Ships that passed in the night

Sydney Morning Herald ^ | February 21 2007 | Linton Besser and Ben Cubby

[fishhound]

TWO queens came to Sydney yesterday and their loyal subjects lost their heads.

Crowds swarmed, roads were clogged and buses stalled late into the night as the Queen Mary 2 prepared to leave the harbour after a rendezvous with its sister vessel the Queen Elizabeth 2.

The scenes were reminiscent of the heady days of the British Empire, when ocean conquest was often followed by a spot of tea. At 23 storeys high, the QM2 took possession of Sydney Harbour. Too tall to sail under the bridge, too long to berth at Circular Quay, it made the Opera House look like the outhouse.

But for all its genteel touches from the golden age of cruising - sweeping staircases, marble pillars, black-tie dinners and cocktails on the deck at sunset - the $1 billion, 151,400-tonne QM2 has all the trappings of modern excess: teeth-whitening, spray-on tan and 14 mealtimes a day.

Perhaps fittingly, in a city founded by convicts and their jailers, there was even a bit of pilfering. Most of the 2620 passengers trying to disembark for a day in port were delayed in the belly of the ship for hours, after several were caught trying to make off with the family silver.

"We see it all at sea," said the QM2's social hostess, Anja Eyvindsson, laughing. "This morning there were items in the luggage that were not supposed to be there. Items that belong to Cunard - artworks, glasses, plates. All that sort of stuff."

[fishhound]

For $335 a night per person for the San Francisco to Sydney leg completed yesterday, you trundle off to your 18 square-metre hideaway. For an extra $89 you get a porthole.

[capt. norm]

These ships are not examples of what bothers me about today's cruise ships. Most are "fair weather vessels" and are designed by people who want to make $$, and the heck with everything else.

If you go on a cruise, make sure it's during a good weather season (varies with geographic location), but if you're going to take the risk, at least know something about that risk up front.

*Before you ask....yes, I have been there, done that, and got the t-shirt.

[thackney]

[Old Professer]

I was all set to make a snide comment on Elton John and Richard Simmons when I was brought up dead short in Woolloomooloo; makes a guy wish he could just take a walk around the block in Peoria.

[fishhound]

Once did the dock work. the people coming off looked absolutley raggged regardless of weather....
I can't recommend it but know plenty who love it.

I like windows and fresh air.

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[fishhound]

Just like a shopping mall:

"24-hour-a-day Kings Court" = Food Court

[Oztrich Boy]

These ships are not examples of what bothers me about today's cruise ships. Most are "fair weather vessels" and are designed by people who want to make $$, and the heck with everything else. If you go on a cruise, make sure it's during a good weather season (varies with geographic location)

The QE2 can manage the South Atlantic (to lat.55 South) in May

[capt. norm]

It's like anything else, you have to pick the one that's right for you, but come bad weather these vessels are a little heavier on top than I would be comfortable with.

Granted that the engines, generators and heavy equipment are located as low as possible to lower the center of gravity and increase stability...but now they're starting to push it a bit in the other direction.

[fishhound]

Are they raising the engine levels?

The displacement on these seems really low.

I would watch the Carnival and other ships turn on a dime with thier thrusters.


The funniest thing was to see the Phillipino guys hand over hand cranking a car they stood in hanging off a rail on the side of the ship to clean the windows. They rounded a corner from the stern as I was on the dock it was just humorous.

[capt. norm]

That's exactly why my reply read:

"These ships are not examples of what bothers me about today's cruise ships

they are just about the exact opposite of today's cheap-a$$ cruise ships and I would be comfortable on either of them in heavy weather.

I didn't make myself clear and made it look like I was saying the reverse of what I meant. They, and some very fine Scandinavian vessels are well-built and as safe as the state of the art permits, but, as Gomer Pyle would say

"Surprise, surprise!"

There are those passenger lines who are more interested in the fast buck than passenger safety.

I have held a master's license since 1975 and have watched all of this happening.

[capt. norm]

Are they raising the engine levels?

No...you want the weight of your engines as low as you can get it. Low center of gravity = great stability.

They are increasing the superstructure above the waterline which has the effect of raising their center of gravity and thus decreasing stability.

Picture it as a test to see how far you could tip the vessel over toward one side and, when released, it restores itself to a normal attitude.

