First, I want to thank Onno Heesbeen for reproducing a splendid original model to work form.

Intention is to keep the look as an evolution of the original, and how I think WF Gibbs would have designed it as a warm weather ship w/o cargo capacity.

Balconies are a necessary evil. Design emulates the QE2 for an integrated look. The aft deck terracing has been extended 100' to allow for an obligitory 24 hour buffet, swimming pool area, sun deck, gymnasium added to boat deck ala SS Norway, and athletic courts above.

A black hull is not good for hotweather cruising. Gray is my choice here.

Interior plans to come

[ 04-02-2003: Message edited by: desirod7 ]

Actually it is not easy to alter her, I wanted to keep her “navy” and sturdy kind of appearance because that is her essence. If you’re not careful then every little alteration erases a bit of that essence.

I looked at the QE2 since she also got the same transference from liner to cruiser (Though QE2 was already build with this in mind) I added the “QE2 like” windshields to her aft section. I did extend the aft decks to create more inner spaces somehow it wasn’t a problem to alter the stern without too much loss of her general appearance. The QE2 like balcony cabins is probably the best solution to ad veranda Cabins (The big rectangular block plunked on the Norway is the worse.)

Between the funnels I created an indoor pool and recreation area with a retractable roof. I extended the promenade which could now hold a Grill with outside terrace. Then there are some small details like cleaning up the cranes and ad six tenders that could be used for harbors with lesser depths.

As for her livery, I’m one of the few that doesn’t mind white hulls and hull art. I left the funnels in original colors, though it would not be a big problem to play a bit with the arrangement of the nationalistic colors. For her hull art I played around with some curved lines to create a bit of optical illusion of waves.

Best, Onno

PS: Desirod I see you already posted your concept, I’ve been a bit busy lately and hadn’t had the time to post it for you.

[ 05-01-2003: Message edited by: Onno ]

If I open up a Naval Architecture design studio, you will be my first hire

quote:

---

Originally posted by Onno:

PS: Desirod I see you already posted your concept, I’ve been a bit busy lately and hadn’t had the time to post it for you.

---

I like Onno's best (primarily because the new upper decks look better-integrated) but for the QE2-look wind baffles on the aft deck. They are a bit too "swept-back" and somehow conflict with the look of the ship to me.

I also prefer the gray hull of Desirod's design. However it appears to take on a "false sheer" curve which does not look very good IMHO.

Onno, Nice work on the graphics...I don't have that capability...I wish I could have someone like you create a better illustration of this design. By the way, this crude design has been reviewed by an investment team and a shipbuilding engineer and the general consenus is that this would be the best way to make the Big U competative within the cruise industry. Her tonnage would be raised to over 65,000 tons. Investors, however prefer to make minimal exterior changes to her superstructure for PHASE ONE, and spend more money on re-engining the ship's aft engine room. PHASE TWO would be to then completely refit the superstructure..."similar" to what I have shown in this initial crude drawings. Below is another close view of the forward part of the superstructure. The design works and she would look even more powerful and "liner-like", yet she would have more efficient use of the space onboard.

The middle section with the balconies is not bad (looks just like QM2) but the forward superstructure ruins her profile, and takes up most of her foredeck (à la SILJA SERENADE/SYMPHONY and countless other big ferries). I also don't like that it is two decks taller under the radar mast... Sure-fire way to ruin the aesthetics of a ship IMHO.

Yes the forward section is a bit much...there is another design that brings 2 of the decks together rather than splitting them all up. Actually the original features are the funnels and the hull of course. It is the hull that is very costly to reproduce nowdays. SS United States has a very strong hull that would cost a fortune to reproduce. Yes this design takes away from the original design and look, but that design and look is outdated today...a new design like this would make the ship more competative in today's market and greatly increase her interior space. If you saw Hadley's design and this one side-by-side you would see that this design is the more desireable look. Also in Hadley's design there was a HUGE forward lounge above the bridge that just plain looked too BIG and tall. This design is more streamlined. It's hard to see from this drawing but there are many similarilties to the QM2's balconied areas, but mostly this design was more patterned after the new Radisson ships.

Also, I like Onno's and Desirod's ideas, but they wouldn't work considering the ship's width. It looks as though their designs with the balconies would be contained within the area "between" the lifeboats, but the ship's current structure wouldn't allow it because of the machinery below the first and aft funnel. The balconies would have to extend "over" the lifeboats. Like I said I wish I had a better graphic so people could SEE how this design really works.

[ 04-02-2003: Message edited by: Barryboat ]

The aft engine foom would be used. Original engines using 2 boilers or modern smokeless diesels, choice to be studied. 60,000 horsepower will drive the BigU at 27 knots. With modern propellors and just 2 of them probably faster.

30 knots on deck at sea is enough wind to knock one over. Try standing up in a convertible at speed.

