quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:
And with all that said, that is why the restoration of the SSUS will never happen. With none of any of her interiors remaining other than completely bare bulkheads, ceilings, and floors, and a complete hull and outter deck blasting to bare metal required, the cost to refit even a usuable portion of her to a respectable facsimile of her former self would be staggering. If it took $300 million to restore the Rotterdam V, why would any investor want to sink a billion dollars into a project that would take 5 years or more to complete and is guaranteed to lose money? 

The SSUS has been in lay up for 40 years. Maybe the money would be better spent building a 'brick and mortar' museum, gathering as many of her original furnishings and fittings from around the United States into a single location, and only refurbishing her outter shell as a 'display'. Or remove and restore maybe a portion of the ships hull structure as was done with the Conte Biancamano. If the outter shell is beyond that, remove her forward funnel and make it the centerpeice of a SSUS museum courtyard.  

---

I agree with you almost completly.

But asking myself is the ship a special museum worthy. Apart fore here technical aspect the ship herself as passenger liner was not that successful here interiors where rather spartan/metallic compared with here fleet mate America and vessels of the competition. Maybe a part of a museum dedicated to US passenger shipping or shipping in general.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:
And with all that said, that is why the restoration of the SSUS will never happen. With none of any of her interiors remaining other than completely bare bulkheads, ceilings, and floors, and a complete hull and outter deck blasting to bare metal required, the cost to refit even a usuable portion of her to a respectable facsimile of her former self would be staggering. If it took $300 million to restore the Rotterdam V, why would any investor want to sink a billion dollars into a project that would take 5 years or more to complete and is guaranteed to lose money? 

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thad:
Well the interesting thing about the US is that as there are no interiors to save, and no asbestos to remove, a renovation into a hotel would actually be somewhat cheaper. One would not be constrained with replicating anything, but could build out the empty shell into a mid century modern hotel with "relative" ease. What would be costly is the fact that there are very few straight or plumb surfaces on the ship, which would make construction a bit more challenging. But she could be rebuilt as a hotel, and towed to NYC, which might be the only location that her "building" costs could be easily absorbed by high room rates and a prime location on the Hudson.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cunardcoll:
Does anyone know where Mona Lisa is at the moment ??

Jochen

---

Last time I saw her on a webcam she was in Norway.

Website
http://lord-nelson-seereisen.de/index.php?mos_change_template=monalisa&Itemid=244

Current Itinerary (takes a moment to load)
http://lord-nelson-seereisen.de/templates/monalisa/images/ML2627.pdf

20.06.2010 Reykjavik / Island  07:30 17:30
21.06.2010 Akureyri / Island  15:00 20:00
22.06.2010 Polarkreisüberquerung
23.06.2010 Kreuzen im Nordpolarmeer
24.06.2010 Ny Alesund / Spitzbergen  09:00 13:00
Königs ord / Spitzbergen Passage
Magdalenen ord / Spitzbergen Passage
25.06.2010 Longyearbyen / Spitzbergen 08:00 12:00
26.06.2010 Honningsvag ( Nordkap) 22:00
27.06.2010 Honningsvag ( Nordkap) 01:00
28.06.2010 Erholung auf See
29.06.2010 Vik / Sogne ord /** 09:00 10:00
Flam / Aurland ord  14:00 20:00
30.06.2010 Bergen / Norwegen 08:00 22:00
01.07.2010 Stavanger / Norwegen 07:00 11:30
02.07.2010 Bremerhaven 11:00

[ 06-20-2010: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

Off course Rotterdam and Queen Mary are already saved but
I think QE2, Kungsholm, Saga Rose or Ruby, The Aegean Pearl (former Southward) or cunard Countess, Oceanic

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cunardcoll:
[...]

I think QE2, Kungsholm, Saga Rose or Ruby, The Aegean Pearl (former Southward) or cunard Countess, Oceanic

Any comment.

---

Of that list maybe Kungsholm or Saga Rose would be worth to be kept around but I am afraid that's also far too late now. QE2 and Oceanic are not in the same league (at least not anymore) - not much (if anything) there to be remotely interesting enough for as a static attraction (beside maybe Oceanic's steam power plant). Cunard Countess on the other hand is a ship that certainly should not be kept longer than necessary .

[ 06-21-2010: Message edited by: Ernst ]

Saga Ruby is a very pretty ship but again what is unique, historic or exceptional about her ?

QE2 - well she is probably too big to be economically viable.

Oceanic and Southward - again why ?

quote:

---

Saga Ruby is a very pretty ship but again what is unique, historic or exceptional about her ?

