PDA

View Full Version : Ship Experts - Dream class ships - why is beam not bigger?


mlayton14
04-11-2012, 06:15 PM
Hello ship experts .. I like some of the improvements on the new Dream class ships. Question however, they made these ships 2 stories taller and 150 ft longer, but only increased the beam (width) like 20ft.

Doing the math .. they add 1500 additional people but couldnt find space to fix the huge obvious problems, small pools and deck areas. This could have been fixed by making the ships beam longer (wider) thereby allowing more room for open deck space (and most notably tiny Pools of course). RCCL is a good example with their Oasis class ships (I think this is the class name). This class of ship has almost double the width of the Dream Class (like 220 ft) allowing a much larger open deck and facilities at almost the same length ..but of course they added a lot more people

Is there an Engineering reason why Disney didnt make these ships wider to address the obvious problems with these ships?

Just interested in the topic, wont stop me from sailing with DCL.

Florida Dreamin'
04-11-2012, 06:24 PM
To make them look like classic, elegant ships the beam had to have been small.
Had it been any larger, it would have made it look like a floating barge - I'm looking at you NCL Epic, RCCL Allure + Oasis, and MSC ships.
Along with that, whats the point besides top deck? They didn't need any more rooms...

~ FD.

mlayton14
04-11-2012, 07:57 PM
Seems like function should take precedence over form no? Seriously, over the course of one week how often do you spend looking at the outside of the ship as opposed to using ship facilities , of which more outdoor area would certainly be a plus no?

MTmomma
04-11-2012, 08:01 PM
Possibly because of the constraints of the port they are contractually obliged to sail from? The Oasis and Allure are too large to come into Canaveral aren't they? (Haven't looked, don't care to)

DisLyd2008
04-11-2012, 08:04 PM
DH and I have noticed this and discussed it also. We were thinking the following reasons may contribute:
1. Hydrodynamics/fuel efficiency
2. Fitting into certain ports/channels
3. Fitting through the Panama Canal

Not sure if any of our theories are true. :confused3 We are only ship expert wannabe's!

Florida Dreamin'
04-11-2012, 08:07 PM
Seems like function should take precedence over form no? Seriously, over the course of one week how often do you spend looking at the outside of the ship as opposed to using ship facilities , of which more outdoor area would certainly be a plus no?

You may not look at it for long but the fact that they went to get the US Coast Guard's approval for yellow life boats just shows that they DO care. Along with that, I don't know if Meyer Werft had the ability to construct vessels with such a great beam distance. When I watched a presentation on our Fantasy by Frank de Heer, WDI DCL New Build, they had specifically picked Meyer Werft because of price and delivery date. Had they not gone with Meyer Werft we might have seen a different out come. Just speculating..

~ FD

kcashner
04-11-2012, 08:10 PM
The classic ships were designed to be the maximum size allowed thru the Panama Canal as it currently exists. While I know the canal is being enlarged, I don't know what the new restrictions will be. That could be a significant factor.

The bigger the ship, the more restricted the ports of call become.

GoofyDisneyDaddy
04-12-2012, 07:43 AM
A couple reasons. First, as a percentage, they both increased about 15%, so proporotionally, the beam and length were keeping in the style of the classic ships, just larger.

This also seems to be the width of ship Meyer Werft can build, so that was probably a factor.

Also, from a design perspective, if you increase the width on the top decks, you also need to increase it all the way down. As it is now, the ships already have a sort of I-beam or hourglass figure where the middle decks don't expand the full beam. This required additional structural struts added to the top deck as is, so I don't think they could have made the top deck much wider. Apparently, Disney has made the design decision that it has enough interior space, so it probably didn't make sense to increase the beam.

DynamicDisneyDuo
04-12-2012, 08:33 AM
Possibly because of the constraints of the port they are contractually obliged to sail from? The Oasis and Allure are too large to come into Canaveral aren't they? (Haven't looked, don't care to)

Actually it would appear they are not. RCL and the Port Authority have already announced that the new terminal under construction will accommodate the Gensis-class ships, which are the Oasis and Allure.

