Topic: QE2 No Longer "British" (Read 5978 times)

IRI5HJ4CK · « **on:** September 15, 2009, 07:51:12 »

Hi guys,

Was just looking at an interesting article, and a few photo's....QE2, Is No longer, officially, British.

"Port Vila Replaces Southampton On QE2

August 26: News from the www.TheQE2Story.com/forum states that since the QE2 is no longer owned by a British company, and hence cannot be registered under the maritime flag of the UK, "Southampton" no longer appears on her stern as the home port. Instead, "Port Vila", the capital of Vanuatu (one of a few convenience flags willing to register a non-SOLAS 2010-compliant, 40 year old ship) has replaced "Southampton", (though clearly still visible) on her stern. This allows QE2 to operate as a floating hotel and within the boundaries of maritime law. Her famous callsign, GBTT, has been changed to YJVW6, as assigned by her new flag state."

QE2 at Port Rashid, Dubai, on August 19, 2009. Photo copyright MartimeMatters.com 2009.

Flag of Vanuatu

www.TheQE2Story.com/forum (Source)

Kind Regards,
Jack.

Agent|Austin · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2009, 07:55:29 »

Cool, I guess.

VirtualSkipper · « **Reply #2 on:** September 15, 2009, 12:48:42 »

Why ''no longer British''?
Even if she is property of the Dubai World Co. then she is still British build. So its still a british ship.

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #3 on:** September 15, 2009, 15:58:20 »

Quote from: VirtualSkipper on September 15, 2009, 12:48:42

Why ''no longer British''?
Even if she is property of the Dubai World Co. then she is still British build. So its still a british ship.

When I said like what you said about Titanic, I was corrected, and told that Titanic was an English ship

- But then again, one could view it differently...That the Northern part of Ireland is "English".

I totally agree with you. To me, QE2 is still British, But technically...To the people that are fussy about it...She isn't. Note I put British in Quotes...

Jack.

matt5674 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 15, 2009, 19:59:29 »

Quote from: IRI5HJ4CK on September 15, 2009, 15:58:20

When I said like what you said about Titanic, I was corrected, and told that Titanic was an English ship - But then again, one could view it differently...That the Northern part of Ireland is "English".

Titanic was built in Norhten Irleand (Irish half) and was registered in Liverpool (British Half) but I say since Northern Ireland if part of United Kingdom, Titanic is 3 fourths British and a fourth Irish

But sad of Queen Elizabeth 2 no longer a British Liner though she is British Built, I just hate it when a famous ships original registration port is replaced. If this ever happened to Titanic if she was a floating hotel to today, I would be furious

matt5674 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 16, 2009, 00:32:52 »

I think I found the Port Vila QE2 here in Sydney Australia with Google Earth 5 in the attachment.

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #6 on:** September 16, 2009, 07:44:39 »

I personally think it's a big shame that they didn't keep Southampton on her stern, flying the British flag...But according to them, they have to comply with some laws over there, And she has to be registered with them.

Jack.

VirtualSkipper · « **Reply #7 on:** September 16, 2009, 14:08:38 »

I found something:

On July 10, 2009 it was revealed that QE2 may sail to Cape Town, South Africa to become a floating hotel (for use primarily during the 2010 FIFA World Cup), in a Dubai World sponsored venture at the V&A Waterfront.
This was confirmed by Nakheel on July 20, 2009.

In preparation for this expected voyage the ship was placed into the Dubai Dry-dock and underwent an extensive exterior refurbishment. During this refit, the ship's underwater hull was repainted and inspected.

Shortly after her refit QE2 was registered under the flag of Vanuatu and Port Vila (her new home port) was painted on her stern, replacing the word Southampton.

She has since returned to Port Rashid where it is anticipated she will soon sail for Cape Town. The arrival of QE2 in Cape Town is expected to create many local jobs (as the ship will arrive with only a mechanical crew) including Hotel staff, Restaurant staff, chefs, cleaners and shop attendants all being sourced from the local workforce.
She will (maybe) steam on her own power.

2 other ship of the Holland America Line will serve temporary as a floating hotel to.

matt5674 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 17, 2009, 03:24:07 »

QE2 sailing again? BIG NEWS!!

she gets to sail one more time ever since her retirement.

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #9 on:** September 17, 2009, 07:24:50 »

Quote from: matt5674 on September 17, 2009, 03:24:07

QE2 sailing again? BIG NEWS!! she gets to sail one more time ever since her retirement.

I suppose it is..But, I still think it's a shame she was stripped of anything relating to England/Southampton/Cunard $:-\$

But maybe I'm just hard to please

Kevinmcg_ships · « **Reply #10 on:** September 17, 2009, 09:01:16 »

I have heard the QE2 will sail to Cape Town without any passengers - when Cunard sold her, there was a clause inserted in the contract which stipulate that should she ever sail again she is not to carry passengers when at sea.

RMS Canada · « **Reply #11 on:** September 20, 2009, 17:22:57 »

Kevinmcg_ships · « **Reply #12 on:** September 20, 2009, 21:04:18 »

Quote from: RMS Canada on September 20, 2009, 17:22:57

Yup, you can't blame Cunard, though. The QE2 is such a high pedigree that if she ever sails again, there was bound to be very strong interest from QE2 fans, or from people who wants a second chance to sail on her after missing out the farewell cruises.

RMSGreatBritain · « **Reply #13 on:** September 20, 2009, 21:16:16 »

Quote from: Kevinmcg_ships on September 17, 2009, 09:01:16

I have heard the QE2 will sail to Cape Town without any passengers - when Cunard sold her, there was a clause inserted in the contract which stipulate that should she ever sail again she is not to carry passengers when at sea.

shame, but when she's reitred she's retired so really, sailing again would just be wrong in my view

on a totally unrelated note, Matt deserves a prize for a fantastic sig, nice to see another nascar fan around!

