Main Menu
Recent News
Latest Articles
Random photos


Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index
   Titanic historic
  Comparing ship's size

Browsing this Thread:   4 Anonymous Users

 

 Bottom   Previous Topic   Next Topic
2

  •  Rate Thread
      Rate this Thread
      Excellent
      Good
      Average
      Bad
      Terrible
Poster Thread Rated:  1 Votes
  •  clinton
      clinton
Re: Comparing ship's size
#11

Joined: 2005/1/8
From London UK
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
QM2: Length 1132 feet
Beam 135 feet
150,000 gross tons

QE2: Lenth 963 feet
Beam 105 feet
70,327 tons

Titanic: Length 882.5 feet
Beam 92.5 feet
46,000 tons (approx.)
Posted on: 2005/3/2 8:19
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Re: Comparing ship's size
#12

Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Thanks for that.

mmm so the QM2 is twice as heavy as the QE2, wonder what the french were doin?
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P
Posted on: 2005/3/2 15:26
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  Johno
      Johno
Re: Comparing ship's size
#13

Joined: 2005/2/13
From Scotland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
the qm has disgraced the seven seas
Posted on: 2005/3/2 16:45
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  clinton
      clinton
Re: Comparing ship's size
#14

Joined: 2005/1/8
From London UK
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
She doesn't look like a trans-atlantic queen does she? I mean, the ship's profile is just plain ugly. The bridge and bow looks good but the rest is awful.
Posted on: 2005/3/8 8:21
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Re: Comparing ship's size
#15

Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
She is like a brick, no design atall, comeon cunard, make an effirt here, suppose they can with the new Queen Victoria, but I would expect more of the same,
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P
Posted on: 2005/6/4 22:13
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  GooseGrl172
      GooseGrl172
Re: Comparing ship's size
#16

Joined: 2004/10/11
From Maryland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Are you saying the Queen Mary was/is an ugly brick? Or do you mean the QM2?

Jessica
Posted on: 2005/6/5 0:43
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  clinton
      clinton
Re: Comparing ship's size
#17

Joined: 2005/1/8
From London UK
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
QM2 is ugly. The Bow/bridge is sorta okay. But the rest resembles a block of councel-flats on water.
Posted on: 2005/6/6 8:39
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  edward9139
      edward9139
Re: Comparing ship's size
#18

Joined: 2005/3/14
From New Hampshire
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
yeah. she looks more like a floating parking garage than a luxury ship. now The World is a different story.talk about luxury
Posted on: 2005/6/6 10:46
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  LeoPlumtree
      LeoPlumtree
Re: Comparing ship's size
#19

Joined: 2005/4/23
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
QM2 is ugly, but I don't think her namesake is so good-lookin' either.
Posted on: 2005/6/6 17:52
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  roseflower
      roseflower
Re: Comparing ship's size
#20

Joined: 2005/5/28
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
What is the QM2 exactly? I don't know allot about ships
Posted on: 2005/6/7 12:02
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
 Top   Previous Topic   Next Topic
2


 


 You cannot start a new topic.
 You can view topic.
 You cannot reply to posts.
 You cannot edit your posts.
 You cannot delete your posts.
 You cannot add new polls.
 You cannot vote in polls.
 You cannot attach files to posts.
 You cannot post without approval.



Copyright © 2006-2012 Titanic.com
Home Photos Advertise Link to us Flower Box