With as busy as I have been lately (yep, autoposting from work once again) I'll be the first to admit that I have not kept up-to-date with the latest travel alert for Americans traveling in Europe, but I do believe authorities in France - and was it Germany or Britain? - did put several or more individuals into custody on suspected terrorism plots. Even if those apprehended arent guilty, I have no problem with authorities being safe versus sorry. I wont be climbing up on one of my "when-innocent-people-are-at-risk" soapboxes because by now the majority of my readers should know where I stand on that issue. Two nights ago when I first heard news of this most recent travel alert on either CNN or ABC World News, yes, my first thoughts went out towards the safety of not just Americans but everyone traveling in Europe; my second thoughts went out to a ship, a very special ship.
On October 12, 2010, following her christening by Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain this coming weekend, the newest Cunard superliner QUEEN ELIZABETH will depart Southampton, England for her maiden voyage to various ports in Spain and being the giant ship buff that I am, I can barely wait until she comes to America! I never got the chance to see the QE II in person so I hope someday to see this newest Cunard Queen. Naturally, there are tons of internet newscasts featuring the newest Cunarder afloat and I gotta admit, she's pretty damn impressive and gorgeous to say the least. Weighing in at 92,400 tons, with a length of 964.5 feet and able to accommodate 2,092 passengers and 1,075 crew members, in size and luxury she's the perfect running mate for the two other Cunard giants currently in service, the QUEEN MARY II and QUEEN VICTORIA, and just as every bit luxurious and spacious as those two predecessors. For us ship buffs, her mere existence is born from an extremely rich maritime history, as well as a close Royal family connection with the Cunard Line.
In fact, Cunard and the Royal family of Great Britain go way, way back. The original QUEEN MARY (1936-67) was named after, as well as christened by, Queen Elizabeth II's grandmother, Queen Mary and her sistership, QUEEN ELIZABETH (1940-72), was named after as well as christened by Queen Elizabeth II's mother, the Queen Mother. With all these "royal" names being dropped it is very confusing for most folks to figure out who or what the new QUEEN ELIZABETH is named after and I will be more than happy to explain. The new QUEEN ELIZABETH (2010) is named after the original QUEEN ELIZABETH of 1940; BUT, here's where it get's really confusing. The QUEEN ELIZABETH 2 (1969-08), although she was christened by Queen Elizabeth II at her launching in 1967, she really wasn't named after her. In fact, between the time of her launching and her maiden voyage in 1969, the Cunard Line didnt know what the hell to name her so one of the managing directors at that time said "How about after our last greatest superliner, since she will be our last greatest superliner?" Or so they thought. After air travel gradually destroyed the world of the great ocean liners beginning in 1958 onward until the the birth of "cruise-ships" in the early 1980's (which incidentally gave birth to the return of the great ocean liners of today), no maritime historian out there ever believed that Cunard would be at the top of the ocean travel market here in the new millenium. Oh dont worry, you'll here most ship buffs and hell, even a few of the folks over at Cunard tell you that the QE II was indeed named in honor of the current reigning Monarch but that's not the true story.
So, if anyone were to ever wonder why the new QUEEN ELIZABETH (2010) wasnt named QUEEN ELIZABETH 3, the aformentioned is the reason why. In other words, both the QE II and the new ship were, technically speaking, named after the same exact predecessor, or "mother" if you will, the QUEEN ELIZABETH (1940-72), which by the way was the largest ship in the world for many years, but only by a mere extra 20 feet or so of her more famous sister, QUEEN MARY (1936-67). This is my 1st time writing about my beloved ships so I hope this maritime history lesson hasnt bored the hell outta any of you thus far. As you can tell, it's one of my heart's passions but I will save that for another posting. One more thing, the launching of the Cunard ships mentioned in this piece were the first launchings ever where members of a Royal family performed the actual christening ceremony. It hasn't happened before or since, except in what is listed in this piece. Pretty neat I think.
The reason why I am writing about the current QUEEN ELIZABETH (2010) because as I was sitting down eating my dinner at my 2nd job that night, that's when I saw the newscast and in addition to immediately being concerned about the safety of others, my next thought to myself was this "Whoah, waita second, isn't the new Cunard QUEEN suppose to be making her maiden voyage soon??" So I didda Google search and sure as shit, my assumption was correct. I won't lie, I love my ships probaly the way that most people love their children and their pets - very unconditionally, yet very protectively. They indeed are my heart's passion, not justa regular passion, but let's put it this way - you show me any ship picture and chances are pretty high that I will be able to tell you at least 3 to 5 facets about that ship, even without ever having seen a photo of that ship until that moment. Alas, this knack of mine belongs in a seperate post. So anyways I thought to myself "Those damn terrorists better leave everyone alone and they especially better leave my ships alone" but it was more than just that. Those genuine thoughts of concern for people, for ships, for the world, and the sense of unrest that permeated the air that evening instantaneously reminded me of the circumstances regarding her predecessor during the time of her maiden voyage too.
