Topic: Oasis of the Seas - ugly or beautiful or...? Discuss (Read 35615 times)

Sam · « **Reply #75 on:** November 03, 2009, 08:15:25 »

The only thing missing is a ferries wheel and a rollercoaster on the top of the ship. (To make it even more ugly)
I like the basic design, but everything around it is just to much.

Why 3 funnels?
There is just to much on the top of the ship.

And that hump in front of the lifeboats allso doesn't mach the smooth lines wich a ship should have.

Bottman · « **Reply #76 on:** November 03, 2009, 08:23:27 »

Well, there is no rollercoaster on board, but a hand crafted merry-go-round!

Agent|Austin · « **Reply #77 on:** November 03, 2009, 08:30:05 »

It was in the newspaper today, apparently her stacks are retractible? They have to retract them to go under a bridge in Florida, only 1ft of clearance.

Bottman · « **Reply #78 on:** November 03, 2009, 09:32:54 »

Yes they are! Otherwise the ship couldn't leave the Baltic Sea at all, due to the bridges between Denmarks isles.

Agent|Austin · « **Reply #79 on:** November 03, 2009, 09:35:49 »

Why not just make them short anyway? Diesel all over the rear decks?

Tomaten · « **Reply #80 on:** November 03, 2009, 11:34:51 »

the funnel cost 15 millions to build, and it is telescopic.
it was just a few decimeters below the brige, and they went will full speed.
wonder what would happend if the ship was 1m taller, then the bridge, is no more

And btw, it wasn't in florida, it was between denmark and sweden....

Bottman · « **Reply #81 on:** November 03, 2009, 13:18:28 »

Hmm - Great Belt between Denmark and Sweden???

15 millions? Which currency?

Tomaten · « **Reply #82 on:** November 03, 2009, 13:23:40 »

15 millions SEK
so its like 2 123 142,25 dollars :p
Yes, the Great Belt bridge

Capt. Matt · « **Reply #83 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:05:08 »

See there is the same thing going on over here with clearance, they are talking about either raising the Bayonne Bridge (Sister to the smaller sydney harbour bridge) or taking it down (It provides a gateway to Staten Island), as ships cant access Port Newark or Port Elizabeth which provide goods to a major part of the country, but my father entioned it would make nno sense to raise it as the Verrazano- Narrows Bridge is limiting ships to enter the harbour to begin with, and I believe it is true that the QM2's height was limited so it COULD enter NY harbour...correct me if im wrong...

Does anyone think they will draw the line somewhere? $:-\$ I mean really how much bigger can you make a ship

Sorry say the new smiley, just had to use it

saltydog · « **Reply #84 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:39:39 »

Maybe someday large ships will use this technique to pass under bridges..

Wave Music · « **Reply #85 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:50:56 »

Quote from: saltydog on November 03, 2009, 14:39:39

Maybe someday large ships will use this technique to pass under bridges..

If that will be implemented, I'm sure after some years passengers will get used to it & won't be afraid of sinking.

Bottman · « **Reply #86 on:** November 03, 2009, 15:37:36 »

Quote from: tomaten2006 on November 03, 2009, 13:23:40

Yes, the Great Belt bridge

Which is Denmark domestic, right?

The bridge between Sweden and Denmark (Oeresund) seems to be even lower or the waterway is too shallow.

Traddles · « **Reply #87 on:** November 03, 2009, 15:45:28 »

The last time I sailed through the Great Belt there was no bridge and I was en-route to Leningrad. Shows how old I am now. A great bridge and a new name for Leningrad too. How things have changed.

saltydog · « **Reply #88 on:** November 03, 2009, 16:16:32 »

Here's a nice video of her going underneath the Storebaelt Bridge at 20 knots, perhaps for the "squat-effect"..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH8-MR24aos

Wave Music · « **Reply #89 on:** November 03, 2009, 17:01:01 »

Quote from: saltydog on November 03, 2009, 16:16:32

Here's a nice video of her going underneath the Storebaelt Bridge at 20 knots, perhaps for the "squat-effect"..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH8-MR24aos

Thanks, Pete! Nice video, nice quality.

CaptainMike1 · « **Reply #90 on:** November 03, 2009, 18:15:20 »

Quote from: The Ferry Man on October 28, 2009, 22:41:00

Same here...

But The proof of the pudding is in the seeing...

Anyone know if she can get into Southampton?

She was in the Solent yesterday off loading 300 Finnish Shipyard workers who prbably didn't want to cross the Atlantic on her??

