cruiseship-gallery.de

It's great to see a traditional promenade deck on a new design as well.

Anyhow, thanks a lot of the pictures!

[ 10-30-2010: Message edited by: Ernst ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:
Very much to my surprise I have to say that there are some angles that can compete with ships like Norwegian Epic (not in a good way).

---

None of the angles I viewed of DISNEY DREAM remind me of EPIC in the least. Certainly not the aft end. EPIC is a giant box with very few curves. DREAM has many curves and if anything is a little flat on top.

I don't think DREAM is as good looking as her older sisters, but none the less as far as newbuilds go, quite attractive.

I do wish the funnels were taller and had more of a base that they sat on (like FRANCE did). This has always been my objection with the WONDER and MAGIC as well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

None of the angles I viewed of DISNEY DREAM remind me of EPIC in the least. Certainly not the aft end. EPIC is a giant box with very few curves. DREAM has many curves and if anything is a little flat on top.[...]

---

She does not remind me of Norwegian Epic either and I did not mean to say that. Disney Dream is ugly in a different way from that angle but that view is certainly in the same league as some angles of Norwegian Epic.

Also, just because a shape is curved it (sadly) does not mean that it must be beautiful. In a way the 'boxy' stern of Norwegian Epic is actually one of the few strong points of her exterior appearance (it's a simple and 'clean' shape). Actually, the aft of Disney Dream looks a bit 'funny' because of these curves which simply do not work out for me at all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

She does not remind me of Norwegian Epic either and I did not mean to say that. Disney Dream is ugly in a different way from that angle but that view is certainly in the same league as some angles of Norwegian Epic.

Also, just because a shape is curved it (sadly) does not mean that it must be beautiful. In a way the 'boxy' stern of Norwegian Epic is actually one of the few strong points of her exterior appearance (it's a simple and 'clean' shape). Actually, the aft of Disney Dream looks a bit 'funny' because of these curves which simply do not work out for me at all.

---

Personally I don't find the aft end of EPIC to be a redeeming quality, just ugly and boxy (pretty much like the rest of her).

I find the aft end of DISNEY DREAM interesting. Not ugly, but perhaps not attractive either.

If anything, it reminds me of CARNIVAL DREAM, which is interesting as they share the same name.

Ernie

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

Personally I don't find the aft end of EPIC to be a redeeming quality, just ugly and boxy (pretty much like the rest of her).

---

No, it's hard to compensate for all these other details. Also, the design of the stern is not nice for those aboard since there is only one public deck looking aft. However, the simplicity of that shape is one of the few statements the exterior of this ship makes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

I find the aft end of DISNEY DREAM interesting. Not ugly, but perhaps not attractive either.

If anything, it reminds me of CARNIVAL DREAM, which is interesting as they share the same name.

Ernie

---

I have to see more of Disney Dream yet but overall the exterior of Carnival Dream finally looks nicer to me since it's much more consistent. I may add - to avoid misunderstandings - that the 'original' Disney ships certainly look nicer than Carnival Dream (and many other contemporary cruise ships) - I guess that's why I am a bit disappointed by the aft of Disney Dream.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:
Attached is a pic I took of the DISNEY DREAM model as showcased at Seatrade. Even then I could see the aft end was going to be 'unique'.

Ernie

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

Thanks for the picture. I also saw a model of her some time ago and the stern of the actual ship is different to the stern of that model. Of course, the narrow superstructure is visible in both cases and also the model must have some 'funny' angles.

---

Do you really think the actual stern is that different? I initially thought so too, but then I started to examine it more closely and looked at other pictures of the DREAM float out.

In the picture you posted, it appears the aft decks don't come to the "V" shape as on the model, but they actually do when you look at other photos. The one thing that is different is the paint line. On the model the black paint is lower on the hull and goes across the stern in a straight line. On the actual ship, the black paint is higher, and it curves up at the stern so the Disney figurines have a black back drop. I'm not sure if there are any actual structural differences?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atlcruiser:
Very nice looking ship. The only thing that I do not like is her name. Disney could have come up with something more original.

---

I think it's actually a very appropriate name for a Disney ship. It's just too bad other cruise lines are using it as well.

It is interesting that Disney can build such an attractive cruise ship with the classic ocean liner style appearance while Cunard rely on the Vista's for their two newest Queens. If Disney could do it, surely Cunard / Carnival could have?

Not to say QV or QE aren't nice ships.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DEIx15x8:
I've been looking at the pictures and model and I can't figure out which funnel is fake (if there still is one). Does anyone know if they are still faking one for the dream and if so which?

---

On the DREAM it's the same as the WONDER and MAGIC. The aft funnel is a working funnel and the forward is a dummy.

