QM2 Design

[ancoaster78]

Hi Everybody,

Does anyone else here think Cunard so NEARLY got QM2 right?

I am thrilled it got built, but disapointed, as I know we all are, with certain aspects of its design.

I am staring at pictures of it, imaging how much more elegant it would look without those uptake aft of the funnel, they make it look stockier, take them away, merge them into the funnel or somehting, and the ship looks a lot sleeker and more QE2esque!

Anyone agree? Or got other points to make, lets work out all the perfections, and get Cunard to oblige us with a heavy refit! :-)

[Twynkle]

Hey - Andytooo,
I know this is 'almost off topic' - on the other hand, it could be just about OK!
Please, before  Cunard is required to change anything at all, about anything else...
don't they absolutely need to 'oblige us' by making an offer for QE2?
Rosie

[NorCal Queen]

I rather think they did what they could. Sadly there are economics to be factored in, certain amount of cabins that type of thing. I am somewhat new to pure, good liner design, but my neophyte eyes find her very appealing. (oh the horror lol)

Where I am most pleased is in performance. I am so happy they made a true performance liner vs a gussied up cruise box. I for one would not cross on anything less.

She is a bit tall, but proportioned fairly well. I like the front, the back could use some work, but I am at a loss to describe what that would be.

[highlander0108]

She is a bit tall, but proportioned fairly well. I like the front, the back could use some work, but I am at a loss to describe what that would be.

We all should at least like the bow, since the shape is lifted right off the QE2.   As Stephen Payne has been quoted many times describing the design of QM2, QE2's bow is well proven and quite effective in handling the rough seas with ease and was the basis of the larger QM2 bow shape.  Qe2's designers nailed the design and Stephen Payne was smart to use what has worked.  It also is a nice gesture that for some people will remind them of QE2 for years to come everytime that see that bow.  Of course, there is one big difference, which is mainly underwater; the very pronounced bulbous bow feature.

Another feature that I recall Flagship pointing out is the center section of the bridge, which is angled forward and very reminicient of QE2's iconic bridge design.  I preferred the original bridge wings before the extensions were added since now they are looking a bit more Princess like in their extensions beyond the sides of the ship.  These extensions were added during the drydock after the run in with the bottom in Ft. Lauderdale that took out one of the pods.

Regarding the stern, I can put a finger on the part that is most odd that I am sure everyon can agree on.  It is the ackward transition from spoon shaped traditional "liner" stern to the flat surface required for the pods to perform.  It is the fold or crease that is highlighted as two unique surfaces meeting that just does not look right.  I wish that they "faired" or smoothed that transition more.  I suspect there were many versions studied and eventually, when the definitive book on QM2's design is written, perhaps we shall see more of the design studies.

[ancoaster78]

Hey,

I deffinatly agree how awesome it is a true performance liner was built, and about the bow too, I love the bow, and the forward end fo the superstructure and bridge, really very very well done!

The stern of the hull was chosen for practical purposes, I understand the compromise made, and am very happy the choice they made was made instead of a regular transom stern, but some alterations to the funnel and after end of the superstructure could lift it to the level of perfection we enjoyed with QE2, maybe anyone would like to add thier photoshopped suggestions, just for fun?!

Cheers 

[534]

After seeing her out in the Atlantic from the QE2, I have to say she looked marvellous. I think Stephen Payne did a masterful job in keeping the accountants somewhat at bay. I think that she age gracefully and take on character.