Cruise Talk: Old ships vs New ships, pros and cons

Cruise Talk

Cruise News

Welcome to Cruise Talk the Internet's most popular discussion forum dedicated to cruising. Stop by Cruise Talk anytime to post a message or find out what your fellow passengers and industry insiders are saying about a particular ship, cruise line or destination.

>>> Reader Reviews
>>> CruisePage.com Photo Gallery
>>> Join Our Cruise Club.

Latest News...Norwegian Cruise Line celebrated the official christening of the all-new Norwegian Aqua in Miami and unveiled its plans to reimagine Great Stirrup Cay, NCL's idyllic private island in the Bahamas, with new experiences debuting in the fourth quarter of 2025, including an expansive pool area with a dedicated bar and kids splash zone and so much MORE. With a history of delivering guests ...

Latest News...MSC Cruises officially named its highly-anticipated new flagship, MSC World America, in a dazzling ceremony on April 9 at the line's new state-of-the-art MSC Miami Cruise Terminal, the largest cruise terminal in the world. MSC World America's Godmother, Drew Barrymore officially named the ship at the glamorous event with the maritime tradition of cutting a ribbon and triggering the breaking of a champagne...

Latest News...Seabourn, the leader in ultra-luxury cruising and expedition travel, celebrated the maiden arrival of Seabourn Encore to the continental United States on April 9, 2025, marking a major milestone as the ship docked for the first time in Long Beach, Calif. The visit offers a rare opportunity for guests and local travel advisor partners to see the award-winning ship up close..

More Cruise News...

my profile | register | search | faq | forum home

»	Cruise Talk » Cruise Ships » Old ships vs New ships, pros and cons

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Old ships vs New ships, pros and cons

Jelllybean
First Class Passenger
Member # 992

posted 01-15-2000 10:10 PM

When I look at cruises, I often wonder that if cruising on relative older ship (ie. 1989 an prior) may have advantages over the new ships; but I don't know of them.

Many people around me are booking for the brand new ships such as Voyager and Explorer of the Seas. Is there any give and take from traveling with new ships?

Very much would like to hear what you think. Old ships has what charms? New ship has what trills?

HappyHappyCoolCatWantsToCruise

Posts: 20 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

Grant
First Class Passenger
Member # 1000

posted 01-16-2000 12:44 AM

New ships seem to have a great deal in common with the large scale resorts that are found in many holiday destinations. Old ships have a greater connection with the sea and old world charms such as polished woodwork, higher ceilings, sloped decks(sheer) and probably more teak decking than astro turf or composite surfaces. It is trade off for tradition versus new amenities, and only you will know what is right for you. An older ship would be like the Royal York Hotel in you hometown; the Grand Princess or Voyageur would be like one of the new luxury hotels found in the city centre. Maybe this will help you decide what is right for you!

Posts: 834 | From: Victoria, BC, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

Malcolm @ cruisepage
Cruise Director
Member # 301

posted 01-16-2000 05:24 PM

The SS Norway (ex France) is one one of NCL's most profitable ships. Cunard's QE2 is also still doing very nicely!

This proves that charm can win over newness!

Posts: 19210 | From: Essex (Just Outside London) | Registered: A Long Time Ago! | IP: Logged

Grant
First Class Passenger
Member # 1000

posted 01-16-2000 06:48 PM

I'm with you Malcolm; old world charm over newness almost all the time. It is still nice to try out some of the new entries into the cruise market to see where the cruise industry is going, but I still return to the older ships when the opportunity rises. I've heard recently that P&O's Victoria has the highest percentage of repeat passengers in their fleet, which is probably due to her old world charm as much as her itineraries.

Posts: 834 | From: Victoria, BC, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

gizmo
First Class Passenger
Member # 972

posted 01-19-2000 09:05 AM

I like both. I have sailed on the Norway 5 times and she is charming. The biggest problem on the Norway is the elevators. You can wait forever and when one arrives it is packed. I get around this by staying on pool deck and using the staircases, this way you do not have multiple flights of steps to deal with. I have also sailed on the Ryndam and love the ship. It is not glizzy like some newer one. I am sailing on the Volendam in March and looking forward to a "new" ship.

