Topic: Cruiseliner question (Read 8987 times)

ravi · « **on:** July 27, 2007, 14:28:58 »

Hi Everyone
I love cruiseliners.I have seen some pictures of Bridge from Cruise ship Freedom of the seas and Queen Mary 2.They both have joysticks.I am aware most ships use joysticks for docking at low speeds.

Are joysticks used at high seas for steering the ship at normal cruising speeds ?.Or they use the wheel

This question has been in my mind for a long time .I will be very happy if you could share your knowledge with me

Kind regards
Ravi

jggriffith · « **Reply #1 on:** July 27, 2007, 19:18:08 »

The captain on the Queen Mary 2 told me that the joystick is normally used all the time, so of course this is at all speeds. He said the wheel is rarely used, but I don't know why they change from the joystick to the wheel only some times and when they decide to do this.

mvsmith · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2007, 00:13:11 »

The R/V Melville, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography has VSPs fore and aft. No wheel.
She has crossed the oceans on joystick alone.
She's not a cruiseliner, although often regarded as such by the scientific party.

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2007, 00:24:49 »

Quote from: mvsmith on July 30, 2007, 00:13:11

The R/V Melville, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography has VSPs fore and aft. No wheel.
She has crossed the oceans on joystick alone.
She's not a cruiseliner, although often regarded as such by the scientific party.

Just found this website http://shipsked.ucsd.edu/ships/melville/index.html 1969 would surely make it one of the first ships to be fitted with this type of propulsion?

Or was it retro-fitted?
Stu

LucAtC · « **Reply #4 on:** July 30, 2007, 01:18:43 »

Hello Stu,
Your link gives the history of the R/V Melville.
http://shipsked.ucsd.edu/ships/melville/section1.html
You were right, by mid-life (1992), the "cycloÃ¯dal" thrusters were replaced by 2 Z-drive Schottel Lips units as indeed a retrofit.
Regards,
Luc

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 30, 2007, 01:29:22 »

Luc you are a walking encyclopedia

Stu

mvsmith · « **Reply #6 on:** July 30, 2007, 14:05:36 »

Quote from: LucAtC on July 30, 2007, 01:18:43

Hello Stu,
Your link gives the history of the R/V Melville.
http://shipsked.ucsd.edu/ships/melville/section1.html
You were right, by mid-life (1992), the "cycloÃ¯dal" thrusters were replaced by 2 Z-drive Schottel Lips units as indeed a retrofit.
Regards,
Luc

Luc:
I'm not surprised that the original VS units were eventualy replaced. On the Manila-Port Louis leg of her maiden voyage in 1970, she stripped the crown gear on the after unit just as we entered the Indian Ocean. We proceeded at 4 kt on the forward unit to a graving dock in Port Louis, Mauritius. A new gear was flown down.
Marty

Admiral-of-the-fleet · « **Reply #7 on:** March 07, 2008, 01:10:59 »

From what i gather.... the two consoles in either wing of the bridge in the large ships are used at docking... know for the QM2 with its azipods a small rotating joystick is used with a small throttle for the fixed pods. Obviously its 3 bow thrusters can be used to take the QM2 sidewards on to the dock and to spin it in its on length. Quite impressive. Got some pics below of the bridge of the QM2. Dunno wether i should be displayin these but hey!!

Notice the two small what look like throtles on the center console (the first pic) those are the individual pod controls which can be rotated 360 degrees as well as the throtles for the fixed pods. Also theres the auto pilot and the small wheel (bit of a let down, was expecting a captain with a white beard and a huge wheel) and the vast array of consoles, charts and radars.

Admiral-of-the-fleet · « **Reply #8 on:** March 07, 2008, 01:23:29 »

oh and to answer the above question.... Often the small joysticks are used for delicate manoveures (easier to control) like docking-the wheel often used for manouvers at sea. Quite dissapointingly the Autopilot is controlling the QM2 the majority of the time and is often only changed to the wheel during rough seas or a manoveure at sea. In fact the captain or commodore doesn't do to much as far as driving is concerned only docking and manouvering the beast in tricky conditions. Still quite a task for something of the size of the Queen Mary. Its often lesser senior officer who will take the wheel at sea when its necissary.

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #9 on:** March 08, 2008, 09:06:32 »

The Titanic was a cruise liner, and she never even HAD a joystick!

mvsmith · « **Reply #10 on:** March 08, 2008, 09:11:12 »

The Titanic was not a cruise liner.
Marty

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #11 on:** March 08, 2008, 09:14:35 »

Indeed, she was an Ocean Liner.

