Head on, who comes off better ?
Just to settle a discussion I was having with someone !
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
It depends on how you look at it, but ultimately its a draw. The QMII, has bulbous bow which extends out in front of the ship for several meters to push water out of the way and minimize drag. She could probably pentrate quite deeply into the Nimitz. On the other hand, the USS Nimitz is a warship and designed to be completly compartmentalized. There would probably be casualties, but flooding would be minimal.
I don't know. I mean for exampile in 1911, RMS Olympic was rammed by a much smaller ship, the HMS Hawke and the Olympic came off second best. Then there was the Empress of Ireland sinking.The Nimitz is about 35,000 tons heavier than the QEII. As with almost all incidents where a smaller lighter object strikes a bigger object, the lighter object gets off with much heavier damage. Maybe if the Nimitz is sitting still and the QEII is moving at its highest speed the Nimitz might be the more heavily damaged ship, but not likely.
Torqumada
I thought the Queen Mary II was heavier than the Nimitz ? That's what initiated the discussion we were having, tho now I'd have to check to be sure...
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Well, just to acquire some numbers, I went to Wiki -
RMS Queen Mary II
Tonnage: 148,528 gross tons[2]
Displacement: 76,000 tonnes (approx)
USS Nimitz
Displacement: 101,000 to 104,000 tons full load
Looks like MR P used wiki for his figures Cunard rates QM2 as 151,000 gross tons. The 76,000 T would have to be the wieght of the metal in the QM2 as ships do not get lighter in the water.Ah, we were probably comparing non-comparable figures ! The 148000 and the 100000 were the sort of numbers we had up. So, the QM2 only weighs the 148 figure in terms of actual metal, but not displacement ?
Best Regards
Grey Wolf