What I discovered on WONDER, and I'm assuming it's the same way on DREAM, is that even though the aft funnel is real, it's not solid as you might think. It's hollow inside and there are actually twin uptakes. In the center section of the funnel there was a production facility for shows, as well as stairs for the slide.

Of course looking at the profile of the ship you would never be able to tell this.

Attached is a pic for reference.

Ernie

quote:

---

Originally posted by DEIx15x8:
I've been looking at the pictures and model and I can't figure out which funnel is fake (if there still is one).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris:
She's a beautiful ship.

It is interesting that Disney can build such an attractive cruise ship with the classic ocean liner style appearance while Cunard rely on the Vista's for their two newest Queens. If Disney could do it, surely Cunard / Carnival could have?

Not to say QV or QE aren't nice ships.

Chris.

---

It comes down to money doesn't it Chris? Carnival can pretty much do whatever they want as they have the financial backing, but they are conservative when it comes to newbuilds. This strategy has really paid off for them. They figure they can save a lot of money using a common platform ship. So long as it's just different enough to fit the brand and it's accepted by most passengers, it's a win win.

Even though Cunard probably carries more ship savvy passengers than most brands, the vast majority probably have no clue that QV and QE are essentially the same ship sailing for HAL, P&O, and even Costa. Marketing plays into this as well, and Cunard drills that "ocean liner" heritage down your throat to the point people actually believe it. Slap on some Cunard colors and a logo and voila, instant ocean liner.

Carnival did prove they have imagination and can still be a risk taker when they built QM2. Unfortunately I don't know if we will ever see a one-off ship design from them again, of course never say never.

greetings Ben.

[ 10-31-2010: Message edited by: Maasdam ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maasdam:
Sorry I don't think she looks like a liner (read prwvious posts) in the angels of the pictures taken yet. 2 funnels don't make that a ship looks like a liner. I must see more pictures of here. On this moment I think here older sisters are better looking.

greetings Ben.

---

I don't think she looks like a "liner" either, especially if you are talking about traditional liners from the Golden Age of ocean liner travel. Of course no modern day passenger ship looks like a liner of the past, not with rows upon rows of balconies, lifeboats to low to the water line, and massive super structures.

This being said, I don't think it was Disney's intent to make a replica of a traditional ocean liner. The Disney ships are meant to be a modern day interpretation of an ocean liner, and in this respect I think they have succeeded. In some ways, I actually prefer the looks of DREAM over her older sisters, and the more I study the stern area the more I like it.

Overall, I think DREAM is a very attractive cruise ship. One of the most attractive since WONDER and MAGIC were introduced. I can't wait to sail on her myself and experience that Disney magic!

Attached is another pic. Quite handsome I think.

Ernie

hmm well as a newbuild she is one of the better looking ships, surely in this striking photo made by
Ruth Kummel

enjoy

quote:

---

Originally posted by buddhaJoe:
hi there,

hmm well as a newbuild she is one of the better looking ships, surely in this striking photo made by
Ruth Kummel

enjoy

regards
b. Joe

---

Great Photo. Overall nice ship, just a few minor things I dont care for though.

Cam J

[ 10-31-2010: Message edited by: Cam J ]

While I don't think the Disney ships look exactly Luke 'liners' there are some nice touches that were clearly added for a design purose.

I recall Bill Miller saying of Wonder & Magic that they kind of looked like what Popular Mechanic in the 1950's would show for a modern liner.

The bow of Dream is superb, as buddhaJoe's photo shows. The retro style anchor is a nice touch.

Her bridge and forward superstructure has been styled and her aft decks give the appearance of terracing, especially if viewed from a distance.

The twin funnels play very little in my thouhts of her being reminiscent of a liner, though a nice touch, it's more the clean lines and purposely designed features that nicely pay tribute to the liner style resulting in perhaps the most attractive cruise ship newbuild in a dedade.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aggablinky:
Very nice pics, can anyone tell me how she compares to the QM2 dimensions and tonnage wise? She looks very similar to me, but i could be mistaken. Thanks in advance.

---

This info from www.nauticalcities.com

QUEEN MARY 2
Type: Ocean Liner
GRT: 148528
Length: 1132 ft
Beam: 135 ft
Speed: 30 knots
Registry: United Kingdom
Passengers: 2620 Crew: 1253
Shipyard: Chantiers de l'Atlantique

DISNEY DREAM
Type: Cruise Ship
GRT: 128000
Length: 1083 ft
Beam: 121 ft
Speed: N/A knots
Registry: N/A
Passengers: 4000 Crew: 945
Shipyard: Meyer Werft

[ 10-31-2010: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]