Author Topic: Transatlantic in 7 days  (Read 8468 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline andyh

Transatlantic in 7 days
« on: Jun 23, 2009, 08:24 PM »
While we were in the QM2 a couple of weeks ago, at one of the gatererings the cruise booking assistants announced that the TA crossings were going to be over 7 days in the future, their reasoning was you get an extra day to enjoy the luxury of the QM2, or is it reason th save fuel and therefore costs

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #1 on: Jun 23, 2009, 08:36 PM »
Seems a bit pointless after making her capable of 30 knots...

The whole concept of the 'express liner' is lost.

That extra day (extra 2 days really...) , dilutes the whole thing to me one more bit.  Just like docking in Brooklyn does.  Oh and the fact that its the wrong ship ;)
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Offline Malcolm

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #2 on: Jun 23, 2009, 10:41 PM »
I'd bet that it's to save money ::)

You also missed that once they've got their passengers for five nights they don't need to spend any more to keep them for an extra two - they need far fewer passengers to keep the ship full.

Online cunardqueen

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #3 on: Jun 24, 2009, 09:07 PM »
Who would believe, it a week to cross the North Atlantic in this day and age with Cunard
The old days of the 5 nighters seem a long time ago..But you really knew you were going somewhere, and fast
And they call that progress ::) Why not stop in Iceland chuck in a few excursions and make even more money.....
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Offline Malcolm

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #4 on: Jun 25, 2009, 10:39 AM »
Why not stop in Iceland chuck in a few excursions and make even more money.....

They'd have to pay docking fees  :o and they would loose all that revenue the bars generate  ::)

Offline eddy666

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #5 on: Aug 22, 2009, 05:07 PM »
But the seven days have the same price as the six day crossings.

I think it isn't that bad spending another night in that surroundings.

Martin
Gone but never forgotten

LegendOfTheSeas

  • Guest
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #6 on: Aug 22, 2009, 10:59 PM »
If I'd spent x amount of pounds on a crossing I'd rather it lasted 7 days than 5. ;D

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #7 on: Aug 23, 2009, 01:08 PM »
I know what you mean, and i agree for ANY other trip, but the very essence of the Transaltantic crossing in a great liner such as these, was to get there quickly!  Its the entire essence, feeling and spirit of the crossing.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Online Isabelle Prondzynski

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #8 on: Aug 23, 2009, 01:51 PM »
I know what you mean, and i agree for ANY other trip, but the very essence of the Transaltantic crossing in a great liner such as these, was to get there quickly!  Its the entire essence, feeling and spirit of the crossing.

There was a former job for which I attended UN meetings once in a while. It was always my dream to get there by QE2 rather than fly. But if the crossing took 7 days, I could never even have considered that...

Well, that's one dream now that will not be fulfilled...

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #9 on: Aug 23, 2009, 02:20 PM »
I would love to see a fuel-consumption comparison between QE2 on a 5 day crossing, QM2 on a 5 day crossing and QV going full pelt (7 day+).
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Offline Malcolm

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #10 on: Aug 24, 2009, 08:31 PM »
if the crossing took 7 days, I could never even have considered that...

Isabelle - I know exactly what you mean. We try not to fly and would certainly not do the 9 or so hours to the East Coast of America. If we could have gone there and back by boat with a crossing taking five nights a three week trip would be a possibility - giving 11 days in America. If you increase the crossing to seven days then it doesn't become worth it :(

Offline mickey g

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #11 on: Aug 25, 2009, 08:43 PM »
I'm doing QM2 eastbound in January and I have very mixed feelings about the extra time at sea. Yes I will miss the speed but, whatever our misgivings about "Cunard", it is still one hell of an experience, albeit on QM2 as against our fair lady. I yearn for rough seas just to see how she copes with it. (If I get bored I will transfer my thoughts to QE2 at speed on route to Dubai in the Red Sea, wonderful)

QM2 aint all bad, it's those who own her that create the problems, at the very least they had her built and we can't deny them that. The QE2 she isn't but she is still a fantastic liner.