A cruise ship or cruise liner is a passenger ship used for pleasure voyages, where the voyage itself and not transportation, is the prime purpose of the trip.

An ocean liner is a passenger ship or passenger-cargo ship that transports people and often freight from one port to another along regular trans-oceanic routes according to a schedule. Transportation is the purpose of the trip.

Regards,
Fred

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #12 on:** March 08, 2008, 09:16:52 »

...I didn't know there was a difference...

wasn't the Olympic sometimes used on cruise-like voyages, though?

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #13 on:** March 08, 2008, 09:23:33 »

Nope...

She made 4 or 5 voyages to New York, after which she had a little accident with the HMS Hawke.
Then she was turned into a troop transport ship during WWI and after that she made a few more voyages to NY after which she was decommissioned. Well, that's as far as I know..

you should know that... you're an ameteur expert on that class, aren't you?

Regards,
Fred

* Edit * Typo

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #14 on:** March 08, 2008, 10:14:57 »

The Britannic (yard #433) would be awesome if she got that German-made pipe organ that was made for her...

too bad she never saw duty as a passenger ship...

But really, have you ever heard of an organ on a passenger liner?

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #15 on:** March 08, 2008, 11:34:24 »

I don't think you need to mention the yard number... if someone does not know her name and thus does not know what ship you are talking aobut, then the yard number isn't going to help anyway.

Regards,
Fred

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #16 on:** March 08, 2008, 13:21:21 »

I just find the number sequence of the 3 wierd:

400
401
433

Britannic breaks the pattern!

mvsmith · « **Reply #17 on:** March 08, 2008, 17:19:09 »

Quote from: RMS Gigantic on March 08, 2008, 13:21:21

I just find the number sequence of the 3 wierd:

400
401
433

Britannic breaks the pattern!

Lollypopâ€¦Giganticâ€¦whatever:
Olympic and Titanic were assigned consecutive yard numbers because their keels were laid consecutively on Queens Yard slipways #2 and #3â€”the only two under the Arrol gantry.
The keel for the third Olympic class shipâ€”which became HMHS Britannicâ€”could not be laid until Olympic was launched.
In the meantime, H&W assigned yard numbers to other projects. These included the two White Star Lines tenders Nomadic & Trafficâ€”needed for Cherbourg where Olympic and Titanic could not dock.
This obvious explanation would have occurred to anyoneâ€”even a non-expertâ€”who was acquainted with the history of those ships.
Marty

mvsmith · « **Reply #18 on:** March 08, 2008, 17:36:02 »

Quote from: RMS Gigantic on March 08, 2008, 10:14:57

But really, have you ever heard of an organ on a passenger liner?

Iâ€™ve seen one on a submarine.

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #19 on:** March 08, 2008, 21:35:34 »

I know WHY they aren't consecutive, I just think it's kinda funny

I'd give people the first 2 yard numbers, and they'd always guess 402 was the 3rd, lol

I haven't come across a person yet that's guessed the 3rd number correctly!

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #20 on:** March 09, 2008, 03:21:59 »

Quote from: RMS Gigantic on March 08, 2008, 21:35:34

I know WHY they aren't consecutive, I just think it's kinda funny

That's a weird statement, because.. when you know WHY it is, it's obvious and thus not funny anymore..

Regards,
Fred

saltydog · « **Reply #21 on:** March 09, 2008, 04:46:04 »

Quote from: mvsmith on March 08, 2008, 17:36:02

Iâ€™ve seen one on a submarine.

Do you mean this one, Marty..?

RMS Gigantic · « **Reply #22 on:** March 09, 2008, 05:16:48 »

Quote from: Mad_Fred on March 09, 2008, 03:21:59

That's a weird statement, because.. when you know WHY it is, it's obvious and thus not funny anymore..

I mean more funny as in odd than anything else, I guess

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #23 on:** March 09, 2008, 05:39:03 »

Yeah I know.. but it still isn't odd, when you realise WHY the number is 433...

It's pretty straight foreward.. they could not start on her unless one of the other two was finished at least.
And in the meanwhile, they kept on building other ships.. it's not like they only had those two projects going.. Sop when it was her turn, they were further along the line..

So it's not odd or funny, or weird or strange at all. I guess they could have "reserved" the number for her. But the number is of no significance anyway. Not for anything other then their own bookkeeping reasons.

No ship is referred to by it's yard number.. they have names for a reason. No one really cared what it would be, I bet.

Regards,
Fred

mvsmith · « **Reply #24 on:** March 09, 2008, 06:14:04 »

Yeah, Dawg,
Great book, good movie.
Marty

Author Topic: Cruiseliner question (Read 8987 times)

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith