Floating skycraper in Southampton

[Sy]

The sister ship of Freedom of the Seas (largest cruise ship in the world), the Liberty of the Seas is currently in Southampton. As I saw it sail past my window, I figured I'd pop down to see it:

Passenger Capacity: 3,634 double occupancy
Gross Tonnage: 160,000
Length: 1,112' 338m
Max Beam: 184' 56m
Draft: 28'
Cruising Speed: 21.6 knots






http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/6580843.stm


Looking forward to the fireworks too.

[NothingBetterToDo]

Great pics

But this ship looks nowhere near as classy and impressive as the Queen Mary 2, it looks about as stylish as a 1970's all inclusive hotel in Benidorm.

[Starscraper]

I took some photos from the same positions you did this afternoon, at Mayflower Park and Town Quay, it really makes the Aurora that was in in front of it look small.

[Sy]

Yep, I liked that fact it was taller than the Holiday Inn hotel.

[Prestonian]

Originally Posted by NothingBetterToDo

Great pics

But this ship looks nowhere near as classy and impressive as the Queen Mary 2, it looks about as stylish as a 1970's all inclusive hotel in Benidorm.

Quite agree, some of these big things are just hideous, i think only really the cunarders and some P&O ships retain any degree of elegance.

Thanks for the pics tho

[Trainman Dave]

At least the Queens look like ships not floating casino's, but the latest P&O vessels are showing distressing tendencies to to bulk up

[LDN_EUROPE]

Good to see - However, I really wish they'd open the waterfront up more in Southampton.

[Sy]

Originally Posted by Prestonian

Quite agree, some of these big things are just hideous, i think only really the cunarders and some P&O ships retain any degree of elegance.

Thanks for the pics tho

I agree that it's not the prettiest ship in the world and the QM2 looks far more graceful when she calls Southampton, but the sheer size of this class of vessel is impressive. It's makes the P&O ships look like Isle of Wight ferries in comparison.

[potto]

Originally Posted by NothingBetterToDo

Great pics

But this ship looks nowhere near as classy and impressive as the Queen Mary 2, it looks about as stylish as a 1970's all inclusive hotel in Benidorm.

[blahblah]

Not only are some of these Cruise Ships a bit ugly, they're also not that safe.

They're only designed for calm seas, so they have a really shallow draught for their relative height so they're top heavy. Also, check how big some of the porthole windows are, and how close to the waterline. Wouldn't like to be on that in a storm!

Queen Mary 2 by comparrison is a more traditional Liner. Difference is that she has thicker hull plating, a taller hull, and the portholes are a bit smaller, and higher above the waterline. But still not really high enough.




But even QM2 is nowhere near as pretty as The Queen Elizabeth 2. Now that's a nice looking boat! Personally, I'd much rather be on QE2 in rough seas than either of the other 2!!

[Trainman Dave]

Tuesday April 24th 2oo7
Disney finalizes order for 2 ships

Pair will more than double capacity of cruise line as demand increases

BY DONNA BALANCIA
FLORIDA TODAY ADVERTISEMENT




Disney Cruise Line announced Monday that it has finalized a contract to build two new cruise ships with German shipbuilder Meyer Werft shipyard. Specific financial terms were not disclosed.

"This is an exciting time at Disney Cruise Line, and we are looking forward to working with Meyer Werft to build two new, innovative ships that will take our immersive, family-focused cruise experience to an entirely new level," Disney Cruise Line President Tom McAlpin said in a statement.

Plans to add two 124,000-ton ships to the fleet were announced in February, when executives signed a letter of intent to negotiate a construction contract with Meyer Werft. The ships will be built in Papenburg, Germany.

Scheduled to launch in 2011 and 2012, the ships will more than double the passenger capacity for Disney Cruise Line to meet the demand for Disney's cruise vacations.

The new ocean liners will be significantly larger than the existing 83,000-ton ships -- the Disney Magic and the Disney Wonder -- with 1,250 staterooms each.

The Magic and the Wonder are home-ported at Port Canaveral.

Disney Cruise Line established the family market within the cruise industry when the business launched in 1998.

Similar to the original Disney Cruise Line ships, Disney said the new ships will be modern interpretations of classic ocean liners of the 1930s.

Disney designers -- known as
"Imagineers" -- drew their inspiration from the original trans-Atlantic ships that featured a dramatic black hull with two funnels and porthole windows.

The profile of the ships, with gentle curves at the stern, combined with sleek angles at the bow, is reminiscent of the art-deco designs of the era.

The Disney ships feature the same exterior colors as Disney icon Mickey Mouse, with a black, white, red and yellow palette.

Disney said the new ships will feature detailed Disney scrollwork at the bow and evoke images of the glamour of the golden age of cruising.

The ships were built to respond to demand for new itineraries, the company said.

While no announcements have been made on itinerary changes, Disney Cruise Line executives said bookings for future Disney Cruise Line trips on the Mediterranean and on the West Coast have been strong.

Disney Cruise Line traditionally offers three-, four- and seven-night Caribbean cruises from Port Canaveral.

"Expanding our fleet will give us the flexibility to offer a variety of itineraries in the future," McAlpin said. "We are looking forward to taking our guests on new adventures to different parts of the world with Disney Cruise Line."

=====================================================
Photo's here
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ItemId=1554431

How much worse can't it get!

[NothingBetterToDo]

Originally Posted by blahblah

Not only are some of these Cruise Ships a bit ugly, they're also not that safe.

They're only designed for calm seas, so they have a really shallow draught for their relative height so they're top heavy. Also, check how big some of the porthole windows are, and how close to the waterline. Wouldn't like to be on that in a storm!

Queen Mary 2 by comparrison is a more traditional Liner. Difference is that she has thicker hull plating, a taller hull, and the portholes are a bit smaller, and higher above the waterline. But still not really high enough.




But even QM2 is nowhere near as pretty as The Queen Elizabeth 2. Now that's a nice looking boat! Personally, I'd much rather be on QE2 in rough seas than either of the other 2!!

I was actually going to comment on how unsafe a lot of those cruise liners look.

I have zero knowledge of ships - but even to my eyes they look far too top-heavy and bulky, as if the slightest wave would cause them to topple over.

I completely agree - the QE2 is a far more attractive ship than any of those new floating blocks of flats, and even the QM2.....it just has far better proportions.

[Trainman Dave]

This site defines the regulations for the safety of Cruise Ships which are permitted to take on passengers at U.S. ports.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/cruiseship.htm

Looks can be decieving but when a floating palace returned to port listing about 15 degrees a few weeks ago, our local media was filled with long dissertations on stabilizers and electronic controls for the stability of these vessels. They certainly don't behave like the sleek fast transatlantic passenger liners. They are more like the Boxy automible carriers which are beyond "Panamax", so they round Cape Horn between Japan and Europe

[blahblah]

My knowledge of Ships & Boats comes from my Dad, who was in the Merchant Navy for 25 years.

He says he thinks cruise ships are dangerous. Too shallow a draught, too tall, too many large portholes near to the waterline, and wide open decks.

Pops has seen some seriously nasty stuff at sea, and shudders to think what would happen if one of these Cruise ships got caught in a storm or hit by a freak/rouge wave.

P&O's Oriana was hit side on by a freak wave in the Atlantic in the year 2000, which was high enough and strong enough to smash porthole windows and partially flood a section of that particular deck, injuring passengers

A passenger injured when a 50ft wave hit a luxury cruise liner has told of his terror as water flooded his cabin.
Pensioner Malcolm MacIver was in his cabin on the British liner Oriana when the freak wave smashed through the window and flooded the room, leaving him and his wife battling to escape.

Mr MacIver, from Colwyn Bay, north Wales, said: "It was terrifying. P&O are playing it down, but it was very frightening."

As the £200m liner arrived in its home port of Southampton on Sunday, Mr MacIver said he had to have stitches to two cuts in his head.

It was a huge swell and it kept coming in

Malcolm MacIver, Oriana passenger
He was injured after being hit by toughened glass from his cabin window, which caved in from the force of the wave.

The Oriana, carrying 1,525 passengers and 800 crew, was sailing back from New York when she became caught in storm force 10 winds as she answered a Mayday message from a yacht on Thursday afternoon.

The wave struck her port side when she was about 600 miles west of Cork, in the Irish Republic.

The yacht later received help from the RAF.

The 69,000-tonne ship was on her first north Atlantic trip to and from New York, although she has sailed to the Caribbean many times.

'Knocked to floor'

Three passengers and an officer were injured by flying glass and four others were treated for shock.

Mr MacIver said the ordeal he and his wife suffered was "terrifying".

"It (the water) came through at ceiling level and brought down metal strips from off the ceiling," he said.

"It was a huge swell and it kept coming in.

"My wife was knocked to the floor. I got up and tried to get her out of the cabin but we were stopped by the metal coming down from the ceiling.

"We had to move the metal before we could get out. It was terrifying."

Mr MacIver said their belongings had been soaked and some possessions had been lost.

BBC News.

My Dad has had experience of a rouge/freak wave coming from nowhere and striking the oil tanker he was on at the time. Oil tankers have a much deeper draught, and are much lower in height, the wave still put the ship on its side, and very nearly turned it over before the ship righted itself. Allbeit with the engines stalled, adrift, and a fair number of the ship's crew injured. Including my Dad who was knocked unconcious.

The relevant authorities also thought that Titanic was safe too, but both her, and her identical twin sister Britannic sunk!

Cruise Ships aren't designed for storms. They try to avoid them, problems arise when/if they have to answer a mayday call from another ship. Like the Oriana incident.

[Mauritz]

Originally Posted by blahblah

The relevant authorities also thought that Titanic was safe too, but both her, and her identical twin sister Britannic sunk!

You do know the Titanic sank as a result of a conspiracy, don't you?

[blahblah]

Originally Posted by Mauritz

You do know the Titanic sank as a result of a conspiracy, don't you?

Did you hear the one where they switched Titanic and Olympic around as an insurance scam?

Olympic was badly damaged in a colision, and the story goes that she was a write off. Because they couldn't claim off their insurance, they took her back to Belfast (supposedly with a broken back) renamed her as Titanic, and vice versa (infront of several thousand Harland & Wolfe employees, who saw nothing!) and sailed her out to sea and sank her deliberately so they could claim off the insurance!!!!!

Utter bollocks!

Titanic really sank because her bridge crew were kidnapped by time travelling aliens, and replaced with Princess Diana, Elvis Presley, Osama Bin Laden, Lord Lucan, and Shergar, who was in the forward lookout tower, and had forgotten his binoculars.

[Chrisyd]

Whilst the Britannic was an Olympic class liner, she was not an identical twin sister of Titanic, following the Titanic disaster she was modified (bulkheads to B rather than E deck etc), so whilst similar it was not the same.

Also the ship was hit in very calm waters by a mine (conspiracy theory - the British were using her as a hospital shiop to carry munitions - obviously a big no no and never proven). Whilst she sank in an hour with 1066 people on board only 30 died. Fortunately the ship had no patients on board otherwise casualties would have been significantly higher.

Regarding the Porthole fears raised, one of the reasons attributed to the ship sinking so quickly was that a lot of the lower portholes were open at the time.

[blahblah]

Originally Posted by Chrisyd

Whilst the Britannic was an Olympic class liner, she was not an identical twin sister of Titanic, following the Titanic disaster she was modified (bulkheads to B rather than E deck etc), so whilst similar it was not the same.

Also the ship was hit in very calm waters by a mine (conspiracy theory - the British were using her as a hospital shiop to carry munitions - obviously a big no no and never proven). Whilst she sank in an hour with 1066 people on board only 30 died. Fortunately the ship had no patients on board otherwise casualties would have been significantly higher.

Regarding the Porthole fears raised, one of the reasons attributed to the ship sinking so quickly was that a lot of the lower portholes were open at the time.

Olympic and Titanic were not entirely identical either. Thats how most sane people know the insurance scam conspiracy theory is bollocks!