Adverts only show for non-members



Author Topic: Not RMS!  (Read 16685 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pete cain

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #40 on: Jul 20, 2010, 09:05 PM »
Rosie , I'm sorry , but that entry only goes to 1967, we all know QE2  came after this date, as ever;   you are ahed of the game looking into Royal Mail . com (I was going to do that next week or whenever!!) However it's probably completely out of topic here, but I was looking up the R M S thing & came across this c/o' QE2 ' a ship for all seasons' ,David R Hutchings, p23, '' In the Mary and the Elizabeth the kitchens, being so low in those ships, had a garbage shute which opened to the sea through the bottom of the ship and down which the rubbish could be jettisoned.There was no such shute on the QE2 so garbage would have to be bagged and manually thrown overboard. That is until a special door was cut into the side of the ship, disguised behind the large' U 'of the red CUNARD logo painted onthe superstructure at the fore end of the Quarter Deck''. Funny what you find whilst looking for something else

Offline Twynkle

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #41 on: Jul 20, 2010, 10:04 PM »
Rosie , I'm sorry , but that entry only goes to 1967, we all know QE2  came after this date, as ever;....

Exactly, Pete! - It only went as far as 1967 because mightn't that have been the year the contract with Cunard wasn't renewed or extended?!

As for the old rubbish:
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,2121.0.html




« Last Edit: Jul 20, 2010, 10:09 PM by Twynkle »
QE2 had been waiting alongside in Dubai for what seemed like ages...Please don't leave her looking more like a Hotel-with-a-Hull than the greatest Liner afloat - Please restore her Lifeboats and Tenders to where they truly belong - she looks naked without them - please spare her this ignominy.

Offline Kindlychap

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #42 on: Feb 07, 2011, 10:58 PM »
I recall seeing a communication to the Palace in the final years which clearly referred to the ship as RMS Queen Elizabeth 2.

Clearly this could have been an error, but there is no doubt that the message had RMS in front of the name.

The Master was, I think, David Perkins.

Matthew
RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 - Sic Transit Gloria Mundi

Online cunardqueen

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #43 on: May 02, 2011, 02:47 PM »
What about SS QE2... ;)

Note:  image not available
« Last Edit: Oct 20, 2018, 10:05 AM by Lynda Bradford »
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Online cunardqueen

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #44 on: Mar 17, 2012, 08:38 PM »
As QE2 was steaming towards the Falklands she was an RMS.... either that or the shipboard printers got it all wrong...

Note: image not available
« Last Edit: Oct 20, 2018, 10:06 AM by Lynda Bradford »
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10916
  • Total likes: 10860
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #45 on: Mar 17, 2012, 09:31 PM »
As QE2 was steaming towards the Falklands she was an RMS.... either that or the shipboard printers got it all wrong...

The people on board frequently got that wrong. I'm certain she was never an RMS, I even saw the relevant registry papers in Dubai!  However it may well be the case that she was commonly referred to as this, but it doesn't mean they were right!
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Offline Twynkle

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #46 on: Mar 17, 2012, 11:39 PM »
As QE2 was steaming towards the Falklands she was an RMS.... either that or the shipboard printers got it all wrong...

Just as a matter of interest - wouldn't QE2 have had RMS painted on her bow, on her stern, on the wind scoop, and even more importantly engraved on her builders plate, had Cunard wanted her to be referred to as a Royal Mail ship?!
Holy Nougat confirms above that the prefix RMS wasn't used on her logs and other legal documentation.
Flagship confirms above that Cunard didn't wish her to be classed as an RMS.
Perhaps it wasn't corrected formally, because for some people (possibly the printers et al) the prefix might have been a convenient way of maintaining a particular sort of status?
« Last Edit: Mar 17, 2012, 11:42 PM by Twynkle »
QE2 had been waiting alongside in Dubai for what seemed like ages...Please don't leave her looking more like a Hotel-with-a-Hull than the greatest Liner afloat - Please restore her Lifeboats and Tenders to where they truly belong - she looks naked without them - please spare her this ignominy.

Online Lynda Bradford

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #47 on: Jul 11, 2012, 03:34 PM »
Quote from Flagship, Post 18

Quote
QE2 was entitled to be an RMS but was never made so for the reasons so far given........

