cruise ship vs liner

This picture is worth a thousand words.......

http://www.discover-stkitts-nevis-beaches.com/image-files/queen-mary-2-and-summit-at-port-zante-st-kitts.jpg

the other ship is the Celebrity Summit. Once I saw this everything that eerveyone one had said all came together. Can't wait to see and feel how the liner handles the Eastern seaboard in Nov !

K

Yes, that is a good picture. You'll also notice the subtle difference once you are onboard. I noticed in a few instances just how much better the QM2 handled the seas than my earlier cruises. Also, when the ship moves at top speeds..............lets just say ocean liners are FAST! Sunnystone, you'll love the QM2.

David

Do you think the Cruise ships are as safe for transatlantic crossings as the Cruise liners are?

Do you think the Cruise ships are as safe for transatlantic crossings as the Cruise liners are?

For all practical purposes - yes. Cruise ships take their time, have Ports of Call built into their itineraries which they can drop if they get behind (which you can't do on a Southampton-New York run) unlike express liners (QE2/QM2, but not, remotely QV) - which have to make the crossing on time, turn round and do it again. They also cross at times of year when you are less likely to have bad weather - and don't forget, many spend their lives in the Caribbean, not unknown for bad weather. If you do hit bad weather they are not likely to be quite as comfortable on a cruise ship (not from rolling, which can be controlled, or pitching, which can't- more from shuddering as their short fat bows slam into the seas rather than cut through them) but you should be as safe.

Do you think the Cruise ships are as safe for transatlantic crossings as the Cruise liners are?

We did a crossing a few years ago on Royal Caribbean Grandeur of the Seas. It was a rough ride. We did lose a port (Ireland) due to rough seas, the crossing was started a day early. Got a new port -- Halifax -- in the deal. Not a great substitute for missing Ireland, but it was interesting.

I have been on the QM2 and other large ships. QM2 is definitely a more stable ride in rough weather than others....

--Judy

Is the QM2 ever late arriving in Southampton or NYC?

Is the QM2 ever late arriving in Southampton or NYC?

Never would be a big word....but very rarely would be pretty fair - both she & the QE2 could cross the pond in 5 nights - but they choose to do it in 6 - so they have plenty of leeway to catch up lost time. Similarly, with luck & a following wind the QV could almost make it across in 6 nights - but sensibly they are doing it in 7 - leave some spare for contingencies. The '5 night crossing' needed 28.5 knots average speed - the QM/QE/QE2 and QM2 are capable of over 30 knots.....

Peter

For all practical purposes - yes. Cruise ships take their time, have Ports of Call built into their itineraries which they can drop if they get behind (which you can't do on a Southampton-New York run) unlike express liners (QE2/QM2, but not, remotely QV) - which have to make the crossing on time, turn round and do it again. They also cross at times of year when you are less likely to have bad weather - and don't forget, many spend their lives in the Caribbean, not unknown for bad weather. If you do hit bad weather they are not likely to be quite as comfortable on a cruise ship (not from rolling, which can be controlled, or pitching, which can't- more from shuddering as their short fat bows slam into the seas rather than cut through them) but you should be as safe.

Well, yes, up to a point. But I'd far rather sail rough seas on QE2 with her tough hull than any of those tinfoil cruiseships!!

Well, yes, up to a point. But I'd far rather sail rough seas on QE2 with her tough hull than any of those tinfoil cruiseships!!

Which is why the tin foil cruise ships would slow down. I would rather be on the QE2 too, but except in severe extremis I doubt I'd be any safer......

Peter

The floating shoe boxes do not have that deep a draft and Liners do.

The floating shoe boxes do not have that deep a draft and Liners do.

The differences may be less than is imagined:

Draft (feet)

Queen Elizabeth: 39.0

Queen Mary: 38.9

QM2: 32.8

QE2: 32.5

Navigator class: 28.2

Grand class: 27.9

Radiance class: 26.6

Spirit/Vista class: 25.6

There is as big a difference between the first and second Queen Marys and the Queen Mary and almost all the 'box boats'.

Peter

I was on a box boat in the eastern Caribbean in moderate seas...... nearly knocked my teeth out. It was that rough a ride. When we got into a port several people left the ship to fly home.

On the QE2 transatlantic in very early spring there was motion, but it was logical.

The box boat rolled and pitched. Enough to make an astronaut ill. We could let my elderly mother-in-law walk around on her own. That bad.

My first cruise was in the Gulf of Alaska in relatively rough seas, in an older ship that is supposedly better designed for rough seas (Regal Princess, soon to be moving to P&O Australia), and it still was not pleasant. Not dangerous, but definitely not pleasant. DH was horrendously seasick, as were several members of the crew, including our assistant waiter.

My first cruise was in the Gulf of Alaska in relatively rough seas, in an older ship that is supposedly better designed for rough seas (Regal Princess, soon to be moving to P&O Australia), and it still was not pleasant.

The Regal Princess was built as a cruise ship - Regal Princess was her first incarnation. You only get the bad weather advantages of older ships if the ship was originally built for liner service - there aren't many left now, but there are a few ships that still fall into that category. I suspect that an older cruise ship could have much worse bad weather abilities than a new cruise ship.

i've been through the western approaches on the black prince (11000t) in a hurricane force 12! i think she's an old flat bottomed ferry and my god that was frightening. force10-11 through the bay on the qe2 if i remember. in fact, i don't think i've been through the bay very often in anything less than a ten!

glenn.

My first cruise was a weekend to Norway from Newcastle, an end of season cruise on a car ferry. We crossed in a cyclone, interesting but I made it to all meals.

2000 I crossed the Atlantic, NY to Soton in a storm on the QE2, no one was allowed on deck for 3 days, behind the scenes we could hear dishes & glasses breaking. The buffet was closed, the trays all went flying one breakfast.

We were a little late arriving in England but that was due to a distress signal. A freighter did the rescue and we arrived in port on the correct day. The Oriana was crossing at the same time, She was a day late, with damage.

I've been across the Atlantic on the Canberra and the Oriana to the Caribbean. I think they tended to cross a little further south than the QE2/QM2 does on the New York run. Both were rough crossings but the Canberra felt more comfortable except when the Engine stopped mid way across!

I would imagine that any large cruise company would ensure the ship is fit to handle the weather and the sea before the itineries were finalised, although extremes can result in minor damage. Comfort and Safety are completely separate.

For those with an interest in Ocean Liners I heartily recommend The Ocean Liner Society. Based in the UK it produces a wonderful quarterly magazine called 'Sealines', and organises regular talks in London:

http://www.ocean-liner-society.com/

The Regal Princess was built as a cruise ship - Regal Princess was her first incarnation. You only get the bad weather advantages of older ships if the ship was originally built for liner service - there aren't many left now, but there are a few ships that still fall into that category. I suspect that an older cruise ship could have much worse bad weather abilities than a new cruise ship.

Exactly, even a cruise ship that's supposedly better at handling rough seas than the bigger, shallower-hulled cruise ships (according to many a Princess fan) isn't great at handling rough seas. Cruise ships just aren't ocean liners.

Cruise ships just aren't ocean liners.

Why should they be? Its a bit like saying 'buses just aren't trucks'. For the job they are designed to do cruise ships are better than ocean liners - and funnily enough, for the job ocean liners are designed to do, ocean liners are better. I would much rather cross the North Atlantic in the QM2 or QE2, but on a Caribbean cruise - out of Miami, say, then the cruise ships are better. Now put a couple of days sailing into the mix by home-porting out of New York, then the QM2's speed advantage comes into play. But a machine designed to take on the North Atlantic will not be as good at cruising as one designed to cruise. They are all based on ferries anyway - the North Atlantic ferry, and modern cruise ship design is based on ferries.......Horses for courses.....in any case, neither the QE2 or QM2 are 'pure liners' - both are hybrids.......and good thing too!

Why should they be? Its a bit like saying 'buses just aren't trucks'. For the job they are designed to do cruise ships are better than ocean liners - and funnily enough, for the job ocean liners are designed to do, ocean liners are better. I would much rather cross the North Atlantic in the QM2 or QE2, but on a Caribbean cruise - out of Miami, say, then the cruise ships are better. Now put a couple of days sailing into the mix by home-porting out of New York, then the QM2's speed advantage comes into play. But a machine designed to take on the North Atlantic will not be as good at cruising as one designed to cruise. They are all based on ferries anyway - the North Atlantic ferry, and modern cruise ship design is based on ferries.......Horses for courses.....in any case, neither the QE2 or QM2 are 'pure liners' - both are hybrids.......and good thing too!

I agree, the right tool for the job.

For those with an interest in Ocean Liners I heartily recommend The Ocean Liner Society. Based in the UK it produces a wonderful quarterly magazine called 'Sealines', and organises regular talks in London:...

Excellent photos of original QE2 interiors in 'Spring 2007' edition - shame :rolleyes:

Why should they be? Its a bit like saying 'buses just aren't trucks'. For the job they are designed to do cruise ships are better than ocean liners - and funnily enough, for the job ocean liners are designed to do, ocean liners are better. I would much rather cross the North Atlantic in the QM2 or QE2, but on a Caribbean cruise - out of Miami, say, then the cruise ships are better. Now put a couple of days sailing into the mix by home-porting out of New York, then the QM2's speed advantage comes into play. But a machine designed to take on the North Atlantic will not be as good at cruising as one designed to cruise. They are all based on ferries anyway - the North Atlantic ferry, and modern cruise ship design is based on ferries.......Horses for courses.....in any case, neither the QE2 or QM2 are 'pure liners' - both are hybrids.......and good thing too!

Wow ... Peter we agree on something :eek:

Ken

I was on The SS Britanis on the Chandris line Back in the 80's. I was going from NY to Bermuda and we hit some rough waters. A tropical storm blew threw just before we left port. We had alot of movement. I can still remember all the little empty Barf bags hanging on the hand rails on every hallway of the ship just waiting for someone to grab one. I had an Outside Port hole room with 4 bunks. If people who never cruised back then saw the pictures of that room they would be shocked how much better the rooms are today. I have to find a friend with a scanner so i can get some of my old pictures online.

Would you consider that an ocean liner? It was very different then the ships I have been on recently.

The SS Britanis

Would you consider that an ocean liner?

Despite being called the Matsonia in a previous incarnation she was nothing to do with Cunard - an occasion when the -ia suffix didn't mean a Cunarder. I would think that she was a liner when first built (at the Monterey IN 1932). There's a potted history of her here

Wow this is how I remember the ship looking. Now I have to dig out that old photo album!