Working around issues at Red Hook Terminal

[hmorrow]

2 hours ago, NE John said:

Box Street Hotel is in Greenpoint area of Brooklyn, very far from the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal. Hotel savings eaten up via higher cab or Uber fees and adding much longer drive to get to Terminal. 
Listen to two Brooklyn guys and stick with Marriott Brooklyn Bridge. Plus, Brooklyn Heights neighborhood of Marriott is a great place to hang out for the evening. 

Maybe we’ll bite the bullet, but it’s almost $500.00 more for two nights. First night we don’t arrive till almost midnight.

[BklynBoy8]

4 hours ago, GTJ said:

 

Cunard does not operate cruises on the Queen Mary 2 between New York and England. The vessel making the transatlantic crossings is an ocean liner, designed for rapid transportation purposes, and thus distinct from the other lines that leisurely cruise across the pond. This difference may be part of the distinct boarding times and arrangements at Brooklyn.

 

"BRAVO"!

 

I like to use the phases Sailings and Voyages....

Edited January 16, 2023 by BklynBoy8

[BklynBoy8]

4 hours ago, GTJ said:

While Red Hook has industry, it is a burgeoning neighborhood that is incredibly interesting. It would be a fantastic area in which to stay but for the paucity of hotels. There's two hotels, both of which are on the border between Red Hook and Carroll Gardens. Neither of the two are directly on Van Brunt Street in the commercial part of Red Hook (it would be great for there to be lodging on the south end of Van Brunt Street). Both hotels are less than one mile from the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, and it is about 15 minutes walking. One hotel is the Brooklyn Motor Inn, a 2-star hotel; the other is The Lodge Red Hook, also a 2-star hotel. Don't expect the highest quality accommodations, but these hotels are convenient. For dining, highly rated is the Hometown Bar-B-Que, on Van Brunt Street, corner of Reed Street.

 

Well described.... They are working on building the area up. Know someone stayed at the Brooklyn the night before a sailing and it was an experience but made it thru. So sorry that Court and Smith Streets are a distance for dining. 

[BklynBoy8]

3 hours ago, hmorrow said:

Maybe we’ll bite the bullet, but it’s almost $500.00 more for two nights. First night we don’t arrive till almost midnight.

 

For a hotel located in a area known as a Civic Center of the Boro of Brooklyn during the daytime, it will serve all your needs while lodging there. During the Day you will experience Brooklyn with it's hustle and bustle that the area is known for ex. Main General Post Office, Supreme & Family Courts and Federal Court House for Eastern Atlantic States. Yes, you will not be alone........

[steve4031]

Imho it would be interesting to learn the differences between QM2 and a cruise ship and why there are different logistics to embarkation and its preparation for a transatlantic crossing. 

[NE John]

Go to the Cunard boards and look up QM2. Tons of commentary in this subject. 
Basically, most of the large venues are placed at or below the water line so the layout and walking around experience is different vs “cruise” ships. 
Traditional QM2’ers guard the terminology of the great ship: Ocean Liner vs Cruise ship and “Crossing” vs a cruise. 

[BklynBoy8]

15 minutes ago, NE John said:

Go to the Cunard boards and look up QM2. Tons of commentary in this subject. 
Basically, most of the large venues are placed at or below the water line so the layout and walking around experience is different vs “cruise” ships. 
Traditional QM2’ers guard the terminology of the great ship: Ocean Liner vs Cruise ship and “Crossing” vs a cruise. 

 

Terminology like Voyage and Sailing...

 

Strolling the Promenade Deck not Race Cars, Surf Boarding, Sky Lines.....

 

Yes, we do Guard the terminology'........

[GTJ]

1 hour ago, NE John said:

Go to the Cunard boards and look up QM2. Tons of commentary in this subject. * * * Traditional QM2’ers guard the terminology of the great ship: Ocean Liner vs Cruise ship and “Crossing” vs a cruise.

As to the distinctions between ocean liners and cruise vessels, one of the problems is that Cunard does utilize the QM2 for some cruises. During the season, it does operate from Brooklyn a few round-trip Caribbean cruises and one-way cruises to and Québec, from Southampton a few round-trip Norwegian cruises, and in January an annual 3-month world tour. That is, cruises using an ocean liner. But between New York and England--and on some crossings extended to the Continent itself--not a cruise. So perhaps it is not surprising that some passengers get confused.