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #14 on:** September 21, 2009, 07:23:40 »

Quote from: RMSGreatBritain on September 20, 2009, 21:16:16

nascar fan

Did you ever see that episode of Top Gear when they went around America....?

The Ferry Man · « **Reply #15 on:** September 21, 2009, 11:06:47 »

Quote from: IRI5HJ4CK on September 21, 2009, 07:23:40

Did you ever see that episode of Top Gear when they went around America....?

The Stigs American Cousin

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #16 on:** September 21, 2009, 13:53:26 »

Quote from: The Ferry Man on September 21, 2009, 11:06:47

The Stigs American Cousin

Hahah

Like two English stigs slapped together

siso7 · « **Reply #17 on:** September 21, 2009, 14:57:31 »

Quote from: The Ferry Man on September 21, 2009, 11:06:47

The Stigs American Cousin

Big Stig

But seriously, somehow we have an extreme tendency of getting waaaay of topic

On topic then: Personally I don't like that they didn't keep Southampton on her stern and flying the British flag as you said Jack, I agree with you

Wave Music · « **Reply #18 on:** September 21, 2009, 15:56:31 »

Well, change of homeport & flag - it's only a little of what could be done. Lucky that she still has Queen Elizabeth 2 written on board!

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:03:05 »

WHY all the big fuss about this ship?

WHAT is so special about it? It's the last big British 'liner'? So what... It was just another cruise ship- it's a long time since that boat was a liner! And to top it off, it's a cruise ship with very little facilities for people- such as gof courses, wall climbing, log flumes, planetariums etc...

Why not just go to a canal and borrow a big barge? OK I exaggerate, but not by much!

Perhaps (directed towards fellow Brits) we should mourn the death of ship building rather than the death of QE2

Quote from: Wave Music on September 21, 2009, 15:56:31

Well, change of homeport & flag - it's only a little of what could be done. Lucky that she still has Queen Elizabeth 2 written on board!

You mean like chopping it in half and adding bits... sitting it in concrete and ripping out the inards, like QM!

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #20 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:09:14 »

Quote from: Stuart2007 on September 21, 2009, 17:03:05

it's a cruise ship with very little facilities for people- such as gof courses, wall climbing, log flumes, planetariums etc...

Why the hell would you want a Golf Course on an Ocean Liner? The whole point of going on an Ocean Liner is for that experience at sea, I think!

Shipaddict · « **Reply #21 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:09:51 »

Quote from: Stuart2007 on September 21, 2009, 17:03:05

WHY all the big fuss about this ship?

WHAT is so special about it? It's the last big British 'liner'? So what... It was just another cruise ship- it's a long time since that boat was a liner! And to top it off, it's a cruise ship with very little facilities for people- such as gof courses, wall climbing, log flumes, planetariums etc...

Why not just go to a canal and borrow a big barge? OK I exaggerate, but not by much!

Perhaps (directed towards fellow Brits) we should mourn the death of ship building rather than the death of QE2

Precisely because it is the last liner. It isn't a cruise ship...

And how do you expect a 40 year old ship to have a planetarium? Perhaps they could put a rock climbing wall on the funnel just for you?

And she was built in a British yard, a fine example of British shipbuilding. So if the shipbuilding itself has gone, at least a product of that building remains.

So that's what all the fuss is about. Some people would rather see a proper ship instead of the rubbish some cruise lines are building today.

IRI5HJ4CK · « **Reply #22 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:11:20 »

Quote from: Shipaddict on September 21, 2009, 17:09:51

Some people would rather see a proper ship instead of the rubbish some cruise lines are building today.

Here here...All that plastic they build in some foreign country via cheap labour...

Nathan|C · « **Reply #23 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:11:46 »

Golf Courses are for plastic bath tub rubbish ships like Freedom of the Seas and Norwegian Epic

And the QE2 along with QM2 is (or was) one of the last regular transatlantic liners...

Stuart2007 · « **Reply #24 on:** September 21, 2009, 17:18:53 »

With respect, it is a long time since it was really a liner (then along came Boeing with their 'nasty' 707 then 'nastier' 747 and liners were finished). It has done a lot more cruising than its limited Transatlantic crossings for most of its 'life'.

QM2 is a cruise ship as well- look at cunard website for details. I know they CALL it a liner, but you could CALL it a sausage roll, but that wouldn't make it so.

I know how easy it is to get sentimental about a ship (that most people here probably haven't even seen, let alone travelled on) but why THIS one? Where was everyone when they scrapped Canberra (look at their comparative histories... both were 1982 troop carriers, but only one was allowed into action zone. Then look at the engineering differences in design- Canberra was built to be adaptable to changing uses, QE2 wasn't. Look at the overall design- the marine architecture was heavily influenced by Canberra- recessed life boats, raked stern decks- a far more efficient steam turbine set)

Quote from: Nathan|C on September 21, 2009, 17:11:46

Golf Courses are for plastic bath tub rubbish ships like Freedom of the Seas and Norwegian Epic

And the QE2 along with QM2 is (or was) one of the last regular transatlantic liners...

I remember when they talked of getting rid of the London Routemaster bus... "noooo they all wailed. It's sooo British" etc... But no one bothered to actually ask those who used them.

Whilst I *DO* agree with you to an extent, do you think RC/PO/CL etc would spend millions building extra facilities if passengers didn't want them. Remember that apart from being of interest to you they DO need to carry passengers to earn money...

Author Topic: QE2 No Longer "British" (Read 5978 times)

matt5674

matt5674

matt5674

Nathan|C