Why the QM2 makes me feel safe

[chengkp75]

Yes, Underwatr, that isn't a keel!

 

To quote from "Queen Mary 2, The Greatest Ocean Liner of Our Time" by the late, great John Maxtone Graham... (Bulfinch Press 2004).

"... As a result, Payne's final design combined a modified transom with elements of the first Queen Mary's cruiser stern; described as the "Constanzi stern" ... The hybrid was necessary because a simple transom stern, slapped by a following sea, can set up troublesome vibrations the length of a hull. But the Queen Mary 2 version had to be further refined to provide appropriate "landing spaces" for her propellers. ... Subjected to a wave onslaught from astern, model QM2 exhibited what is described as a "hunting instinct": The hull cycled through a series of random, side-slipping undulations. When those waves were amplified, the movement was so pronounced that propellers tended to emerge above water. The solution was installation of a remedial skeg-a stout vertical steel divider separating the ... propellers. The skeg, in combination with the stabilizers, minimised the hunting instinct and vastly improved QM2's longitudinal stability in a following sea."

 

Best wishes.

 

The cruise ships with two azipods will have skegs as well, it helps to direct the water flow from the hull to the propellers. Those with 3 pods obviously cannot have one, as it would transect the flow into the center pod. The skeg, as noted above, is more for efficiency and sea keeping than stability.

 

The reason the QM2 and the "liners" ride stormy seas better (didn't say they were more stable) is because of a different block coefficient (how much the hull looks like a cinder block), a finer bow (tapers over a greater portion of the hull), more flare to the bows (how the hull tapers sideways from the deck to the keel) which creates reserve buoyancy when burying the bow in the seas, and a higher promenade deck.

[matt87]

well i think we can all agree, the QM2 is a proper ocean liner, built to take rough seas of the north atlantic in all months. the Anthem of the Seas could not make any forward headway during this storm, took a lot of internal damage, and even burnt out all the clutches in one of its azi pods. she is very lucky engine power did not fail, that ship would have been sunk if they did.

Edited February 14, 2016 by matt87

[chengkp75]

well i think we can all agree, the QM2 is a proper ocean liner, built to take rough seas of the north atlantic in all months. the Anthem of the Seas could not make any forward headway during this storm, took a lot of internal damage, and even burnt out all the clutches in one of its azi pods. she is very lucky engine power did not fail, that ship would have been sunk if they did.

 

Please look at some of my posts on the various "what does it take to capsize a cruise ship" threads. Even a ship without power, and broadside into the seas, will most likely survive the storm. Also, look at my descriptions on the various Anthem threads about what the clutches were. The pod was never shut down until the Captain did not require it anymore, the clutches were not completely failed, and the pod was stopped to prevent further wear and possible damage. What "internal" damage did Anthem take? Furnishings and dinnerware, some non-structural interior ceilings. I've seen the same type of damage on the QE2 when I sailed on her.

 

As I said, the QM2 rides better, and has more power, but even she will find a time when the wave height, shape, and period create a harmonic with the hull shape causing the screws to lift in the water, where the Captain will slow down, possibly even to steerage way. Unless you put the QM2 at the same patch of ocean, at the same time, heading in the same direction, in the same storm, you don't know how she would react compared to Anthem.

[pepperrn]

Please look at some of my posts on the various "what does it take to capsize a cruise ship" threads. Even a ship without power, and broadside into the seas, will most likely survive the storm. Also, look at my descriptions on the various Anthem threads about what the clutches were. The pod was never shut down until the Captain did not require it anymore, the clutches were not completely failed, and the pod was stopped to prevent further wear and possible damage. What "internal" damage did Anthem take? Furnishings and dinnerware, some non-structural interior ceilings. I've seen the same type of damage on the QE2 when I sailed on her. As I said, the QM2 rides better, and has more power, but even she will find a time when the wave height, shape, and period create a harmonic with the hull shape causing the screws to lift in the water, where the Captain will slow down, possibly even to steerage way. Unless you put the QM2 at the same patch of ocean, at the same time, heading in the same direction, in the same storm, you don't know how she would react compared to Anthem.

Thank you chengkp75,

 

Um... Vulgarity of the Seas or Queen Mary 2... I know which vessel I would rather be on. Even in a flat calm. Even tied to the quay. :D .

 

As for finding myself at sea in a storm of any size... as others have said in this thread; only one vessel, QM2 every time, no question.

