Shipbucket

Welcome aboard Mike, and I do say, you know how to ingratiate yourself with me - the liners are a soft spot of mine (even if I do prefer the designs of the 50s and 60s to the 30s). I look forward to seeing more.
What he said. Azipods and bow thrusters also mean that a ship doesn't need tugs to manuver into port, which reduces costs. This is more important with cruise ships that more often than liners visit smaller, unimproved ports, but it still helps. If you do decide to not use them, then the twin screw with bow and stern thrusters is probably the next best thing (I know you know this Mike, just saying it for others).

Welcome aboard Mike, and I do say, you know how to ingratiate yourself with me - the liners are a soft spot of mine (even if I do prefer the designs of the 50s and 60s to the 30s). I look forward to seeing more.

Gotta love the look of these though. I'm not a fan of flat style sterns like that but they have to have them for fitting azipods (hence the QM2 has that ugly flat rear with stuck on spoon shape to give a slight resemblance to her older sisters.

Yep, but QM2 has that ugly bulkhead (the transom) jutting out of the water

Yes, and there's probably a very good reason for that. Naval engineers don't do things because they feel like it.

...initial intent was to make the ship's stern profile with a spoon shape, similar to that on most previous ocean liners, but the mounting of the propeller pods required a flat transom. The compromise was a constanzi stern – a combination of the two. The final design was agreed upon, as a Constanzi stern provides the transom required for azimuthal pod propulsors, and provides better seaholding characteristics in a following swell than a standard transom stern.