Jump to content

SS. Stockholm 60 years and still sailing. Why not QE2


Cunard Cruiser

Recommended Posts

The Stockholm (the ship that collied with thr Andrea Doria) is still in opreation as sails as the Athena for Classic International Cruises. She is considered the oldest operating cruise ship in the world, almost 60 years since her launch!!

 

QE2 is 20 years younger. Why couldn't Cunard, who is all about marketing is history, refit QE2? It just a shame to see a "real" British liner, built in the UK with the "real Cunard" company be pushed aside for some "liner want-to-be (aka QV and soon to be QE2."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stockholm (the ship that collied with thr Andrea Doria) is still in opreation as sails as the Athena for Classic International Cruises. She is considered the oldest operating cruise ship in the world, almost 60 years since her launch!!

 

QE2 is 20 years younger. Why couldn't Cunard, who is all about marketing is history, refit QE2? It just a shame to see a "real" British liner, built in the UK with the "real Cunard" company be pushed aside for some "liner want-to-be (aka QV and soon to be QE2."

 

The fact that Athena is still sailing at the moment isn't really the issue - QE2 is also still sailing. The real question is "will she survive the implementation of the SOLAS regulations in 2010?" Personally I doubt that she will, and I think that, along with other cruise ships of similar age to QE2 [Funchal (61), Oceanic II (66), and Van Gogh (75) come to mind], she will go to the breakers.

 

If she does survive, it will be because she is a very much smaller and less complex vessel than the QE2, and consequently far less expensive to refit.

 

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Athena of today has virtually nothing at all in common with the Stockholm.

 

She has been gutted and completely rebuilt.

Save for the hull, nothing at all of the Stockholm survives today, and it's really a stretch to even say that they are the same ship.

 

What one sees as the Athena is really a good two decades newer than QE2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes someplace I saw a Lloyd's List of ships that will be lost in 2010 due to the SOLAS changes. The ones listed and Stockholm were on it and several others.

 

And about QE2, THEY could do the refit, but it seems that THEY have wanted to dump QE2 for quite a while now. That seems to have been Carnival company policy for years and we were lucky to have the ship as long as we did. I have that opinion from what crew and Cunard shore staff have told me and friends over the last several years.

 

She doesn't meet their uniform cabin standards of 2+ in a room and ease of getting passengers and stores on and off at the end. If you look at any new ship the crew decks have a wide corridor running the near full length and they have forklifts going back and forth on port days loading things from pier to holding area in one motion. And they can't wiat to get away from the situation where QE2 crew have single cabins. On all the new ships regular crew are all 2 in a room. QE2's hull is made of impressively wonderful material that will be sound for decades. The aluminum on top is more of a problem and the pipes for passing water around the ship seem to need constant attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stockholm (the ship that collied with thr Andrea Doria) is still in opreation as sails as the Athena for Classic International Cruises. She is considered the oldest operating cruise ship in the world, almost 60 years since her launch!!

 

QE2 is 20 years younger. Why couldn't Cunard, who is all about marketing is history, refit QE2? It just a shame to see a "real" British liner, built in the UK with the "real Cunard" company be pushed aside for some "liner want-to-be (aka QV and soon to be QE2."

 

We spent Christmas and New Year 2006/2007 on the Athena ,in the Owners Suite :D . We had a great time, im sorry that Travelscope went bankrupt :( Lucky for us it was not last Christmas. :)

Gavin :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that it was easier getting passengers on board the QE2 than it was the QV! Of course, the fact that she needs tugs may have something to do with the decision.

 

The cabin I had on QV had a bunk up on the ceiling but I think there is more room in the QE2 5 deck three bunk cabins. There are also three wardrobes in the latter - great when there are only two of you!

 

Last April, I went to a presentation by Cunard and we assured that she would remain in service until 2010 b ecause she was making the money. At the same time, representatives from Dubai had boarded at the end of the World Cruise to look her over. I suppose they need the money to build a new ship! It is not so long ago that they sold Caronia to Saga.

 

I hope you behaved yourself in the owner's cabin, Gavin.

 

Maureen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they can't wiat to get away from the situation where QE2 crew have single cabins. On all the new ships regular crew are all 2 in a room.

 

Carmel the Librarian on QE2 has said she will not transfer to another ship because she does not want to share cabin. When you are onboard for 4 months you need your own space.

 

Here is a question. If they took out all the cabins on 1 to 5 decks and replaced them with new 2010 complient ones. Would QE2 still have been the same ship? I know one thing, they would not have put in any single cabins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmel the Librarian on QE2 has said she will not transfer to another ship because she does not want to share cabin. When you are onboard for 4 months you need your own space.

 

Here is a question. If they took out all the cabins on 1 to 5 decks and replaced them with new 2010 complient ones. Would QE2 still have been the same ship? I know one thing, they would not have put in any single cabins.

 

To answer your question: absolutely not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, let me make something clear... ATHENA will sail beyond 2010. She is already 100% compliant with the regulations that will come in force at that time.

 

This is, in essence, a ship that was built in 1994. The only thing that she has in common with the STOCKHOLM is the bare hull.

 

There is really no good reason to do what was done to this ship - the only reason it happened is that it was heavily subsidized by the Italian state. The Italians came up with the idea of subsidizing cruise lines to have 'new' ships built off existing hulls in Italian shipyards that didn't have the facilities to build their own hulls. This ship was the result, along with some others, like COSTA MARINA, which was built off a container ship hull.

 

As I recall, the ITALIA PRIMA (now ATHENA) conversion cost something like $100 million. The state paid for something like half of it - a nice little incentive to build off an existing hull rather than a totally new ship!