 

Best wishes and thanks again :)

Edited February 14, 2016 by pepperrn

[Salacia]

Please look at some of my posts on the various "what does it take to capsize a cruise ship" threads. Even a ship without power, and broadside into the seas, will most likely survive the storm. Also, look at my descriptions on the various Anthem threads about what the clutches were. The pod was never shut down until the Captain did not require it anymore, the clutches were not completely failed, and the pod was stopped to prevent further wear and possible damage. What "internal" damage did Anthem take? Furnishings and dinnerware, some non-structural interior ceilings. I've seen the same type of damage on the QE2 when I sailed on her.

 

As I said, the QM2 rides better, and has more power, but even she will find a time when the wave height, shape, and period create a harmonic with the hull shape causing the screws to lift in the water, where the Captain will slow down, possibly even to steerage way. Unless you put the QM2 at the same patch of ocean, at the same time, heading in the same direction, in the same storm, you don't know how she would react compared to Anthem.[/QUOTE]

 

 

One obvious factor is that invalidates the comparison is that the two ships (QM2 and Anthem) were constructed differently and intended for different routes. As to whether or not two different captains would make the same decision to sail into the storm's path in the first place, that is an unknown.

 

Several times I've enjoyed sailing r/t NY to the Caribbean on QM2. There have been occasions when the sea was rather nasty - which is why I prefer to sail on the ocean liner rather than a cruise ship (and yes, I have sailed the same route on cruise ships).

 

Once again, I must agree with Pepper: " QM2 every time, no question."

 

Regards,

Salacia

[Cats2010]

[quote name=Salacia;49090604

 

Once again' date=' I must agree with Pepper: " QM2 every time, no question."

 

[/quote]

 

 

Absolutely so, and without being an engineer, a captain or an expert I think that one cannot compare these two ships at all, since they have been constructed for different purposes.

 

On the other hand, QM2 can be used as a cruise ship, while a cruise ship can be used for transatlantics as well, but .... :rolleyes:

[chengkp75]

 

Unless you put the QM2 at the same patch of ocean, at the same time, heading in the same direction, in the same storm, you don't know how she would react compared to Anthem.

 

 

One obvious factor is that invalidates the comparison is that the two ships (QM2 and Anthem) were constructed differently and intended for different routes. As to whether or not two different captains would make the same decision to sail into the storm's path in the first place, that is an unknown.

 

 

Regards,

Salacia

 

While I agree that the two ships were designed differently, and as you say, with a different "mission", that does not invalidate any comparison of the two. You are making a comparison of the two design philosophies.

 

And in the statement of mine above, I'm not talking about the Captain's decision of whether to be in the storm or not. What I am saying is that every storm is different, every square mile of a storm may have different conditions, even every wave in a storm can be different, so what I am saying is that you cannot say that two ships in roughly the same reported winds and sea conditions at two different times and two different places, on two different courses can be compared. The only logical way to compare two ship's storm weathering abilities is to have the two ships in the same place at the same time, experiencing the exact same conditions.

[loubetti]

With all of the above being said, I offer this:

 

[matt87]

no we are comparing a ship half the size qe2 vs anthem? looks like qe2 was heading west to east and hitting a storm heading south to north. that musta been one hell of a storm to stop her for 21 hrs. regardless of the RCi cheerleaders, someone dropped the ball big time on making that call to sail. they took a huge chance and luckily came out ok. if that ship had lost power and went broadside with 30-40ft swells hitting all that glass.....ya no thanks.

[DDBINK1]

I don't mean to chime in and be off on the thread, but I have been on QM2 in a force 10 gale from LA to Hawaii and when we arrived we spoke with people from Princess lines ships and they described a horrible time and on QM2 we had dinner and a great show the night of the storm. Now I do remember a small amount of movement and barf bags hanging in the elevators but no way was it rough. I also remember waves moving past the windows in the Britannia dining room without anyone worrying about it at dinner.

Now I repeated the trip on QV and we had a storm with a force 8 gale. I still remember a great time with just that annoying vibration when larger waves hit the bow but we still had a great time. But if I remember right, the QV has some additional strengthening to the hull?? Correct me if I am wrong. But in any case the trips were great. I thing these ships are better.

[loubetti]

I've been on QE2 and QM2 in force 12 seas (but not what Anthem experienced). Otherwise, the Queens room was full for afternoon tea during those conditions.

 

Anthem proved her mettle in the horrendous, non-forecasted conditions she encountered (captain was expecting force 12, not twice that!). Good for her! I think some passengers learned something with this encounter with mother nature! It's not always smooth sailing, and do not expect to always stay in port if there is a storm in the way. If you expect that, then cruising is not for you!