Although the QUEEN ELIZABETH (I) (1940-72), which is how most ship buffs and maritime historians refer to her as, was christened and launched in 1938, she didn't make her maiden voyage until 1940. Up until then, she sat in the River Clyde in Scotland being fitted out, but not with all the luxurious accommodations that were designed specifically for her interiors, those things were put on hold. Hell, the whole world was put on hold then. As most of you may know, World War II had broken out in 1939 and both the future and safety of the QUEEN MARY's much heralded slightly larger sister-ship lay in the balance. Back then the Royal family had way more governmental power than they do now and believe it or not, they were feared. Remember, at this time period, ships were more than just an important mode of transportation, this was still the era where ships were regarded as symbols of national pride. So several days before she made her 1st maiden voyage (the 2nd "official" one would not take place until a year after the war ended, in 1946), in March, 1940, the British Admiralty (with the approval of the Royal Family) told the Cunard Line to paint her gray as fast as you can and get her outta here, get her to America. And it's a good thing they did because Hitler's Luftwaffe were told to look for her - and destroy her. After all, imagine what a troopship that size could do for the Allies.
On that March morning in 1940 that the QUEEN ELIZABETH left the River Clyde river basin where she floated idly for so long, the air of urgency and secrecy that permeated the air was felt by everyone. Her captain had strict orders - get her to New York as soon as possible, follow a zig-zag course to confuse any wolfpack commanders out there, keep the portholes blackened out at night and go fast, as fast as you can. But a couple of things happened to her before she left for America that day. First, the woman who she was named after wanted to see her, one more time. When she arrived she looked up at the gray-painted, solemn-looking 1,031 foot long liner, and oneof her military aides distinctly remembered her saying something very similiar to the comment she made the the day the ship was launched - "May God bless her and all those who sail aboard her. Now go, go in peace, and as quickly as you can." Second, both the British Admiralty and the British monarchy were so impatient to get the new QUEEN to safety and away from the threats of Hitler's Luftwaffe that the main scaffoldings that held her bow in place during her fitting out period could not be removed! It's true - if you look at the few rare photographs of her arriving in New York Harbor you will see them firmly hugging her bow. You see, there wasnt any time to waste, those concerned knew that if she wouldnt have left Scotland when she did, Hitler's Luftwaffe woulda destroyed her the second they detected her.
Granted, to most people the circumstances surrounding the original maiden voyage of the QUEEN ELIZABETH (I) back in 1940 and the upcoming maiden voyage of the new QUEEN ELIZABETH (2010) are two totally different situations because the former took place so long ago, but when you compare the parallels between the two, the similarities are undeniable. True, we are not in a World War like Europe was in 1940 but our world is definitely fighting a war right now, the war against terrorism. Various countries are fighting with each other; thousands and thousands of innocent lives have already been lost in the war against terror, not unlike those innocent lives taken by Hitler's Luftwaffe during their Blitzreig of Great Britain during World War II. Granted, there may not be the air of urgency to get the new Cunard QUEEN to a safe neutral port like there was with her predecessor but the air of concern is still there. Two superliners, built by the same company, hailing from the same country, with the same name and two maiden voyages, one completed 70 years ago and one soon to be completed. They tell us that we dont want history to repeat itself, but that applies to things like wars and other unnecessary tragedies. In regards to the new QUEEN ELIZABETH's upcoming maiden voyage and career, I hope history does repeat itself with that which happened so long ago - may she have Godspeed on her maiden voyage and every voyage, and may her career as a much heralded liner be just as illustrious as her predecessor.
Just as with the human world, the world of ships has evolved over the last several decades. The ocean liners or cruise-ships of today are more than just floating luxury palaces with list after list of amazing statistics regarding their size, their interiors and their grace on the seven seas. Nowadays the majority of them are not only larger, heavier and in many cases, faster than any military vessels out there, but the concept of them being defenseless floating hotels traveling the worlds seas is over. The new ocean liners have one thing their predecessors did not have - the right to protect themselves. Call it what you will but its generally considered the "Right of Soverignty" law at sea, and like the great ocean greyhounds of yesteryear, it too has evolved over the decades. Nowadays if any passenger liner out that has her safety perimeter violated - as an example, the QUEEN MARY 2's is a maxinum of 250 feet - her captain and crew, have the sole power to protect their vessel in any way they deem necessary. In other words, anybody or anything crosses over that 250 foot limit, the QUEEN MARY 2, more specifically, her captain and crew have the right to protect or take any evasive action deemed necessary to protect the ship and those on board her, without contacting the British Admiralty for permission. Any attack on any vessel, of any country, is like attacking a floating extension of that country personally. Yes, the ocean liner is now more than justa symbol of national pride, the ocean liner is that national pride.
Ever since 911, I have heard government official after government official, from country after country state that it is "highly unlikely" that terrorists would specifically target ocean liners, passenger liners, cruise-ships, etc, for attack and/or destruction but how soon people forget the ACHILLE LAURO incident of 1985. I didnt buy that bullshit theory in 1985, nor in 2001 and I dont buy it now. Whether on land or at sea, I think the entire world needs to use the same common sense and precautions when dealing with possible terrorists - be aware, be alert and don't hesitate to report any and all suspicious behavior. Yes, I fear for the safety of human lives during such times of unrest and political strife that the majority of our world is experiencing these days, but the safety and welfare of my beloved ships is also of great concern to me. The two worlds connect in so many ways, yet isnt it ironic that they both are vulnerable to the threatening behaviors of madmen? So in regards to this most recent travel alert, and for any future ones, I'd like to say this - may every human being in this world be safe from harm-n-danger during such uncertain times and may every ship at sea be safe from harm-n-danger too. Thank you for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment