ArchGuy1 wrote:

Here is a petition to sign to try and save the Queen Mary for further generations and this is a ship that desperately needs restoration.
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... =675739135

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Here is a petition to sign to try and save the Queen Mary for further generations and this is a ship that desperately needs restoration.
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... =675739135

I went onboard her in 2004, apart from the hull and superstructure most of the interiors have been chopped and changed from when she sailed that there really isn’t much left worth preserving, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s scrapped. She’s also in a stupid location.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Here is a petition to sign to try and save the Queen Mary for further generations and this is a ship that desperately needs restoration.
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... =675739135

I went onboard her in 2004, apart from the hull and superstructure most of the interiors have been chopped and changed from when she sailed that there really isn’t much left worth preserving, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s scrapped. She’s also in a stupid location.

Why is the Queen Mary in a stupid location?

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Here is a petition to sign to try and save the Queen Mary for further generations and this is a ship that desperately needs restoration.
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... =675739135

I went onboard her in 2004, apart from the hull and superstructure most of the interiors have been chopped and changed from when she sailed that there really isn’t much left worth preserving, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s scrapped. She’s also in a stupid location.

Why is the Queen Mary in a stupid location?

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

I went onboard her in 2004, apart from the hull and superstructure most of the interiors have been chopped and changed from when she sailed that there really isn’t much left worth preserving, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s scrapped. She’s also in a stupid location.

Why is the Queen Mary in a stupid location?

She’s in the middle of a port, there’s no other attractions close by ie shopping, amusement, restaurants within walking distance and she’s not interesting enough as a destination in her own right.

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

I went onboard her in 2004, apart from the hull and superstructure most of the interiors have been chopped and changed from when she sailed that there really isn’t much left worth preserving, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s scrapped. She’s also in a stupid location.

Why is the Queen Mary in a stupid location?

She’s in the middle of a port, there’s no other attractions close by ie shopping, amusement, restaurants within walking distance and she’s not interesting enough as a destination in her own right.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Many ocean liners and cruise ships built from the 1950's onward sailed 40-50 years before being scrapped despite being outdated for many years before their retirement.

But that is because:
1) The market could absorb the capacity. It can't any more.
2) Passenger expectations have changed.

If we compare it with aviation, business class seats were pretty much unchanged from the 1950s onwards. In the 2000s we then got angle-flat seats and in the 2010s the lie flat seats. Barely anyone would be satisfied with an angle-flat today, let alone a traditional business recliner.

Many 1970's cruise ships sailed a little over 40 years, even years or over a decade after the megaships with balconies, watersides, rock climbing walls,, and other entertainment amenities became standard.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

" Barely anyone would be satisfied with an angle-flat today, let alone a traditional business recliner."
Just about anyone having to fly for business would be happy to have a traditional business recliner if the option is a Y class seat. Many flying leisure may be willing to pay a little extra for a great recliner versus a multiple extra.

bennett123 wrote:

ArchGuy1

I think you are failing to take account of the impact of COVID.

Th cull has not ended yet.

petertenthije wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

ArchGuy1

I think you are failing to take account of the impact of COVID.

Th cull has not ended yet.

I have not heard of a single building being demolished due to COVID-19, even though a lot of businesses occupying them have gone out of business.

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

I have not heard of a single building being demolished due to COVID-19, even though a lot of businesses occupying them have gone out of business.

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

johns624 wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Wrong question. The correct question is...how much money does it cost to put a ship on dry land. Answer...too much. Buildings can be re-leased to someone else. When the entire industry is way over capacity, there are no buyers. Just like when the US steel industry tanked in the early 80s. They didn't sell the mills to other companies, they tore them down.

FGITD wrote:

johns624 wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Wrong question. The correct question is...how much money does it cost to put a ship on dry land. Answer...too much. Buildings can be re-leased to someone else. When the entire industry is way over capacity, there are no buyers. Just like when the US steel industry tanked in the early 80s. They didn't sell the mills to other companies, they tore them down.

To add-a building can also become something else. That out of business coffee shop can become a restaurant, or a bakery, or an insurance office, or a daycare etc etc etc

A ship is a ship. Outside of being a cruise ship or a hotel, there’s not much room for change. It’s a very limited model. No entrepreneur is looking to open up shop downtown with that giant retired ocean vessel.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

FGITD wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Wrong question. The correct question is...how much money does it cost to put a ship on dry land. Answer...too much. Buildings can be re-leased to someone else. When the entire industry is way over capacity, there are no buyers. Just like when the US steel industry tanked in the early 80s. They didn't sell the mills to other companies, they tore them down.

To add-a building can also become something else. That out of business coffee shop can become a restaurant, or a bakery, or an insurance office, or a daycare etc etc etc

A ship is a ship. Outside of being a cruise ship or a hotel, there’s not much room for change. It’s a very limited model. No entrepreneur is looking to open up shop downtown with that giant retired ocean vessel.

