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...Disney Cruise Line announced today that the honorary role of "godparent" for its new ship, the Disney Treasure, will be held by The Walt Disney Company cast, crew, Imagineers and employees around the world. The profound declaration is a heartfelt tribute to the more than 200,000 dreamers and doers who make every Disney entertainment, vacation and at-home experience possible. Disney Cruise Line is proud to celebrate...
Latest News...Carnival Cruise Line is adding to its line-up of 2026/27 deployment with sailings from New York City on Carnival Venezia, and more Long Beach sailings on Carnival Firenze and Carnival Radiance. “Our two Carnival Fun Italian Style ships offer great options from the east and west coasts, conveniently connecting New York and Long Beach to popular destinations, while delivering unique experiences on board...
Latest News...Vacationers are in for more ways to make memories across Royal Caribbean’s latest combination of tropical and Northeast 2026-27 getaways. The lineup of 12 Royal Caribbean ships rounds out a variety of adventures across Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico and the Northeast for every type of family and vacationer to get away any time of year. Crown & Anchor Society loyalty members...
Therefore, I wonder who Stephen Payne ensured this with the QM2, as he did not use Aluminium, but steel. The drafts of both Voyager and QM2 are similar and quite shallow for their size.
(Interestingly the SS Norway has a deeper draft than the QM2 and the QE2’s is similar to the QM2).
quote:Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:We have confirmed that a Video about building the Voyager class clear states that some of the upper decks are constructed of Aluminium to ensure that this very tall ship is NOT top heavy.Therefore, I wonder who Stephen Payne ensured this with the QM2, as he did not use Aluminium, but steel. The drafts of both Voyager and QM2 are similar and quite shallow for their size.(Interestingly the SS Norway has a deeper draft than the QM2 and the QE2’s is similar to the QM2).
QM2 is wider (Beam).
So how is stability achieved?
quote:Originally posted by PamM:With the extra thickness & strength of QM2's Steel hull, and therefore the actual weight of her lower hull, I should imagine her centre of gravity is far far lower than any Voyager Ship and a darn site more stable.
Good point!
I wonder if the 'Royal Prom' which is essentially a big hole in the middle of the ship affects stability?
quote:Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:Yes, my information says the published beam of Voyager is 19 feet wider than the QM2's?So how is stability achieved?
Hmmm, maybe what I read was that QM2's beam was wider than QE2's.
Is it really 19 feet wider? The bridge width is not the important figure. The important figure is widest point of the hull at or below the water line; that is the true beam. For QM2 that is 135 feet. What is it for Voyager?
In any event, using just the beam of two ships to attempt to explain differences in their stability is overly simplistic and not very reliable.
The shape of the underwater hull also needs to be considered, rather than just her beam. For example, Weight determines the volume of water displaced and the geometry of the underwater hull determines how far the ship will sink into the water (and hence her draught) to achieve that displacement.
On top of all that, the location of the centre of gravity in relation to meta-centre (centre of geometry) has the greatest affect on stability....the lower the centre of gravity, the better.
The heavier steel used in the hull (mentioned by Pam) offsets the extra weight of using steel rather than alumumum (or aluminium if you prefer) in the superstructure. This was achieved by moving the public rooms into the hull, allowing the major length of the superstructure to be narrower (and by extension lighter) than it would otherwise have been.
I have no doubt that there are other factors that need to be considered but the point that stability cannot be explained by one number has been made.
Brian
[ 05-02-2004: Message edited by: Brian_O ]
155.5 Feet.
Was there any mention of them, at any time?
Given the legacy of smashed crockery, I gather that they were not completely effective.
[ 05-04-2004: Message edited by: Cambodge ]
quote:Originally posted by Cambodge:Given the legacy of smashed crockery, I gather that they were not completely effective.
Am I right in thinking a ship using stabilizers loses speed and uses more fuel - hence the Captain's sometimes choose not to use them?
Observations?
quote:Originally posted by Cambodge: how well did the stabilizers actually work in the heavy seas encountered?Was there any mention of them, at any time?Given the legacy of smashed crockery, I gather that they were not completely effective.
Adding to Colin's comments in this thread, I felt she did an excellent job. How much of that was down to the stabilizers I don't know, I never heard them mentioned in the Commodore's reports, but I was usually in a lecture which typically overran, and didn't get to hear them. I did hear some people say they'd been able to feel the jolt when they were employed, but I am sceptical there.The waves were all over the windows on deck 2 from time to time but ne'r when my camera was in action. Spray was also over the top of deck 13 at times.She was more pitching than rolling. The plates etc were not sliding back and forth, but ended up on the floor when one of the extra high waves 'slapped' hard, a quick jolt. I am not very good at explaining.We were [on the Sun am] eating breakfast in Kings Court, all was fine, just the pitching, when bang, a big slap on the starboard side and crockery basically dived to port. I reacted quickly and put my arm across the edge of the table, not losing anything, but several tables did, and one of the large urns with palms fell over next to us. This is a big urn 2' 6"+ high, see here , and as we discovered, filled with sand and the plastic 'fronds' on metal poles held in place with polystyrene in the rim covered with stones. Quite amusing watching the steward march off, palm under arms, poles and polystrene sticking out behind. I did not have the camera.We got slapped like that a few times during the night, hence the loss of champagne, and also I believe wine too, as certain items on the wine list became 'not available'.We did roll a fair bit one, late evening, when I could not stand without holding on in the Play Zone, and flew across the room. The children were only allowed to sit down. The contents of their cupboards were completely turned upside down. One of the co-ordinators there had been on the Maiden Voyage and his comments were that the rough weather experienced then was more 'side to side' & nothing like what we were currently experiencing. A totally different movement altogether he said.Pam
quote:Originally posted by PamM: I did hear some people say they'd been able to feel the jolt when they were employed, but I am sceptical there.
I did hear some people say they'd been able to feel the jolt when they were employed, but I am sceptical there.
I have long been able to discern when the stabilisers are in use on QE2; she has a unique little "wiggle" to her that disappears when they are not in use.
quote:Originally posted by PamM:...hence the loss of champagne, and also I believe wine too, as certain items on the wine list became 'not available'.
That was more likely to be caused by the big drinker's onboard, rather than by big waves!
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...