Getting Queen Mary to Sail Again!

[@AlextheHistorian]

I plan to sail to the UK to film dozens upon dozens of historic places for this channel, if you would like to learn more about it, you can watch the video link below, or you can learn from my GoFundMe page where you can also help support the effort so I can accomplish this goal much sooner! Video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/opTbZXWcp86KnrM GoFundMe: gofund.me/0598f205

[@nezi0319]

Could the queen mary be used as a troop ship if war broke out again?

[@AlextheHistorian]

To be honest, no its not possible. Every cruise ship in the world would be pressed into service before they considered restoring the Queen Mary as a troopship

[@nezi0319]

@@AlextheHistorian thanks for the response keep up the good work 👍

[@Iconoclasher]

If you're going to the east coast to catch the QM2, maybe you can stop by the SS United States and give us an update. If any old liner is gonna be restored, that's the one.

[@setter501]

Fantastic Alex! Have a Great time and stay safe Mate We need you, your doing fine work! Cheers Mate!

[@jamesg8199]

Couldn’t agree more. The QM was dodging u boats in WWII and rolled heavily in high seas. She’s got wear and tear no doubt. Let her rest and be treasured. Can you imagine how tacky it would look to have some outdoor slide on the sun deck? The majority of cruise ship passengers would never appreciate her character, history, and artwork anyway. They’re too busy stuffing their faces at the buffet.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Well said!

[@boldverg484]

Yes leave it well preserved as a shrine to the times,there's a queen mary 2 now,museum and hotel ship is fine,it did 300 odd years.

[@davidlyons9992]

I think there are a LOT of people who would go aboard to relive the past, I sure would in a heartbeat, even more so than the modern ships.

[@AlextheHistorian]

I would too, and yes there would be a lot of people. But...I do not think it would be enough to give her full occupancy every day, no. And she would need full occupancy to make up for the expense of keeping her operating.

[@boldverg484]

30 odd years rather

[@ij2750]

The expense to make the QM sea worthy again would cost a lot more than just out right building a brand new replica ship, however I wish they had left the ship in a sea worthy condition and did occasional local sailing a few time a year.

[@jeffpotipco736]

I would think the War would have fucked her. Roll or not, an elegant lady. Fast.

[@SILENTSTORMSTUDlOS]

Interesting idea

[@mwat22]

Lol 🤣 I came to post the same thing here

[@jimbilton1956]

Yes, I wish so much that the boilers and other machinery had not been so heartlessly ripped out and scrapped.

[@blackterminal]

​​@@jimbilton1956 did not realize parts were removed.

[@kevinstonerock3158]

Watching you discuss the issues with refitting the queens there’s a ship that is already stripped, has a non riveted hull, elevators which may/may not have to be enlarged, could be refitted with ramps, practically fireproof by design, is faster than the Queen Mary and doesn’t roll when at high speed. Since the engines and boilers are more midship it might be able to be re-powered easier than many other ships. It would need new propellers but the design has been proven over time. Personally I’m leery of cruising aboard current cruise ships since they look like they’d capsize in rough waters. You could still have some rooms with balconies but I wouldn’t want to see them out to the edge of the hull. When last evaluated it was still 90% structurally sound. Those areas would possibly be the topside structures anyway. The SS United States is a tested design that has a lot of life left in her. The designer was absolutely obsessed with safety.

[@nathanaeljonesmyfsd]

The Crystal Cruises study from 2016 on the SS United States put the total bill for all that work at some $700 million. That is completely unrealistic for an old liner like the SSUS, as much as I'd love to see it happen. A new cruise ship on the small side like the SSUS would probably be in the $200-500 million range.

[@mikeh2006]

As far as im aware the QM is in better shape than the SSUS. I'm sure I read that the hull isnt in great shape due to neglect? Anyway, try the QM2, shes the only current ocean liner in the world (still sailing).

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

@@mikeh2006 yes and no. SS United States hull is quite sound and in good condition. But she has been completely stripped of ALL interior fittings and her engine room and boilers have been out of service for over 50 years now. Honestly they would have probably replaced those engines anyway because of the fuel consumptions issues but still...

[@lawrencebraun7616]

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 everyone who tries to fix the united states' goes bankrupt

[@rahuldeshpande4938]

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 I had read earlier somewhere that her engine technology is pretty much old and getting those engines back to life is next to impossible. Also making her the fastest, and military category, they had put the most powerful engines which means those would not prove fuel efficient in current times. And replacing them with modern engines would need to remove large portions of the superstructure which is again another challenge.

[@anthonyjackson280]

The biggest issue with QM was only obliquely touched upon. It had reached its hull integrity end of life. QM used up a big chunk of its seaworthiness as a troop transport during WW2. It is a riveted hull and with the continuous flexing ('working' in maritime jargon) those joints weaken and start to open up and crack. Not a practicable thing to fix. The same thing happens to all ships (and aircraft as well).

[@AlextheHistorian]

You are right, I just didn't want to confuse people into thinking that means she can't float where she is, because many people will take it to mean that.

[@tincoffin]

@@AlextheHistorian It was done with the J class racing yachts one of which lay in the mud in Southampton water UK for fifty years before being bought and rebuilt. There are now about fifteen of them. This would be the same on a larger scale !

[@maxideas9393]

On top of this is the fact the ship was gutted and weakened further by cutting out decks and bulkheads to build that massive Jacques Cousteau museum that failed. So much of the internal structure of the ship is either missing or badly altered that even trying to tow the ship would likely result in the bow being torn off and the ship sinking for good right in the harbor. The conversion job was botched quite severly.

[@AlextheHistorian]

@Maxideas yes you are right that many of her interiors were gutted, but the rest of the statements about structural weakening all that...I had done a lot of research into this and what I found was that areas of structural alteration had their supports replaced with strengthening members more robust than what was there before. Take the entrance of the museum on D Deck for example, they removed C Deck to create high ceilings, but they replaced the structural support with steel dual beams 4 feet in depth and 24 inches in width. Not to mention the steel is welded as opposed to riveted, and is made of higher quality steel than what they ripped out. In all my research the only place aboard the ship that was left weakened by the removal of structural support was the C Deck bulkheads located next to the tank of the first class swimming pool, it allowed the tank to warp its shape. But with the water of the pool since removed, it poses no further hazards. The biggest concern with moving the ship is not having the bow being torn off (which is not physically possible), is actually losing control of the ship in high winds and having it collide with something. Otherwise with hull plates still at least an inch thick, there's no worry of punching a hole into it and causing a flood, especially considering she has a double hull, so you'd have to punch a hole at least 6 feet into the ship to breach both layers.

[@bully056]

@@AlextheHistorian it would cost a lot, but you could rehull her.

[@dreiser92626]

The Queen Mary is best left alone as a museum. Thank you for for all the sensible information today.

[@RedLP5000S]

I agree. Leave the RMS Queen Mary exactly where she is. She earned her retirement tenfold. Also, if cruising the open seas in a bonafide Cunard ocean liner is your thing, then we still have the mighty RMS Queen Mary 2 in service. ✌🏻🇺🇸🚢

[@peterlv68]

The quick and dirty answer to all of these "can it run again" questions is always "with enough money and political will". Applies to ships, locomotives, planes, cars etc.

[@bellabella2865]

Speaking of Locomotives the flying Scotsman is over 99 years old she's was also resorted and continues to take passengers under her own steam. When she came back into serves thousands of people from all over the UK came out to see her

[@rudycarlson8245]

@@bellabella2865 the flying Scotsman is now 100 years old

[@TheSonic1685]

Exactly, I mean look at the Iowa class battleships last activated in the 1990's still technically ready and able to go if need be. Though there is a lot of debate in the navel world about reactivating them.

[@MrTimeless101]

I think the most you could hope for is a modern ship designed to look like an ocean liner. I for one would love to see design elements of the olympic class ships bought back to live.

[@bisken6547]

Oh yes the RMS Olympic is my favourite ocean liner of all time. And the best looking

[@Ryzilience]

@@bisken6547 Olympic was a Gem. She might be shorter in length by 40M but she holds her own and she isn't that small to us anyway, she's deemed small because modern ships will be bigger but 270m is a sight. I'd like to see new ship designs that are like the Olympic class

[@cowerdnerddespacito9518]

The Queen Mary 2 is an actual Ocean liner with design elements of the original Queen Mary

[@blue_static_rocco]

@@bisken6547 i think titanic. They need to make the sisters al 3 off them again just like it was ones. And let it run on fuel.

[@dima343.]

retro-looking modern liner with sheer and without balconies, with "cathedral" diesel engines (like on Emma Maersk) - too good to be true

[@CrankyBeach]

I've probably told the story here before... but my family spent Christmas 1968 at my grandparents' house in Long Beach. I was 13. One night my uncle drove us down to the waterfront where we could see the Queen Mary in the distance. We couldn't see much, as there were only a few lights. My uncle told us the funnels were missing because they had to take them off to get the machinery out. But since I was only 13, I had no way to make my way to the waterfront in daylight so I could see more. And frankly, at the time, I was more impressed with seeing the view of earth from lunar orbit on TV for the first time that Christmas Eve.

[@-Jadon]

My favorite part about the Queen Mary is that it feels like a time machine when you step on board! I also wondered about the ship sailing again but if it means loosing that feeling I don't think anyone would say its worth it.

[@S.M.R]

I'm glad that you're the kind of person with good sense of logistics and realism as I am. Bringing back an old ship is a suicidal venture in the cruise industry, but there are still some classic ships out there still sailing today like the Astoria (formerly the Stockholm) but only because of upgrades and changes during her career. The only way to bring back a classic-styled ship (without being a replica of a famous ship like Titanic or Queen Mary) is to design it from scratch to meet all the modern regulations and at the same time to meet the modern expectations of passengers when traveling. it'll be generally built as a cruise ship.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Agreed!

[@rich_edwards79]

Astoria is now sadly laid up and likely to end up on a beach after several attempts to save her fell through; she hasn't sailed under her own power since her owners went bankrupt in the early stages of Covid. I wish it were otherwise, but I just don't think there's a future for the handful of classic ships that survive other than as museums and hotels, and even they struggle (I.e. the Rotterdam receives millions in subsidies from the Dutch govt.)

[@trainstorm1225]

What’s interesting is that what you described in terms of changes to be made is exactly what we see aboard Queen Mary 2. Yes all of the changes are aboard all the cruise ships too, but Cunard planned for all of that in Queen Elizabeth 2 and Queen Mary 2 and to still have that ocean liner experience which is pretty cool.

[@tylerfrederick246]

I appreciate you taking the time to make this video. Really I do. I hope this puts the question to rest. I'll admit, I am not the most patient man in the world, I got frustrated when I hear you repeat yourself. The questions that were asked, I never asked because I never need to because I knew why. And honestly if bringing Queen Mary back means all those changes, then I would rather not have her go back in service. I don't want anything to change about Queen Mary. I love her just as she is

[@davidrubin8228]

Alex, well done! As having had dealings with the Queen Mary over the past 20 years or so, you have hit some very good points as to why she can no longer sail. Another point is that during her conversion (read rip out) during the 1960's, the City of Long Beach (in there "infinite wisdom") decided to have several of her load bearing bulkheads removed. Ergo, she is NOT structurally sound. Furthermore, the overall LACK of maintenance and upkeep at the hands of the various "managers" have left the ship as she is today in sore need of major projects to keep her afloat! I see your other video of the Repair of the ship and I will watch and comment there but right now, the fact that the Queen Mary is even floating is a testament to her construction and frankly By the Grace of a Benevolent Higher Power. Thank you again.

[@AlextheHistorian]

While some of the load bearing bulkheads were removed, they were replaced with structural framework even stronger than before. This can be seen on D Deck aft where they removed C Deck to make the museum lobby with taller ceilings. Even though they removed the Deck above, the framework was reinforced with a lattice of steel I-beams four feet tall. Far stronger than what was there before.

[@saberridge6867]

Frankly, you can still get the ocean liner feel with Cunard's current Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth ships. Cunard has two classes of ships in their fleet, the large ocean going transatlantic passage style of the Queens and ships designed more toward the local cruising style of trips. The big difference with sailing a Cunard vessel is the personal service. Cunard seems to continue insisting on outstanding service from everyone that has any contact with a passenger. If I ever get enough money and can arrange it I would love to travel on one of the Queens again someday.

[@baritonebynight]

Actually QM2 is the only ocean liner still in service in the world. Queen Elizabeth is a cruise ship (unlike QE2 which was an ocean liner now used as a hotel in Dubai).

[@laurielaurie8280]

I think what makes the Queen Mary awesome is the original look of it. I love the woods throughout the ship. It is beautiful. I've stayed the night on her and it was a lot of fun. I've been going to see her for 40yrs :)))

[@rich_edwards79]

Idk about the QM and tbh I think she's way too precious to be risked out on the unpredictable ocean now, but I would love to see a cruise line set up using smaller / vintage ships restored to their original decor. The idea of the modern Carnival / Celebrity cruise 'experience', of packing 4000 people onto a floating theme park to basically eat all day, drink all night, and overwhelm any stop on the itinerary with sheer numbers is my idea of hell, but i'd definitely reconsider if there was the option of actually feeling as though I were on a ship rather than a floating Vegas hotel. Problem with that idea is that there are so few older vessels left now (maybe 15-20 years ago it would have been more viable as a concept) and the ocean liner community, whilst growing, is too small and fragmented to make sailing such ships on a regular basis profitable. Still, a guy can dream!

[@ernshaw78]

Another concept I like is re-creations of the iconic older ships used to be tourist attractions but also functional ships like the great German, French, and British liners to be used for smaller scale travel and for people interested. I imagine with the amount of fans there are for titanic and other ships we would have a viable experience for those who like traditional to art nouveau to art deco and it would all be an option for people who design to incorporate modern ideals like ensuites and perhaps a more open concept for people to experience all the ship with an upgrade to be able to enjoy all the rooms rather than the class designated spaces.

[@rrice1705]

Try a Holland America ship. They're a bit smaller and at least somewhat more like a vintage ship size-wise. I share your angst about some of the monstrosities that pass for cruise ships these days, but I didn't find their Eurodam to be excessively large.

[@beedalton9675]

Her hull is still strong... Still better looking than the ugly design cruise ships sailing today. She got a refit update the boilers and turbines... Other coast guard codes...

[@Brandyalla]

Try a Windjammer cruise...they use sailing ships. It's not a vintage liner, but it's small, with limited passenger capacity. Also, you're actually on a ship, not a floating monstrosity

[@dlanodsknib]

Having sailed on the R.M.S. Queen Mary in June of 1958, I can readily understand why people lament the fact that no liners of her ilk sail today. However, are there passengers today who would fit into the style of travelling by such a liner? Style, sophistication and dress sense has changed somewhat. People today dislike formality and I could not imagine the dining room of an evening on the Queen Mary with women in jeans and men in shorts and Hawaiian shirts! :-)

[@SAOS451316]

another reason not to make it seaworthy is the risk of it sinking. it's a unique object and it's safe in the harbor. it would be cool to sail on a liner again and if enough people wanted to we could just build a new one that looks like it's from a century ago all up to code. i don't expect we'll ever get one unless one of the Titanic II projects is ever done, and i don't think i would tempt fate like that.

[@setter501]

Yes very understandable

[@francoismurrell4604]

The Titanic II is likely a scam at this point. Its been talked about for best part of a decade now with nothing really to show, and it would have the same problem as the QM. Complying to current maritime laws would make it unrecognisable and not even resembling the original

[@ernshaw78]

People should recreate these ships so MORE people can experience the design and history. We have so many brilliant ships even before which are lost and are something I think would be financially worth the time.

[@SAOS451316]

@@francoismurrell4604 yeah it's either a scam or too poorly managed to get anywhere. a 1:1 perfect replica would only be good as a museum anyway.

[@ericcriteser4001]

I think we all need to just enjoy Queen Mary 2. It's the closest we'll ever get and I still can't afford it!

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

Very good point. I agree. I have seen QM2 but doubt that I will ever sail on her. All the best from Sydney Australia 🇦🇺

[@buzzukfiftythree]

The QM was built in the 1930s when passengers didn't know what a balcony cabin was - very few existed. Nowadays most cruisers expect to have a private balcony and modern facilities, something that, with the best will in the world, the QM could not provide. Its appeal as a heritage ship with outdated facilities would inevitably be limited. It's best off where it is and let's hope it can be restored to its former glory and remain with us for many more generations.

[@moosecat]

Who wanted a balcony cabin in the North Atlantic in winter time?

[@baritonebynight]

Having crossed on RMS Queen Mary 2 several times, there is absolutely no need for a balcony on the North Atlantic. You want to cross the ocean quickly and in comfort (which airplanes don't do....there are not comfortable and the number of missed and delayed flights are not worth it). RMS Queen Mary will likely never sail again nor will she survive her current state. However, it would be nice of we had another transatlantic liner in service as QM2 is often sold out.

[@Robochop-vz3qm]

In 1998 I was very privelaged to stay overnight on this magnificent ship. One of those once in a lifetime memories.

[@TractorMan104]

My Dad took the Queen Mary/gray ghost to England in 1941 to serve in WWII. He loved that ship and read everything he could about her.

[@davidlewis1199]

Thank you for your info. And I Love your Love for her. She’s a Gem. I hope she’s stays open to enjoy for years to come

[@AlextheHistorian]

I hope so too!

[@Wm.]

Just found your channel! The QM has been my favorite thing in the world for almost 50 years. Per your "wishing you could sail on her" comment: I wanted to do that so badly I built a VR simulation and then added several other Magnificent Ships. It's the closest we'll likely ever get!

[@cyberp0et]

You'll love this channel :)

[@andrewmiller6009]

In 1967 I just had my Birthday on board of the first Queen Elizabeth. The next day we past the Queen Mary on her second to last voyage from New York to Southampton England, I still can hear the ship horns in my head 62 years later. Thanks for your information.

[@chrisjeffries2322]

Thank you, Alex.

[@thomasalpert6465]

Nice analysis. My mom sailed on the Queen Mary to England in 1957 when she was 10.

[@guyz7777]

Alex is awesome...his passion is unparalleled

[@truthteller8459]

I visited the Queen Mary on Veteran's Day one year and when I got off the bus in the parking area to walk onboard her the horn sounded like she was preparing to get under way. Oh if she would've once I was onboard!!

[@travelinben1966]

She more than paid her dues.Let her continue to enjoy the calm of Long Beach,and the millions of visitors who come away moved by her beauty and history.Long live the Queen!🇬🇧

[@TheBasicPersonSorta]

I need to tell you... she died and now the king is in charge

[@jetsons101]

Alex, your work is amazing. Thanks for your hard work........

[@AlextheHistorian]

My pleasure!

[@drakejdf]

I’m no expert but I think to get the QM up to par to sail would recommend so much work that most of the original ship wouldn’t be original.I honestly like the ship 🚢 right where it is because that’s the way I remember.I just hope I can walk the decks again.

[@rebeccarabinowitz6590]

You'd also need to put in an engine, and quite a bit of the original ship is already missing because they gutted the steerage and second class to make way for a conference center.

[@murraystewartj]

It's the old "ship of Theseus" riddle from ancient Greece. If (days of wooden boats) you replace planking, structural members and so forth over many years, at which point does the vessel become abother ship?

[@TheT-90thatstaresintoyoursoul]

Ehhhh, just replace the engines and whatnot. If it was safe enough and worked then, it is now

[@richsudol2714]

Sailed the the Queen Mary & Elizabeth twice in 1954 & 1957. Still have some Menues and pictures of a children's Tea Party all dressed up with hats. Wonderful memories sailed from NY to England to stay with my family for the summer.

[@jefftube58]

Excellent video. Newer cruise ships today sometimes run precariously close to the profit margin line, and they already were built to all the modern codes.

[@patrickryan6065]

Another great video Alex. Very intelligent and level headed insight here. Let’s see her stay right where she is.

[@mariebcfhs9491]

as a massive hater of long range flying, I would love to see ocean liners again!

[@therealtony2009]

queen mary 2, theres your answer

[@gildavis8266]

Basically, the Queen Mary is a piece of history and should be treated as such. She represents a bygone era and provides a window back to the time when she was created to illustrate how our grandparents once lived. You were correct to point out just how much has changed in the last 80 plus years since the ship was put into service. People live differently today and have different expectations. The same will be true for the generation that will exist in the next century and beyond. Time does not stand still.

[@raymondleggs5508]

not impossible just expensive. The reason why a small liner like the Ms Nordstjernen and former ww 2 minesweeper the MS Sunnhordland (ex kristina brahe) can be both a Museum and a sailing charter/passenger vessel is because they tiny in fact the Sunnhordland can only hold like 80 passengers because shes almost a yacht you could fit both ships in queen marys lagoon end to end beside her.

[@ernshaw78]

How much are they as a passenger?

[@raymondleggs5508]

@@ernshaw78 Don't know I don't live in sweden and Skandanavia lol

[@metromaster2010]

I enjoyed. You are, of course, right. All we have to do is compare the SS France with what she finally looked like as NCL's Norway. I suspect that the lack of balcony cabins also figured into QE2's retirement as well. And it is certainly a major player into why I think we will also never see the SS United States (1952) in passenger service again as well. The required upgrades to meet modern maritime standards would make it at the very least, prohibitive, if not entirely impossible

[@The_Dudester]

Why the QM couldn't sail again. Let us consider the SS France. The France entered service in 1962 and the ocean liner business basically tanked in the mid 1960's. Soon after being in service, the France became a cruise ship, just to make money because the transatlantic runs weren't making money. The France was docked in 1974 and sold in 1979 to Norwegian cruise lines. After some upgrades the France was back to being just a cruise ship. In 2003, there was a boiler explosion while the ship was in port. The now SS Norway never sailed again under her own power and was scrapped just a couple of years later. Sad end to a ship that in the early 1960's was a beautiful ship.

[@GlamorousTitanic21]

There were some things also going for the France that made her conversion to cruising much easier. As an example, her design was such that the ship had ample air conditioning throughout.

[@Kaidhicksii]

In all fairness to the France though, I feel using her as a comparison is just unfair. From her debut as the Norway all the way to the end of her service life, she was both the most famous and most successful vessel in the cruise market and is the ship we have to thank for making cruising what it is today. The only reason her boiler exploded is that, when Knut Kloster stepped down from the head of NCL in '86, his successors were money-hungry trash bags who frankly couldn't give a damn about this literal gold mine they had at their disposal, and as such, cut down heavily on her maintenance. No wonder she finally blew, and it is a testament to her construction and the Frenchmen who built her that she lasted so long. It is my firm belief that if they had shown that vessel the care that she not only deserved but rightfully earned, or just decided to sell her right then and there as soon as they took over the company, that she would still be here today.

[@The_Dudester]

@@Kaidhicksii The QM lucked out in her final disposition. Keep in mind that ships, like planes, are modes of transportation. When a mode becomes old, it is eventually scrapped. Think of the Ford Tri Motors, the Pan Am clippers and even today's 747's. Today, only a vestige of them exists in the razors that you use (they were melted down). How long was the France to carry on? Since the France was a cruise ship the last few decades, the likelihood of it being a museum ship was slim to none. I pray that one day the SS United States can be saved.

[@Wongwanchungwongjumbo]

The Then Giant Ocean Liner, France 🇫🇷 that became Norway that also just like its Rival Queen Elizabeth 2nd Vessel also sailed for 40 years and eventually had many Engine troubles failures that eventually was Scrapped at Alang, India 🇮🇳

[@TheClive1949]

@@Wongwanchungwongjumbo Hello!! What are you talking about? The Queen Elizabeth 2 certainly had some initial mechanical problems early in her life but those were put right. Eventually she was re-engined to diesels from steam turbines as the diesels were more efficient. With these engines she ran very well until the end of her life. She was not scrapped at Alang or anywhere at all, she is now in a static role in Dubai.

[@nancyvogel4941]

We’ve sailed many times out of Long Beach on Carnival cruises and it was always our routine to stay on the Queen Mary the night before we sailed. I just loved the old style cabins, decor throughout the ship & the observation bar 😉. Have been on 3 cruises since cruising resumed but no Queen Mary, really miss her. I really hope the city of Long Beach continues to repair/restore her so tours & hotel reopens.

[@ardiffley-zipkin9539]

Cherish QM2, the last ocean going liner still sailing. I sailed on her for many cruises and transatlantic voyages. Not a “roller,” QM2 has great stabilizers and is very enjoyable even in heavy seas and winds. She is terrific at high speeds moving at 24 knots ! I know since I was a passenger on her for those voyages. Enjoyed your presentation. I subscribed and will follow your presentations on line. Thanks, Ms Audrey !

[@AlextheHistorian]

Thanks Ms Audrey, welcome aboard!

[@johnminter732]

@@AlextheHistorian Audrey is right about the QM2. I have just completed a transatlantic passage on her. She is a beautiful ship, fitted out to a standard comparable to her forbears, even allowing for the restrictions on materials that can be used today, and her art deco inspired interior is just stunning. The standards of service, entertainment, food and general facilities make her a worthy successor to the great Queens and other liners of the past.

[@rriflemann308]

when the ship was converted to a convention center, lateral frames were removed, longitudinal beams were installed to handle static load, ( the ship is absolutely incapable of handling dynamic load) the sea worthy question was professionally answered in the’90s by marine engineering. finding- (impossible, repair costs exceeded entire value of ship)

[@wyster14]

Tbh I feel like if they restored the hotel services to what they were during her passenger service, she would become more popular since she would have actual amenities on board, rather than just being a larger and dated hotel. Swimming pool, gym, spa, sundecks, tanning space, the fashionable verandah grill, lots of nooks for entertainment and fun, as well as the historical aspect in the way you could choose different rooms or even just bunk with friends in 3rd class for cheap and enjoy the ship for what she is. Also not only that, but also do stuff like opening further museum sections and even machining shops in the open spaces below decks. If she had shops on board, they could also repair damages as they occur and even start doing stuff like replicating historic furniture on board. Another side note, restoring the ballroom and other public rooms would also provide correct spaces for the correct events, rather than like using the lounge as a ballroom

[@AlextheHistorian]

I agree 100%

[@Nunofurdambiznez]

VERY interesting video!! thanks for posting it!

