3 ms·
One thing that terrible link fails to note is that they're comparing a supersized cruise ship to a transoceanic liner. For a modern transoceanic liner, look at
by ethbro 7y ago
One thing that terrible link fails to note is that they're comparing a supersized cruise ship to a transoceanic liner.
For a modern transoceanic liner, look at the RMS Queen Mary 2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Mary_2 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Mary_2
Cruise ships are just mobile enough to scoot around whatever close-shore locales they serve.
Ocean liners are built for fast transoceanic voyages.
- dan-robertson 7y agoThe article suggests that the cruise ship is faster than the titanic, so maybe you want to make a point about being designed to always be close to port or something, but I’m not sure that’s really the case either as these ships must go from the place they are built to wherever they are operating the cruise and that place may move about the world from time to time. I don’t think you really can get an apple’s to apple’s comparison because people don’t really travel on fast ocean-liners anymore. They travel on aeroplanes. So the category that the titanic fits in doesn’t really exist anymore.
- ethbro 7y agoTitanic: 24 kts (1912) Allure: 23 kts (2010) Queen Mary 2: 30 kts (2003) If your benchmark is 100 year old technology, then you've probably got an agenda in your comparison... * All numbers from Wikipedia