 

From a SOLAS standpoint, she is no different from any other ship built in 1994. There is a rule in SOLAS - it's called something like 'substantial change' (those aren't the exact words) - that if a ship undergoes a big enough refit, it is considered a new ship not, and has to comply with all of those rules. ITALIA PRIMA's conversion was more than big enough to fit into that category, and as a result, as far as SOLAS is concerned, she comes under the rules of a ship whose keel was laid whenever work on her refit started (sometime around 1992).

 

Here are a lot of nice photos of her, inside and out. The only giveaway that she is not a new ship is the pronounced sheer and that nice double row of portholes in the dining room, which is an interesting original feature that was preserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug - what's with the odd stern?
It's to increase the surface area of the hull so that the ship meets modern stability requirements.

 

My father was due to go on Athena a couple of months back for a five week cruise and it was canclelled. Does anyone her know why?
The company that chartered the ship at the time, Travelscope, could not fill two ships so it cancelled its charter of ATHENA.

 

Travelscope went out of business last month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's to increase the surface area of the hull so that the ship meets modern stability requirements.

 

.

 

 

 

 

Doug,

 

Correction and use of technical terms....

 

The duck's tail stern increases the WATERPLANE AREA of the vessel at normal operating draught and a larger Wp area results in a greater moment of inertia.. I.

 

Bm (Height of) for (Longitudinal stability) is equal to I divided by V where I is the moment of intertia of the waterplane with respect to the transverse axis through its centre of gravity and V is the volume of displacement.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug,

 

Correction and use of technical terms....

 

The duck's tail stern increases the WATERPLANE AREA of the vessel at normal operating draught and a larger Wp area results in a greater moment of inertia.. I.

 

Bm (Height of) for (Longitudinal stability) is equal to I divided by V where I is the moment of intertia of the waterplane with respect to the transverse axis through its centre of gravity and V is the volume of displacement.

 

Stephen

 

Stephen,

 

Please take pity on the non professionals - I'm afraid I can't follow what you are saying.

 

Matthew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen,

 

Please take pity on the non professionals - I'm afraid I can't follow what you are saying.

 

Matthew

 

 

 

Sorry about that, but I was trying to give the most simple explanation! It took me a couple of years in college for it to sink in!

 

The duck's tail appendage is necessary for the vessel to meet the most up to date stability criteria. They almost fitted on on the CARONIA! Instead they opted for a different approach... they added solid ballast in some of her double bottom tanks... probably pig iron.

 

With the ducks tail you get improved waterplane area.... with solid ballast... you can't see it but it means the ship is carrying around extra weight and you loose tank capacity. Cheap option in the short term, more costly in the end. The duck tails look damn awful though and I'm thankful it wasn't done to CARONIA/SAGA RUBY.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is called a "maid"... :rolleyes:

oops, not P.C. ! :eek:

 

 

Whatever you call her, she was very lovely :p breakfast in bed every morning, canapes every evening :eek:

 

The room was great and next to the Bridge, it was included on the Bridge tour :o (not the interior im glad to say) It had a bedroom with en-suite , a lounge with a table and six chairs, a couch, a large flat screen TV and DVD player , bar and second bathroom, also a large balcony. It was approached through a door which said Crew Only, and was opposite the Captains Quarters.

 

Gav :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The duck's tail appendage is necessary for the vessel to meet the most up to date stability criteria.
Didn't I say that ;) ?

 

I really wish I understood all this technical business but I'm afraid I just don't :o !

 

This is why I didn't go to naval architecture school; all the ships I designed would probably sink ;) !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry about that, but I was trying to give the most simple explanation! It took me a couple of years in college for it to sink in!

 

The duck's tail appendage is necessary for the vessel to meet the most up to date stability criteria. They almost fitted on on the CARONIA! Instead they opted for a different approach... they added solid ballast in some of her double bottom tanks... probably pig iron.

 

With the ducks tail you get improved waterplane area.... with solid ballast... you can't see it but it means the ship is carrying around extra weight and you loose tank capacity. Cheap option in the short term, more costly in the end. The duck tails look damn awful though and I'm thankful it wasn't done to CARONIA/SAGA RUBY.

 

Stephen

 

I'm sure I'm better informed, but unfortunately I'm none the wiser. Why does this affect things?

 

What is the practical difference?

 

Matthew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't I say that ;) ?

 

I really wish I understood all this technical business but I'm afraid I just don't :o !

 

This is why I didn't go to naval architecture school; all the ships I designed would probably sink ;) !

 

 

Doug,

 

Nope... that isn't what you said. You said 'increases the surface area of the hull'. That isn't correct. It increases the WATERPLANE AREA of the vessel. Two different things. First one is the 'total area of the external surface of the hull'. Waterplane area in that area of a horizontal slice through the hull at the draught she is floating at.

 

Surface area of an orange.... all the orange stuff that you can see on the outside... waterplane area of an orange... cut it in half and look inside... that flat area bounded by the peel is the waterplane area.

 

Are we clear? ARE WE C L E A R ???;)

 

It's OK... they don't teach this stuff in schools, A pity. Can you imagine going to Sec School and having the teacher come in a take a class on 'How to build Ocean Liners'? :D

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I'm better informed, but unfortunately I'm none the wiser. Why does this affect things?

 

What is the practical difference?

 

Matthew

 

 

Practically, it helps ensure that the ship mintains an adequate degree of stability at all times, floating in still water, rolling in a seaway and also in a damaged condition. Every few years the standards of stability requirements are improved or reviewed... just like the fire fighting regulations. Some ships need to be upgraded to meet new regulations... the duck tail is just a way of improving the stability of an already existing hull.

 

Next time you sail, grab one of the deck officers and get him or her sit down and explain it to you.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...