Posts: 686 | From: Kennesaw Ga. (origianlly from Philly) | Registered: Dec 1999 | IP: Logged

usha
First Class Passenger
Member # 818

posted 01-19-2000 07:18 PM

On a new ship, obviously, everything is state-of-the-art and shiny-new, but there may be some "bugs" to work out. Also, it seems to take a little while for the staff to get organized, and service may be spotty. On an older ship, you'll see some signs of normal wear on the ship itself, but typically the staff is much more experienced, and that usually means better service. This is just my opinion, of course. But, hey, I still haven't met a ship I didn't like!

Posts: 94 | From: Hobart, IN USA | Registered: Jan 99 | IP: Logged

WJCdiver
First Class Passenger
Member # 946

posted 01-19-2000 08:25 PM

Personally I would never sail on the maiden voyage of any ship. First, ships aren't always completed on time so the first cruise may be cancelled.

Second, no matter how careful the shipyard there will be problems on anything as complex as a new ship. Until everyone tries to shower (just before cocktail time) at the same time you won't know if they have the hot water set right.

Finally, Like any hotel or restaurant the crew also needs time to shake-down and learn to work as a team.

I wouldn't take a brand new ship until at least 3-6 months after its planned first sailing.

Posts: 159 | From: New York, NY | Registered: Dec 1999 | IP: Logged

DAMBROSI
First Class Passenger
Member # 100

posted 01-19-2000 10:02 PM

for me, it has to be the fact that these new ships look too top heavy.
when we were on the S/S OCEANIC this
last year, the second officer told us that the liner could list at 30
degrees and snap back with no problem. do any of you think the new ones can do that?

Posts: 2554 | From: Florida, USA, Where the Legend SS NORWAY sailed from. Moving back to FL next yr. | Registered: May 99 | IP: Logged

sympatico
First Class Passenger
Member # 797

posted 01-19-2000 11:02 PM

Hi Dambrosi - I agree, some of the new ones do look top heavy. A few years ago when we were on the Nieuw Amsterdam, leaving Ft. Lauderdale, it was very, very windy. We had to wait for one of the new Princess ships to leave and they were having trouble getting her away from the pier. We were on the bridge with the captain and he said this was one of the problems with that particular ship - she looked top heavy and the wind just kept pushing her back. They finally had to get the tugboats to take her out. The higher they get the more problems they will probably encounter like this.
I do like the older ships, but also do love the verandahs.

Posts: 3305 | From: Toronto, Ont. Canada | Registered: Jul 99 | IP: Logged

Joe at PwC
First Class Passenger
Member # 225

posted 01-20-2000 11:47 AM

I guess it's just another quirk of the "floating brick" theory. The more surface there is for the wind to push against, the more likely it is that wind resistance will be a factor. When your ship is shaped like a brick, that's what happens. But that's life in the ship biz. There's any number of reasons why they are shaped in this manner, most of which relate to economics.

That top-heavy situation is complicated by the fact that most of these ships have a shallow draft, which I just recently heard creates less stability. The consensus seems to be that the deeper the draft, the more stable the ship, and the better its seakeeping is.

[This message has been edited by Joe at PwC (edited 01-20-2000).]

Posts: 385 | Registered: A Long Time Ago! | IP: Logged

Grant
First Class Passenger
Member # 1000

posted 01-20-2000 03:36 PM

I'm very curious as to what will happen to the "top heavy and shallow draft" situation with one of the latest development of cruise ship design. To counter act the height of the superstructure has been the weight of the heavy machinery deep down in the hull; engines, generator sets etc.. We now hear that Celebrity, Royal Caribbean, Princess and P&O are building ships with gas turbine power plants (commercial jet engines which power wide bodied jets, coupled to electrical generators) which will be housed in the funnel casing ON THE TOP DECKS! This will remove massive amounts of weight from deep down in the hull, to relativly light weight equipment very high up. I'm sure there is an answer, but I've yet to read about it; perhaps more ballast-after all Canberra had tons on concrete in her bows for years.

Posts: 834 | From: Victoria, BC, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

gohaze
First Class Passenger
Member # 586

posted 01-20-2000 10:52 PM

Hi...let's get rid of one term that is used a little too much - top heavy - if a ship is top heavy it will turn over, and if it does then the hull once again becomes stable. A very simple way to look at stability is to take the Grandfather clock which we all know, and which has a pendulum. To speed it up we lower the weight on the arm and it swings faster. Conversely to slow the clock we move the weight up the arm. In other words move the weight down and with a ship you have better stability and the ship rolls faster. Move it up and the less stability and a slower roll. Back to the clock, if you put the weight on the arm above the pivot, make it "top heavy", and it will reverse and be on the bottom again.
A deeper draught does not necessarily mean a more stable ship as the beam also has considerable effect. Take an example most of us have heard about ...the Andria Doria. In those days of high fuel consumption and at the end of a voyage, as she was, her fuel tanks were pretty empty, so too were her fresh water tanks as they made very little on board. In other words her actual stability was marginal and could only be improved by putting ballast water into fuel tanks. No engineer wanted to do that as it meant discharging dirty water to barges on arrival and would delay bunkering. So, all it took to destroy what stability she had left was the lack of the watertight door which was supposed to have been fitted in the tunnel between the engine and generator rooms. But she was a deep draft North Atlantic liner.
I could go on but I tried to make this brief.
rgds...peter

Posts: 1909 | From: Vancouver.BC | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged

Vaccaro
First Class Passenger
Member # 465

posted 01-21-2000 05:22 AM

Yes, a good demonstration Gohaze.
A ship do not have to be too stable with a too high moment of return (to recover its horizontal situation) to not be too unconfortable for passengers and restrictive for structure, equipments, furnitures...
The roll has to be smooth enough.
To sum up and to not enter in the details of pressures, static and dynamic physical laws of the careens, the moderns ships compensate their low draught by a larger beam (essencial as you wrote). Their "deficiency" in water pressure strength, due to the low draught is conpensate too, for a part, by a better efficiency of the modern stabilizers systems and actual roll keels. It is true too than the modern ships are much more ballasted than the older ones. Nowadays (and since about 20 or 30 years) there is no hesitation to fill the empty fuel oil tanks by sea water because they are all fitted with several high flow separators. The ballasts are now more important and used than in the past, relatively to the weight of the ship.
The superstructures in the heights of the modern ships are built in light materials (in the old ones too) and you don't find heavy structural pieces in them, for weight and elasticity reasons, the "master beam" of the ship to support the various constaints being located in the hull itself. The larger rooms are usually located in the heights too, so there is less partition and the density of the weight in the heights is less important than it appears if you look at the high and cubic shape, especialy if we consider the ship is very ballasted at the bottom, as I explain above. In fact, the only one big problem of high ships (if I put aside they are not very beautiful and elegant for several of them) is they are very sensitive with the wind, as Sympatico wrote.
I notice too, the case of the ANDREA DORIA is quite particular because there was a very big volume of water which went into a side of the hull in a very short time. So the stability of the ship had lot of chance to be quickly compromised. Despite that, she sank only the day after the collision.
Bye.

Posts: 1193 | From: France ...where the greatest liners ever are born, ...by far! | Registered: Feb 99 | IP: Logged

gohaze
First Class Passenger
Member # 586

posted 01-21-2000 06:45 AM

Vaccaro...GM. Just a bit more on the Andria Doria...the 2 compartment damage criteria was actually working if it hadn't been for that w/t door missing. It was said that when the Stockholm's lawyers were going to introduce that fact at the civil trial that that was when the case was dropped.
We did the first repositioning trip on the Grand Princess and it was quite windy all around the Med. The morning going into Livorno it was gusting up to 50 and I found it very interesting to watch how easily she made the docking. At Livorno it's a narrow entrance followed by a 90 deg. turn, also narrow and then another 90 to the berth, but you swing up and then go astern into it. The fact that even that ship with the huge windage she has, could do it smoothly, shows how good the computorised controls of all the engines,thrusters, rudders etc. is on these new ships. I understand they can pre-plan a docking on the computor, put the disc in when you get there and then stand back and watch it all happen.
Amazing!!! and only 60 years ago new ships were going to sea with only a telegraph and a magnetic compass.
yours aye...peter

