Adverts only show for non-members



Author Topic: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2  (Read 9584 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10941
  • Total likes: 10980
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« on: Sep 04, 2010, 01:29 PM »
Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2 but from what I can see the press and the public alike are thinking that she is, and Cunard is obviously not going to be doing anything to correct them which is a shame, as I think they are actually undermining their own amazing & completely unique QM2.

I think it is important that we, as QE2 fans, correct people who say this.  The replacement for QE2 is QM2. To say otherwise undermines both QE2 & QM2.

This is one of the reasons why I am still completely dismayed at them choosing this name for their new cruise ship.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Offline Twynkle

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #1 on: Sep 04, 2010, 04:28 PM »
'New QE2  to have....'

http://luxguru.typepad.com/lorre_white_the_luxury_gu/2010/09/new-qe2-to-have-fortnum-mason-onboard.html

Rob
Very sorry - Have no time to write at the moment
Maybe the media need a notice?
QE2 had been waiting alongside in Dubai for nearly 12 years.  Please restore her Lifeboats and Tenders to where they truly belong - she looks naked without them - please spare her this ignominy.

Offline Stowaway2k

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #2 on: Sep 04, 2010, 06:26 PM »
 
It reminds me of the quote by Huey Long, the scandalous governor of Luisianna... "I don't care what the newspapers say about me, as long as they spell my name right."

In other words... publicity publicity publicity.

In this case, Cunard have got it right, even though us purists aren't going along with it.   ;)

People are going to notice and pay attention when the new Queen Elizabeth pulls into port... which likely does not happen much for any of the other Vistas save for Queen Victoria.

Online cunardqueen

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #3 on: Sep 04, 2010, 06:27 PM »
I thank no matter what is said and done, people will always continue to to think that the QE is the replacement for QE2.
So let them think what they like, WE know nothing can replace QE2, It probably the only way the media can get interest in the new ships anyway is to link it with the past.. ::)
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Cruise_Princess

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #4 on: Sep 04, 2010, 06:57 PM »
On Queen Vics Maiden Voyage we could have been a Moran tug for all anyone cared....it was a total non event.  I think the only decent maiden was on Queen Mary as Cunard pulled out all the stops..it was unforgettable....and hence QVs was so very disappointing in comparison. QM2  was a one off. the largest and only LINER in the world.. this Lizzie is just another in the very long line of copies due to follow ASAP.

Offline Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10941
  • Total likes: 10980
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #5 on: Sep 04, 2010, 07:50 PM »
I agree that the name gets people out of their house and down to the pier to take a look - I saw that with QV in Greenock, but as I stood with the people of Greenock on the Esplanade and they first saw her (when she reversed out from behind the quayside) the overally reaction was definitely one of "oh, is that it?".  I think this effect will be worse next year when the identical QE turns up amid no doubt much fanfare.

I hate the idea that people will think that this ship is simply "better" than "the one(s) that went before".

She should have been called Caronia.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

Online Clydebuilt1971

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #6 on: Sep 04, 2010, 11:02 PM »
She should have been called Caronia.

Rob you've got it in one mate - QV - Caronia. QE - Carinthia with QM2 heading up the whole show.
Oh aye and QE2 as the Cunard luxury hotel in Southampton as well.

Gav

Offline Beardy Rich

  • QE2 Crew member
  • Britannia Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 262
  • Total likes: 14
  • Engineering Department 1984-1988
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #7 on: Sep 05, 2010, 09:26 AM »
'New QE2  to have....'

http://luxguru.typepad.com/lorre_white_the_luxury_gu/2010/09/new-qe2-to-have-fortnum-mason-onboard.html

Rob
Very sorry - Have no time to write at the moment
Maybe the media need a notice?

I've posted a comment Rosie  :)
Rich Drayson. Ex Snr Mechanic QE2 1984-1988.

Cruise_Princess

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #8 on: Sep 05, 2010, 10:29 AM »
Cunard are very very good at the pre new build hype,,,,,

Then in reality folks are disappointed....not just us cruisers but the general public...cause what does EVERYONE remember and expect...?

The QE2 of course....

despite being the 21st century and all that jazz.....

nothing else compares does it?

Maybe its the Clyde built thing.....pride etc.....its all gone now.

Also just heard this morning that Commodore Warwick not even asked to the naming ceremony of the new ship...

You see as I always say....ANYONE who had too much to do with or sailed Qe2 every day of their life  are no longer 'required' by Cunard....they know too much ....remember too much .....and quite simply are

"Not wanted on Voyage"

Offline Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 10941
  • Total likes: 10980
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #9 on: Sep 05, 2010, 11:59 AM »
My only gripe is the name and the confusion it causes.

QE - the latest of Cunard's many cruise ships.
QM2 - the latest of Cunard's many express Atlantic liners.

If you look at the index page of the forum, under 'cruising queens', you'll see the carefully chosen wording that we came up with to try to position the forum - not being negative unnecessarily, just factual.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 35 years and creator of this website.

