Shipbucket

Kim, nice work. Altough I believe the <<Aotearoa>> was originally a project made by Navarchos -and me as a proposed 2014 looking version of the Normandie.
Since there would be a Titanic II. So please credit Navarchos atleast.

Yea, always remember our rules about crediting original artists when using their drawings fully or partially.
So I advice strongly to correct the possible errors in the crediting of the drawings Navarchos points out.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

To all who correctly recommended proper - and correct - credits for AOTEAROA - it was one of those wonderfull benefits from copy and paste, in this case from COOK-class, I forgot to correct it, so, sorry for that, now I have all of you in the credits.

@Novice: The funnels are inspired by QM II, but their positions and heighth are taken from the original NORMANDIE.

@TimothyC: The COOKs operate in remote Waters and visit spots where it's usefull to have a large, fast tender
Well, the sad and simple truth is, I wanted it that way and didn't bother about economics.

_________________
Don't be a troll - just Rock 'n Roll

Kimwolf, may I remind you that the Normandie was a steam ship and QM II an diesel + gas turbine powered ship. 3 funnels of that size are never needed (even with modern steam propulsion systems it isn't) hence why 3 huge funnels on a ship like that looks and is wrong.

also, as speed is related to waterline length (relatively less power required to move a larger ship) your cruise liner might actually have about the same top speed as your tender. a smaller tender could have a planing or semi planing hull and because of that be faster then your tender.
in addition, the well deck for this tender just made all of the hull aft of the funnel unusable for anything else..... as IIRC that space is mostly storage space, you just made your ship less suitable for remote waters, as it's unsupported range is decreased by 1/3 per passenger compared to other vessels of its size.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Well, seen from our technically limited universe, you're absolutely right, but: CISP is my AU and as I'm fascinated by the concept of Cold Fission, I decided that they found a way to master it. So, PACIFICA-Class, COOK-Class and their tenders are all driven by this form of energy, which means: No huge engines and tanks and so on, hence, enough space for supplies, storage and whatever needs much space aboard. I know, cold fission is still considered impossible by most scientists, but so was flying not so long ago.
The funnels are used for other purposes, for example: hiding antennas elegantly, instead of using ugly puffball radoms. Then, as you might know, the three funnel concept is adopted from Navarcho's and ALVAMA's Normandie 2014 concept - and I definetely believe that the two of them know enough about naval technics to know they would have needed just one funnel using modern engine concepts.
Concerning that enormous tender: It can go were the COOKs would rip their hulls open or simply ground on sandbanks.

_________________
Don't be a troll - just Rock 'n Roll

so your ship with 3 funnels would not require funnels at all......... uhm what!?

you know that the invention of cold fission would change EVERYTHING in ship design? from hull shapes, stability (very different center of gravity with a light powerplant and no fuel anymore.) however it would not change the size of powerplants that much. you'd still need engine rooms, and the space that comes free from removing the fuel is mostly double hulls and double bottoms, which remain empty if you have nothing else to put on board. cold fission would also not solve the problem that the engine room would need to be larger then tender itself to have enough power to propel this vessel to high speeds, as the limitations on hulls are still there.

note also that those funnels of the QM-2 were shaped as such to make sure the smoke stayed off the stern. so, if your funnels are no funnels, you could use a very different, maybe even better looking shape.

as for small big tenders: I would always prefer a slightly bumpy, fast ride in a 15m tender over the fact that the stern of my cruise ship sinks every time you get near another group of islands (thus having all cabins at an angle, sweet dreams passengers!)

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Yeah, you're not getting it. The large Lifeboats on your Pacifica Class are going to be the tenders (that's what most cruise ships use these days ) - It makes sense to use them when you are already taking them everywhere. While there have been some steel beach designs for new-build 'adventure' cruise ships, those only support RHIBs, not something the size of an LCU.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