# RMS Titanic



## The Doctor

Created via recommendation of Rodders.

This subject has fascinated me for years now, after the great liner sailed into the history books at 2:20 AM on April 15th 1912. One of the most fascinating things about her is the sheer continuous bad luck she encountered; short sea trials, bad steel and rivets, watertight compartments that only went up to E-Deck, a crew change that resulted in the loss of the binocculars etc.

Any takers?


----------



## Urlik

well there is the conspiracy theory that the ship that sank wasn't the Titanic but her sister ship, the Olympic.


----------



## The Doctor

Which is totally false.


----------



## Pyan

That's not going to get many people to post here, Doctor - at least give us some reasons _why_ you say that. 

I've looked at the two photographs of the bow-plating patterns, and some other photos in the Special Maritime Collection in the Central Library in Southampton, where I live - and a flat denial isn't going to win me over to ruling out the possibility...


----------



## The Doctor

Right, the theory is that White Star's flagship RMS _Olympic_ was pretty much screwed from her collision with the HMS _Hawke_, so they created a plan which was to switch the two ships, sink _Olympic_ and claim insurance on her.

But it's a load of bull.

For starters, if they WANTED to claim insurance on a liner, they could just blow a hole in the side of her in dock. Second of all, there are several notable differences between the two sisters (or were, whatever):

1. The forward half of _Titanic_'s A-Deck promenade was completely enclosed, albeit this wasn't true of the ship straight away.

2. The two ships did not have exactly the same porthole layout.

3. On _Titanic_'s B-Deck, there were a set of suites called The Millionaire's Suites. _Olympic_ did not have these.

4. _Olympic_'s wheelhouse was curved. _Titanic_'s was straight.

5. _Olympic_'s hull number was 400, _Titanic_'s was 401. Many unique items found on the wreck have the number 401 embedded into them.

The conspiracy was first thought up in a book written by Robin Gardiner. He caused a cultural phenomenon with his theory. The hilarious thing is, at the end of the book, he admits it's a load of crap.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the theory that the two sister ships were swapped. Absolutely none at all.


----------



## Nik

IIRC, the Titanic's big 'gotcha' is that if it had T-boned the 'berg, the compartmentalisation was such that it would have survived easily, limped into NewYork with a mashed bow. 

But, side-swiping the 'berg opened too many zones to the sea. The rest, as they say, is history.

And, if it wasn't for that 'unsinkable' hype, a lot more folk would have boarded those first-launched, near-empty life-boats...

Once the ship began to heel...

IIRC, extending the bulkheads would have protected the trim a bit longer. Weren't lifeboat davits also changed as a result ??


----------



## The Doctor

Actually, it wasn't until _after_ she sank that she was declared in any way 'unsinkable'. In fact, the only time the word was used beforehand was in a White Star publicity leaflet stating she was 'practically unsinkable'.

Davits were kept the same, but the layout of the boat deck of the _Olympic_ was changed so that lifeboats lined the full length of the ship and not under half. _Britannic_ had different davits; as well as on her boat deck, she had crane-like davits holding about half a dozen boats each, three on either side:


----------



## Rodders

Agreed Doctor, this is a fascinating story. Probably the most interesting in recent history, but is history not fraught with disaster stories involving bad luck and management. A lot of which is in hindsight.


----------



## Urlik

The Doctor said:


> Right, the theory is that White Star's flagship RMS _Olympic_ was pretty much screwed from her collision with the HMS _Hawke_, so they created a plan which was to switch the two ships, sink _Olympic_ and claim insurance on her.
> 
> But it's a load of bull.
> 
> For starters, if they WANTED to claim insurance on a liner, they could just blow a hole in the side of her in dock. Second of all, there are several notable differences between the two sisters (or were, whatever):
> 
> 1. The forward half of _Titanic_'s A-Deck promenade was completely enclosed, albeit this wasn't true of the ship straight away.
> 
> 2. The two ships did not have exactly the same porthole layout.
> 
> 3. On _Titanic_'s B-Deck, there were a set of suites called The Millionaire's Suites. _Olympic_ did not have these.
> 
> 4. _Olympic_'s wheelhouse was curved. _Titanic_'s was straight.
> 
> 5. _Olympic_'s hull number was 400, _Titanic_'s was 401. Many unique items found on the wreck have the number 401 embedded into them.
> 
> The conspiracy was first thought up in a book written by Robin Gardiner. He caused a cultural phenomenon with his theory. The hilarious thing is, at the end of the book, he admits it's a load of crap.
> 
> There is absolutely no evidence to support the theory that the two sister ships were swapped. Absolutely none at all.


