bicycle:-p
Pam

---

Oh, I still think cruise ships of 200,000 to 300,000grt can and will be built. Of course they will not have 90 ft drafts or be designed like a tanker, but they will be extremely wide, maybe with two accommodation towers on an aircraft carrier style deck, and offer an immense amount of interior space (which is what the grt measurement is anyway).

The ship (or resort as it may be called) will be the destination, not the ports. A high service speed will not be necessary, and what ports the ship does stop at will be secondary in nature.

With all this talk about big ships, I'm amazed that nobody's yet brought up Kloster's WORLD CITY, né PHOENIX? (Judging by the number of times this has "risen from the dead", the original name would have been more appropriate.) That "thing" was going to be about 250,000 GRT and had first four, later only three hotel towers. Westin later signed up to manage it and they extended the name to the utterly ridiculous WORLD CITY THE WESTIN FLAGSHIP. Last I saw, it was called WORLD CITY THE AMERICAN FLAGSHIP (just as bad). In its initial phase, it was an NCL project (we're talking late 1980s).

Amazingly enough, this "thing" still has a web site (here) with lots of (apparently ancient - undated) press releases and not much else. Apparently, she is supposed to enter service in... Er, she's supposed to enter service about now, according to the site, which predicts that in 1999 (!) they plan to sign a contract. Hmm ...

It also predicts "the first planned use of gas turbines to power a passenger ship", which last I remember, happened in 1977... And probably earlier, if we're not just talking about large passenger ships. And if they forgot FINNJET, they can't have forgotten MILLENNIUM, which has been out for about three years already...

Anyhow, the WORLD CITY or whatever they're calling it at the moment looks even uglier than it did back in the 1980s when Knut Kloster first came up with it! I guess he lost interest in the idea... Instead, I guess, we have Residensea and THE WORLD. (At least THE WORLD is a concise name, though I find it a little boastful.) I imagine he could only scrape up the $$ (or kroner) for a 50,000 tonner, but it had to be crazy, so he dreamed up that one instead .

At any rate, while WORLD CITY appears to be dead, FREEDOM SHIP (a whole different animal - even crazier) is still alive and kicking. I doubt it will ever happen, but it's interesting to see these projects rise and fall.