[ 12-09-2005: Message edited by: BigUFan ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BigUFan:
Is that for certain? Does anyone think she could wind up a sister to QM2?

---

It has been confirmed through various sources she will just be a derivative of the HAL Vista Class. The changes you can expect are a strengthened hull, different interior layout and decor, and slightly longer. On the exterior, I don't expect her to look much different then what we have already seen with the Vista Class.

In a way, I'm glad she is not a sister to QM2. I think one QM2 is enough and I prefer her to stay as something unique.

I don't think QM2 has paid for herself yet by any means. She was an expensive ship and it will take years for that to happen.

Ever since the introduction of QM2 and now QV - it's obvious they're playing on what used to be - but what no longer is - it's just a brand.

Sad day in the industry - but it is what it is. For those of us that truely LOVE the ocean Liners (that ended w/ QE2) I doubt we'll see anything like it in the future.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jekyll:
I have to say - that I have lost ALL interest in the CUNARD of today. I find this a difficult comment to make as ever since I was a teenager - CUNARD was "IT".

Ever since the introduction of QM2 and now QV - it's obvious they're playing on what used to be - but what no longer is - it's just a brand.

Sad day in the industry - but it is what it is. For those of us that truely LOVE the ocean Liners (that ended w/ QE2) I doubt we'll see anything like it in the future.

Some of us need to move and find other niches to think about - while never forgetting that once was will never come back

---

I think a LOT of us here wished the Queen Victoria would have not been built off of an existing hull design but as a one-of-a-kind liner, a monument to her namesake, something to be proud of. Sad to say that Carnival Corp. thinks it is not economically viable to do so when they can just crank out another Grand-class, Vista-Class, or Conquest-class hull, paint it a different color and slap a defining trademark funnel on it.

When the Queen Victoria is built and the media and public say 'THAT's IT?, then someone at Carnival Corp. will say "Maybe we should have listened to those crazy (wonderful) people over at CruiseTalk"...

Like you said...'Sad day in the industry - but it is what it is'.

Remember the past, look towards the future, but honor that which came before you.

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

Ocean Travel is no longer important. There are no longer ships of state. However, having a vacation afloat has never been so popular. The indusrt has dramatically changed.

Sad day in the industry - but it is what it is. For those of us that truly LOVE the ocean Liners (that ended w/ QE2) I doubt we'll see anything like it in the future.

Personally I think it ended with the Queen Mary 1.

Some of us need to move and find other niches to think about - while never forgetting that once was will never come back.

Yes, ‘history is a thing of the past’. But today’s cars are tomorrow’s vintage cars, in the same was as many of today’s ship will be regarded as classics, one day.

Many of the people who lived at Southampton in the days of the great liners, walked past them without giving them a second glace. They were the norm, not necessarily objects to drawl over, they were state of the art transport. In many cases they were not considered as attractive as there predecessors.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:
If you want to travel on an old ship, in pristine near to original condition...you just have to book a cruise on the Sea Cloud.

---

What would you say is the oldest liner (or cruise ship) still in service today, that is in the very best condition, that might still reflect the days of the grand old ocean liners of days gone by? Are there any besides the sailing vessel Sea Cloud?

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:
What would you say is the oldest liner (or cruise ship) still in service today, that is in the very best condition, that might still reflect the days of the grand old ocean liners of days gone by?

---

A complex question!

I though the SS Norway felt more like an 'Ocean Liner' than most other ships inc. QE2, simply because she was originally an 'Ocean Liner', a ship of state. the SS France. Even her refit to become the SS Norway 'cruise ship' did not completely hide her pedigree.

However, she was not in perfect condition or full of the brass and wood that you might expect to find in an Ocean Liner. She's also no longer in service.

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:

What would you say is the oldest liner (or cruise ship) still in service today, that is in the very best condition, that might still reflect the days of the grand old ocean liners of days gone by? Are there any besides the sailing vessel Sea Cloud?

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

---

IMO there are sadly no 'big passenger ships' left today which 'reflect' the 'era of the grand ocean liners'. There are nevertheless alternatives.