[Thaxted]

I don't recall seeing this link posted before. I came across it this morning. Its firsthand account is vivid to say the least. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/travel/royal-caribbean-cruise-anthem-of-the-seas.html?_r=0

[S&G1968]

I don't recall seeing this link posted before. I came across it this morning. Its firsthand account is vivid to say the least. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/travel/royal-caribbean-cruise-anthem-of-the-seas.html?_r=0

 

Wow! Thanks for sharing that...

 

~Steve

[BobBranst]

We returned home last weekend after spending the previous 28 days on the QM2 South American WC segments from Fort Lauderdale to Valpo. This was a once in a lifetime event for us. While we were very fortunate to have had remarkably good weather and sea condition going around Cape Horn, nearly every other passenger we talked with agreed that they wouldn' have considered taking this cruise on any other ship than the QM2.

[chengkp75]

I don't recall seeing this link posted before. I came across it this morning. Its firsthand account is vivid to say the least. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/travel/royal-caribbean-cruise-anthem-of-the-seas.html?_r=0

 

And in counterpoint, here is an account by a mariner who was onboard. This was posted on a thread about a lawsuit filed over the Anthem storm:

 

http://auburnpub.com/skaneateles/lifestyles/mid-lakes-navigation-captain-recounts-royal-caribbean-s-anthem-of/article_c3423d77-0621-54a6-acde-a4181dacbc54.html

 

And, another account, by a non-mariner:

 

http://m.capemaycountyherald.com/news/article_0db4c9c8-d422-11e5-93fb-4b572cf0f10b.html?mode=jqm

[S/S Excalibur]

I have been on the Queen Mary 2 on at least two occasions where the weather was much worse than this storm. Last October on a TA the wind was in excess of 100 mph with seas 35+ feet without problems to ship or passengers.

 

Sailing in a proper liner like the QM2; as opposed to a "cruise ship", makes all the difference.

That's some strong storm, even for the QM2.When did this happen ? Was it a Hurricane ?

[DadTheBigKid]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/02/08/anthem-cruise-ship-storm/79997114/

 

Whoa !!!!

 

 

Hmmm, we have our first ever cruise / crossing in 4 weeks on QM2. I read the thread with interest and the majority opinion seems that the QM2 is better for rough conditions than any other?

 

Really looking forward to this and I do feel all future atlantic trips will be with QM2

[BoiiMcFly]

I heard the Freedom of the Seas is supposed to be very stable as well since it has 4 stabilizers like the Queen Mary 2. How do the two compare?

[MarkBearSF]

(EDIT - I read further back in the thread and see that my reply has been more thoroughly stated earlier. For a deeper explanation - please read the earlier posts)

 

Stabilizers are only part of the equation. (Of use only when the ship is in motion and only helps with roll, not pitch.) More important is hull design - and these days, the aerodynamics of the superstructure.

 

I recall a few years ago that Princess ships were notoriously susceptible to wind while Royal Caribbean's designs were considered more stable. Both lines have had a couple of generations since, so I don't know what the situation is now, but all of their ships will be less stable than the QM2 in rough seas.

 

Basically, ocean liners were built for stability on the open seas and their hulls had deep draughts while cruise ships have shallower draughts suited for docking in more ports. (There's also a difference in the speed that they right themselves after listing).

 

The QM2 is the only ship that was specifically designed for crossing the north atlantic. Part of that is her deeper draught and length designed to straddle the typical waves, and another is her strengthened hull.

 

I've noticed that my fellow passengers like to talk about the stabilizers, but there's SO much more involved.

Edited February 8, 2017 by MarkBearSF

[ricki]

I'm curious about the QE, how does she handle rough seas since she is not an ocean liner? We've done six crossings on the QM2, and feel very confident in her ability to handle a spirited sea.

 

I'm most familiar with Crystal,, Regent and Oceania but have sailed some of the smaller HAL ships, any comparisons to the QE?

 

Ricki

[MarkBearSF]

I wouldn't worry about QE crossings. She uses a more southern route as do other cruise ships. In fact, if you've done a crossing on most HAL ships, the QE shares a hull design (or variation) with most of them.

 

The Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria have sailed across the world's seas to great satisfaction for years now.

 

-Mark

[ricki]

I wouldn't worry about QE crossings. She uses a more southern route as do other cruise ships. In fact, if you've done a crossing on most HAL ships, the QE shares a hull design (or variation) with most of them.

 

The Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria have sailed across the world's seas to great satisfaction for years now.

 

-Mark

 

Thank you, Mark!

 

Ricki