Onno and I are in the same profession and have the same education, albiet different specialties. We are a generation apart in schooling, and Europeans have a different design approach than Americans. I have studied in Denmark and have European clients.

Our differences create the synergy as much as the similarities.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barryboat:
cruiseny,

Also, I like Onno's and Desirod's ideas, but they wouldn't work considering the ship's width. It looks as though their designs with the balconies would be contained within the area "between" the lifeboats, but the ship's current structure wouldn't allow it because of the machinery below the first and aft funnel. The balconies would have to extend "over" the lifeboats. Like I said I wish I had a better graphic so people could SEE how this design really works.

[ 04-02-2003: Message edited by: Barryboat ]

---

By the way, my re-do of Onno's re-do includes the following:

A) Extension of Onno's new balcony deck towards the rear

B) Addition of similar balcony deck above that deck, also extended rearward

C) Addition of glass-enclosed upper deck along the length of original upper deck that would include floor to ceiling windows for the Magradoom mid-ships pool (as in Onno's), as well as new lidos, span, and two deck, glass enclosed forward observation lounge above the bridge

D) Superstructure extended forward slightly with bridge extended forward as well. Also, new whaleback-style forward superstructure connecting orignal promenade deck to bow. There is still a very long foc'sle

E) Extension of all stern decks to the rear. New open air pool aft of the second funnel, on new lido deck.

F) New stern mast aft of second funnel that is similar to main mast

I know that this sounds like a massive overhaul that could look monstrous. However, you should see how amazing she looks. The revised ship has an essence that the Disney ships tried to capture, and a regal-ness that QM2 doesn't possess.

Here is a new scanned updated version of my design which I wasn't able to scan before because of it's size.

Here's a closer view of the restructured forward section. The bridge is all enclosed with lot's of glass. There are two different sized balconied staterooms. As you can see the lifeboats were shifted down one deck to accomodate the new balconied staterooms.

[ 04-07-2003: Message edited by: Barryboat ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barryboat:
I'd like to see what others think about my design.

---

To be frank, I still don't like it that much. The superstructure and hull just don't "mesh" right... To me it screams, "conversion". It looks top-heavy... The blue hull looks seems about to disappear beneath that massive superstructure.

And the lack of sheer in the superstructure compounds the whole thing.

While your design has merit and presents valid points, I think I like Hadley's design better. It seems to flow better in terms of the manner in which the decks terrace downward towards the stern. It's just more aesthetically pleasing. Your design smacks a bit of how the Norway was redesigned, particularly aft, and I've always felt that that's where the Norway's redesign went most wrong. No offense, of course.

Desirod7, your design is quite nice, but I suspect it will not be very competitive. The "veranda-mania" factor has your design lacking a bit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barryboat:
I'd like to see what others think about my design. Any comments?

---

Why not take a Vista class hull, lenghten the bow, and replicate the BigU stacks. The '50's decor inside could be copied.

Yes,the BIgU hull would be very expensive to build new, but who needs it. The low deckheads and many subdivisions are a big compromise for the unneeded increased strength in warm water cruising.

quote:

---

I recall from a previous post you made, that you proposed it to an investment group and the BigU foundation and was rejected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barryboat:
I did speak to someone with the SS United States Foundation, and they are opposed to ANY modifications to the original ship. They want to make the Big U into a museum, but she wouldn't make a good museum, because all of her interior is GONE.

---

If they don't want any modifications, I think they're a little late. Tearing out her interiors is certainly a modification!

If what they're proposing is to rebuild the ship to 100% original specifications as a museum, I'd say these people had ought to have their heads examined.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JOE:
Onno, I also was thinking about modifying your design a bit. You have 38 balcony cabins aft of the bridge. I was thinking of adding 4 more for a total of 42 on one side. The grand total would be 84 balcony cabins. I was thinking on adding an additional deck making it have a total of 168 balcony cabins. But it would make her top heavy. I could put four balcony suites aft surrounding the new pool.

---

Hello Joe,

I have no problems if you show my design with credits to me, but I can not approve adjusting or adding to my rendition. Then I would suggest you make your own rendition.

Even a second extra deck, I think, would not ruin her profile too badly, though of course I would prefer only one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by cruiseny:
Onno... Why not contact NCL with your idea? It can't hurt and I for one like it a lot . OK, the hull color is not my cup of tea, but it really does preserve her profile while adding those balconies.

Even a second extra deck, I think, would not ruin her profile too badly, though of course I would prefer only one.

What Barry proposes, IMHO, does. I hope NCL does not do something like that, though it is still of course better than the alternative, which is just leaving her to rust right into the water, or having her end her days at some scrapyard someplace...

---

Maybe I will. Of course the hull coloring pattern was just for fun, though I myself like it (but then again it could look horrible on a real ship) An extra deck of balconies wouldn’t hurt as well though it does make her look less sleek.

Best, Onno

[ 04-14-2003: Message edited by: Onno ]