At some point you get too heavy on the top and she will be unable to recover from a bad roll.

There are some "iffy" vessels out there.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

500 ton ?

[piasa]

"We see it all at sea," said the QM2's social hostess, Anja Eyvindsson, laughing. "This morning there were items in the luggage that were not supposed to be there. Items that belong to Cunard - artworks, glasses, plates. All that sort of stuff."

... But did they at least leave the "W" keys in the keyboards? I wondered where al Gore's been these days.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

There are some "iffy" vessels out there.

High CG (low hydrostatic stability) was part of the problem with the Andrea Doria. As she approached New York, she had burned off most of her fuel and was sitting high in the water. They did not flood the fuel bunkers because she could make better time lighter. When the Stockholm (for no good reason) turned into her, striking her amidships, she was was doomed. (The vessel was a she, even if Admiral Andrea Doria was a he.)

The loss of the Andrea Doria is one of the most famous incidents of radar induced collision. The pilot on the Stockholm misread the radar scale and thought the Andrea Doria was 10 NM away when he turned towards her in heavy fog. In the event, she was actually two NM away.

[Hiryusan]

About the Andrea Doria:

My understanding of the situation following the collision is that the ship was struck forward of the diesel generator room( a full width compartment which flooded) in the area of a cluster of near empty "deep tanks". Those tanks on the side of the collision flooded immediately, while those on the other side did not. This gave the ship the immediate list, and the list resulted in flooding through the watertight deck down the off-center passanger staircases. The high side "deep tanks" could have been counter-flooded(saving the ship) using valves put there for that purpose on the tank top level of the tank comartment in question(flooded immediately in collision)---DOH!

If you want to talk about ships of questionable stability try HMS Captain or (most probbably) SS Waratah

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

The Andrea Doria was not exceptionally unstable, just enough. I forget the details, but from what I've read, she was doomed when struck, efforts to save her were futile.

The fault clearly lay with the Stockholm, which was sailing on the wrong side of the (at that time suggested) shipping lanes, since her course for Sweden was more northerly than most shipping, her captain preferred sailing on the left hand side while outbound from the crowded approaches to New York Harbor.

The Stockholm only had one (by his own testimony) inattentive helmsman and one officer on the bridge at the time of the collision. The Andrea Doria had the captain and two officers plotting her course (and the Stockholm's from the radar observations) right up to the time of collision. The watch officer on the Stockholm misread the radar scale and thought that the A.D. was more than ten nautical miles away when he got nervous about driving on the wrong side of the road and decided cross over so as to keep the A.D. on his port side when passing.

The officers on the A. D. could not believe it when they heard the Stockholm sound her maneuver horn. Even in the thick fog they could see on radar they she was turning directly towards them. The captain of the A.D. could have avoided the sinking by turning into the Stockholm and colliding head on. Both ships would have swapped painted, but would have been deflected away from each other. In the event, the captain, who was in love the pretty A.D. tried to avoid the collision (o.k., technically an allision) altogether and turned away trying to avoid the Stockholm. This mistake proved fatal.

Three weeks into the Admiralty court trial in New York, it was decided that since the underwriters for both ships were essentially the same, there was no point in trying to assess blame. It was mutually agreed to split liability down the middle, although, clearly the Stockholm was far more culpable.

[P8riot]

For another treat, on January 13, 2008 the QE2, and the new Queen Victoria are scheduled to complete a tandem TA crossing and meet the QM2 in NYC.

[Hiryusan]

I am not commenting on the situation that led to the Andrea Doria getting a big hole in her, but the seemingly minor design detail that made that situation result in the vessel's loss. The valving that would have allowed the Andrea Doria to right the list were located in the only compartment suceptable to asymetric flooding(the same was true for the tank compartment aft of frame 83..don't ask me why the crew didn't use these). If these valves had been controlable from above or an adjacent compartment the flooding would have been restricted to at worst 3 compartments instead of the whole length of the vessel. Even if the vessel eventually sank, it would have probably been in a salvagable position. As it stood, Andrea Doria was not unstable until the Stockholm came aboard. If these few details had been dealt with prevoiusly ( add in a little more crew initiative) Andrea Doria might have been able to regain stability and be saved.