This topic has been archived due to inactivity and closed to further replies.
Contributor Level:
Captain
Titanic and the Allure of the Seas
13 Answers
Contributor Level:
Admiral
Just visited Port Canaveral a few days ago to see the biggest cruise ship in the world, which docked there for one day. It was the Symphony of the Seas. She was massive.
Contributor Level:
Captain
Another perspective.
Contributor Level:
Purser
Why is that big ship being towed by that little ship ?
Contributor Level:
Captain
Wow, thanks Kennicot interesting read.
Contributor Level:
Captain
Originally posted by:
Yankee47
Yep..gives a whole new meaning to "massive"...notice the actual hgt of the bow above the water line is actually almost the same. that's why I questioned the "perspective"...anybody happen to know those numbers?
From an observer's point of view, looking at the depiction, the Titanic is 882.8 feet closer to the viewer. Meaning a person on the bow of the Titanic is going to appear larger than someone of equal size on the bow of the Allure of the Seas.
The Titanic was a vessel with no "Rake" to the bow while the Allure has quite a bit of rake. In addition, the Titanic was a double well decker while the Allure is not. Not that rake or well decks would have anything to do with the apparent size of people on board but the vessels profile when in the water are significantly different due the design of the ships. Take a look again at the side profile of the two ships, near the top of this article: https://malcolmoliver.wordpress.com/titanic-vs-oasis-of-the-seas/ .
The Titanic had a beam of only 92.5 feet and a length of 882.8 feet, meaning it was a long and skinny vessel. While the Allure has a max beam of almost 200 feet and a length 1,187 feet, meaning it is almost fat compared to the Titanic.
I would say that the artist or whomever put this depiction together was pretty accurate.
TITANIC
Length:
882 feet, 8 inches/268 meters
Gross tonnage:
46,328 tons
Net tonnage:
24,900 tons
Total capacity:
3547 passengers and crew, fully loaded
Decks:
9 in total (counting the orlop deck) the boat deck, A,B,C,D,E,F,G and below G boiler rooms.
Beam:
92.5 feet/28 meters
Height:
60.5 feet waterline to Boat Deck, 175 feet keel to top of funnels.
Depth:
59.5 feet
Draft:
about 34 feet
Engines
2 reciprocating 4 cylinder, triple expansion, direct - acting, inverted engines: 30,000hp 77 rpm.
1 low pressure Parsons turbine: 16,000hp 165rpm
Propellers:
3 ; Centre turbine: 17 feet ; Left/Right wings: 23 feet 6 inches
ALLURE OF THE SEAS:
Class and type:
Tonnage:
225,282 GT[2] 242,999 NT[2]Length:
Beam:
47 m (154 ft) waterline[2] 60.5 m (198 ft) max beam[2]Height:
72 m (236 ft) above water line[4]
Draught:
9.322 m (30.6 ft)[2]
Depth:
22.5 m (74 ft)[2]
Decks:
Installed power:
3 × 13,860 kW (18,590 hp) Wärtsilä 12V46D 3 × 18,480 kW (24,780 hp) Wärtsilä 16V46DPropulsion:
3 × 20 MW (27,000 hp) ABB Azipod, all azimuthing 4 × 5.5 MW (7,400 hp) Wärtsilä CT3500 bow thrusters[2]Speed:
22.6 knots (41.9 km/h; 26.0 mph)[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(angle)
Contributor Level:
Cruise Director
I knew I could count on you for the technical explanation. It was a good read...I can add that to my vast store of interesting facts...interesting probably only to me however. Thanks for that. You forced me to unaddle my brain for a few minutes///what an effort...I didn't really want to...now, I have to start all over...cheers!!
Contributor Level:
Captain
From an observer's point of view, looking at the depiction, the Titanic is 882.8 feet closer to the viewer. Meaning a person on the bow of the Titanic is going to appear larger than someone of equal size on the bow of the Allure of the Seas.