[@ajgunter8932]

my mom was a tour guide on the ship in the 70s. They have removed too much equipment and parts of her hull

[@draytonblackgrove]

I just found your channel and really enjoyed this. Keep up the great work!

[@NOrlando952]

I think hypothetically if the QM went back into service and was somehow modernized properly to run efficiently as a Cunard liner again I think it could book a lot more passengers than their cruise ships. It would need a very extensive and expensive modernization but if it were to be done it would most certainly be the most popular passenger boat in the world.

[@setter501]

Well apparently a replica Titanic is being built with the Involvement of Clive Palmer one of our Australian Billionaires! I hear!, The major Question for me with our Queen would be, Is the Hull and Superstructure still strong enough for a sea going career long term? If so you're still looking at Billions of dollars here But it is the sort of stuff Dreams are made of! Second to ships (I am a retired Ships Engineer and actually worked for Cunards Cargo ship division in the 70s & 80s as Third) my other love is Trains, I love the way the Brits have preserved much of their Steam locomotives eg The Flying Scotsman just one example, of course Ships are a different ball game, still I so wish the "Pomms" (I'm a Pomm living in Oz) had been able to preserve at least 1 or 2 of their Classic larger vessels, Passenger and Cargo! The Germans, Dutch and Japanese have done this, of course the general public are far more interested in Trains than Ships, sad but I completely understand that.

[@rmsteutonic3686]

@@setter501 Clive palmers running it, no chance it’s ever gonna finish. He’s a joke in Australia. If you’re interested check out friendlyjordies videos on it

[@NOrlando952]

@@setter501 I remember first hearing about that a decade ago, honestly I don’t think it’s going to go anywhere and I think QMs hypothetical success would be because of its historical status, something that a replica ship cannot achieve.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Clive Palmer has been talking about that Titanic since I was a kid, I knew then it would never happen. His idea never left the drawing board and it was officially canceled last year.

[@setter501]

@@chillinginthefrozennorth A very good question!, If the drive shafts (assuming they haven't already been removed??) haven't been rotated in 50 odd years the main problem would be settling into the bearing surfaces, now let's say someone came along with a few Billion to spend!, and she could be somehow "re made" (this is currently hyperthetical It's improbable but not impossible!) She would most likely be re engineered completely with motive and auxiliary power being provided by several large medium speed Diesel engines driving Alternators in what amounts to a floating power station, a possibility is Azipods would replace the original shafts and propellers, these Azipods are electrically driven self contained propulsion units, (as is the case with the Liner QM2 and many modern cruise vessels) this would be an enormous undertaking as I say not impossible but!.....OK, let's say it was decided to stick with the old system of propulsion engines driving the propeller shafts, Those shafts(I don't know if they are even still in place??, (Alex??...Are they??) If so? they would definitely have to be removed and checked over on shore along with all the bearings, couplings the whole 9 yards, this would have to be done just for survey just for a start, it's quite possible new shafts would have to be manufactured rather than mess around with the old ones! The whole thing about getting QM1 running again is not impossible but it would never be a profitable undertaking for any organisation that took it on, I'd certainly do it if I had an 20 billion Bux to spare! But that's just me! I hope I've answered your question satisfactorily?, I am a humble ex Ships Engineer, a full on Naval Architect may be able to give you a better idea? But that's the basics, Great question.

[@donalddodson7365]

Alex, Good job helping nostalgic Queen Mary fans into the 21st Century. In other more recent episodes (2023) you explained even as a stationary boutique hotel, she needs $millions to catch up to consumers' expectations and regulatory demands. Well done! Thank you. Blessings.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Thanks Donald!

[@garyhowtobluetoothjblheadp3583]

They could make "Queen Mez" Sail again because she still has a 1inch steel hull; but why would They? She has retired and is just as lovely and graceful as ever and may she stay that way?! I've been aboard a few times as a guest and she's a time capsule that must be respected and preserved for future generations to thoroughly enjoy like I have.

[@1949rangerrick]

I worked on the Queen Mary when she was being refurbished for Long Beach. I was able to acquire a coat hook that was attached to a door in first class. It was made of Bakelite, an earlier form of plastic. You might ask why plastic on such a grand ship. It turns out that Bakelite in the 30s was a very expensive material and was very upscale.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Yep, bakelite was considered a miracle material too, it was tough, resistant to heat and cold, and could be made into jewelry.

[@WardenWolf]

The biggest problem is, she was structurally compromised during her hotel conversion because they used non-maritime construction engineers for the work. She is irreparably damaged. They would also need to replace her engines at this point, although doing so through the boiler uptakes would not be impossible.

[@shrek_428]

They only way to really do that would be to convert her to diesels.

[@AlextheHistorian]

You'd have to do that anyway because no one is going to construct a new steam propulsion plant for her

[@jaywalker1233]

Very informative, well-argued and enjoyable. Delivered with a beautifully mellifluous tone and crystal clear diction - your voice is a Strad!

[@marterair551]

Great video Alex, very informative :)

[@jackrembold4976]

I thank you for presenting this topic in a brilliant, polite and informative way which truly was the smart and right way to do it. I'm pretty sure that I could not have done it without dripping sarcasm all over it. If I had done it, I would have said something like this. "It would be far more cost effective to build an entirely new ship that is up to all modern standards that emulates the majesty of the Queen Mary. Oh wait, they did. It's called the Queen Mary 2". My way would not have gotten the point across near as well as you have.

[@AlextheHistorian]

I dont think I was all that successful. A lot of people ended up commenting "just build a replica with today's standards" and indeed I have responded "they did, its called Queen Mary 2."

[@jackrembold4976]

@@AlextheHistorian LOL, Things could be worse. You could be trying to explain why the SS United States will never be rebuilt.

[@AlextheHistorian]

Lol true

[@SoCalDude1793]

I’d like to see the Iowa, Queen Mary, Lane a victory and that Soviet Sub all together in a museum area but that would be way too costly.

[@Aviatorpeck1957]

My father brother and I were at Cherry Park when the Queen Mary come into port for it resting place 1966-67 we lived on 23rd St Long Beach Ca.

[@kevinkern2149]

Couldn't agree more; the Queen Mary should remain as a static, floating relic of the golden age of ocean liners. However, there is another Blue Ribband holder in need of some serious TLC that I think would be a better candidate for restoration to sailing status. The SS United States sits in Philadelphia harbor essentially gutted: no rare woods to save, no period interiors to preserve. I think there were plans at one point to turn her into a modern cruise ship that fell through. Again, even given an all but blank canvas to work with, it's just more expensive to adapt an old hull to modern standards than to build a ship to your specifications from scratch. It would be my dream for some cruise company to restore the SS US to resembling her original state as much as possible while bowing to modern codes and expectations...perhaps a cruise company whose ships are all styled after classic ocean liners featuring black hulls and red funnels just like the United States...a cruise company whose parent company's pockets are magically deep. I know Disney's try with the Queen Mary didn't go well, but why not try again? I can dream.