---

By the way, she has been re-flagged in Malta and has some corrosion problems on ballast and tanks.

She was re-flagged the day of the dead-line asked by DNV to repair the corrosion

The finding on the temporary repairs on the air vent pipe of no.5 DB / Side Ballast Tank (S) and corrosion pitting iwo the plate between no.2 DB ballast tank (P) and no.2 HFO deep tank (P) is to be dealt with. Extension on due date may be given if approval from DNV Head Office is given..

Discovered: 2010-03-14
Due to be repaired and approved: 2010-06-14

If they have located a much more severe corrosion pitting, it could be her last year and the end of Solas 2010's project to upgrade her.

quote:

---

All RIP.

---

Noting to add, perfect abstract in three letters. Don't believe that QM is saved, it's just now a peace of scrap. Wait a little bit more to see if the SS Rotterdam is a real success or a temporary curiosity.

A cruise ship is designed to cruise, not to be a “floating something.” Even if the quality, the respect of history is there … It has always been a bottomless hole, with a good management, with a good place, with low fees in term of docking. Because the amount of money given as static exhibition (in any form) is far different than the money with cruise passengers. And the fees are almost the same, even if they are located in others levels (no propulsion costs).

[ 06-21-2010: Message edited by: LenKinap ]

quote:

---

Noting to add, perfect abstract in three letters. Don't believe that QM is saved, it's just now a peace of scrap. Wait a little bit more to see if the SS Rotterdam is a real success or a temporary curiosity.

A cruise ship is designed to cruise, not to be a “floating something.” Even if the quality, the respect of history is there … It has always been a bottomless hole, with a good management, with a good place, with low fees in term of docking. Because the amount of money given as static exhibition (in any form) is far different than the money with cruise passengers. And the fees are almost the same, even if they are located in others levels (no propulsion costs).

---

It's absolutely true. And as any project has never been financially equilibrated in long term, the political authorities of every cities involved in a static exhibition project of of former cruiser, liner (except Rotterdam, we will see the result in 2015) are careful.

If the preservations/salvation of a cruise ship can have some interest for some of the citizens, authorities have to work for a majority of them. And they can not give a piece of scrap into the heritage to next generation. Preservation is something important, as patrimony or a part of our history. But it has a cost and we have to realize that the cost of a cruiser/passengers ship permanently berthed has an heavy cost, very heavy.

A preservation is not only to put a good coat of paint and a refurbishment. There is also others fees, including structural fees. And they are very expensive, the salt action is almost similar with a seagoing cruise ship and a "floating berthed something".

By the way, Mona Lisa has been put onto the market a few days ago. She is on maritime-digital lister as sale # S40750033

She is not listed for the moment "for scrap" but she is in the hands of JM-Marine Consultancy & Trading, India. For an undisclosed price...

Cruise 1000pax 397cabins
Blt 1966 UK
----------------------------------------

Blt 1966 UK
LR SS 02/2006
994 Pass 397 Cabins
4 Decks 5,572Dwt
Grt/Nrt 28,891/11,005
L 201.23m B 26.52m Dft 8.560m
M/E 2 x Gotaverken Goteborg,
Gotaverken(760/1500VGS9) 25,202/bhp
Speed 21.5kts Facilities 3 Lounges/4 Bars
Gens 5/5,000kw
Prop 2 Screws 1 Thruster
10 Bulkheads

-detls w.o.g., availability subj to free / unsold-

LDT is 17,961t. The vsl is non-solas compliant

quote:

---

Originally posted by LenKinap:
By the way,  Mona Lisa has been put onto the market a few days ago. She is on maritime-digital lister as sale # S40750033

She is not listed for the moment "for scrap" but she is in the hands of JM-Marine Consultancy & Trading, India. For an undisclosed price...

The vsl is non-solas compliant

---

But I was a little bit more optimistic for the Mona Lisa, because the project was studied a long time before her retirement, with a real business team and a clever and polite man (not like R. Goossens to be clear) , with an studied business plan. And you have the result, don't blame politicians: they are realistic.

So I'm a little bit disappointed that even with a good plan, it's impossible to preserve a vessel without engaging a lot of public money and put the financial results on the shoulders of the future generations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by thundergod:
There is new hope to Kungsholm. [...]

---

It would be really nice to see her restored and preserved. However,....

quote:

---

Originally posted by LenKinap:
To be honest, I am always skeptical when I hear about a project to preserve a old vessel as static exhibition. [...]

---

..I have to agree with LenKinap - most static vessels sadly become a horrible mess. Here one of many examples:

Remains of DS Johann Strauss

[ 07-25-2010: Message edited by: Ernst ]