Does an aircraft, bridge, locomotive, or rail car have the ability to become something else as well?

ArchGuy1 wrote:

FGITD wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Wrong question. The correct question is...how much money does it cost to put a ship on dry land. Answer...too much. Buildings can be re-leased to someone else. When the entire industry is way over capacity, there are no buyers. Just like when the US steel industry tanked in the early 80s. They didn't sell the mills to other companies, they tore them down.

To add-a building can also become something else. That out of business coffee shop can become a restaurant, or a bakery, or an insurance office, or a daycare etc etc etc

A ship is a ship. Outside of being a cruise ship or a hotel, there’s not much room for change. It’s a very limited model. No entrepreneur is looking to open up shop downtown with that giant retired ocean vessel.

Does an aircraft, bridge, locomotive, or rail car have the ability to become something else as well?

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

I have not heard of a single building being demolished due to COVID-19, even though a lot of businesses occupying them have gone out of business.

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

IH8BY wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

FGITD wrote:

To add-a building can also become something else. That out of business coffee shop can become a restaurant, or a bakery, or an insurance office, or a daycare etc etc etc

A ship is a ship. Outside of being a cruise ship or a hotel, there’s not much room for change. It’s a very limited model. No entrepreneur is looking to open up shop downtown with that giant retired ocean vessel.

Does an aircraft, bridge, locomotive, or rail car have the ability to become something else as well?

Not really, no - and you'll notice that a lot of aircraft are indeed going to be scrapped. The odd one here and there might be preserved, as with ships, but just as in the cruise industry this crisis has accelerated retirement for a lot of aircraft.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

IH8BY wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Does an aircraft, bridge, locomotive, or rail car have the ability to become something else as well?

Not really, no - and you'll notice that a lot of aircraft are indeed going to be scrapped. The odd one here and there might be preserved, as with ships, but just as in the cruise industry this crisis has accelerated retirement for a lot of aircraft.

Have you heard of any buildings being demolished due to COVID-19, because I have not heard of any?

VSMUT wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Those ships are tiny. Costa Victoria is over 11 times as big as Doulos.

I visited the Doulos a lot of times when she was still a book store, so I've been following it with interest. The conversion was very extensive. The ship was pretty much gutted and rebuilt on the inside to suit her new life on land. In particular the sides had to be strengthened to support the weight while on land. The reality is that the ship today is more not ship than ship. It is a nautical themed building inside the husk of a ship.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

I have not heard of a single building being demolished due to COVID-19, even though a lot of businesses occupying them have gone out of business.

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

A building does not cost a lot of money to leave empty. It is also less economically viable to strip of parts for reuse in another building.

A vessel costs money even when it is not in use. Also, a vessel is made of valuable materials that are easy to recycle.

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Give up already, those are small ships, relatively easy to beach, try hauling a 260m plus, 80,000 ton plus cruise ship onto land, nobody has ever done that before, it won’t be easy, it’s frankly a very stupid idea.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Give up already, those are small ships, relatively easy to beach, try hauling a 260m plus, 80,000 ton plus cruise ship onto land, nobody has ever done that before, it won’t be easy, it’s frankly a very stupid idea.

Ships that potentially could be hauled onto land include the MV Funchal and MV Stockholm/Astoria as they are small ships.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

How much does it cost to maintain a ship placed on dry land like the MV Doulos and MV Lydia?

Give up already, those are small ships, relatively easy to beach, try hauling a 260m plus, 80,000 ton plus cruise ship onto land, nobody has ever done that before, it won’t be easy, it’s frankly a very stupid idea.

Ships that potentially could be hauled onto land include the MV Funchal and MV Stockholm/Astoria as they are small ships.

Kiwirob wrote:

Why go to the expense? MV Astoria looks nothing like MC Stockholm, what ever history she had is long gone, and Funchal what’s notable about her, they are just old ships. I don’t see any interest in them becoming museums or hotels. And as we have already discussed Queen Mary is in financial difficulty, it’s send her to the scrappers as well. I think the same fate will befall QE2, she’s also in a crappy location. Why got to a hotel on a ship moored to a wharf when you can go on a cruise on a ship that is actually at sea??

Kiwirob wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Give up already, those are small ships, relatively easy to beach, try hauling a 260m plus, 80,000 ton plus cruise ship onto land, nobody has ever done that before, it won’t be easy, it’s frankly a very stupid idea.

Ships that potentially could be hauled onto land include the MV Funchal and MV Stockholm/Astoria as they are small ships.

Why go to the expense? MV Astoria looks nothing like MC Stockholm, what ever history she had is long gone, and Funchal what’s notable about her, they are just old ships. I don’t see any interest in them becoming museums or hotels. And as we have already discussed Queen Mary is in financial difficulty, it’s send her to the scrappers as well. I think the same fate will befall QE2, she’s also in a crappy location. Why got to a hotel on a ship moored to a wharf when you can go on a cruise on a ship that is actually at sea??

bennett123 wrote:

It is also 2,750 tons not 70,000 tons.