The Titanic was a vessel with no "Rake" to the bow while the Allure has quite a bit of rake. In addition, the Titanic was a double well decker while the Allure is not. Not that rake or well decks would have anything to do with the apparent size of people on board but the vessels profile when in the water are significantly different due the design of the ships. Take a look again at the side profile of the two ships, near the top of this article: https://malcolmoliver.wordpress.com/titanic-vs-oasis-of-the-seas/ .
The Titanic had a beam of only 92.5 feet and a length of 882.8 feet, meaning it was a long and skinny vessel. While the Allure has a max beam of almost 200 feet and a length 1,187 feet, meaning it is almost fat compared to the Titanic.
I would say that the artist or whomever put this depiction together was pretty accurate.
TITANIC
Length:
882 feet, 8 inches/268 meters
Gross tonnage:
46,328 tons
Net tonnage:
24,900 tons
Total capacity:
3547 passengers and crew, fully loaded
Decks:
9 in total (counting the orlop deck) the boat deck, A,B,C,D,E,F,G and below G boiler rooms.
Beam:
92.5 feet/28 meters
Height:
60.5 feet waterline to Boat Deck, 175 feet keel to top of funnels.
Depth:
59.5 feet
Draft:
about 34 feet
Engines
2 reciprocating 4 cylinder, triple expansion, direct - acting, inverted engines: 30,000hp 77 rpm.
1 low pressure Parsons turbine: 16,000hp 165rpm Propellers: 3 ; Centre turbine: 17 feet ; Left/Right wings: 23 feet 6 inches ALLURE OF THE SEAS: Class and type: Oasis-class cruise ship Tonnage: 225,282 GT[2] 242,999 NT[2] Length: 362 m (1,187 ft)[9][10] Beam: 47 m (154 ft) waterline[2] 60.5 m (198 ft) max beam[2] Height: 72 m (236 ft) above water line[4] Draught: 9.322 m (30.6 ft)[2] Depth: 22.5 m (74 ft)[2] Decks: 16 passenger decks[11][12] Installed power: 3 × 13,860 kW (18,590 hp) Wärtsilä 12V46D 3 × 18,480 kW (24,780 hp) Wärtsilä 16V46D Propulsion: 3 × 20 MW (27,000 hp) ABB Azipod, all azimuthing 4 × 5.5 MW (7,400 hp) Wärtsilä CT3500 bow thrusters[2] Speed: 22.6 knots (41.9 km/h; 26.0 mph)[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(angle)
1 low pressure Parsons turbine: 16,000hp 165rpm Propellers: 3 ; Centre turbine: 17 feet ; Left/Right wings: 23 feet 6 inches ALLURE OF THE SEAS: Class and type: Oasis-class cruise ship Tonnage: 225,282 GT[2] 242,999 NT[2] Length: 362 m (1,187 ft)[9][10] Beam: 47 m (154 ft) waterline[2] 60.5 m (198 ft) max beam[2] Height: 72 m (236 ft) above water line[4] Draught: 9.322 m (30.6 ft)[2] Depth: 22.5 m (74 ft)[2] Decks: 16 passenger decks[11][12] Installed power: 3 × 13,860 kW (18,590 hp) Wärtsilä 12V46D 3 × 18,480 kW (24,780 hp) Wärtsilä 16V46D Propulsion: 3 × 20 MW (27,000 hp) ABB Azipod, all azimuthing 4 × 5.5 MW (7,400 hp) Wärtsilä CT3500 bow thrusters[2] Speed: 22.6 knots (41.9 km/h; 26.0 mph)[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(angle)
Contributor Level:
Cruise Director
Originally posted by:
OldGreyWolf
Just a matter of perspective ... ever look at the original 1964 Mercury or following Gemini space craft and compared them to the Apollo or Space Shuttles ....
Yep..gives a whole new meaning to "massive"...notice the actual hgt of the bow above the water line is actually almost the same. that's why I questioned the "perspective"...anybody happen to know those numbers?
Contributor Level:
Staff Captain
Just a matter of perspective ... ever look at the original 1964 Mercury or following Gemini space craft and compared them to the Apollo or Space Shuttles ....
Contributor Level:
Captain
People were taller back then
Showing 1 - 10 of
13 Answers