QM 2 update

Hi all
Well, I posted a full review at CruiseMates, suppose it will be a week before it is on the site.
Took over 300 photos on the trip and they are being edited and placed into web albums.
Bottom line: It is always difficult for a sequel to live up to the reputation of the original, isn't it? Having waited so long before building a new ship, I believe Cunard could have done better.

I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a "sequel" I guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create something really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]... but it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling like I was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

In fact, I happened to be on the last '84 crossing before the QE2's last major overhaul, and aboard again for one of the first '85 outings following it. I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85 re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers and crew... it seemed like zillions... and many [most?] weren't particularly complementary to the new ship.


""Van" Van Doorne" wrote in message ...
Hi all
Well, I posted a full review at CruiseMates, suppose it will be a week before it is on the site.
Took over 300 photos on the trip and they are being edited and placed into web albums.
Bottom line: It is always difficult for a sequel to live up to the reputation of the original, isn't it? Having waited so long before building a new ship, I believe Cunard could have done better.

Maybe they SHOULD have had Farcus do it. It sure wouldn't have felt like a QE2 sequel if he did it.

--Tom

"BTC/TAK on ACK" wrote in message ...
I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a "sequel" I guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create something really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]... but it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling like I was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

In fact, I happened to be on the last '84 crossing before the QE2's last major overhaul, and aboard again for one of the first '85 outings following it. I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85 re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers and crew... it seemed like zillions... and many [most?] weren't particularly complementary to the new ship.


""Van" Van Doorne" wrote in message ...
Hi all
Well, I posted a full review at CruiseMates, suppose it will be a week before it is on the site.
Took over 300 photos on the trip and they are being edited and placed into web albums.
Bottom line: It is always difficult for a sequel to live up to the reputation of the original, isn't it? Having waited so long before building a new ship, I believe Cunard could have done better.

BTC/TAK on ACK wrote:

I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a "sequel" I
guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create something
really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]... but
it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling like I
was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as
different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85 re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost
count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers

.... and many [most?] weren't particularly
complementary to the new ship.



The ship is called QM2.

Ben S.

The ship is called QM2.

Yes, and the ship I [and others] have been comparing/ contrasting it to
[with] is QE2... am I missing your point?


"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message
nk.net...
BTC/TAK on ACK wrote:

I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a "sequel" I
guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create something
really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]... but
it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling like I
was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as
different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85 re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost
count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers

... and many [most?] weren't particularly
complementary to the new ship.



The ship is called QM2.

Ben S.

During my 36 days on board I found more complaints about the management of
the passengers than of the ship itself. Extra chairs in the theater so it
was difficult to be seated, crowd control at ports, having to carry your
own luggage off the ship in Ft. Lauderdale, if you had plane connections
before 1 PM. (It was announced those carrying their luggage would debark
from deck 3 at 7:30 AM. At 8:30 AM they changed the deck to deck 2. You can
imagine the problem when all the passengers, about 200, tried to get down to
that deck. The next group to leave the ship were already on deck 2 and
wouldn't let the luggage carrying passengers through! If your tour was late
coming back, room service was the only place you could eat. All in all not a
happy group of passengers. That said there are no bad cruises ,only those
worse than most.

"BTC/TAK on ACK" wrote in message
...
The ship is called QM2.

Yes, and the ship I [and others] have been comparing/ contrasting it to
[with] is QE2... am I missing your point?


"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message
nk.net...
BTC/TAK on ACK wrote:

I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a "sequel"
I
guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create something
really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]...
but
it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling like
I
was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as
different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85
re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost
count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers

... and many [most?] weren't particularly
complementary to the new ship.



The ship is called QM2.

Ben S.

"Mel Owen" wrote in message
...
During my 36 days on board I found more complaints about the management of
the passengers than of the ship itself. Extra chairs in the theater so it
was difficult to be seated, crowd control at ports, having to carry your
own luggage off the ship in Ft. Lauderdale,

You're kidding, right? They tried to have us do that on Destiny and
Norwegian Dawn and it was a nightmare both times.


if you had plane connections
before 1 PM. (It was announced those carrying their luggage would debark
from deck 3 at 7:30 AM. At 8:30 AM they changed the deck to deck 2. You
can
imagine the problem when all the passengers, about 200, tried to get down
to
that deck. The next group to leave the ship were already on deck 2 and
wouldn't let the luggage carrying passengers through!

It really ****es people off when they try to do things like that (meaning
get the people with the luggage off the ship first, even if they have to go
through a crowd to do it).

Poeple are crowded into a tight area, and then they are supposed to let a
few hundred people with luggage roll bags across their feet and belongings.

I DON'T THINK SO.

I wouldn't have been a happy camper in that instance. I don't handle those
kinds of "situations" well. I'm not a "make the best of bad circumstances"
kind of guy. I have little tolerance for incompetance and cheapness...
particularly when a cruise line is too cheap to pay the steevadores, so they
want you schlep your own luggage.

What you'll find is that in that kind of situation, people will roll their
luggage against walls, paneling, furniture, artwork, etc., not caring what
they scratch or cut up. In fact, if they're ticked off enough... they may
half do it on purpose.

Talk about incompetence and stupidity.


If your tour was late
coming back, room service was the only place you could eat. All in all not
a
happy group of passengers.

I'm not surprised.


That said there are no bad cruises ,only those
worse than most.

I've had a few I'd rate "bad".

--Tom

... there are no bad cruises, only those worse than most.

In my experience, Royal Caribbean has the "worse than most" fully covered.