I didn't care to look it up either but had heard it previously.

MTmomma
04-12-2012, 08:48 AM
Actually it would appear they are not. RCL and the Port Authority have already announced that the new terminal under construction will accommodate the Gensis-class ships, which are the Oasis and Allure.

I didn't care to look it up either but had heard it previously.

At the time the contracts were signed for the building of the two ships, the PC expansion for the Oasis/Allure size hadn't been approved.

papa
04-12-2012, 09:28 AM
The dream and the fantasy are too wide to fit through the panama canal as it is now. The magic an d wonder just are able to squeeze through the canal as it is now.

ilovetexas
04-12-2012, 09:52 AM
Possibly because of the constraints of the port they are contractually obliged to sail from? The Oasis and Allure are too large to come into Canaveral aren't they? (Haven't looked, don't care to)

You're really that adverse to looking up information on another cruise line? then why mention it?

You may not look at it for long but the fact that they went to get the US Coast Guard's approval for yellow life boats just shows that they DO care. Along with that, I don't know if Meyer Werft had the ability to construct vessels with such a great beam distance. When I watched a presentation on our Fantasy by Frank de Heer, WDI DCL New Build, they had specifically picked Meyer Werft because of price and delivery date. Had they not gone with Meyer Werft we might have seen a different out come. Just speculating..

~ FD

Meyer Werft is in the process of building two ships for NCL that are bigger than the DCL ships they built. I don't know how big the beam is on the new NCL ships that are under construction. Maybe DCL was just going for a certain "look", like the yellow life boats. :)

Wendy&Grumpy
04-12-2012, 10:32 AM
Larger ships are probably in future plans.

Doesn't DCL have a contract for more ships?

Maybe the Magic & Wonder are the "Baby Bear" boats, the Dream & the Fantasy are the "Mama Bear" boats, and the new ones will be bigger and be the "Papa Bear" boats. :lmao:

Seriously, though, I'm sure they could make a larger ship with the same look simply by expanding in all directions, so why not go larger with the second round and even larger yet with the third round?

Alexander
04-12-2012, 11:19 AM
Personally, I think the Dream and Fantasy look top-heavy. It almost looks like they'd tip over in rough seas because they sit so high. Of course I know they won't, but overall, I think the ships look weird in comparison to the Magic and Wonder.

wmharley
04-12-2012, 11:21 AM
The new Dream class boats lookk like they will tip over.

MTmomma
04-12-2012, 01:54 PM
You're really that adverse to looking up information on another cruise line? then why mention it?





Way to make an assumption. Nine times out of ten, I am posting from my smartphone. Do I REALLY want to go cross eyed looking for something as trivial as Beam Width on a line that I am currently not planning on sailing? Heck, even with DCL, The thought HADNT CROSSED MY MIND to go looking for its exact Beam, because frankly, it wouldn't have an impact on me or my family sailing on the line. It was a question on a message board, I responded. Plain and simple.
However, knowing that the Magic and Wonder can fit through the Panama Canal as it is in its current state, THAT would be helpful information to know, IF I WANTED TO DO A PC CRUISE! Sheesh.
Also, do I look for other lines and other dates? No, because I am willing to pay what DCL asks for, because it fits our CURRENT needs and wants. Will that change in the future? Im not dumb enough to say no. I just dont want to "waste" my brain power knowing random tidbits of information about other cruise lines, when by the time I would CONSIDER sailing on those lines, it would be outdated information anyway. :surfweb:

ilovetexas
04-12-2012, 02:10 PM
Personally, I think the Dream and Fantasy look top-heavy. It almost looks like they'd tip over in rough seas because they sit so high. Of course I know they won't, but overall, I think the ships look weird in comparison to the Magic and Wonder.

I saw a pic of the Fantasy parked next to the Magic and thought the same thing! The size difference is amazing and it does look top heavy when you look at it straight on from about the same height (another pic I saw that someone had taken from the Dream).

