QM2 problems

[Rod]

The problem, as I see it at least, AND, don't forget that I have dined in ships dining rooms a LOT less than any of you, is that people do not know what they want ! Do they want what they have at home? Do they want what they had Last year on their hols? What they had for breakfast. It's impossible to tell. Kinda like a kid trying to decide!

[Barumfox]

To counter the you tubers views there are a couple of excellent threads on the last and current (ending today) Westbound crossings on the Cruise Critic Cunard board which provide a more balanced / positive view of the service on board the ship - one in Britannia and the other in Queens Grill - again they both love the ship but have mixed views on the food. There was a lot of useful information for me about changes in life on board in terms of venues and entertainment since I was last on board in 2015.

The potential impact on service on QM2 of experienced crew being transferred to QA is an interesting point - reminds me of  the same discussions on QE2 when the QV came into service in 2007/08. The Solent Ships coverage of the QM2/QA departures quoted 2434 / 2750 passengers respectively with almost identical crew numbers of around 1220-1225. To put this into perspective P&O's Arvia left after them and reported over 5500 passengers - more than both Queen's combined - and 1600 crew.

 In terms of the review from the Black Country couple I only saw the first night coverage and it is clear that cost seems to be their overriding concern - cancelling the tips at due to the issues experienced at that time is premature and they seem oblivious to the fact that these are to enable the non-passenger facing members of the crew such as engineers / laundry / kitchen staff / deck department to receive something rather than the dining room / cabin stewards they had issues with. They did not mention that their dinner appeared to be in King's Court rather than the Britannia - not sure what level of waiter service is provided there in the evening?

They did well to get a late booking at a low cost but seem to be taking the cost focus too far. Leaving the car in a shopping centre car park certainly appears cheaper but would be less secure than the likes of CPS and they would have to get their cases from the ship to the car presumably by taxi after the cruise. They were fortunate that the weather was kind when walking to the Mayflower Terminal. Overall not particularly impressed with their approach.

One issue which has affected both of the most recent Westbound Transatlantics -six nighters - is being delayed berthing at Red Hook by a further two to three hours by the tide levels - first time I have become aware of this - is this just an issue with Red Hook or with the Manhattan piers as well?
QM2 draws around 33 feet - similar to QE2 but most cruise ships are around 27 feet but this is still considerably less than the original Queens at 40 feet whose scheduled arrival and departure times were determined by the tide tables.

Gary

[Rob Lightbody]

In stark contrast, a rave review of QM2s crossing in mid June.

Jamie, the reviewer, absolutely loved the ship and the service and his only criticisms were very mild.

[Rob Lightbody]

I've just had another report in from a personal friend of the forum, and very long time Cunarder, to say that shes just spent a week on QM2 and everything was tickety-boo!  So that's great news indeed. 

[Rob Lightbody]

I had forgotten to share part of my QM2 Transatlantic crossing a few weeks ago.

We were roughly halfway across, around about 3pm, when I tried to flush the loo in our cabin, and all it did was a great bit hooting noise, because it was just sucking air.  Trying again made it even louder.  Then we realised there was no water at all in the cabin.

A call to the pursers office came up with "all our lines are busy..." so I immediately concluded that it was a ship-wide problem.

Roughly 15 minutes later I think, the Captain came over the PA system, to announce that a major fresh water pipe within the "technical spaces" had burst without warning, and they were working to resolve this, but that they anticipated it would take at least 3 hours.

Toilets couldn't be used, people couldn't have showers etc, and it included the crucial time when people are getting ready for dinner after exercising or being for a swim etc.

True to form, the water did come back on, although our cabin then suffered low water pressure and had to get a plumber to visit it to sort it all out.   It was SO QE2!

The last bit of the story is that a few hours after getting off, we received an email from Cunard saying that there had been a Legionnaires outbreak on board (they'd had to wait to dock in New York to get the tests done I assume).  I presume this was due to the water problem, but maybe not.  What do you think?

But what would have happened if they'd not managed to fix it?  Thats what I was wondering.  I concluded the only thing they could have done would have been to engage maximum speed to get to the nearest major port that could take her, as soon as possible.  Would she have had enough fuel to go flat out, if it wasn't planned?

[Peter Mugridge]

I'd imagine that like with aircraft, ships carry enough reserve fuel to cover such contingencies over and above what is needed for the planned voyage?

[Barumfox]

Rob

According to one credible source I have checked QM2 can go for 16-17 days at 28.5 knots / 500 tons of fuel a day - which is very impressive if true so a decision to increase speed on a crossing in such circumstances would only be restricted for economic, weather or technical / mechanical reasons not range / shortage of fuel.

Gary