Agent|Austin · « **Reply #91 on:** November 03, 2009, 18:43:15 »

Quote from: tomaten2006 on November 03, 2009, 11:34:51

the funnel cost 15 millions to build, and it is telescopic.
it was just a few decimeters below the brige, and they went will full speed.
wonder what would happend if the ship was 1m taller, then the bridge, is no more
And btw, it wasn't in florida, it was between denmark and sweden....

THen our newspaper is a liar, it said Miami, Fl.

Tomaten · « **Reply #92 on:** November 03, 2009, 18:43:54 »

well, I got these fact from a newspaper to xD

Ballast · « **Reply #93 on:** November 03, 2009, 18:44:25 »

Quote from: saltydog on November 03, 2009, 16:16:32

Here's a nice video of her going underneath the Storebaelt Bridge at 20 knots, perhaps for the "squat-effect"..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH8-MR24aos

I don't think the captain would increase the clearance under the bridge by using the squat effect. If something goes wrong and the ship has too stop, they will be screwed like a doodoo

saltydog · « **Reply #94 on:** November 03, 2009, 19:38:44 »

I guess so..It was pretty close though..Missing by 10cm is just as good as missing by 10m, eh..?

siso7 · « **Reply #95 on:** November 03, 2009, 19:41:00 »

Quote from: Agent|Austin on November 03, 2009, 18:43:15

THen our newspaper is a liar, it said Miami, Fl.

It was in Denmark, here's even a photo of it on AIS

For all the scandenavian people here's a good article about it

http://www.dagbladet.no/2009/11/01/reise/oasis_of_the_seas/rccl/karibia/8829015/

It stands here that the captain had full throttle of the ship so it would go deeper in the water, I'm not shure if that is the squat effect

Some quotes from the article

Almost zero clearance
Friday 30 October was the 360 meter long cruise colossus towed from the shipyard west of the Finnish city of Turku (Ã…bo). The first hundred yards was the most critical. Utseilingen had to happen at high tide. Then there are exactly 90 inches between the bottom and the ship. Yet it is too shallow to use propellers. Therefore, the claim had to be blowing no faster than 10 knots of wind.

Sunk chimneys
It initially was considered a physical impossibility was conducted in the night. The 72 meter tall ship Seas passed the 65 meter high StorebÃ¦ltbroen. It was possible thanks to the specially built telescope chimneys that were sunk. This reduced the ship's height of 6.15 meters. In addition, she passed at low tide. The Norwegian Captain Tor Olsen and his colleagues on the command bridge put full speed on the propeller, which caused the ship to drop deeper in the water.
- Everything went as planned. But we were not prepared for the crossing would be such a spectacular experience, "said William S. Wright, who serves as captain of the transfer from the yard.

New ships next year
With no fit night to Sunday 1 November, putting mega ship "Oasis of the Seas", a preliminary standard for how much these ocean giants can be. There was only one and a half feet of clearance between the chimney and the bridge.
Next year, about the same time, the sister ship, "Allure of the Seas" sailing the same fairway.

Ballast · « **Reply #96 on:** November 03, 2009, 19:53:19 »

The squat effect happens when a vessels is sailing quickly through shallow or narrow water and creating lowered pressure under the ship. The vessel will 'squat' in the water. Squat is pretty dangerous, the vessel could end up unmanoeuverable. If the vessel reduces speed, it will come back to its normal level.

You could use the squat effect to reduce the ship's airdraft, but it's really risky.

Don't believe everything the journalists write about maritime business in the newspaper. They have the tendency to give the story a twist (or two).

Ballast · « **Reply #97 on:** November 03, 2009, 19:59:44 »

Quote from: siso7 on November 03, 2009, 19:41:00

It stands here that the captain had full throttle of the ship so it would go deeper in the water, I'm not shure if that is the squat effect

Some quotes from the article

Then there are exactly 90 inches between the bottom and the ship. Yet it is too shallow to use propellers. Therefore, the claim had to be blowing no faster than 10 knots of wind.

The Norwegian Captain Tor Olsen and his colleagues on the command bridge put full speed on the propeller, which caused the ship to drop deeper in the water.

If it was too shallow to use the propellers, how the heck did they create the squat effect?

Tomaten · « **Reply #98 on:** November 03, 2009, 20:02:35 »

fast moving tug?

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #99 on:** November 03, 2009, 20:02:42 »

Quote from: Ballast on November 03, 2009, 19:59:44

If it was too shallow to use the propellers, how the heck did they create the squat effect?

That's what I was thinking...!

Squat is a big problem in Ports like Fleetwood...There's not much Depth on a low tide when the Leader comes in..And the beach is so, so close, it's deadly...Trainee's do anything not to come to Fleetwood.

Jack
p.s. Like the new Smiley:

Poll

What do you think about her look?

Author Topic: Oasis of the Seas - ugly or beautiful or...? Discuss (Read 35615 times)