 
when you look at how people behave around large sums of money, it isn't difficult to imagine the White Star owners cooking up such a plan to get rid of the Olympic by pretending that she was the Titanic and sinking her, claiming the insurance and have the Titanic continue to sail under the name of Olympic.

and to say that big business men wouldn't risk lives over money is naive.
there have been a lot of disasters caused by business men taking a few cost cutting measures around safety and routine maintenance.

after a rail crash in 1988, the Hidden inquiry into the crash recommended the installation of automatic train protection (ATP) for the whole rail network. But the £750m price tag was considered too high by British Rail and the government, immediately prior to privatisation in 1993, and implementation of the safety system was ruled out.

it all boils down to the old question of "what is your price?"
would the heads of a company that was losing money having it's flag ship out of commission (and they could claim the insurance on her as the Navy blamed the Olympic for the collision) cook up a scheme where they could make good on some or all of their losses?

even in the official story many parts that were scheduled for the Titanic were used to repair the Olympic. maybe there was more of the Titanic in the Olympic than anyone suspected and vice versa.


----------



## Nik

IIRC, the life-boat provisions on Titanic *exceeded* the prevailing requirements, as did the bulk-heading.

With such ghastly events to provide hind-sight, the next ship was hastily upgraded, even as legal requirements were rudely revised...

IIRC, swopping props, anchors and such between 'part-built' sibs is routine. Such big castings are not exactly stock items, and needs must when deadlines creep...

As you may have gathered, I subscribe to 'Occam's Razor', Murphy's Law(s) and the c**ck-up theory of history rather than foil-beanie / top-hat conspiracies !!


----------



## Urlik

as you say, needs must when deadlines creep and instead of having a ship earning, it is costing money.

it might also be worth pointing out that later, the "Olympic" had a six week refit in which all the foreward B deck cabins and gangways were ripped out and completely rebuilt (which shows that the points raised by The Doctor about the differences in cabin and deck layout aren't valid as those changes could have been done while both ships were at Harland and Wolff)
you don't need a foil beanie to realise the power of human greed (just read the World Affairs forum for proof of that or look at many disasters from recent history to see that money is often put above human life)


----------



## Steve_

Sorry I took so long to post here, but I have only just joined up.

Anyway what I was going to say is that when the Titanic was built there were no rules and regulations to say that a ship needed to be able to provide enough lifeboats for its crew and passangers, because of this the titanic didn't have enough because the company thought that having too many would ruin the view of it ( they wanted it to look nice). As a result of this they brought in a law saying that you need to provde enough lifeboats for the entire crew and passengers.

Sorry about this but going back to the conspiracy thing, they believed it was the olympic because of missing windows (Were there on the Ttanic but not the Olympic). The reason they couldn't tell them apart was also because they reshaped the Olympic after its collision. The Titanic was not coplete at this point and so could have been easily made to look like the Olympic. the Titanic only went through 1 day of slow trial runs, instead of the faster paced 2 days that the Olympic did, This is because the Titanic was the olympic and the hull hadn't been remade to withstand such trials.
It was disguised as the Titanic because the compensation recieved would have been greater. Blowing it up in dock would have got more attention from the authorities and would have been harder to disguise, not to mention this would have resulted in 46,000 tons of ship at the bottom of the docks, creating a hazard. It would be easier to get away with it in the middle of the ocean because it would have been almost impossible to find its location again, back then, so all the people looking into had to go on would be statements from passengers and crew.


----------



## PTeppic

a) Regarding the conspiracy (which I hadn't heard before): how does the theory play-out now they've found and explored the wreck?

b) I see a cruise liner is intending to replicate the ill-fated voyage, 100 years to the day after the original.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

PTeppic said:


> b) I see a cruise liner is intending to replicate the ill-fated voyage, 100 years to the day after the original.


 
Yes, I heard about this - it's the MS Balmoral and it'll be April 2012 when the cruise takes place.

Talk about tempting fate though! And not sure it's in the best possible taste either. Perhaps they'll follow up with a Hindenberg tour as well...


----------



## Pyan

I believe they're getting over the taste issue by holding a multi-denominational memorial service on April 12th at 2 ° 46 ' North - 67 ° 78' West, over the wreck.




