Former owners pour cold water on QE2 scrap reports (From Daily Echo)

As long as it's not salted cold water as that won't help the rust problem.

What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

I stand corrected, I was not aware of that.

I don't know how passionately the people of Southampton feel about QE2, but you gave her a good send-off.
She carried the name of Southampton around the world and to many she was Southampton's ship.
There is currently a viable plan to return her to London as a commercial concern. It's not Southampton, but she'll be there for us all to enjoy for years to come.
There is an e-petition here : http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/43821

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

But once they sneak it away and start to break it up, its too late.

What's it got to do with anyone else? I scrapped my roller last year and no one was bothered about that. Get over it. We'll all be having a little bit of the QE2 in years to come.

Eastleigh Bloke wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

But once they sneak it away and start to break it up, its too late.

This will be the fifth year - I would guess that someone in Dubai is counting down right now.

The plan for London is to settle the hull on the bottom - With a Thames tidal range in excess of 5 metres that should be 'interesting' to watch.

As stated by QE2Watcher there is a e-petition online which but the Echo as usual are not telling the whole story here and have not even touched the surface regarding the proposal to bring QE2 to London and be moored opposite the O2 Arena.

I suggest anyone with any interest in QE2 should check out www.theqe2story.com for the full story including the proposed move to London which in my opinion looks very promisng going by the details put forward!

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote: What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

Correction

Cunard is part of the (Carnival UK) group of companys NOT (Celebrity) as they are part of the RCCL group (Royal Caribbean Cruise Line)

WoolstonSean wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote: What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

Correction

Cunard is part of the (Carnival UK) group of companys NOT (Celebrity) as they are part of the RCCL group (Royal Caribbean Cruise Line)

Oops! What a typo, how did I manage that? thanks for pointing it out.....
Almost worthy of 'you know who' ;-)

X Old Bill wrote:

WoolstonSean wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote: What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

Correction

Cunard is part of the (Carnival UK) group of companys NOT (Celebrity) as they are part of the RCCL group (Royal Caribbean Cruise Line)

Oops! What a typo, how did I manage that? thanks for pointing it out.....
Almost worthy of 'you know who' ;-)

How many other "typos" did you have when filling in your "pocket book" whilst on duty

Lone Ranger. wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

WoolstonSean wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote: What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

Correction

Cunard is part of the (Carnival UK) group of companys NOT (Celebrity) as they are part of the RCCL group (Royal Caribbean Cruise Line)

Oops! What a typo, how did I manage that? thanks for pointing it out.....
Almost worthy of 'you know who' ;-)

How many other "typos" did you have when filling in your "pocket book" whilst on duty

Typographical errors come when typing without thinking properly, and also apparently with age......
My pocket book was handwritten, since you ask.

There is a very viable future for QE2 if the offer can be accepted as a serious on by the current owners. The site at the O2 in London would be perfect and the local council, Newham, are very much backing the plan together with London and national government figures. Please, please sign the petition which will help a great deal. Southampton will not feature in the plans as there is no space in the Port, but it will only be a shortish train ride away to London to visit this great vessel again.

the similarities in this pantomine with the fate of the QE1 are uncanny, cue the mysterious fire breaking out no doubt relieving the owners of any obligations to cunard white star carnival p and o or whoever the previous owners were

X Old Bill wrote:

Eastleigh Bloke wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

But once they sneak it away and start to break it up, its too late.

This will be the fifth year - I would guess that someone in Dubai is counting down right now.

The plan for London is to settle the hull on the bottom - With a Thames tidal range in excess of 5 metres that should be 'interesting' to watch.

And would not last long in that salt water, a ship like this would need to be in a dry dock or concreted in.

How sad that everything in this country has to revolve around London.
Perhaps that is the reason that house prices have fallen in places like Manchester by 9% last year, yet continue to race ahead in the Capital.
A very, very unbalanced country.

QE 2 is just another old ship, send her to the breakers.

Southy:
The plan is for the ship to be ballasted and rest on the mud. Presumably they could remove the ballast and take her to dry dock as required, similar to the system in place for HMS Belfast.
My concerns are firstly:The huge area of boot-topping between high and low water marks - The algae and weed would look awful in a very short time, which is fine on a dock but not pretty on a ship.
And; There are bunkering ports near the waterline - these would need to be sealed; So how do they intend to bunker it, being as the intention seems to be to use the existing engineering spaces?

Regarding the petition - If this is a commercial proposition then what has it got to do with the Government?

southy wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

Eastleigh Bloke wrote:

X Old Bill wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:
What has it got to do with the former owners that happens, or does not happen to QE2. What a pointless article, unless they can get comments from the current owners.

There were conditions attached to the sale - If the present owners wish to dispose of the vessel within 5 years then they can only do so with the consent of Cunard (Celebrity).

But once they sneak it away and start to break it up, its too late.

This will be the fifth year - I would guess that someone in Dubai is counting down right now.

The plan for London is to settle the hull on the bottom - With a Thames tidal range in excess of 5 metres that should be 'interesting' to watch.

And would not last long in that salt water, a ship like this would need to be in a dry dock or concreted in.

When you refer to 'that salt water' are you inferring that they water in the Thames is some ho more corrosive? Strangely I would have thought that the level of alkalinity was reduced due to the diluting effect of the river waters... Unless of course you have been to a secret meeting or read it in a library. how is it other ships (HMS Belfast) have not dissolved??

There is no reason why, with proper protection systems in place and with a suitable maintenance regime, a vessel cannot remain in the water almost indefinitely. But for me, the problem is the customer offer. A ship's cabin is fine if you're undertaking a voyage or a cruise, but however luxurious the cabin is relative to other ships, it's still a ship's cabin. If I had the money to spend on premium hotel accommodation in London, I would book into a top hotel.