Plus there is a pandemic and people do not have money sloshing about.

VSMUT wrote:

Speaking of ships being dragged ashore, here's a neat video timelapse of the former Danish ferry M/F Broen being beached in late 2020 as part of turning her into a museum to the Great Belt ferries that were replaced by the bridge in 1998.

https://vimeo.com/489829327/5feb52eb20

But before someone draws parallels between this ferry and the Golden Princess, note that it only weighs 1580 tons.

johns624 wrote:

Here's my easiest (and last) attempted explanation for ArchGuy... Back in the ocean liner days, the ship had equal billing with the destination. For example "I'm taking the Queen Mary to Southampton". Nowadays, in the cruise ship world, it's merely "I'm going to Alaska (Caribbean, etc.) for a cruise". The ship itself doesn't enter into it. I bet 6 months after a cruise 90+% of the passengers even remember the name of the ship. It was merely the vehicle that took them to their destination. They don't remember it anymore than they would the number of the cab that took them to the pier, the N# of the plane that flew them there, or anything else.

FGITD wrote:

What’s equally confusing is that I’ve read a few different sources for the “outcry” that all seem to be copy/pasted from each other, seemingly originating on one blog with no primary source.. And there’s no actual evidence that the alleged outcry did anything to save the SS Rotterdam. It just seems there was more desire and more importantly, funding, put up for Rotterdam

bennett123 wrote:

ArchGuy1

That was in 2018, not 2020.

Whole different ball game..

petertenthije wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Indeed, the scrapping of the SS Nieuw Amsterdam in 1974 led to an outcry in the Netherlands and this led to the SS Rotterdam being preserved in her namesake city 35 years later.

You keep bringing up the SS Rotterdam when it comes to ship preservation. I am pretty sure you know nothing of the background on the preservation.

The SS Rotterdam also led to an outcry, when the public found out how much money was wasted by stichting woonbron. They are a housing board that relied heavily on public money. The government giving them money to provide cheap social housing. You’ll understand that a company being kept afloat by the government can’t waste money on useless prestige projects.

Year on year they made a lot of loss, but kept going on the SSR. Then one year they posted a 120 million euro loss. That’s where the authorities intervened.

The entire board had to resign, and the successors where told to sell at least 80% of the shares of the ship. Unfortunately they could not find any interested parties. Due to the sunk costs they did not stop the project, but it did lead to further resignations. It even led to a parliamentary enquiry, which are a big deal in the Netherlands.

What I am trying to say here, is that the SSR should not be used as a shining example of ship preservation. And the SSR is a pretty small and low-tech vessel compared to some of the behemoths you want to see preserved.

bennett123 wrote:

Given the supposed demand for old cruise ships to be turned into hotels or museums, why have all these ships been scrapped?.
.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

FGITD wrote:

What’s equally confusing is that I’ve read a few different sources for the “outcry” that all seem to be copy/pasted from each other, seemingly originating on one blog with no primary source.. And there’s no actual evidence that the alleged outcry did anything to save the SS Rotterdam. It just seems there was more desire and more importantly, funding, put up for Rotterdam

Here is a source to back up my claims about the outcry that was seen with the SS Nieuw Amsterdam being scrapped.
http://ssmaritime.com/nieuwamsterdam-II.htm

johns624 wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

FGITD wrote:

What’s equally confusing is that I’ve read a few different sources for the “outcry” that all seem to be copy/pasted from each other, seemingly originating on one blog with no primary source.. And there’s no actual evidence that the alleged outcry did anything to save the SS Rotterdam. It just seems there was more desire and more importantly, funding, put up for Rotterdam

Here is a source to back up my claims about the outcry that was seen with the SS Nieuw Amsterdam being scrapped.
http://ssmaritime.com/nieuwamsterdam-II.htm

That is a secondary source. It's just one person writing something on their website. In legal terms, I believe that would be "hearsay". A real source would be newspaper articles and editorials from back when it was actually happening.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Here is a source to back up my claims about the outcry that was seen with the SS Nieuw Amsterdam being scrapped.
http://ssmaritime.com/nieuwamsterdam-II.htm

That is a secondary source. It's just one person writing something on their website. In legal terms, I believe that would be "hearsay". A real source would be newspaper articles and editorials from back when it was actually happening.

The person who wrote this is a cruise/shipping industry expert who has been in the industry since 1960.

johns624 wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

That is a secondary source. It's just one person writing something on their website. In legal terms, I believe that would be "hearsay". A real source would be newspaper articles and editorials from back when it was actually happening.

The person who wrote this is a cruise/shipping industry expert who has been in the industry since 1960.

It's still a secondhand source. Why are you so concerned with saving ships that you've never seen or been aboard?