Way to make an assumption. Nine times out of ten, I am posting from my smartphone. Do I REALLY want to go cross eyed looking for something as trivial as Beam Width on a line that I am currently not planning on sailing? Heck, even with DCL, The thought HADNT CROSSED MY MIND to go looking for its exact Beam, because frankly, it wouldn't have an impact on me or my family sailing on the line. It was a question on a message board, I responded. Plain and simple.
However, knowing that the Magic and Wonder can fit through the Panama Canal as it is in its current state, THAT would be helpful information to know, IF I WANTED TO DO A PC CRUISE! Sheesh.
Also, do I look for other lines and other dates? No, because I am willing to pay what DCL asks for, because it fits our CURRENT needs and wants. Will that change in the future? Im not dumb enough to say no. I just dont want to "waste" my brain power knowing random tidbits of information about other cruise lines, when by the time I would CONSIDER sailing on those lines, it would be outdated information anyway. :surfweb:

I just looked at your screen name. Never mind, I get it.

MTmomma
04-12-2012, 02:31 PM
Yeah, 'cause my geographic location means everything :thumbsup2

ilovetexas
04-12-2012, 03:19 PM
Yeah, 'cause my geographic location means everything :thumbsup2

That wasn't what I was referring to and I'm not arguing with you, no matter how hard you try. Have a lovely day.

Florida Dreamin'
04-12-2012, 04:25 PM
As for the Panama Canal argument, that's not going to get you very far. The Panama Canal is and will be going to be going through changes over the next few years. They've decided to update to something called New Panamax allowing for your large super tankers, cruise ships, etc to sail through easily. Another thing I've though of as reasoning for such a small beam length is elegance. When you roll on up to Port Canaveral who honestly wants to see a sqaure box hotel on a floating barge?! Not me for sure.

~ FD.

mmouse37
04-12-2012, 08:48 PM
Play nice people....no personal attacks.

MJ

truck1
04-12-2012, 08:51 PM
As for the Panama Canal argument, that's not going to get you very far. The Panama Canal is and will be going to be going through changes over the next few years. They've decided to update to something called New Panamax allowing for your large super tankers, cruise ships, etc to sail through easily. Another thing I've though of as reasoning for such a small beam length is elegance. When you roll on up to Port Canaveral who honestly wants to see a sqaure box hotel on a floating barge?! Not me for sure.

~ FD.

Its not the size of the locks that limits a ship thru the Panama Canal, though it is a factor. The Oasis class will fit in the new locks, but wont fit under the Bridge of America. A ship has to have an air draft of less then 290 feet to clear the bridge.

maria-fan-22
04-12-2012, 10:28 PM
Meyer Werft is in the process of building two ships for NCL that are bigger than the DCL ships they built. I don't know how big the beam is on the new NCL ships that are under construction. Maybe DCL was just going for a certain "look", like the yellow life boats. :)

The New NCL ships have a beam of 130 feet, just 5 feet wider than the Dream.

trimix
04-12-2012, 11:12 PM
The new ships could be 50 feet wider and fit into the under-construction Panama locks.

I have a theory that I am frankly shocked nobody has mentioned yet: the new ships NEED to be narrow enough to fit into the docking channel at Castaway Cay, with available spare room to maneuver in and out. I strongly suspect CC was the limiting factor.

And to those who think the ships look like they are about to capsize, I assure you the design engineers took care to prevent that from happening.

MTmomma
04-12-2012, 11:37 PM
Why would CC be the limiting factor? They altered it already to make way for the Dream class.

trimix
04-13-2012, 09:03 AM
They lengthened the pier and added pilongs further out. Looking at CC before and after from a Cessna it didn't look like they widened the channel.

truck1
04-13-2012, 12:58 PM
They would if they had to. At the moment, there is still room, for them without issue. If in the futue DCL needed to make it wider for what ever reason, theyll dredge it and widen it.