[@danbell124]

Seconded. It would be more feasible to return the SS United States. The engines are actually reported to be maintained, interiors gutted, the ship was designed to be fire resistant. There is no need for every ship to resemble a floating shopping trolley/apartment block. If the big U was restored I expect at least a profitable amount of clientele. Perhaps about 1,500? After all the QM2 operates on the Atlantic with a capacity of 2600 and she is a much larger ship. The only problem would be rebuilding the interiors, boilers, bridge instrument update and perhaps a major overhaul of the turbines. As she is an existing ship there is no stipulation to be powered by anything other than oil. So yeah fair enough if a new cruise line wanted to try this but we must wait and see. She deserved a longer career anyway.

[@HyperVegitoDBZ]

@@danbell124 Engines were the property of US military and engine room was filled with gravel and engines dismantled.

[@Kaidhicksii]

The annoying thing about the whole bringing the United States back into revenue service question is that it most definitely can be done, but the problem is no one has the guts to do it. That or they don't have the means. The ship is in very good condition structurally: in fact, when her hull and superstructure were tested, it was still roughly 92% sound. That's being Navy built for ya. And while her interiors may be completely gutted, they now present a clean slate with which to start over. For that reason alone, it wouldn't be unreasonably difficult to change the layout of some areas to make room for, say bigger cabins. Now the problem with the venture proposed by Crystal Cruises (and everyone else for that matter) is that it called for changing the ship DRAMATICALLY. Stupid idea: that's not thinking at the margin. Of course it would cost upwards of $700-million dollars to do what they were planning to do with her, though even then I don't want to hear it, because in the cruise market, $700-million is chicken feed. You mean to tell me you have $1.6-BILLION (not million, BILLION) in the bank to build one of these mega-ships that are increasingly becoming little more than floating condominium buildings, but you don't have $700-million AT MOST to restore a ship that, though old and pretty small by today's standards, is still in top-notch condition and is ironically back to being an empty shell with which to work with? Give me a break. But no; the best thing to do to bring the United States back into service is to think at the margin. Rather than making such a vast amount of changes right away, one should instead take the path that made her contemporaries, the QE2 and the France, successful in the long run. QE2 went from her original 1969 configuration to having a few balcony cabins and new shopping areas two years later. As time went on, she gradually received more and more upgrades, until she became what she was when QM2 took over her role as flagship in 2004. France, when she was transformed into Norway, mostly just received a few new outer deck areas as well as tenders due to her deep draft (in the case of the United States, whose 31' draft is more comparable to the largest cruise ships, I don't think she'll need that). As time went on, the additional balconies were added. These are just the changes that I can already eyeball and name off the top of my head. The thing that none of those ships had were already empty interiors with which to start from scratch, like what the US now has. If one were to buy the US and make only the necessary changes to start off, and then add more incremental changes as time goes on, then that would be a whole lot cheaper than just making them all right out of the gate. With a project such as this, success lies not in the short run, but in the long run, and that's what one needs to remember.

[@HyperVegitoDBZ]

@@Kaidhicksii companies aren't interested in the long term, if the project isn't brining profit right away, it's worthless.

[@danbell124]

Surely not every ocean going passenger ship requires balconies. I think passengers would sail on board a restored SSUS for the nostalgia it conjures. Traditional cruising/transatlantics have at least enough clientele to fill this 50 something thousand gross ton vessel (considerably smaller than even 'small ships' such as Aurora and Oceana in the P&O fleet). I agree that the cabins should be enlarged and the engines rebuilt but people would surely adore the restored public areas.

[@waynemacfarland1546]

So glad she was able to escape the ship breaker's torch. My great aunt once took a cruise on the Queen Mary a long time ago, and it would break heart to even think of such a beautiful ship headed for a Turkish scrapyard where the dreaded ship breaker's torch awaits.

[@c3cubed]

Queen Mary was designed as a transatlantic liner, not a "cruise" ship . As her height is much less than the newer "wedding cake" styled monstrosities with balconies (including her latest namesake QM2) even a replica would not wish to be caught in the massive waves of a mid-Atlantic storm. They can be intense enough to wipe away all the deck chairs (and some passengers) and encourage comparisons to the original 1972 version of "The Poseidon Adventure".

[@c3cubed]

@Robdog 1 Did you not understand my comment? It somewhat aligns with yours, although not sure I agree about QM2 in the "beauty" department. I've sailed on her, as well as her sister Queen Victoria. Funny (you) mention 'floating apartment blocks'. That's a good description of the disproportionately elevated profiles.

[@justanoldman9762]

Thank you for a well presented and informative presentation I look forward to others.

[@skyden24195]

I have a couple of comments for this topic/video; first, besides the given reasons for not returning the Queen Mary to a sea-worthy vessel, why would anyone want to risk this incredible piece of history out on the unforgiving open ocean? Losing her, out at sea, would be a tragedy almost akin to the loss of Titanic (in certain respects.) My other comment is in relation to how famous the ship was during her operational days, that is I'm always thrilled when a film or television show, from that time period, includes the Queen Mary as part of the story; for example, it was the (supposed) ship that transported Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russel across the Atlantic Ocean in the classic film, "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes."

[@hibob418]

One thing the host here doesn’t mention is that during her conversion starting in 1967, her entire power train (boilers, all but one engine room) were removed and part of that space was used for a Jacques Cousteau museum that failed after only a couple of years. I was lucky enough to have stayed on the QM in the mid-80’s and during a tour, the guide mentioned that part of the deal with Long Beach was that if any boilers or engines were re-installed to make her seaworthy again, the City of Long Beach would owe Cunard something like $50 million. So she’s not going anywhere under her own power. Thanks very much for the video.

[@walterschultz3579]

Like all things, they are relative to their time. The Queen Mary had her day. It's more valuable to keep her preserved for as long as practical and economically feasible as a museum and hotel so people can enjoy her past. More of our past should be so preserved accordingly like the Queen Mary. The SS United States docked in Philadelphia, by comparisin could have met a better fate than it has ever since its retirement many years ago, but times and people do certainly change. The Queen Mary is still a credit to our times at present because of her past and her present status.

[@heels-villeshoerepairs8613]

Nice work. She is beautiful and safe. Lets keep her that way.

