A couple of interesting points to follow up on here. The first is that although I also feel the dissapointment of the loss of our enginering heritage of the 60's we have to move on.
Concorde, the E-Type Jag, the Triumph Bonneville and the QE2 were all years ahead of thier time as far as thier engineering goes but they were all designed in a time when fuel consumption wasn't an issue and emmissions were not even considered. The QE2 uses fuel at a horrendous rate, even in her Diesel Electric configuration, as did the Concorde and the E-Type.
Are we not supposed to be thinking a bit more responsibly about these things nowadays? Isn't it up to us to design machinery that uses fuel more efficiently and harms the environment considerably less and does less harm to the lagacy we leave our children etc..etc..? The Queen Victoria is a world apart as regards fuel efficiency and environnmental impact and so she should be. As for looks change is always a difficult one to get to grips with. No-one liked the QE2 when she was shown to the world because she was too futuristic for a traditional liner. Now every one seems to think she is beautiful. ::)
As for sailing on the Queen Victoria, I have a cruise booked on her in May and I have no doubt whatsoever that she will be a superb ship to cruise on and I will thoroughly enjoy it.
An interesting point about loyal followers needs putting into perspective a bit as well. Passengers nowadays are getting more and more demanding as they know what is available and what they expect to pay for it. The fuel for the QE2 continues to demand a high ticket price but just look at how she compares. Sea water in the toilets as opposed to fresh water, sea water in the pools as opposed to fresh water, very few cabins with a balcony as opposed to the majority with a balcony, air conditioning that struggles to mantain temperatures as opposed to the latest in comfort control, traditional trans Atlantic hull giving a very fast passage but not the best in transverse stability as opposed to the latest in stabiliser technology. The list goes on and on and the loyal passenger base who are prepared to continue to put up with these things for the sake of saying they have sailed on her is fast diminishing.
Then look at her from the owners point of view, fuel costs, maintenance costs soaring, totally inadequate thrusters requiring the use of tugs regularly, increasing costs involved with meeting the latest regulatory requirements.
Unfortunately love or hate her, and trust me, I love her to bits, but the QE2 has long since had her day. I am so glad that she is being given the chance to retire gracefully and continue to demonstrate to the world what Britain was cabale of producing in those days but we now have to look to new ships in an ever changing and ever more demanding world.
By the way Colin I once saw the results of an air conditioning survey of an 83,000 ton cruise ship that stated the ship had an increased demand on it's domestic power requirements of 12% for purely having a dark hull. That's a good few million in fuel a year!
The new funnel of the QE2 is actually pretty much the same height and the outside plate work was reused with an increased section of plates added to the width to give the new funnel. It was quite simply required to accomodate nine engine exhausts as opposed to the three boilers originally fitted.
This link below is actually quite an interesting read, especially when you project fuel costs of that time into todays prices. Fuel nowadays cost anywhere between $450-500.00 per ton. Re-engining her equates to a saving today of $100-125,000.00 at 28 knots, per day!!
http://www.roblightbody.com/liners/qe-2/1987_Refit/index.htm