18 foot Titanic model on display in Washington DC


May 9, 2001
741
2
146
CNN reported today that in honor of the 90th anniversary of the sinking, the National Geographic Society will display an 18 foot, exact model of the Titanic in its Explorer's Hall in Washington DC. The report stated that the exhibit will last until Sept. 2nd.

Here's the report:

http://www.cnn.com/2 002/US/04/11/model.t itanic.ap/index.html

I think I may have to take a weekend and go see this. I've always feared that a trip to Washington would result in the Smithsonian Museum sucking me inside, and I'd never be heard from again. All those thousands of antiquities, all that history, I'd die of starvation before I could make myself leave the place!!

Yuri
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
1
148
Guess I have another reason for going to DC this Summer. I'll be sure to take plenty of photos. I'll probably put in some more research to find out how many flaws it has. Judging from what I've read at TRMA, it's chock full of them.


Adam
 

Mike Herbold

Member
Feb 13, 2001
1,007
2
168
Yuri:
Thanks for that. Take a lot of pictures. This one looks as impressive as Father Pirrone's model out here at the Los Angeles Maritime Museum.
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
0
166
My apologies to Yuri. I failed to throughly check the *new* headings before I abruptly made a *new* one of my own...

MAC
USA
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
1
148
The 18' model in DC isn't Fr. Pironne's model. His is based at the Maritime Museum near San Diego, whereas this model is from Fine Art Models. As I stated above, the model is full of errors. Glancing through the photos, it's easy to pick up a number of them.

True, the people who built it are master craftsmen, but they are lousy researchers.


Adam
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
1
148
Yuri, I'm not talking about errors like that. It's the annoying ones that stare you in the face when you look at the photos. For instance, their vent configurations are wrong. They used Olympic for most of it, interspersed with Cameron's set design, which also had its problems. The collapsible boats are the wrong type, the wing cab roofs are the wrong color, and the ladders should be dark gray/black, not white, as they portray them.

Ask someone who's a more frequent visitor of the TRMA for details.
happy.gif



Adam
 
May 9, 2001
741
2
146
Oh yes, of course. Why didn't I realize that's what it stood for? As Homer Simpson would say, "DOH!"

Thanks Michael,

Yuri
 
Dec 2, 2000
1,513
1
168
Yuri,

Actually embarrassed that I did not know about this as I am in the DC area as are a few others here. The National Geographic itself is near Senator Smith's residence when he did the Titanic hearings, just within blocks of the Taft White House, which is where the Butt Memorial is located. The Williard Hotel where Ismay stayed is on Pennsylvania Ave. The National Archives with Census, Immigration Records and other goodies is on the corner of 7th and Pennsylvania. The Smithsonian already had a life jacket. Based on this, theyw ill also have a model. But knowing the NGS, it will be great. AS one heads for the waterfront, the Women's Titanic memorial is there. And there is a headstone in Arlington Cemetary for Butt. The capitol senate office buildings and the library of congress where many papers and books written about Titanic reside.

The Smithsonian's tractor beam that holds Titanic Researchers captive past the closing times has been lifted for this event Yuri, so you are safe. hehehehehehehehehe

I spend a lot of time with all of the Museums here and have lived most of my life around here, but I still do nto think that I have seen it all yet, but I keep trying.

Maureen.
 
Dec 2, 2000
1,513
1
168
"The Smithsonian already had a life jacket. Based on this, theyw ill also have a model. But knowing the NGS, it will be great."

Sorry, I made a mistake in my previous post. While the lifejacket is in fact at the Smithsonian, the Tiatnic Model is contained in a Model exhibit. The model exhibit is at the NGS Explorer's Hall. The NGS website is at www.nationalgeograph ic.com. It is free.

Maureen.
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
4
0
The FAM model is truly a work of art. There is some precision craftsmanship there that brings tears to your eyes, it's so good. Have a look-see:

http://www.fineartmo dels.com/t48postcard .htm

Yes, there are errors in accuracy in the model. A lot of good advice was rebuffed by the builders. Why, I don't know. It breaks one's heart to see such beautiful detail in a accuracy-flawed model, but that doesn't mean that the workmanship can't be appreciated. Take a look through the website, look at the photos of the model under construction and prepare to be amazed.

