Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[tony52]

New evidence released today, or another twist to this one?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/22/titanic-secrets-criminal-decision-officers

Tony

[Patrick Henry]

It's about time we had another story/rumour about the loss of Titanic, hasn't been one for a while. Last one I heard was that Elvis was at the helm...singing 'shaking all over'.

[Bryan Young]

Surely all this is going a bit far?
There's a perfectly simple reason why the wheel was turned the wrong way. Forget all the guff about different steering systems and all that. It was purely a fault in the films continuity.
As you will remember, only half the "model" Titanic was built. So when filming from/on the side that didn't exist the film was reversed. This meant that uniforms and all sorts of other things had to be reversed as well. But when the helmsman was told "hard a port" that's what he did. But he should have gone had a stbd, so when the film was reversed it would appear that he'd gone hard a port. Seemples. A film continuity error, pure and seemple. BY.

[Colin Bishop]

Are you sure it wasn't because the propellors had been screwed on backwards Bryan? (and maybe the funnels installed back to front?) Withe theTitanic, anything is/was possible.

If Madame Patten has know this since the age of 10 then why has she only divulged it just as her novel is being published?

Colin

[Bryan Young]

Colin, do I understand that you don't agree with me? Think about it, watch the film again (at least that bit of it). Bryan.

[Colin Bishop]

Bryan, I agree with you 100%. I was just being a bit sarcastic about the fact that this 'revelation' has coincided with the publication of Ms Patten's novel.

There is also a book on the market which suggests that it wasn't the Titanic that sunk but the Olympic and that the two ships swapped identities when Olympic was being repaired after the collision with HMS Hawke. The theory was that Olympic was structurally weakened by the impact and was sent to sea as the Titanic to find a suitable iceberg so that her owners couild cash in on the insurance. Of course the change was done in great secrecy.....

Colin  

[DickyD]

I think Bryan is under the impression that the sinking of the Titanic only happened in a fictional film 

Anyway what is so special about a ship that didn't complete even one voyage and killed a lot of people in the process ?

[jonny shoreboy]

Bryan, I agree with you 100%. I was just being a bit sarcastic about the fact that this 'revelation' has coincided with the publication of Ms Patten's novel.

There is also a book on the market which suggests that it wasn't the Titanic that sunk but the Olympic and that the two ships swapped identities when Olympic was being repaired after the collision with HMS Hawke. The theory was that Olympic was structurally weakened by the impact and was sent to sea as the Titanic to find a suitable iceberg so that her owners couild cash in on the insurance. Of course the change was done in great secrecy.....

Colin  

This is my favourite story. Even though it has been proven time and again that it isn't true, there are always a few people who don't like the facts getting in the way of a good story..

Jonny

[Colin Bishop]

Anyway what is so special about a ship that didn't complete even one voyage and killed a lot of people in the process ?

I think that is what most people consider to be special about it!

Most ships complete many voyages and don't kill anyone - even the Isle of Wight Ferry.

Colin

[DickyD]

There have been a lot of people killed on a lot of ships Colin, while do we seem to celebrate this one.

If you lived down here you would be sick of hearing about it.

Even Malvina Dean the last survivor made a living giving talks on the sinking and she was only 2 months old at the time. She must have had some memory.

[Colin Bishop]

There have been a lot of people killed on a lot of ships Colin, while do we seem to celebrate this one.

It caught the public imagination in a number of ways that's all. Height of the self confident Edwardian period, lots of posh passengers on board, maiden voyage, took quite a while to sink, possible rescue never materialised etc. etc. Ticked all the boxes really.

When the Empress of Ireland went down a couple of years later it made much less of an impact(!). No famous faces and overshadowed by the war.

In our local publioc library, over half the books on shipping are about the Titanic. I suspect it's the same all over the country. The legend feeds on itself. I've even got some books myself although they are of a technical nature.

Did enjoy the film though, especially when the ship broke in half.

Colin

[tony52]

Will anyone be sailing on the cruise in 2012 which will follow the Titanic's itinerary? The cruise is on board the MV Balmoral.
 
http://www.titanicmemorialcruise.co.uk/?gclid=CPj91Ojvm6QCFUg-4wodzHEYDg

[Colin Bishop]

That's Fred Olsen's cruise ship - not Waverley's companion!

[tony52]

I thought the Waverley's companion was being brave, venturing across the pond. Thanks for the clarification Colin.

Tony

[gondolier88]

  going to say- are they trying to replicate everything- even the MCA (DOT's replacement) ignoring it's regulations (not unlike the DOT in 1912)?!?!?

Glad I googled MS Balmoral and saw an ocean-going liner and not a small coastal vessel!!!!!

Greg

[RaaArtyGunner]

Due to our location   we in Oz see things in a different perspective
Seems to make perfect sense, usual normal mistake didn't know his left foot, in this case his hand, from his Right 

[herrmill]

Yea, seeing that article yesterday in the Telegraph made me laugh.   

Whatever became of the hustlers who tried to capitalize on the movie's popularity & wanted to build a replica of Titanic for modern day cruising?  I remember looking over their website in '98 & thought it first had to be someone's attempt at satire but apparently it was legit until a few people regained their senses.

[Colin Bishop]

There is a programme about Titanic on UK TV tomorrow Monday 26 Sept, Channel 4 at 9pm. The subject matter is the construction of the vessel from an enineering viewpoint. Apparently they have built a reproduction of part of the bow.

Probably worth a look.

Colin

[gondolier88]

Looks very interesting from the trailer- including a rivetted full scale bow section/recreated engine room (large pumping station triple and boiler room methinks) as well as other things they have recreated.

Greg

[victorian]

At about the time of the movie's release, a letter appeared in the Times recounting that in about 1932 an international convention was implimented changing the sense of the steering in all the world's ships to the modern intuitive method. The letter writer said that his father had been a sea captain and that, before  the war, he had bought a car but had been unable to drive it because he could not master the steering! Does anyone know if there was such a convention? Googling for it doesn't produce much.

[meyer]

 Merchant Shipping (Safety And Load Line Conventions) Act 1932 (c.9)
  FIRST SCHEDULE International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1929
  Chapter V.-Safety of Navigation {no text}
  Article 41


Helm Orders

The Contracting Governments agree that after midnight on the 30th June, 1931, helm or steering orders, i.e., orders to the steersman, shall on all their ships be given in the direct sense, e.g., when the ship is going ahead an order containing the word “starboard” or “right” or any equivalent of “starboard” or “right”  shall only be used when it is intended, on ships as at present generally constructed and arranged, that the wheel, the rudder-blade and the head of the ship, shall all move to the right.

[victorian]

Wow! Thanks for that speedy reply!

[gondolier88]

Interesting that it took 19 years for the government to implement commen sense- anybody have any idea why it took so long after the the Titanic disaster?

Greg

[dodgy geezer]

Interesting that it took 19 years for the government to implement commen sense- anybody have any idea why it took so long after the the Titanic disaster?

If it is shown that a bureaucracy is wrong there is a problem. Bureaucracies can't (or won't) punish themselves. Instead they will play a waiting game, putting off any allocation of blame. Eventually, all the staff associated with the old mistaken policy will have retired, died or moved on, and the new staff are free to change the policy with no loss of face or need to blame anyone. I suppose that takes about 20 years....

[Colin Bishop]

I don't think the change was a direct consequence of the Titanic disaster but simply reflected the change from sail to steam - there were still a lot of sailing ships in service right up to the 1930s. It was also necessary to get International agreement and that would have taken a long, long time anyway.

Colin