 

Now if only Cunard could improve its crossing times . . . 6-1/2 days for what required only 4 days by United States Lines in the 1950s.

Edited January 16, 2023 by GTJ

[NE John]

No ship has yet to beat the Crossing time of SS United States. Still classified blueprints/documents for that ship. 
But, why do all that packing and effort for a four day crossing…?

[steve4031]

That’s interesting about the location of the various venues on lower decks.  

[navybankerteacher]

10 hours ago, GTJ said:

As to the distinctions between ocean liners and cruise vessels, one of the problems is that Cunard does utilize the QM2 for some cruises. During the season, it does operate from Brooklyn a few round-trip Caribbean cruises and one-way cruises to and Québec, from Southampton a few round-trip Norwegian cruises, and in January an annual 3-month world tour. That is, cruises using an ocean liner. But between New York and England--and on some crossings extended to the Continent itself--not a cruise. So perhaps it is not surprising that some passengers get confused.

 

Now if only Cunard could improve its crossing times . . . 6-1/2 days for what required only 4 days by United States Lines in the 1950s.

Anybody in a hurry will fly, people who want a leisurely shipboard experience (I won’t call it a trans-Atlantic “cruise” for fear of stirring up commentary on the difference between crossings and cruises) will take the ship and will want more than enough time to just unpack and re-pack.  
 

Running a ship at full speed will burn enough fuel to price the sailings out of reach of most folks who prefer to travel by sea rather than air. (By the way:  how many port calls in Europe, before calling at Southampton after sailing from New York will convert that “crossing” to a “cruise”?)

[NE John]

3 hours ago, steve4031 said:

That’s interesting about the location of the various venues on lower decks.  

There are also some good You Tube reviews on QM 2 and several good ones on liner vs cruise discussion. 
Better than I on this format. 

[GTJ]

12 hours ago, NE John said:

But, why do all that packing and effort for a four day crossing…?

I would compare the transatlantic crossing with traveling by railroad between New York and California. Four days and three nights by Amtrak . . . I don't think many people would like to extend that train ride to seven days. The goal is to get to the other coast and undertake whatever business it is that brought oneself there. For those of us who do not, or cannot, travel by air, having reasonable surface transportation--that is not unduly slow--is necessary.

[navybankerteacher]

6 hours ago, GTJ said:

I would compare the transatlantic crossing with traveling by railroad between New York and California. Four days and three nights by Amtrak . . . I don't think many people would like to extend that train ride to seven days. The goal is to get to the other coast and undertake whatever business it is that brought oneself there. For those of us who do not, or cannot, travel by air, having reasonable surface transportation--that is not unduly slow--is necessary.

Anyone who seriously compares four or more days as a passenger on Amtrak with that much time on a cruise ship (or liner) may have experienced one —- but most likely has not experienced both.

[NE John]

6 hours ago, GTJ said:

I would compare the transatlantic crossing with traveling by railroad between New York and California. Four days and three nights by Amtrak . . . I don't think many people would like to extend that train ride to seven days. The goal is to get to the other coast and undertake whatever business it is that brought oneself there. For those of us who do not, or cannot, travel by air, having reasonable surface transportation--that is not unduly slow--is necessary.

 

6 hours ago, GTJ said:

I would compare the transatlantic crossing with traveling by railroad between New York and California. Four days and three nights by Amtrak . . . I don't think many people would like to extend that train ride to seven days. The goal is to get to the other coast and undertake whatever business it is that brought oneself there. For those of us who do not, or cannot, travel by air, having reasonable surface transportation--that is not unduly slow--is necessary.

I refer you to take these thoughts to the Cunard board to bring this question up. It will get a robust response. 

[steve4031]

I've ridden Amtrak, and I have experienced Carnival, NCL, and HAL.  Next summer's transatlantic on the QM2 will be my first on Cunard.  A week long cruise on Carnival is significantly better than Amtrak, and I love riding the train.  So I suspect that Cunard, which is usually ranked higher than Carnival, NCL and HAL to be much better.  

[NE John]

That’s great about your upcoming Crossing. Embrace the environment of Cunard and enjoy the Gala nights in the Queen’s Room - a scene you won’t see every day. 

[GTJ]

24 minutes ago, steve4031 said:

I've ridden Amtrak, and I have experienced Carnival, NCL, and HAL. * * * A week long cruise on Carnival is significantly better than Amtrak, and I love riding the train.