Parks
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
4
0
Again, I don't always convey what I intend properly. The FAM model has a few errors, very minute in comparison to the detail they rendered correctly. Also, for every good piece of advice they received, there probably also received 10 (or more) pieces of bad advice. Receiving and dealing with unsolicited advice (or having solicited avice become too contentious) over the Internet during construction must have been a frustrating process. The builder actually talks to this on his intro page. I don't mean to second-guess FAM, or criticise them after the fact. Any errors notwithstanding, they have built the most beautiful and detailed model of Titanic to date, in my opinion.

Parks
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
1
148
As I understand it, there was a rather large rift between TRMA and FAM. Apparently Roy Mengot had offered to fly to Latvia, free of charge, to give assistance for the model, and was flatly rejected despite his expertise and credentials. Same with Ken Marschall, from what I have heard. I would not comment on it too much, but apparently there were some questionable comments by Gary Kohs about other researchers, such as those at TRMA. Why he made those comments, I haven't the vaguest idea.


Adam
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
4
0
Adam,

I have heard the same, but since I don't know the details or motives involved, I don't want to speculate. I vaguely remember Ken talking about his advice being rejected, but I didn't retain the details.

I also know that when I saw the miniature Marconi aerial pillar on the FAM site, I didn't contact Kohs about how inaccurate it was. I figured that once fabricated, no one would want to expend the effort to re-do the item. I also knew of the contention between FAM and various Titanic experts and didn't want to add fuel to that fire. I made an assumption and could have been wrong. Therefore, I may very well only be able to blame myself for the inaccuracy in that specific case.

My point is that there are usually two sides to a story and I've only heard one in this case. Like you, I don't want to assume I know both.

Parks
 

Dan Cherry

Active Member
Mar 3, 2000
775
1
0
Parks,
I also don't know the whole story but had received a few snippets in the crossfire about a year ago when the conversations were going back and forth.
The only thing I can say for certain is that despite FAM's claims on accuracy and precision, bits of their model directly contradict proven Titanic pictures and images from the wreck, examples being:
1) a two port setup on each panel of the forecastle crew galley skylight - the wreck clearly shows only one port per panel;
2) the bridge interior's support posts on the model are about 4 times thicker than what are shown in the Titanic/Capt. Smith bridge picture.
3). Wrong type of collapsible boats
4) Some of the gooseneck vents appear to be incorrect. The poop deck vents are wider than the body at the top on the real ship. On the model, they do not match this style.

I also understand that there were efforts to offer advice and corrections, and those offers were indeed rejected.
Hey, what can you do? In the meantime, I am building my own model as accurate as I can, based on available pictures, plans, and advice from fellow researchers who are making honest efforts to construct models as accurate as they are able; claiming nothing greater and nothing less.
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
4
0
Dan,

Right. I am not FAM's defender. I have compiled my own list of inaccuracies that I have observed while examining the pictures on their site. Two factors cause me to exercise restraint:

1. The workmanship put into this model is absolutely amazing. I don't want to dilute the overall effort by over-emphasising details.
2. I don't want to resurrect the controversy here, especially since I haven't heard both sides.

I do not mean to take anything away from your own effort which I understand, based on what little I've read, has been quite substantial.

Parks
 

Dan Cherry

Active Member
Mar 3, 2000
775
1
0
Hello, Parks,
I agree 100%. I only intend to make observations like you, and I have to say as well, for the record, that their craftsmanship is second to none.

As far as my own model, I always encourage and welcome advice and constructive criticism
grin.gif


My motto: better to get it right now than do it wrong and look stoopid later, eh?

Dan
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
4
0
<font color="#006600">My motto: better to get it right now than do it wrong and look stoopid later, eh?

Dan,

My motto is strikingly similar to yours: "Better to get it right now than do it wrong and be subsequently eaten by the wolves." :)

Parks