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...
I wonder if any of you might have and idea why this strange (in my opinion, anyway) decision was made when building this particular ship.
Regards,
Rego007
I have no idea why she doesn't have a stern thruster.
Monarch of the Seas
Majesty of the Seas
Sovereign
In that case the question would be why SOVEREIGN appears to have a stern thruster the two newer ships don't. Perhaps it was added?
I have seen all these ships enough times I should be able to recall whether any of them have stern thrusters but I'm drawing a blank. (Of course you can visually tell whether any ship has a stern thruster by the markings on the hull.)
Bruce - Yes, NORWAY had stern thrusters, in fact three of them, and three bow thrusters. These were added by NCL. QE2 still has her original two bow thrusters, now reportedly operating at about half their original power after 39 years of use.
quote:Originally posted by dougnewman:Bruce - Yes, NORWAY had stern thrusters, in fact three of them, and three bow thrusters. These were added by NCL. QE2 still has her original two bow thrusters, now reportedly operating at about half their original power after 39 years of use.[/QB]
Bruce - Yes, NORWAY had stern thrusters, in fact three of them, and three bow thrusters. These were added by NCL. QE2 still has her original two bow thrusters, now reportedly operating at about half their original power after 39 years of use.[/QB]
The latest images of ss Norway on the Midship Century site show the aft three thrusters. As for QE2, I wonder w/the tens of millions spent on her over the years why her original thrusters were'nt rebuilt years ago.
When on board, she seemed to maneuver well enough, albeit with a little more vibration when the rudders were at great angles.
My initial point in this matter was that I found it strange that the "middle" ship of this trio would be the one without the thruster. Sovereign was the prototype of the group. I could see if she didn't have one and the others were designed with one. Or, conversely, if it was determined to not be needed and the latter two were designed without the thruster. It just struck me as rather strange, but I guess we may never know why.
Thanks again,Rego007
I'm sure someone knows why, but the odds of finding that person are pretty slim...however, you never know, miracles sometimes happen on the Internet.
quote:Originally posted by dougnewman:QE2 still has her original two bow thrusters, now reportedly operating at about half their original power after 39 years of use.
Hey Doug,
I was informed when aboard QE2 in March 08 that one of her two thrusters was unable to be used due to technical problems. QE2 required up to 4 tugs to get out of berths that had previously been done with 2 during this voyage. When asked, they said it's unlikely that this thrusters would be fixed before her retirement, and considering she never made it back to Dry Dock, I'd say it's going broken to Dubai.
Chris.
quote:Originally posted by Chris:I was informed when aboard QE2 in March 08 that one of her two thrusters was unable to be used due to technical problems.
quote:Originally posted by Rego007:My initial point in this matter was that I found it strange that the "middle" ship of this trio would be the one without the thruster. Sovereign was the prototype of the group. I could see if she didn't have one and the others were designed with one. Or, conversely, if it was determined to not be needed and the latter two were designed without the thruster. It just struck me as rather strange, but I guess we may never know why.
I'm guessing, but one explanation might be that after in-service experience with the first ship, someone suggested they could try to get away without the thruster. Howeber, experience with the second ship showed that, on balance, the thruster was desirable to have.
Monarch and Majesty have 2 forward, none aft.
All three have same variable pitch propellors, steering gear, wartsila diesels, same reduction gears and rudder assemblies.
Sovereign was 'over engineered' as she was a departure in new ship contruction, and maneuverability was a concern for a vessel of this mass with shallow draft and wind impact.
Alsthom (Chantiers) shipbuilders were able to prove Sovereign's performance in sea trials that she could indeed manage Miami's turning basin without reliance on a stern thruster.
Subsequently, the stern thruster was financially redundant to the construction of Majesty and Monarch.
https://exchange.dnv.com/exchange/main.aspx?extool=vessel&subview=machinerysummary&vesselid=14915
https://exchange.dnv.com/exchange/main.aspx?extool=vessel&subview=machinerysummary&vesselid=16251
https://exchange.dnv.com/exchange/main.aspx?extool=vessel&subview=machinerysummary&vesselid=16765
quote:Originally posted by Chris:Hey Doug,I was informed when aboard QE2 in March 08 that one of her two thrusters was unable to be used due to technical problems. QE2 required up to 4 tugs to get out of berths that had previously been done with 2 during this voyage. ... Chris.
I was informed when aboard QE2 in March 08 that one of her two thrusters was unable to be used due to technical problems. QE2 required up to 4 tugs to get out of berths that had previously been done with 2 during this voyage. ... Chris.
We had a similar situation once - Can't remember exactly when. The Chief Engineer got a wet suit on and went down to have a look. He eventually reappeared with the remains of a lobster-pot.
He later told us he only did it himself because it was warm water, if it had been cold he would have sent someone else. Ah, the privilege of rank
Regards, Colin.
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...