True about the service comparison . . . but the point I was making was to counter the assertion, "why do all that packing and effort for a four day crossing," by providing an example of how people will pack for a 4-day crossing of the United States via Amtrak. The schedule for transatlantic crossings has slowed significantly over the decades, and is now 6-1/2 days, and the question is whether people want the longer crossing (perhaps to have a longer experience on board?), and would they put up with having to do all the packing for a crossing that is only four days in duration? My view is that if someone wants a longer trip across the Atlantic, then take a cruise instead . . . the QM2 should cross the pond as quickly as practicable.

[steve4031]

44 minutes ago, GTJ said:

True about the service comparison . . . but the point I was making was to counter the assertion, "why do all that packing and effort for a four day crossing," by providing an example of how people will pack for a 4-day crossing of the United States via Amtrak. The schedule for transatlantic crossings has slowed significantly over the decades, and is now 6-1/2 days, and the question is whether people want the longer crossing (perhaps to have a longer experience on board?), and would they put up with having to do all the packing for a crossing that is only four days in duration? My view is that if someone wants a longer trip across the Atlantic, then take a cruise instead . . . the QM2 should cross the pond as quickly as practicable.

I did not know that 4 day crossings were possible.  I would be interested in that as well.  IMHO adding a few of these in place of those cruises to Hamburg would be a more interesting option.  

[BklynBoy8]

6 minutes ago, steve4031 said:

I did not know that 4 day crossings were possible.  I would be interested in that as well.  IMHO adding a few of these in place of those cruises to Hamburg would be a more interesting option.  

 

It's been quite some time since we've heard about a 4 day crossing.  Use to be 5 and even then a long, long, longtime ago.

 

7 is the NYC-SOU OR SOU-NYC standard now a days.

 

Never heard the Mary 2 pushing 4 days across the pond. 

Edited January 17, 2023 by BklynBoy8

[GTJ]

23 hours ago, steve4031 said:

I did not know that 4 day crossings were possible.

 

23 hours ago, BklynBoy8 said:

It's been quite some time since we've heard about a 4 day crossing. Use to be 5 and even then a long, long, longtime ago. 7 is the NYC-SOU OR SOU-NYC standard now a days.

On her maiden voyage, in 1952, the S.S. United States made the crossing in 3 days 12 hours, an average of 34.5 knots. The timetable from 1958, pictured below, shows regular westbound crossings from Le Havre to New York in 4 days (I am not certain why the eastbound crossing was scheduled for 5 days). It was a while ago (maybe even a "longtime ago," though being within our lifetimes I would limit the number of times to repeat "long" so as not to make us as being ancient!). Today's QM2 schedule is 7 calendar days, but given the evening departure and morning arrival, that's really 6-1/2 days. In any event, too long. Technology should allow us to cross the ocean faster, not slower, than 70 years ago.

 

[steve4031]

I’m paying 4000 for 2 on my 7 day crossing. One way in bC or one person on an airplane is typically 5000 to 8000. A 3 day crossing priced at 2000 to 3000 is definitely competitive to air travel.  Can Cunard make money doing this?

[NE John]

The technology is not available for a five day crossing, let alone a three day crossing. The QM 2 already hauls across the Atlantic at 30 knots!
Those who cross on the QM2 are more concerned with the experience onboard versus time getting there. I have met quite a few people onboard who use the QM2 as their mode of transport across the pond; they just don’t fly. 
Those who do fly know the air travel options and still travel by ship for relaxation and being taken care of by Cunard. 
As you may read from reviews, Cunard is not perfect but I’ve enjoyed by time onboard their wonderful ships. 
I believe many lines, hotels, restaurants etc are far from perfect these days…

Edited January 19, 2023 by NE John

[navybankerteacher]

On 1/17/2023 at 12:24 PM, GTJ said:

. . the QM2 should cross the pond as quickly as practicable.

“Practicable” should involve the concept of being “profitable” as well being simply “possible”.  If Cunard thought they could make money on five or six day crossings (which  speed would be “possible” on QM2), I believe they would.   But I am willing to bet that the fares would be so much higher that combined with the difficulty of finding enough passengers who want such an abbreviated crossing that Cunard knows better than to try it.

[FritzG]

We were very pleased with the Marriott Brooklyn Bridge last may, and we’ll be staying there again in August.