.....However, this ruling does not seem to have been adhered to on the ship itself. Examples of cabin stationary (printed on board) clearly state 'RMS Queen Elizabeth 2' and several merchandise items do too. I think that is where the confusion comes from.

I was thinking about Flagship's quote in post number 18 regarding cabin stationery printed onboard using RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 when I recently came across these two items. 

The first is a Cunard Landing arrangements leaflets for 8 June 1974 where you can see the RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 is used. 

The second item dated 2 June 1974 is a letter from John Sawyer, Hotel Manager, arrangements for New York.  Again you can see RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 at the top of the letter.

Both of these items verify what Flagship has posted. 
I was proud to be involved with planning QE2's 50 year conference in September 2017 in Clydebank
www.qe2event.com

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10916
  • Total likes: 10860
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
QE2 was never a Royal Mail Ship (RMS)
« Reply #48 on: Apr 14, 2013, 08:39 PM »
I thought you might all be interested in the following that I've put together after speaking directly to Michael Gallagher and Ian McNaught.  I'm going to use it to attempt, again, to correct one of the many inaccuracies on the QE2's messy Wikipedia page.

https://www.theqe2story.com/aboutQE2/NotRMSQE2.html
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Offline Rod

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #49 on: Apr 15, 2013, 01:19 AM »
Well I guess that my Falkland Island pewter beet tankard is ...right out of ths wall!!


It says LPLL!

Offline Stowaway2k

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #50 on: Apr 15, 2013, 02:08 AM »
Quote
QE2's messy Wikipedia page

which seems to be one person's jealously guarded private domain.

Who is this person?

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10916
  • Total likes: 10860
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #51 on: Apr 15, 2013, 08:40 AM »
I have so far managed to get the title of the page changed to remove RMS and also have now edited the text.  It's been an 'interesting' process. If I want to remove the letters RMS, I have to prove she wasn't one, citing a source. However the person who originally wrote it was incorrect and didn't have to cite a source.

References in books are treated as gospel by Wikipedia even though, as Ian mcnaught says, they're often incorrect...

We have a whole separate Wikipedia topic. Sorry for taking this off topic.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Online cunardqueen

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #52 on: Apr 15, 2013, 05:31 PM »
and from some promotional adverts...
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Offline holynougat

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #53 on: Apr 21, 2013, 09:16 PM »
I tried editing the wikipedia article to remove RMS a few years ago but my edits were removed within 48 hours...

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10916
  • Total likes: 10860
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #54 on: Apr 21, 2013, 09:30 PM »
I tried editing the wikipedia article to remove RMS a few years ago but my edits were removed within 48 hours...

This has taken me many months to achieve, but so far my edits have remained in place.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Online Isabelle Prondzynski

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #55 on: Oct 16, 2018, 12:41 AM »
Here is the QE2 letterbox, which at the time I thought was there because I mistakenly thought she was an RMS :


Postbox
by Isabelle Prondzynski, on Flickr

I wondered about the initial though : GR VI? Was this an old letterbox already when it was installed?

Offline Chris Hodges

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #56 on: Oct 16, 2018, 06:19 AM »
King George 6th 1936-1952
Maybe this letter box was originally on the Queen Elizabeth and transfered to QE2 ??

Online Isabelle Prondzynski

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #57 on: Oct 16, 2018, 04:17 PM »
King George 6th 1936-1952
Maybe this letter box was originally on the Queen Elizabeth and transfered to QE2 ??

And when was it last used -- up to when was it functioning as a letterbox?

Offline Thomas Hypher

  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2084
  • Total likes: 3528
  • QE2, a home from home - beautiful from all angles!
Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #58 on: Oct 16, 2018, 04:22 PM »
The letterbox is still in the same place onboard in Dubai, outside where the Library and Bookshop used to be on Quarter Deck. One wonders if it will be used...I think I've heard plans it might be but time will tell.
First travelled on QE2 in August 2003 aged 6 years old. Last stepped foot and travelled on QE2 in July 2008. Last saw QE2 in person from the decks of QM2, on QE2's last Transatlantic crossing (Eastbound tandem) in October 2008 - we had the better view!

Offline Michael Gallagher

Re: Not RMS!
« Reply #59 on: Oct 16, 2018, 04:42 PM »
Not sure the box was from either of the Queens as here is what a post box looked like on Queen Elizabeth. Granted each class would have had a box and I think they would have all been in this style and I'm sure Queen Mary would have been similar...