As for the Brooklyn terminal, words completely fail me, just try getting a cab at Penn Station!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "where" they say!
Yacht Club lover

Offline highlander0108

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #12 on: Aug 25, 2009, 10:52 PM »
I would love to see a fuel-consumption comparison between QE2 on a 5 day crossing, QM2 on a 5 day crossing and QV going full pelt (7 day+).

I would also like to see the real numbers on fuel consumption on the tandem crossing with QV where we plodded along at 22ish knots with "only" 4 MAN engines running while QV was at full speed.  I suspect that slowing the ship down, she was very close to or as fuel efficient at QV due to her hull design.  QV does not have bow thruster doors, which add drag too as well as her hull form itself, maximized for volume and not speed.  I guess I just want to be proven right that she wasn't the fuel hog that I keep seeing and hearing from time to time and that she wasn't horribly expensive to operate when given the chance to "slow down".  To go 33 knots, you just have to burn more fuel to move all that mass through the water. Could that question be added to the list to be asked Rob?
Ken
"There will never be another one like her" QE2's last Master Ian McNaught
My Blog:  http://qe2-prideoftheclyde.blogspot.com/

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #13 on: Aug 25, 2009, 10:58 PM »
She absolutely was not a fuel hog.

I am fairly certain she used less fuel than QV at any given speed, and thats what I wish to confim.

Her engines were efficient as well as powerful.  Hugely flexible... she only made the power she needed, no more.   Why would she be a fuel hog?  in 1987 her engines/powerplant was ABSOLUTELY state of the art, and was by far the most expensive option that they had to choose from.  I'm told that the MAN diesels were still in production, and apart from some fairly minor refinements, QE2's were the same.

If someone tells me QV used less fuel, I want figures, proof and an explanation so that I understand why.
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Offline highlander0108

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #14 on: Aug 25, 2009, 11:38 PM »
Perhaps it is the often quoted one gallon per 50 feet fact that leads people to believe she was a fuel hog.  I wish that fact would  have been elaborated more by Cunard by stating that was a 28.5 knots, a speed no current cruise ship could ever attain.  In fact, I watched a program on a typical NCL cruise (I know it was somewhat painfull to look at the ship with the tatooed hull) and they quoted the same fact for their ship and that was only 20 knots.  :o

I am torn with the 7 day crossing.  While I enjoyed every second onboard QE2 at any speed, there was only one time where I experienced over 28 knots, in the Carribean of all places, and standing on the aft deck with the rumble beneath me was something I will never forget.  The midnight buffet was exciting at times too with the vibration threatening to tople the ice and butter sculptures.   ;D There was a mess up with a tug not arriving to keep us off a reef while we anchored off St. Croix and we got into town very late and Captain Wright extended our departure time, making up the time the following sea day.  How many ships out there now have the speed to be able to accomplish such a feat and still maintain their schedule? 

I wouldn't mind a 7 day crossing again if there was at least a period with a burst of speed on QM2.  ;D  I am booked for an even longer 8 day crossing, I believe, in January 2011 on QE, but it will be tough not to compare.
"There will never be another one like her" QE2's last Master Ian McNaught
My Blog:  http://qe2-prideoftheclyde.blogspot.com/

Offline jdl

  • Britannia Grill Diner
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Total likes: 15
  • Sorry its not a picture of me and QE2!
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #15 on: Aug 28, 2009, 11:26 AM »
It's just another dilution of the cunard brand, never mind the use of the 'new' terminal in New York - one of my most enduring memory on QE2 was watching the grid streets of Manhattan pass as we ate a stress free breakfast in the morning of arrival in NY.

I've only done one trip on QM2 and whilst she doesn't look like the block of flats that most other cruise lines have she isn't a patch on QE2 - little or no spirit and too many people on board.


Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #16 on: Oct 17, 2009, 02:08 PM »
They should do the occasional faster one - "6 days or as quickly as we can manage" - might even manage it in 5 at a push like QE2 used to do weekly...
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Online Rob Lightbody

  • Administrator
  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 12332
  • Total likes: 15855
  • Helping to Keep The Legend Alive
    • Rob Lightbody dot com
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #17 on: Mar 19, 2010, 02:40 PM »
Wonderful spin here

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/cruises/item.aspx?type=blog&ak=83982.blog

No mention of the fact that for many, many decades the line maintained a 5 night crossing... as i understand it the increase to 6 was introduced to reduce wear & tear on the ageing QE2, then kept for the brand new QM2, and now they're going for 7 days - more on-board profits, less fuel costs.