[@ironclad57]

My father was a Far East Prisoner of War. After years of being used for slave Labour, VJ Day finally arrived. It was upon the Queen Mary that he, and his comrades, sailed home to their families. This ship will always have a place in my heart.

[@robertworden8559]

Hi Alex, You have done a truly superb and thoughtful examination of the "Proposed, yet futile" future plans for the Queen Mary. The sheer reality of it would be hard for many to understand, but a very young person, deeply in love with this terrific old icon of a time long ago, you did a great service to her legacy to clearly and succinctly explain the true hard facts. I love that old girl more than many, - I was shipboard in the welcoming Armata when she arrived in Long Beach. - I was shipboard when she was permitted to take on visitors when she docked. - I worked on the TV Crew when she supported the Beach Boys Concert in the 1970's - I've stayed on the ship as a hotel passenger at least 12 times including the Churchill Suites for a week. - I've attended two Royal British Titanic Society Meetings onboard as a member of the RBTS - Like you, I love her to death, all my wives (3) have shared time with me on the ship as well as both of my daughters since birth practically. - I'm a Southern Californian (40 years) raised in the beaches and grew up in Pacoima.

[@mike.4277]

Very nice video, keep up the great work!! 😎👍

[@AlextheHistorian]

Thank you Mike!

[@MrSilver708]

I loved this video....i booked a room overnight aboard her a few years ago and was so taken by her history. Winston Churchill sailed on her! Leave it as is for future generations to enjoy.

[@Unclejake]

I agree, with what has happened to Queen Mary over the last 50 years, if there was a need for a Queen Mary ocean liner again, it would be financially smarter to build a new ship vs repair the QM. When you build new you pay materials and cost to build, if you tried to rebuild Queen Mary, you would add the cost of rip out, removal, and disposal, then add the cost of materials and cost to build. As we have discussed before anything can be fixed…it’s how much do you want to spend. It’s not the things you can see, it’s all the things you will run into you didn’t plan to address, but find this is now priority 1, if you want to continue with the repair. I hate to see her fate like the USS The Sullivans….but rust never sleeps.

[@stormbowman7148]

You made some really good arguments. I totally agree. It would probably be cheaper to build a completely new one, that looks like on the outside, but is modern on the inside. Then again, it would not be the same.

[@jec1ny]

The short answer to the question is no. The longer answer is that the QM could not realistically be brought up to SOLAS (maritime safety regulations) standards. It would not just be difficult. It would be impossible. You could gut her interior completely. Just rip it all out and rebuild between the hull plates from scratch and it STILL would not work. Why? Because her hull itself cannot pass modern safety regs. She was put together using rivets! Sorry, the QM will not sail again as a passenger liner.

[@setter501]

Sadly I must Agree with you

[@erikh9991]

If they could cut off the bottom part and put in on a barge, we might get something done!!

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

And that doesn't even address the SOLAS requirements for steering gear that she fails to meet. That was one of the things that well and truly killed the idea of the SS United States ever sailing again. SS Rotterdam which was far newer and more up to date was removed from service partially because she couldn't meet new SOLAS requirements. And that happened over a decade ago.

[@rosewood1]

There are riveted iron sailing ship's that have been restored to full operational sea service. The James Craig here in Sydney Australia is a fully restored sailing ship. Nevertheless restoring the Queen Mary to operational service would never be remotely viable. At some stage she will need to shifted to have the hull restored just to continue to float!

[@davidthurston3346]

There are Lakers from the early forties and fifties, with, I am certain, rivets still operating....you may be incorrect.

[@kef103]

The amount of effort and resources to make this ship sail again even ignoring safety code would be astronomical.

[@raymondleggs5508]

only 3 historically listed/museum passenger vessels sail under their own power, one of those is the 1960s Cargo-liner Cap San diego and the other 2 are also mid century modern era Inside and only one of those is pre 1950. I have already mentioned those ships in the previous comment. They are considered cruise ferries but the were designed for the rough Scandinavian waters and have much more in common with an ocean liner because of their age. You will never get the glamourous superliner experience it's a shame the SS Norway was scrapped along with the SS independence and Ss' constitution along with the USS Edwin D Patrick which was a troop transport of the same class as both of those liners she was in much better shape than those 2 and could have been preserved as a liner due to her looks and Surprisingly civilian looking interiors.

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

SS Constitution was spared from the breaker yards and was not scrapped because she sank on the journey there, which in my opinion is a far far better and more merciful death for the old girl. I will never forgive NCL for what they did to Norway and Independence and what they tried to do to Constitution. They lied about the future of those ships until practically the moment they were beached for scrapping.

[@deannabayless8025]

I stayed on the Queen Mary hotel for a week with my disabled boyfriend, so we got to know the wheelchair workarounds. Besides the elevator outside that only goes to a limited number of decks, there’s a hidden large service elevator on the starboard side of the ship, in an area that’s usually inaccessible, but you can get a pass card from the front desk if you can show need. There’s also the trick of sending the first elevator”, empty, to a random floor, so you can call for what’s usually the second elevator, which is larger.

[@AndreiTupolev]

Well, two answers I you know would pretty much answer that question: (1) SOLAS; and (2) fuel costs, even with completely new machinery

[@JackieDannenberg]

Thank you for the explanation why these older ships are retired and for good reason. To strip the interior for current codes, etc would be a tragedy ! It would be fun to cruise her as she is but obviously, that’s not and never will be possible. I hope they can keep her structurally sound as a museum so people can see her majesty.

[@Glenni91N]

If you want an example of an old ocean liner that is now a cruise ship, look up the MS Stockholm, now MV Astoria, she's still sailing, But she's been altered quite a lot. Her front superstructure is very different from how it was, etc - You could ask yourself, is this really what you'd want done to the Queen Mary?

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

Poor Stockholm. She is virtually unrecognizable from the beautiful little liner she started her life as.

[@lawrencebraun7616]

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 Is this the same ship that sank the Andra Doria?

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

@@lawrencebraun7616 yes it's the same ship that rammed the Doria.

[@the.porter.productions]

Greetings from the O-H-I-O Porters. 🇺🇸 I saw this for the 1st time today in 2022. I’m so glad that she’s still afloat & residing here in America. Good info. It’s good to have a piece of history & I’m sure that there are those who would love to sail on her even just for nostalgia purposes alone or even to recreate an ancestral journey. 🧐 It’s a shame that she was gutted of some of her beauty & to gut her even more of it for the purpose of the upgrades would be preposterous! 😠 I’m sure there are some loopholes in the current laws that could assure her of not being so upgraded, but they would have to make her safe & reliable at all costs. Too much cost I’m afraid. So here she sits! I would love to visit her some day. 🥰 Thanks for the info. 🥰😎✌️

[@matthewchen3678]

The sheer difficulty of trying to turn Queen Mary back to her ocean liner form would probably cause more problems than money. Sure she could be used to carry passengers and refugees(cough cough Ukraine), and it would be fun to sail on her, and would be nicer for her to be owned by Cunard, but the effort, money and resources would be too much. Look at Titanic 2, if Palmer is still building, which I doubt it, because of the United Australia Party, then the Titanic 2 would probably not be like Titanic. It would be practically impossible to try and sail Titanic 2 if it was more or less like Titanic thanks to new maritime law.