The Sea Cloud is of course a yacht but as an old, proper ship she has many aspects of an 'old ocean liner' -> Even without her the Sea Cloud is a fantastic ship - a 'must' for eveyone interested in ships. (not only sailing vessels!)

To see what I mean, look at these pictures of her promenade deck:

..or her engine telegraph:
(still in use - the bridge is open to passengers)

...or her engine room:
(passengers can of course visit the engine room)

See this link to learn more about the history of the Sea Cloud...

... the 'public rooms'....

...and the cabins.

My awnser to the question which is the oldest cruise ship in service is the Juno on the Göta Canal in Sweden. 131 years old she is in principle an ocean going vessel, tough very small.

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: Ernst ]

[ 12-11-2005: Message edited by: Ernst ]

quote:

---

dmwnc1 wrote:
When the Queen Victoria is built and the media and public say 'THAT's IT?, then someone at Carnival Corp. will say "Maybe we should have listened to those crazy (wonderful) people over at CruiseTalk"...

---

Crazy and wonderful we are, I agree, but we are only a handful and we are no Arisons, Fains, Veitchs or Apontes.

******

quote:

---

Originally posted by br1ghtonbo1:
If you think about it, Carnival must have realised that the QV1 didn't fit Cunard. Therefore surely Carnival wouldn't make the same mistake again by copying the Arcadia! And also, we should be praising Carnival for the QM2, because if it wasn't for Carnival, we wouldn't have QM2!
br1ghtonbo1

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matts:
I believe its more a case of longevity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
...was there not talk of the QV's home port being in the Med?

We may not see so many Southampton depatures, let alone Transatlantic ones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

I think is was Gerry (who worked on the QM2 project) that said that a cruise ship on regular and/or winter crossings would risk serious structural damage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by desirod7:
Malcolm is correct here. The Granduer of the Seas had major cracks in the superstructure after hurricane George.

---

...like QE2 and other 'liners' have been damage in storms.

quote:

---

Originally posted by desirod7:
The Regatta took a beating during my hurricane crossing. She is a 600' ship. SSLewis told me the 600' ships suffer less storm damage than the 1000'ers since they ride with the waves rather than plow through.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm.
But today’s cars are tomorrow’s vintage cars,...

---

Actually, the likelihood is that you won't see a single one of today's cars on the road in 20 years. The fact that vast amounts of a car's system today are controlled by computers implies that sooner, rather than later, manufacturing of the electronic components used in today's cars will be abandoned due to the parts' obsolescence; it might not be viewed as economically feasible. Those parts would have to be replaced by an equivalent, if anything, that might be backward compatible. I don't know if such design considerations are made regarding car electronics. On top of that, the failure rate of electronic components seems to be far greater than that of their mechanical ancestors, so I can't see people holding onto that new 2005 Nissan 350Z past, say, 2020. In fact, I'll be surprised if I see many past 2015. So the most you might get out of a new car these days might be 15 years. I seriously doubt we'll ever see any of these actually becoming "antiques" of 30 or 40 years of age.

Not to change the subject, mind you.

It's almost kind of a shame that QM2 might be a one-off, but let's face it, she's huge, and Cunard has a history of running one-offs. Even Mauretania and Lusitania were considered only "near-sisters," and QE1 and QM1 were not sisters as well, although their appearances were similar save for the number of funnels.

[ 01-03-2006: Message edited by: BigUFan ]

Neverhtless, I believe that the public has some preconceptions about 'electronic devices' or 'computers'. Actually they are extremly reliable and much easier to mantain. (often you just replace them - which is easy to do but strange for some people)

The same goes for computer manufactures, why make a PC that is reliable for 20 years, technology development goes in such a fast rate that a new PC is antiquated within a year (that does not mean you can’t use it for longer then 1 year)

Another good example are carpets, years back you invested in good carpets that lasted a lifetime. These days carpets won’t last even 5 years before showing wear marks, but then again many people toss out their carpets well before that period to accommodate the latest fashion trends.

the days of mass consumption society aren’t over and will only grow in the future (especially now that low wages countries are producing like mad man)

Onno

[ 01-03-2006: Message edited by: Onno ]