I think its OK, though, as long as they keep some 'express' sailings which, after all, is what this crossing is all about.  There should be more than one per year. Allow QM2 and her fans to get up to speed and experience an entire day at her quoted 'service speed' of 28.5 knots, as for QE2, QM1 and QE1.

Some people still prefer to sail than fly.  Some people love the fact that the crossing was a race.

The 7 day crossing, of course, doesn't make QV/QE's 8 or 9 day crossings look so bad ...
Passionate about QE2's service life for 40 years and creator of this website.  I have worked in IT for 28 years and created my personal QE2 website in 1994.

Online Peter Mugridge

  • Queens Grill Diner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3610
  • Total likes: 3456
  • At Mach 2 three days after being on QE2...
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #18 on: Mar 19, 2010, 03:23 PM »
Well, we could ask them to spend 48 hours going in a huge circle so that we can have the 7 night crossing with the whole thing done at full speed...

More seriously, I'd be less inclined to book a TA now.

In the article it says the the change has been made permanent because the 7 nighters are selling well, but with all due respect to Cunard that statement is a bit disingenuous seeing as nobody else offers a regular TA in competition, so people wanting to do a TA haven't really got much choice have they?
"It is a capital mistake to allow any mechanical object to realise that you are in a hurry!"

Online cunardqueen

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #19 on: Mar 19, 2010, 06:17 PM »
My first voyage was the classic 10 day round trip Atlantic crossing, with a day in New York. Back then In the golden days it was always a fast crossing and you were aware with the atmosphere that you were really going somewhere. Out on the open decks the speed was always there, but the bit under the bridge was always closed due to high winds.
 l always found they passed just a bit to quickl, But then again it was always possible to have  a day in New York and only use 10 or so days out of the holidays.
 On the recent farewell crossings it did stike me just how slow we appeared to be going at compared to the old days granted it was a day longer than the olden days. Now with the introduction of a week long crossing personally l see no need to book a transatlantic ever again. A week to cross the North Atlantic ???.
 The new breed of Cunard passenger will probably accept this as the norm and be happy with it, at the same time soaking up the onboard experience over  a week and will probably see this as a cruise.
It would be interesting to find out if by extending to 7 days the extra revenue gained would be more than slotting an extra crossing and reducing them back to 6 days.   
From the moment you first glimpsed the Queen,
 you just knew you were in for a very special time ahead.!

Offline QE2 Canuck

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #20 on: Mar 20, 2010, 03:28 AM »
Back in 1996 on my first transatlantic, it was 5 days.  I was like a gallop across the ocean... the next time in 2001 it was of course 6 days and much more enjoyable.  I won't mind the 7 days...there are times I just want to get on the ship and don't care where it is going.... I quite like sea days..... if you feel you want to go across the ocean faster, then I guess you'll have to get on an airplane and endure the ride !!!  Yuck !!!

Linda

Offline Matt

Freo, Heave Ho! We are the Freo Dockers!

Offline Douglas Carmichael

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #22 on: Mar 20, 2010, 07:08 AM »
Quote
I think its OK, though, as long as they keep some 'express' sailings which, after all, is what this crossing is all about.  There should be more than one per year. Allow QM2 and her fans to get up to speed and experience an entire day at her quoted 'service speed' of 28.5 knots, as for QE2, QM1 and QE1.

I agree that some cutbacks have to be made in the current economic climate.

But, I'd agree with Rob that, if marketed properly, some 'express' sailings, at a higher fare, could really do well with those that wish to travel to Europe without the hassle of airport security (the US Transportation Security Administration and their ilk) and the general lack of service and stress-creating atmosphere that air travel is today.

(Also, I could see a tie-in with the business relocation/expat market as well... take the QM2 to Europe, and we'll ship your household goods so you don't have to worry about them!)

