New QE2 Plans Outlined
The QE2 is back in the news. DP World, the Dubai state investment company that owns the former Cunarder, outlined scaled-back plans to keep the ship at Port Rashid where the famous liner has been laid up for three years.
Unveiling a more modest plan than the radical rebuilding first proposed before the 2008 debt crisis, DP announced the QE2 would still become a luxury hotel, but with 300 of the originally projected 1,000 staterooms opened for use. QE2 will not move to Palm Jumeirah, the palm-tree-shaped island off Dubai, as originally proposed.
“Unfortunately we had many ambitious plans but they didn’t work,” said Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, chairman of Istithmar – the outfit that bought the QE2 for $100m (£64m) in 2007 — and chairman of port operator DP World. “What we are doing now we should have done when we got it,” he said.
The public areas, such as the restaurants and entertainment halls, will be largely left as they are, which will be a relief to most ship preservationists who would prefer to see the original fittings retained.
Three hotel operators, including Dubai Holding-owned Jumeirah Group, are in talks to run the new hotel and there was mention of a maritime museum being built at Port Rashid as part of a tourist hub to surround the ship. The work is expected to take 18 months.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
In each report I have so far read regarding this latest phase of the life of the Queen Elizabeth 2 the emphasis appears to be on retaining the original appearance of the ship. But I seriously doubt (even though I have read reports that refer to ‘the original furnishings’)that the ship will ever be restored to her original appearance, as she appeared in 1969, either internally or externally – more’s the pity!
All this latest report really is, is an admission that they do not have the money to carry out the original plan and they are trying to make the best of a bad job.
Martin
I read this in todays Daily Mail, and with mixed emotions.
One of euphoria, afterall, the QUEEN ELIZABETH II, suffixed in the Daily Mail with II, not 2, was my first passenger ship to sail in back in 1969 when she was new, and ugly, interior design with Carnaby Street modish decor. Over the years she was updated, yet, she still had the plastic fittings that were not replaced. Overall, I liked the ship, a lot. I feel the II or 2 are both acceptable.
Second, the Daily Mail elluded to the new docking site as a less than nice area.
What this boils down to, without going into Dubai culture, is one amazing fact: money. For Dubai Holding to proclaim “they” had to hold back and reconsider the finances is a pure sham.
There will probably not be a casino as an attraction, and maybe not a bar serving booze. Lets just wait and see what unfolds.
This is pretty good news! Considering the fact that OCEANIC, AUGUSTUS, ITALIA, SANTA ROSA, and SAN GIORGIO are all headed to the scrapyards, I am thankful that the QE2 will finally become a hotel at last. I hope that these plans work out and don’t fall through like the last 40,000 plans Dubai has had for her. This is also the first major plan that leaves the QE2 intact and as is. My prayers are for these thrilling new plans to follow through. This really is “what they should have done in the first place”.
Martin, does this plan have a good chance of succeeding? I would hate for this venture to fail like past ones. Although this seems the most reasonable idea for the QE2 so far.
Do you know how the SS ROTTERDAM is doing in Rotterdam? I thought I heard somewhere that the ship had some debt problems. I follow the news about the ship but have not noticed anything concerning or confirming debt problems.
As the Sultan indicated in one of the printed news reports, this is the basic program they should have followed from the outset. They’ve got so much invested in her–especially after the fortune they paid, four years of fuel, a drydocking, and a staff of over 30–that they have to do something, and her scrap value even with the extensive aluminum content won’t bail them out. It should have been obvious that the only reason someone would seek her out as a hotel/entertainment venue would be to enjoy a semblance of the ambiance she was known for in service, just as it is with Queen Mary and Rotterdam, and not a totally different design stuffed into her hull. I don’t know the total cost of developing shore power, connecting the other utilities, getting the air conditioning in satisfactory shape, and whatever cosmetic upgrades are required, but all of that should be a commercially viable expense. In a pinch, she could even be operated “as is” with the diesels and/or frequent sewage disposal by barge. Overall, my sense would be that it will work–and it’s about time!
Common sense and constrained cash prevail, at last. Honestly, I never understand why people buy famous things, be they ships, houses or wives, and then facelift them into something entirely different from what made them famous and alluring in the first place.
Tastes vary, but Kenneth Eden you must be in the tiny minority disliking QE2’s utterly fantastic original interiors, the very best in British Design of the late 1960s and crafted from the best materials, much of it custom designed and made. Without doubt, the best interiors of any ship post 1939 and something that Britain could be very proud of. What a contrast to her interiors now!
These are absolutely great news. Let’s hope that those plans are not -as usual- plans that finally fail before being put into action. We don’t know how many further options there will be in the future before we lose her to the scrappers.
The initial ideas of an entire transformation including taking off the funnel sounded really frightening. The preservation of her outside appearance and the public rooms is simply the best option possible.