			
				WS said:
			
		

> Perhaps they'll follow up with a Hindenberg tour as well...



Or for those on a budget, an R101 trip...


----------



## blacknorth

This subject of this ship makes me very angry.

The bad luck and ill-fated nature of the Titanic isn't just a matter of the ship herself, but also of the area of Belfast in which she was built.

The Harland & Woolf offices have been allowed to fall into ruin, and the whole area resembles a ghastly abandoned industrial estate. The current redevelopment consists of demolishing the original buildings and fixtures and replacing them with cheap build hotels made of steel and glass. Most of these remain unfinished because of the property crash. When the tourists go out there all they see is a wasteland. 

Belfast City Council are so idiotic that they recently paid a substantial sum of money for a replica artefact manufactured for James Cameron's film _Titanic_ while they were allowing the area where the ship was built to be destroyed and thus genuine artefacts were lost forever.

A few years ago a fellow appeared on local radio claiming he had rescued designs and schematics for many ships from public hire skips outside the H&W offices - it appears they had been dumped, destined for a landfill.

Desperately trying to claw back some credibility after these embarrassments, the Northern ireland Assembly purchased the _Nomadic_ from a French junking yard. Why they did so no-one really knows as its connection with the Titanic is tenuous and its connection with Belfast is nil - it ferried several passengers to the ship, elsewhere. Thus we're reduced from being the authors and builders of the Titanic to scrambling around trying to buy up second-hand links to the ship - because we shamefully destroyed our first-hand links to her.

And people wonder why we had troubles for 30 years.


----------



## Pyan

Whereas we know exactly how valuable the memory of the ship could be to a city - there are plans in motion for a huge new dedicated museum in Southampton, there's a walking trail around the many memorials to the passengers and crew (most of which came from the city), and plans to commemorate the centenary with all sorts of events...


Ideas for new Titanic museum


----------



## Drachir

pyan said:


> Whereas we know exactly how valuable the memory of the ship could be to a city - there are plans in motion for a huge new dedicated museum in Southampton, there's a walking trail around the many memorials to the passengers and crew (most of which came from the city), and plans to commemorate the centenary with all sorts of events...
> 
> 
> Ideas for new Titanic museum



Any plans to recognize the Titanic victims burial site in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

The Final Destination for many of the Titanic victims: Halifax


----------



## blacknorth

pyan said:


> Whereas we know exactly how valuable the memory of the ship could be to a city - there are plans in motion for a huge new dedicated museum in Southampton, there's a walking trail around the many memorials to the passengers and crew (most of which came from the city), and plans to commemorate the centenary with all sorts of events...
> 
> 
> Ideas for new Titanic museum



The Belfast plans featured in that video are pure fantasy - they were the developer's dream scenario if everything went according to plan and were drawn up during the height of the property boom. Now Northern Ireland is bust and the European funding has largely fallen through.

I've no doubt they'll produce something for 2012 - but why has it taken 100 years, and why have the pump-house and offices been allowed to fall into disrepair?

Sorry for my abrasive tone in these comments, but I can't help it -  over the past 25 years I have watched Belfast being reduced from a grand Victorian City to a small ugly town. Those of us concerned have learned to fear redevelopment plans - they usually mean the destruction of fine and intricate buildings to construct vulgar and by-the-numbers malls, all commerce, no common sense. Those doing the demolition work talk about but progress, but progress has been the clarion call of every scumbag wrecker in history.


----------



## Dave

Anyone interested in the Titanic might be interested in this website: Encyclopedia Titanica : Titanic Facts, Survivors Stories, Passenger and Crew Biography and Titanic History

It has as complete a list of the passengers as is possible, along with their stories. I came across it through family history research (a brother-in-law of a distant cousin of my wife went down on her. His wife survived.)

It has pretty much anything you ever want to know about the Titanic.


----------



## marklord

If you're interested in maritime disasters then I'd recommend reading Gustav Grass's Crabwalk which tells the story of the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff, a German ship sunk in the Second World War by a Russian Submarine. The Gustloff is famous as the single biggest maritime disaster with the loss of 9,000 people, many of whom were women and children fleeing the Russian armies invading East Prussia. 

Crabwalk uses fictional characters and has a lot to say about the nature of Germany now and guilt for the past, but there is also a lot of detail about the ship and what happened to it as well - well worth a look.


----------