Play on the advantages of peace of mind (see the popular "United Breaks Guitars" videos for an example of airline customer service gone wrong), luggage safety/security, stress reduction, and value (e.g., quality food included, etc.), and I'd think you could have a formula that would work if the marketing was done right.

(One idea would be to use some of the things that aggravate air passengers, i.e., liquid/gel size limits.)
 
Thoughts?

« Last Edit: Mar 20, 2010, 08:07 AM by Douglas Carmichael »

Offline andyh

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #23 on: Mar 21, 2010, 04:32 PM »
 ;D ;D ;D  Great Video   ;D ;D

Offline Mauretania1907

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #24 on: Mar 22, 2010, 08:29 AM »
I wouldnt care if QMary die grosse took 8 or even TEN days, be she ever so slow, she would still be ten thousand times better than an aeroplane. (of course Qe2 could do a big circle around the atlantic and be a Million times better.)

Offline Clydebuilt1971

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #25 on: Mar 22, 2010, 01:23 PM »
They announced the 7 day crossings during our return Transatlantic last June but at the time they were saying that it would only be 7 days on the Eastbound Crossing. The reason was given that customer surveys carried out had indicated that the Eastbound guests felt a little short changed by losing the hour on most nights so they were giving them an additional night at no extra cost.

The running costs of the ship would also decrease due to reduced speeds.

At that time the Cunard inferred that the 6 night Westbound would remain.

As long as she is still sailing I cant say that I mind.

Gav

Offline highlander0108

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #26 on: Mar 23, 2010, 02:28 AM »
This article on the Beyond Ships site goes into detail on the powerplant operations of QM2, the burn rate of fuel, and when the more expensive to run gas turbines are needed.  The eastbound crossings loose an hour a day, thus require a faster crossing speed, which necessitates the use of at least one of the gas turbines. http://beyondships.com/QM2-art-Watling.html

Unfortunately, reading between the lines, QM2 does not have the reserve of power/redundancy of equipment that QE2 was so masterfully fitted with back in 1987.
"There will never be another one like her" QE2's last Master Ian McNaught
My Blog:  http://qe2-prideoftheclyde.blogspot.com/

Offline Bob C.

Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #27 on: Mar 23, 2010, 06:13 PM »
While we were in the QM2 a couple of weeks ago, at one of the gatererings the cruise booking assistants announced that the TA crossings were going to be over 7 days in the future, their reasoning was you get an extra day to enjoy the luxury of the QM2, or is it reason th save fuel and therefore costs

I would have loved my eight trans-Atalntic crossings from 1969-1979 to have been 7 days instead of 5.  I remember standing out on deck multiple times wishing for more time onboard. 

The move is a logical one though.  The time at sea is what's popular today, not the Blue Ribband.  Couple that with water resistance (and therefore power requirements) rising as the square of the velocity and slower speeds definitely makes more economical sense - to a point.     Not to worry, there are lots of situations where that 31 kt design speed will come in handy.

Ocean Liner Fanatic

  • Guest
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #28 on: Mar 27, 2010, 08:10 PM »
I am going aboard the QM2 next November 1st for a 7 day Eastbound transatlantic crossing then staying aboard the QM2 for both the November 8th 2 night cruise to Cherbourg and then the November 10th Westbound transatlantic crossing which then adds up to 15 nights aboard the QM2.I must admit that I really do enjoy the QM2 so much that I really do look forward to the 7 night Eastbound crossing next November   ;D though the Westbound crossing next November willl only be 6 nights   :'(     Regards,Jerry

Ocean Liner Fanatic

  • Guest
Re: Transatlantic in 7 days
« Reply #29 on: Mar 27, 2010, 08:18 PM »
Maybe could it be that the reasons for the QM2's 7 night Eastbound and Westbound crossings starting next year could be for fuel economy and that passengers like me that enjoy the ship a lot that we don't mind and want the extra night aboard the QM2?   :)    Regards,Jerry
« Last Edit: Mar 27, 2010, 08:26 PM by Ocean Liner Fanatic »