It is hard to say, if the current idea to keep her in Port Rashid is better than placing her in a proper area like Palm Jumeirah. But actually, this is a minor issue considering that we will keep her as she is.
I would nothing more than to see the QE2’s exterior/interior renovated back to its 1969 appearance, plus a complete overhaul of the plumbing and electrical systems. Is this a distinct possibility?
It is certainly good to hear that something will happen at last, and that the atrocious plan to disfigure the vessel has been dropped. I like her looks just as they are.
A good idea to create new accommodations (though hopefully no balconies cut into the hull!), but hopefully the public areas will be left exactly as they are. Preserving the authentic aura and charm should be paramount.
Funny how tastes change. The QE2 when brand new had no wooden paneling, and had a prevailing undefinable red/orange nubby almost burplappy fabric in the then Mauretannia Dining Room, same fabric in the Queens Room, only blue not reddish. Plastic prevailed everywhere, in molded chairs in ALL dining vernues, and in the Queens Room. This white plastic did have stress cracks, and dirt got into the cracks, and left black streaks. There was no overly visible art, such as paintings on the walls, the woven mural of the ship and the bust of her majesty were about all was for art.
Over the years there were many refits and rennos, each one advancing a more traditional decor. With each renno a grandeur developed thoughout the ship.
Surely, some may think her look today is not so great, I have mixed feelings, as I thought her early days were akin the a floating Howard Johnsons. Arghhhhh that reddish orange!
Sorry, Kenneth… QE2 had LOADS of real wood panelling from the very onset! I am not sure why you think otherwise. All of the First Class passageways were (and still are) lined in beautiful hardwood (ash I think), all of the First Class cabins had wood panelling, the 736 Club was filled with wood etc., Lookout Bar, Libraries etc The nice thing about the original QE2 was that a variety of finishes were used.. traditional wood, leather, suede, alloys etc. I can’t imagine you approved of the utterly cheap and fake stick on “wood” they added to the former Tourist Class passageways.. that’s about as grand as cheap DIY kitchen cupboards!
Taking off the ships funnel, well, maybe to replace it with the look of her original one, thin, black and white, and to make her even more authentic, remove the penthouse suites located way up,added in the early 1970’s, looking for all the world like a motel afterthought.
Most of the “real wood” on ships built during the mid ’60’s to ’70’s was real,albeit, a thin veneer. This was evidenced in SAGAFJORD and VISTAFJORD, and in the three Royal Viking ships, SEA SKY and STAR, and porbably in the QE2. Thin vaneer is prevalent on the QM2, and others today.
As luggage and service carts scraped walls, the metal shined underneath the wood grained veneer.
The last truly extensive use of woods that I noted were in the MARDI GRAS where passengers or crew, had carved initials and some not so printable four letter words in it, which was later covered by Carnival with foiled wall paper.
Any ship built to 1966 SOLAS regulations had real wood veneers bonded to Marinite or similar fireproof sheathing. It’s as real as anything just really, really thin. QM2 has no real wood panelling, it’s fireproof panelling made to look (and quite convincingly) like real wood. Anything on QE2 that looked like real wood was just that with Marinite underneath. Such ships are still Method One in construction, only UNITED STATES and a few others went the PR route to ban wood entirely but it had little real impact on the essential fireproof qualities of the ship. You can take a blowtorch to wood veneered Marinite and it will just smoke without combusting.
AMERICA was the first Method One ship built with lots and lots of wood veneered Marinite. During WW2, GI’s discovered just how thin the wood was and absolutely ruined most of the stateroom panelling with pen knife carved initials and graffiti. During the post-war refit, it was decided to just patch it and paint it over.
And of course, we all know what Marinite is made of…. asbestos of course!
As I said, most of the real wood was real, meaning, real wood, albeit a thin, (very thin), veneer. That does not make it solid paneling as once was the fashion, mores the pity there.
As for the SS UNITED STATES she was an inigma, in the pure fact that she was built as a war ship, not for passengers, She was indeed built to be stripped and converted in 48 hours to use in wartime, TG that never happened. Sames true for the ORIANA, her main public rooms had sliding roofs that could store helicopters, her decks cleared of above deck pools for aircraft. use.
In the event that marinite should be smoldering, well, that could be the end of the cruise!
QUEEN MARY 2 does in fact have veneered wood, in all cabins and stateroom, on the wardrobe doors and the dressers. It is easily removed and replaced when scratched or ruined, something even the cheapest motels could/should use. Notghing I hate more than staying in a top-notch hotekl with banged and dented furniture.
FYI
BNZ Materials, manufacturess non-asbestos marinite. I neglected to post that in my comment.