Posts: 1909 | From: Vancouver.BC | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged

Grant
First Class Passenger
Member # 1000

posted 01-21-2000 03:05 PM

Vaccaro and gohaze; Thanks for shedding more light on the situation. With these new buildings with gas turbines high up in the funnel casings,how will they compensate for the added weight up top and a lack of weight low down, owing to the missing diesel generator sets, shafting etc? With ballast only? Indications are that these vessels are Panamax and as such they will not be able increase the beam at all; the recent newbuilds for each fleet have all been maximum width for the Panama (Sun Princess class, Century class, and even the latest in the Vision of the Seas group)

Posts: 834 | From: Victoria, BC, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

gohaze
First Class Passenger
Member # 586

posted 01-23-2000 07:07 AM

Grant..good question. Even more so now with the newer propulsion systems like the azipods which have eliminated the weight of long propeller shafts aft thrusters and even the rudders etc. However the actual engineroom spaces have decreased dramatically over the years as the size of engines has shrunk. Now putting gas turbines up top will half them again - these engines are basically aircraft engines so it's easy to imagine their size and weight for power compared to a diesel. This is going to leave a lot more space available for ballast which is very flexible to use. Now that these ships make nearly all their own fresh water requirements, other than fuel and with bunkering every 7-10 days thats not such a large amount, there is not much variation in their displacement tonnage.
I noticed on the Grand Princess that one of the deck officers was listed as the "ballast officer", so it's become a big enough job to have an officer dedicated to it. Sounds sensible.
I see that the azipod drive ships won't even be anchoring now as the computor will keep them in the reqired spot by using whatever is required. Actually that should make it much easier to give the launches a good lee alongside and speed up that operation.
You mention Panamax, but these new ones are only that for beam. They could be longer and deeper, as the max draught is about 39feet but this would make them way too deep for most ports - the Sun Princess has about 26feet. The max length is 965feet and the Sun is 856 to illustrate.
Guess that's why you have the quantum jump from around 75,000 GT to 110,000 GT and a beam from 105feet to 145. All in the beam.
Interesting to see what comes next.
rgds..peter

Posts: 1909 | From: Vancouver.BC | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged

Malcolm @ cruisepage
Cruise Director
Member # 301

posted 01-24-2000 08:54 AM

Hmm…this is all getting a bit technical for me! However I can contribute a few simple facts;

The QE2 is the only ship that risks the rigors of the North Atlantic in winter. Surely this is an endorsement of her deep drafted hull? None of today's mega-ships would risk it!

Today's mega-ships trade-off stability for cheapness of design and maximum passenger capacity. Additionally, these modern giants now have the ability to berth in relatively shallow waters. After all, the modern ships are designed for slower speeds and calmer waters than the great ocean liners of the past.

Posts: 19210 | From: Essex (Just Outside London) | Registered: A Long Time Ago! | IP: Logged

shipman1
Just Boarded
Member # 939

posted 02-05-2000 10:35 PM

having cruised many times on the federico c with her 29' draft, i can say that this shipped rolled a lot. it may have also had something to do with the constant changes in the wheel to maintain her on course. when you would look out over her water trail, it zigzagged as opposed to now a days where the trail is straight. i also heard rumors that an extra deck was added which also made her top heavy. what do you think?
shipman1

Posts: 6 | Registered: Dec 1999 | IP: Logged

gohaze
First Class Passenger
Member # 586

posted 02-06-2000 12:02 PM

Hi...she was built in Italy in 1958 and is steam turbine driven. So there are a whole bunch of things here - Italian ships were notorious for poor stability to start. it looks like you are correct that additinal housing was added high up - another minus. With many small tanks and using more fuel than a motorship, the later regulations regarding oil pollution could make these ships a nightmare for the Officers trying to keep the ship stable. And thus your rolling and listing.
As for a wandering wake...that's the sign of a lazy or even new quartermaster, but I suspect she's been fitted with automatic steering by now, and thus should have the usual nice straight wake astern.
......peter

As for the

Posts: 1909 | From: Vancouver.BC | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged

Panos
First Class Passenger
Member # 1022

posted 02-06-2000 02:11 PM

Well,
I 'm sure that all these newbuilts must have "added mass" somewhere below the water level. This is one of the methods used to make a ship stable (i.e increase the tonnage) and more important to "move" the centre of gravity downwards. This is actually what happens with the tall double deck buses which have their engines and all mechanical and airconditioning stuff below the "passenger area"
Now if you are interested in what will happen with the new "jet engine" ships...well it seems that they will have to put a lot of bulk load somewhere below water level in order to move the centre of gravity at a reasonable and safe height.