[@chrisjpfaff314]

This thing will never leave Long Beach in one piece.

[@robertsilva8097]

To get the Queen Mary ready for the ocean it would probably cost over 1 billion dollars up to the United States Coast Guard standards they would have to take her to dry dock Pull her apart to put a brand new engine since she does not have an engine in her then there to make sure that everything's up to code and standards then they would have to do a ocean run trial to make sure that there's no leaks let's see if this really did happen it would probably be 20 years before they would see any profits

[@christo-chaney]

This makes a lot of sense. While it would be truly meaningful to have the original Queen Mary sail with the successor one, it’s great that we have the QM1 as it is in one place we can travel to & see her safely!

[@rickc303]

Question is, if given the choice; would people using the ocean liners in the 30s, 40s and 50s prefer them, or our modern day versions/examples/amenities Same goes for reminiscing about the old days of highway travel, small motels vs interior corridor hotels etc

[@AlextheHistorian]

I think people from those eras would prefer the newer Queen Mary 2, to the original.

[@rickc303]

@@AlextheHistorian I think that goes for most everything we glorify from the past, those folks would likely be eager to take the modern examples Especially when ocean liners weren't used as a tourist destination, but rather a means to cross the ocean. That is now achievable to the masses far cheaper, and in a fraction of the time required via airlines Another example would be cars, and the "they don't make them like they used to" in reference to modern consumerism, yet back in the 50s, automotive design changed every year purposefully to make the previous model look old so that customers return to buy the newest version In other words, people in the 30s, 40s and 50s were likely excited about what the future has to bring, to sort of overlook what they currently have to experience. Much can be said about is in our current time, reminiscing about past ways of life or future endeavors, rather than embracing and enjoying the current state of technology/advancements/achievements etc It would be like someone in the 1930s on an ocean liner pinning for the 1850s way of transportation

[@AlextheHistorian]

You speak the truth, yet I can't explain why I still love the style and technology of the 1930s more than today. I just prefer it.

[@everythingautomotiveeta5839]

Love your dialog brother! Hola from LBC

[@Cilla0415]

there are many reasons why the QM will never sail again. From the complete gutting of her engines and boilers, to the many regulation compliance issues that she would face. There are many structural and design issues that the QM faces that would not make her compatible for modern cruising. Let's look at some structural issues. For one, the QM was built in a whole other world of ship building and passenger comfort. From her class division, to her use of highly flammable materials. Not to mention her fuel consumption and her high operating costs. She lacks outside balconies, no outdoor pools, no casino, or not many dining options. I have always said that the QM should never sail again. As any attempt to rehab her would lead to nothing. Like the United States, it's just not practical .

[@TheBig50pCollection]

Great video. Cheaper to build a copy !!

[@nordisk1874]

I’ll say this when it comes to Solas. If she was and it will never be cause she’s an aging rust bucket. There is nothing on wheelchairs and and accessibility on cruse ships. It’s done as an accommodation/amenity. Now if the Queen Mary was ever to get a 500 million reconstruction, she wouldn’t be able to operate here. She has no history or connection besides rusting away in Long Beach. If she was US built there are exceptions. Ie Delta Queen or the late SS Independence they both operated near coastal or inland. So were under the coast guard and Congress. The Queen Mary doesn’t fit. The Delta Queen has a lot of wood. Her restoration is being held up by the do nothing Congress. Great video as always!

[@Citizen_07]

I really like your videos Alex! keep it up!

[@fionawimber1028]

Disregarding the legal reasons in the initial contract (Which could be circumvented today after 50 years) making QM into a sailing passenger vessel is extremely impractical. That said, I've never measured can you or can't you by practicality. The question is, can QM be reconverted into a sailing ship? Yes, she absolutely could be. Impractical, yes. Expensive, oh definitely. (Machinery alone would be ridiculous although a modern gas turbine set up is not out of the question. It would free up a shit ton of space too as there would be no need for boilers.) But COULD it be done, yes. Technically it could be.

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

Same as concorde. It could be made airworthy again but it would probably be cheaper to build a modern version from scratch

[@halbouma6720]

Yeah, contracts can be redone as well - given the rest of the work involved - this would be the easiest/cheapest part of the process. Anyway, its not even clear where Long Beach is going to find the money to repair the ship as it is now let alone get it sailing again. lol.

[@williamdixon1992]

Excellent video! You brought up some good points. Personaly I wouldnt want a room with a balcony.

[@jeromesevy1112]

Firstly. Queen Elizabeth took over as the flag ship in 1949. Secondly one of the main reasons Queen Mary would never sail again is the cost to make her seaworthy again as well as the cost of fuel. Daily cost for fuel for the Queen Mary would be 6-700k per day because let's be realistic; the Queen Mary was a gas guzzler. Not to mention the liberal city of long beach would not want that "evil" fuel oil smoke to be blown into the city each time she departs or arrives.

[@AlextheHistorian]

I dont have any documentation that days QE took over as flagship, until the brief period after QM retired and QE2 went into service

[@jeromesevy1112]

@@AlextheHistorian I've read from quite a few sources that she took over in 1949. Not sure how reliable the sources are however.

[@jaredellifritt6094]

What a beautiful ship, impressive record.

[@rmsteutonic3686]

“People don’t go to universities to have fun, people go to universities to learn” Learnings fun isn’t it?

[@AlextheHistorian]

I make learning fun 😎

[@jeffreylaurahutton5379]

Queen Mary’s hull today is still very strong she was made that way to take on the storms while sailing the N Atlantic. But LB had her equipment her engines, water treatment, electrical system all removed they had the cutting torch literally de gut her of her machinery which was a bad thing. Today we still have this great Ocean Liner and we need to keep her for future for our kids.

[@iCarlosPro]

So, the QM should become the QM2 to sail again. Well, we already have the QM2. The QM already completed her transatlantic and wartime duties, she deserves the relaxed life she has now as an hotel and museum. Although I wish they gave her proper maintenance through all her retirement, they’re starting to fix that now.

[@johndunkle740]

The Queen is class!

[@jimcrawford5039]

It would cost millions to TRY to get her seaworthy. Built in 1936? It will never happen.