Trust me, Kenneth.. QM2 doesn’t have any “real” wood panelling, thin or otherwise. If she did, she’d be in violation of SOLAS. It all fake, every cm of it. OCEANIC, MICHELANGELO. RAFFAELLO also had all fake wood laminate. And all ships sailing now have it or they would have been forcibly retired unless rebuilt. FUNCHAL is an example, all of her wood panelling is being removed to allow her to continue in service.
As for ORIANA having “sliding roofs” on her public rooms to “store helicopters” etc, that’s a new one…. even her designer didn’t make mention of that in his own book. What is your source for this?
Surce? Having sailed on the ORIANA, chats with Captain and officers, thats the source. And, not the current ORIANA.
Oriana designed to carry helicopters and aircraft in time of a conflict? What utter, utter nonsense. I’d bet that I have probably read just about every word that has been written on the design and building of that liner (as I’m an avid fan of her) and until now I had never heard such a thing. There was a time when some ill-informed people used to say that her hull was that of an aircraft carrier. Mad how these strange stories take hold.
Tis true how some things DO take hold, but, that was what the scuttle was while I sailed her in 1980, perhaps since there were only six yanks, myself and partner being two of them, they thought we were easy prey for shinanigans, thats all I can say. Victims of innocent folly?
I spent most of the morning looking, searching and surfing for any info on the sliders and choppers and ORIANA came up dry.
Mr. Harvey…what was it about the late Oriana that makes you such an avid fan? Was it her decor, her comfort, her history, her profile, or all of the above? My Kiwi grandmother sailed on the Oriana (as well as the Orsova and Chandris’ Ellinis) and always remarked that the Oriana was her favorite. But I always found her profile to be a bit eccentric. Was that an attempt at “modernity”, or was there something else at work there? Why did the Oriana look the way she did?
David L. I’m always a little surprised when I find ocean liner enthusiasts who, as far as Oriana is concerned, just don’t seem to ‘get it.’ For me she was, from every angle, stunning and strikingly beautiful. No, she wasn’t “an attempt” at modernity – she was modernity! My passion and enthusiasm for Oriana is not something that has happened in retrospect, I loved her from the very beginning as I remember her when she was new. Why did she look as she did? Well look at the Orient Line vessels that came before her and one can easily see that she was a development of their design.
I was fortunate to sail on Oriana, though only once. Her interiors were warm and elegant and far more stylish than those aboard Canberra. Indeed, in every respect Oriana was the superior vessel of the two (I sailed on Canberra as well). I know there are many who seem to prefer the more conventional lines of Canberra and while she certainly had a certain style about her, she had none of the sheer power and sense of drama that Oriana exuded.
The one and only sailing with P&O for me was in the SS ORIANA. Outside her look was odd, yet inside she was homey and warm.
A real mid-century decor and ambiance highlighted her very large public spaces. Particularly lovely were the Plymouth Room and the Elizabethan Restaurant. The restaurant was swathed in cerise leather on the comfy chairs, as I rmember. A splendid watering hole was the Carnival Room.
We took a cruise and were called and invited a month later to come see the ORIANA in Boston, where by Nicki, our maitre during our cruise, had arranged a visit and to have lunch aboard her. To our surprize two passengers that we had booked the New England cruise from S’hampton, only to visit us, and see our home. What a lovely day that was.
P&O caled in Boston a couple of times a year back in the 1980’s, ORIANA, CANBERRA and SEA PRINCESS visited Comonwealth Pier. It was also during a SEA PRINCESS cruise that we visited and had lunch aboard with passengers we had also sailed with on the same SS ORIANA cruise. I also visited and toured the CANBERRA, no friends, no lunch, just a tour. Inside she was stunning.
One thing I wished I could have seen, the SS ORIANA in her “corn hull” livery.
It is interesting to note that the board that announced this, including the Sultan, was subsequently replaced a few weeks after this announcement. I’ve made some notes about this here – http://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,4538.msg47911.html#msg47911
From my point of view, although I very much support a sympathetic and modest conversion (compared with the original ridiculous plans), I will believe it when I see it!
Various sources now claim, that the Qe2-owners are currently taking scrap-offers. This sounds very serious. Does anyone have more specific news about the current situation?
http://cruisecastaway.blogspot.de/2012/10/cruise-news-qe2-to-be-scrapped.html
http://reisen.t-online.de/-queen-elizabeth-2-droht-der-schrott/id_60438600/index
Yes, check out the website QE2 story and there is more info there. It has been on there and I’ve known since monday. I just didn’t say anything because I didn’t feel it was my place to. 🙁
The agreement, as I understand it, between Cunard and the ship’s new owners was that they could not sell the ship for something like ten years. So I will take this report with a grain of salt and hope it is not true. If it is, well I have a few choice things I would like to say to both Cunard and her current owners…