But I can't tell if those 36 days were a "worse than most" for you. I was
fine with 12, leaving feeling like "a few more days aboard might be nice"
works for me... especially, as was our situation, having had a week in Rio
first and a visit with friends in Florida still to look forward to. It
seemed to me the 24 day folks I met were very ready to go. I didn't meet
many 36ers [only one woman, that I recall]... how was that for you? Three
weeks seems about my timing for arrival of the "can I swim there from here?"
fantasies.

That said, Cunard continues to outshine all others [again, based only on my
experience] in the category of "Most Disorganized Embarkation /
Disembarkation"... but on March 6th at Ft. Lauderdale they achieved a new
low!


"Mel Owen" wrote in message
...
During my 36 days on board I found more complaints about the management of
the passengers than of the ship itself. Extra chairs in the theater so it
was difficult to be seated, crowd control at ports, having to carry your
own luggage off the ship in Ft. Lauderdale, if you had plane connections
before 1 PM. (It was announced those carrying their luggage would debark
from deck 3 at 7:30 AM. At 8:30 AM they changed the deck to deck 2. You
can
imagine the problem when all the passengers, about 200, tried to get down
to
that deck. The next group to leave the ship were already on deck 2 and
wouldn't let the luggage carrying passengers through! If your tour was
late
coming back, room service was the only place you could eat. All in all not
a
happy group of passengers. That said there are no bad cruises ,only those
worse than most.

"BTC/TAK on ACK" wrote in message
...
The ship is called QM2.

Yes, and the ship I [and others] have been comparing/ contrasting it to
[with] is QE2... am I missing your point?


"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message
nk.net...
BTC/TAK on ACK wrote:

I believe Cunard could have done better

I tend to agree [obviously]. I had been hoping for less of a
"sequel"
I
guess.

I imagined the QM2 might take the best of the QE2 and create
something
really "new" [with some "tips of the hat" to the QE2, of course]...
but
it seemed so much like an expanded QE2 to me that I kept feeling
like
I
was aboard the older ship following another major refurbishment.

I basically feel the QM2's design is only about as
different from the current QE2 as that ship seemed after its '85
re-do.

We were a little surprised how many folks reacted similarly. We lost
count of how many references we heard to the QE2 from passengers

... and many [most?] weren't particularly
complementary to the new ship.



The ship is called QM2.

Ben S.

You're kidding, right?

I think Mel was quite serious, it was pretty awful. We didn't actually have
to carry our luggage off. But we weren't interested in that "self-help"
thing [or whatever it's called]. There have been times, though, we have, and
it was nice to have that option. It was hard to figure out why that
disembarkation was soooooo disorganized... frankly, I think it was as much
the fault of Ft. Lauderdale's set-up as Cunard's "head 'em up... move 'em
out" approach.
There were stevedores, by the way... and we had plenty of time to locate
one, since Cunard really outdid themselves misplacing two pieces of our
luggage.
The real fun was waiting at the curb for our friend to arrive. We saw her
[and she us] on the other side of the road... it took over a half-hour for
her to make the turn around. The arriving passengers luggage was mixed with
ours... unless the luggage-handlers looked very closely at the tags we saw
no way to tell what was what. We, for example, could easily have driven off
with any number of nifty-looking bags.


"Tom & Linda" wrote in message
. net...

"Mel Owen" wrote in message
...
During my 36 days on board I found more complaints about the management
of
the passengers than of the ship itself. Extra chairs in the theater so
it
was difficult to be seated, crowd control at ports, having to carry
your
own luggage off the ship in Ft. Lauderdale,

You're kidding, right? They tried to have us do that on Destiny and
Norwegian Dawn and it was a nightmare both times.


if you had plane connections
before 1 PM. (It was announced those carrying their luggage would debark
from deck 3 at 7:30 AM. At 8:30 AM they changed the deck to deck 2. You
can
imagine the problem when all the passengers, about 200, tried to get
down
to
that deck. The next group to leave the ship were already on deck 2 and
wouldn't let the luggage carrying passengers through!

It really ****es people off when they try to do things like that (meaning
get the people with the luggage off the ship first, even if they have to
go
through a crowd to do it).

Poeple are crowded into a tight area, and then they are supposed to let a
few hundred people with luggage roll bags across their feet and
belongings.

I DON'T THINK SO.

I wouldn't have been a happy camper in that instance. I don't handle
those
kinds of "situations" well. I'm not a "make the best of bad
circumstances"
kind of guy. I have little tolerance for incompetance and cheapness...
particularly when a cruise line is too cheap to pay the steevadores, so
they
want you schlep your own luggage.

What you'll find is that in that kind of situation, people will roll their
luggage against walls, paneling, furniture, artwork, etc., not caring what
they scratch or cut up. In fact, if they're ticked off enough... they may
half do it on purpose.

Talk about incompetence and stupidity.


If your tour was late
coming back, room service was the only place you could eat. All in all
not
a
happy group of passengers.

I'm not surprised.


That said there are no bad cruises ,only those
worse than most.

I've had a few I'd rate "bad".

--Tom

BTC/TAK on ACK wrote:

The ship is called QM2.


Yes, and the ship I [and others] have been comparing/ contrasting it to
[with] is QE2... am I missing your point?


It would stand to reason that QM2 would evoke the spirit of the Queen
Mary and pay homage to that ship. That she seems to be so much like the
QE2 seems for some that Cunard missed the mark. I think if the ship was
too much unlike the previous ships that some would feel it wasn't a true
Cunard ship. I think Cunard played it close to the vest in designing the
ship, hence the feeling that it is very close to the QE2, the ship most
current Cunarders sail often.

Ben


... and many [most?] weren't particularly

complementary to the new ship.



The ship is called QM2.

Ben S.