Posts: 443 | From: Cyprus | Registered: Jan 2000 | IP: Logged

gohaze
First Class Passenger
Member # 586

posted 02-07-2000 11:48 AM

Hi...see that Carnival has a news release out that they will be using a new enviro-friendly diesel-electric engine system from Wartsila in their future new construction.
However, as most of the new cruise ships have to be built with 2 main criteria regarding size - max width for Panama and a max draught for the ports/anchorages they are going to, there only remains the internal spaces such as the engine room which can be reduced. The azipods have helped a bit by eliminating shafting and thruster spaces. Greater engine efficiency has reduced the quantity of fuel carried as has better fresh water production. What that means is there is a lot more cubic space available low down for water ballast. I think I mentioned before that the Grand Princess has a "Ballast Officer" so obviously the job is a big one.
The weight of the consumables for the average cruise today is really quite small when you compare it to something like the Queen Mary doing a crossing.
All these things have a bearing on stability and you can be sure that today's ships are an awful lot better that way than the old timers.....peter

Posts: 1909 | From: Vancouver.BC | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged

All times are ET (US)

Ultimate Bulletin Board^TM 6.1.0.3

VACATION & CRUISE SPECIALS

Check out these great deals from CruisePage.com

Royal Caribbean - Bahamas Getaway from $129 per person

Description: Experience the beautiful ports of Nassau and Royal Caribbean's private island - CocoCay on a 3-night Weekend Getaway to the Bahamas. Absorb everything island life has to offer as you snorkel with the stingrays, parasail above the serene blue waters and walk the endless white sand beaches. From Miami.

Carnival - 4-Day Bahamas from $229 per person

Description: Enjoy a wonderful 3 Day cruise to the fun-loving playground of Nassau, Bahamas. Discover Nassau, the capital city as well as the cultural, commercial and financial heart of the Bahamas. Meet the Atlantic Southern Stingrays, the guardians of Blackbeard's treasure.

NCL - Bermuda - 7 Day from $499 per person

Description: What a charming little chain of islands. Walk on pink sand beaches. Swim and snorkel in turquoise seas. Take in the historical sights. They're stoically British and very quaint. Or explore the coral reefs. You can get to them by boat or propelled by fins. You pick. Freestyle Cruising doesn't tell you where to go or what to do. Sure, you can plan ahead, or decide once onboard. After all, it's your vacation. There are no deadlines or must do's.

Holland America - Eastern Caribbean from From $599 per person

Description: White sand, black sand, talcum soft or shell strewn, the beaches of the Eastern Caribbean invite you to swim, snorkel or simply relax. For shoppers, there's duty-free St. Thomas, the Straw Market in Nassau, French perfume and Dutch chocolates on St. Maarten. For history buffs, the fascinating fusion of Caribbean, Latin and European cultures. For everyone, a day spent on HAL's award winning private island Half Moon Cay.

Celebrity - 7-Night Western Mediterranean from $549 per person

Description: For centuries people have traveled to Europe to see magnificent ruins, art treasures and natural wonders. And the best way to do so is by cruise ship. Think of it - you pack and unpack only once. No wasted time searching for hotels and negotiating train stations. Instead, you arrive at romantic ports of call relaxed, refreshed and ready to take on the world.

Holland America - Alaska from From $499 per person

Description: Sail between Vancouver and Seward, departing Sundays on the ms Statendam or ms Volendam and enjoy towering mountains, actively calving glaciers and pristine wildlife habitat. Glacier Bay and College Fjord offer two completely different glacier-viewing experiences.

More Vacation & Cruise Specials...