RMS Queen Elizabeth 2

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #10 on: Sep 05, 2010, 04:39 PM »
Cunard are very very good at the pre new build hype,,,,,

Then in reality folks are disappointed....not just us cruisers but the general public...cause what does EVERYONE remember and expect...?

The QE2 of course....

despite being the 21st century and all that jazz.....

nothing else compares does it?

Maybe its the Clyde built thing.....pride etc.....its all gone now.

Also just heard this morning that Commodore Warwick not even asked to the naming ceremony of the new ship...

You see as I always say....ANYONE who had too much to do with or sailed Qe2 every day of their life  are no longer 'required' by Cunard....they know too much ....remember too much .....and quite simply are

"Not wanted on Voyage"


Now I know why Cunard chose the Queen to name the new ship. Publicity! I wonder what the Queen truely thinks about the new Queen Elizabeth?
I did watch Queen Mary 2's naming ceremony and still have it on tape and when she named the ship she looked disappointed in some way.

Cruise_Princess

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #11 on: Sep 05, 2010, 06:34 PM »
I wonder what the Queen truely thinks about the new Queen Elizabeth?


That's something none of us will EVER know!

Online cunardqueen

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #12 on: Sep 05, 2010, 07:54 PM »
Quote
Also just heard this morning that Commodore Warwick not even asked to the naming ceremony of the new ship...
 

When you looked at some of the faces who were asked to the QM2 naming ceremony, l would love to know how many of them have even been close to the sea ! let alone sailed on any ship....
 Perhaps the new breed of invited guests for the Queen Elizabeth naming ceremony will come from the X Factor ::).
 Can you imagine if Carnival had invited some original Queen Elizabeth passengers to the ceremony, wouldnt that have been a nice touch....
I wonder what drink will be used to launch the new ship, a bottle of Malt whisky, nope the links with Scotland are all gone, Unless they use the glorious Italian Prosecco, after all you can pass that off as champagne and folks are none the wiser. Mindyou Carnival dont  pass anything off as fake.... ;) ;) ;)     

Ok enough slagging off the new ship, l havent even seen her yet so perhaps l should reserve my thoughts till after the 9th October :-[ :-[
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Online Isabelle Prondzynski

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #13 on: Sep 05, 2010, 08:05 PM »
Well, let us see how it goes -- not much longer to wait now.

As far as I know, we don't know much about the naming ceremony at this stage, other than the name of the ship as such and the fact that Queen Elizabeth II will be doing the naming. Those Forum members who will be there, we shall be relying on your detailed reports!

I am quite glad that Cunard are keeping some surprises in store for the day -- now that the name itself is not a surprise...

RMS Queen Elizabeth 2

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #14 on: Sep 05, 2010, 10:53 PM »
I hope it will be broadcast as I will like to watch it.

Offline andy liney

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #15 on: Sep 11, 2010, 10:40 AM »
Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2 but from what I can see the press and the public alike are thinking that she is, and Cunard is obviously not going to be doing anything to correct them which is a shame, as I think they are actually undermining their own amazing & completely unique QM2.

I think it is important that we, as QE2 fans, correct people who say this.  The replacement for QE2 is QM2. To say otherwise undermines both QE2 & QM2.

This is one of the reasons why I am still completely dismayed at them choosing this name for their new cruise ship.

Classic example:


http://jamesjetsam.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-not-qe3.html

Online Michael Gallagher

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #16 on: Sep 11, 2010, 03:36 PM »
People will be people and no matter how many releases or how many full page advertisements Cunard put out to say she is not QE3 there will still be some people who will always call her that. Just like for her entire 39-year career many people called QE2 'QEII' and many still do.

Out of the 220+ Cunarders there have been QE2 was the first exception as she used '2'. The second Mauretania, the second Caronia or even the third Caronia had no number on the side. Cunard were going to continue that by simply having QE2 named Queen Elizabeth. HM intervened and while I'm sure Cunard was delighted at the time, it did make a mess of their naming practice. A mess continued with QM2 having a '2'. But it's all just one other facet of Cunard which gets peoplem passionate and at the end of the day that's what makes Cunard different to all the rest.

Perhaps like all rules, 'naming rules' are meant to be broken!
« Last Edit: Sep 11, 2010, 03:39 PM by flagship »

Cruise_Princess

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #17 on: Sep 11, 2010, 07:23 PM »
And of course we all know how long it took for us to get Queen Victoria,.....our Royals were to blame again!!!    WE got Queen Mary instead!  LOL

Offline Matt

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #18 on: Sep 12, 2010, 10:31 AM »
Now I know why Cunard chose the Queen to name the new ship. Publicity! I wonder what the Queen truely thinks about the new Queen Elizabeth?
I did watch Queen Mary 2's naming ceremony and still have it on tape and when she named the ship she looked disappointed in some way.

I would second this, everyone wants to go see and sail on the 'Queen'. Its all about the public image
Freo, Heave Ho! We are the Freo Dockers!

Offline Kindlychap

Re: Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2
« Reply #19 on: Sep 17, 2010, 04:48 AM »
She should have been called Caronia.

Not practically possible. A Caronia had only just left the fleet........
RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 - Sic Transit Gloria Mundi