Does QE2 have sheer?

[Lachlan]

I agree with Bob C. QE2 would have been built with a flat centre section and an angle up to the bow commencing about under the centre of the CUNARD logo adjacent to the bridge wings. There was a slighter angle up to the stern. This way the angles of deck to bulkheads would have been different between but consistent within each of the forward, centre and after sections.

I am sure that this "three section" approach to incorporating sheer was adopted in the construction of the original Oriana completed in 1960. It was probably in other vessels too but I don't know about that.

I have a photo of QE2 which shows the change of angle from horizontal to rising toward the bow very clearly - it's not on this computer but I'll find it and put it up.

Have you ever thought about how they went about building a ship on an angled slipway with a continuously changing sheer line fore and aft as well as camber (ie., curve of deck from side to side)?  Every bulkhead would have met the decks at a different angle both lengthways and crosswise. No wonder they designed that complication out by having a three section approach with no camber to the decks.

Maybe other factors came into play such as welding and high-tensile steel too. Modular construction would have been nearly impossible without removing continuous sheer and camber from ship design.

[Rob Lightbody]

I was thinking of how they built on a slope too, it must have made everything harder!  For example a spirit level for flat, would actually need to show whatever the degrees of the slope it was on was.... so they all must have known that??

[Michael Gallagher]

One of the key economies in QE2's construction was that the decks were built flat and without the conventional long parabolic lines of sheer that turn the decks up slightly towards the bow and stern as a means of maintaining a constant freeboard height as a ship inevitably pitches fore-and-aft while in motion at sea. As an added safety consideration for her North Atlantic role, the forward decks were, instead, sloped upwards in a straight line from a point just ahead of the main mast to the bow, and those aft, towards the stern, from about where the Quarter Deck lido ended. James Gardner superimposed a beautifully curved sheer line where the contrasting hull and superstructure colours meet on the ship's sides, bringing it up across the Two Deck porthole line and around the curved top of the bow. The lesser slope, aft, was compensated by the tapered glazed windscreening above.

[Rob Lightbody]

One of the key economies in QE2's construction was that the decks were built flat and without the conventional long parabolic lines of sheer that turn the decks up slightly towards the bow and stern as a means of maintaining a constant freeboard height as a ship inevitably pitches fore-and-aft while in motion at sea. As an added safety consideration for her North Atlantic role, the forward decks were, instead, sloped upwards in a straight line from a point just ahead of the main mast to the bow, and those aft, towards the stern, from about where the Quarter Deck lido ended. James Gardner superimposed a beautifully curved sheer line where the contrasting hull and superstructure colours meet on the ship's sides, bringing it up across the Two Deck porthole line and around the curved top of the bow. The lesser slope, aft, was compensated by the tapered glazed windscreening above.

Was Gardner's sheer line kept exactly the same throughout her career?  How?  In some refits she was stripped back to metal, so how did they know the exact line to put back!?   I had no idea about this aspect, thanks for sharing!

[Michael Gallagher]

I don't know Rob but Gardner's original paint work for the ship (the khaki coloured bulkheads on Boat Deck and under the Bridge and the black painted lifeboat davits) were not maintained over the course of her career.

[Lachlan]

The position of the paintlines were probably marked out with weld marks that indicate where the line is to go. If it was it would have been what amounted to a 'dotted line' of weld marks along the ship's side which showed where the paint line was. All you would then have had to do was to join the dots to get a straight and consistent paintline.

I will still find the photo I mentioned above but for what it's worth I took a measurement off a 1/96 scale profile plan I have of QE2 which shows that 2 Deck, for example, where it terminated at the bow was very roughly 2.4 metres higher than at the flat centre section.

[Lachlan]

Hi all,

I found the photo - it's a photo of a photo and I don't know its original source so I can't provide a photo credit.

The pic shows clearly what is described in this thread: the portholes and thus decks, run parallel to the waterline then angle up in a straight rising line towards the bow. Sheet, but not continuous sheer

[pete cain]

Does QE2 have sheer, course she does    sheer beauty, it was never in doubt

[Isabelle Prondzynski]

The sheer achieved by her paint lines is (to my mind) clearly visible in this recent photo from Dubai :

https://instagram.com/p/Ba0ZeKQjF8a

https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,7479.msg89773.html#msg89773

[Thomas Hypher]

The sheer achieved by her paint lines is (to my mind) clearly visible in this recent photo from Dubai :

https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,7479.msg89773.html#msg89773

Her real sheer (not the exaggerated paint line) is also very visible in my opinion.

[trevorc]

This is my email to Stephen earlier :-

and his reply :-

Found the webcam image of QM2’s sheer!

[Thomas Hypher]

Found the webcam image of QM2’s sheer!

Just a note to say some of what we see as sheer is caused by the camera and perspective as QE2's webcam had a wide angle lense (evidenced by the curved horizon line). Basically it is more exaggerated than in person due to the lense distortion. Also, QM2's charcoal grey paint forms an exaggerated sheer line that doesn't match the real sheer line at least at her bow (much like QE2).


My Dad's photos of the 3 Queen's in Southampton on 22 April 2008 by Thomas Hypher, on Flickr

QM2 docked in Hamburg, August 2013 by Thomas Hypher, on Flickr


Thomas

[Thomas Hypher]

Another example of QM2:

My Mum and Dad's QE2 and QM2 photos from 5th June 2004 by Thomas Hypher, on Flickr


Compared to QE2:

My Mum and Dad's QE2 and QM2 photos from 5th June 2004 by Thomas Hypher, on Flickr

[Thomas Hypher]

Also, QM2's charcoal grey paint forms an exaggerated sheer line that doesn't match the real sheer line at least at her bow (much like QE2).

I should rephrase this in that QM2 only has sheer at her bow so the paint line can only attempt to match it (which it doesn't) at her bow  . QE2 has the sheer at her bow and stern as mentioned earlier in this topic but her paint line exaggerates even that a bit.

What's also worth noting for both QM2 and QE2 is that their boot topping paint and the white separating paint line follows the exaggerated sheer line of their charcoal grey paint (or QE2's post Falklands pebble grey paint for that matter).

[Thomas Hypher]

2004 photos were a few months after my birth! Crazy!

I was with my parents on the pleasure boat (maybe with some relatives on that occasion - can't remember exactly) and at Calshot later that day as both QE2 and QM2 left Southampton. I was 7 years old at the time! Where's the time gone  ? I didn't have a camera of my own at the time as I'd used disposable film cameras on our first trip the previous August and my Dad was yet to buy his DSLR which he had by our first QE2 cruise in October 2004, when he gave the very good compact camera he used before to me. The camera I used on that October 2004 trip and the last trip in July 2008 for example.

Anyway enough of my wittering and going off topic!

Thomas