New Titanic to be built

Hello Ernie,

Yes, it would be interesting to see how others would feel about it. There actually could be a market for something like this. But it does boil down to marketing studies.

Geo
 
>>...and I even jumped for joy when I read about one in Popular Mechanics many moons ago. But when I saw the drawing of the ship, I initially balked and complained, "NO STEAM!! How could you build a steamer without steam power!"<<

You can't. And I think things like that cut to the very core of the matter. The selling point for a scheme like this would be authenticity and there's nothing authentic about anything that would be both legal and economical to sail. Steam has been a dying duck for a long time now because diesels are a helluva lot more economical. You still find it in nuclear powered vessels and if fusion ever comes to pass, in all likelihood, the superheated plasma from the reactor will be run through a heat exchanger to produce steam. Even if it becomes practical to do that in our lifetime...and it may...it would still be terrifically expensive, and it still wouldn't be faithful to a ship fired by coal.

If there's a market for a vessel themed to Edwardian decor and tastes, that may well be a different matter, but you can bet that nobody's going to pay top dollar or even bottom dollar for the 3rd Class accomadation. All that aside, passengers still want their casinos, bars, shops, swimming pools, theatres, dance floors...in sum, all the amenaties that we take for granted that mostly didn't exist on Edwardian liners.
 
And, as I recall from that article, things like sewage processing were somewhat - primitive on the original.

I maintain if one ever went for a near bolt-for-bolt rebuild, it would be as a museum piece, not a traveling ship.

Wayne
 
Hello Wayne, Mike

I enjoy your discussions very much. As well as those from Jeff. All four of us do seem to approach this idea of a Titanic Replica realistically. In another thread I explained to Jeff what I would do in terms of a stand alone attraction (forgot where I put it, but you should be able to find it easily) based on a museum/hotel. As Wayne said above...this would be the only way that you could ever achieve something on a bolt to bolt level detailing. Moreover, you wouldn't have to be burdened with the cost of building and operating a ship. So this is definately a more viable option.

Mike, yes you are right...on an Edwardian or White Star Line themed ship, more then likely the bulk of the rooms would be more modeled after first class with quite a few 2nd class rooms. There would be third class rooms for those that want to embrace the experience and really want to rough it out, but I could only see a handful of them as the market would be small on this count. But in one aspect that is a good thing, because you will need the space for other ammenities as we both mentioned above. But the bottom line is that the ship would have to appeal to a great number of people. This would determine it's size. It would undoubtably be much larger than the Titanic. So having a larger market and a larger vessel will definatly bring the cost of sailing on her down considerably. Something like this just recently happened. It is the Queen Mary 2. When Carnival bought Cunard, they realized right off the bat that the QE2 was too small to continue to operate at a profit and such the costs of operation required a high ticket price even for the less luxurious accomodations. Where as on the QM2 the prices of the lower accomodations are much more affordable. Thus this appeals to a larger market and thus can sustain the ship's operation while the company can still turn a profit. So the same principle would have to apply to an Edwardian Era or White Star Line themed ship. Exterior wise the ship could retain a classic look and retain the four funnels, but outside of that, it would be very different from the Titanic indeed.

This would be a tremendous undertaking and I seriously doubt a private venture would be able to pull it off. It is possible, but doubtful. The money needed to pull it off is astronomical. The marketing studies alone would cost a fortune. I could only see a large cruise ship company, such as Carnival pull something like this off, mainly because they already know the costs of operating a ship. But even still the market has to be there and I am sure research has been done on it already due to the high interest in Titanic. As Mike pointed out though...if the market was present...there would have been a ship already floating around out there.

For me I would go the museum/hotel route. More accuracy can be maintained, you don't need as large a market and costs of operation are much much lower. The downside? Well, you are not out at sea and you don't go anywhere. But the upsides outweigh this and a project like this is much more feasible.


Thanx guys for the great conversation.

Geo
 
>>And, as I recall from that article, things like sewage processing were somewhat - primitive on the original.<<

No kidding. The caca doodoo was piped directly over the side. Even in port. Except for some really backward countries, you won't find anyone willing to put up with that.
 
Mike & Wayne, you probably are correct there as well (the sewage issues). So that would be another issue that had to be dealt with. I am sure the list would go on and when you really think about it.

Wayne, I addressed a permanent land structure such as a museum/hotel somewhere else. It would probably be much easier to do and can be more accurate as well...not to mention less costly. Of course certain building codes would have to be dealt with, but by and large a more accurate representation of the ship could be attained as a building on land rather than an actual working ship at sea.

Geo
 
Yes, land basing of one form or another makes things easier from a maintainance standpoint - I have considered that for my eccentric billionare project (laughing at me)

Wayne
 
>>Mike & Wayne, you probably are correct there as well (the sewage issues). So that would be another issue that had to be dealt with.<<

Well, for a working commercial vessel or a warship, the fix would be simple enough in that the ship would be equipped with Collection and Holding Tanks. What we referred to as CHT tanks in the Navy. (As you can well imagine, CHT was spoken as a rather more colourful metephore for caca doodoo.)

As it stands, I'm not sure a landlocked replica would really be cheaper. Those building codes are very stringent...fire safety is a BIG issue...and a structurally accurate vessel is designed to get some of it's support from the water while afloat.
 
By and large, there is hardly anything bigger than a wooden spoon which has not had its design and construction improved over the past one hundred years.

Even if the expertise still existed to do it, to build something as large and as complex as an ocean liner using technology which is a century out of date is totally unfeasible. This would apply even to a liner which never leaves its moorings.

If the new Titanic were built in a manner wwhich satisfies 21st century rules and codes, it would wind up resembling the original in little more than name.

And, believe me, that name by itself is a marketing person's nightmare. There is hardly anybody outside of a few remote jungles and deserts who doesn't associate the word "Titanic"
with words like "disaster", "tragedy", and "catastrophe."

So, for the millionth time, it ain't ever going to happen. The only Titanic is going to remain the crumbling wreck on the Atlantic floor.
 
In about 1994, I heard that the Japanese were planning to build a full size working replica as a Hotel/Conference Centre, but the ship's "Owners" would not allow it.
Personally, I'd love to see one built so that I could get an idea of the Immense size.
I saw the QE2 once in Liverpool, but she looked tiny with only the one funnel.
 
>>Personally, I'd love to see one built so that I could get an idea of the Immense size.<<

The stories of the Titanic's size are grotesquely over-rated. Larger vessels were already in the water by the time Titanic sailed (The Imperator) and vessels which are signifigently larger have been built since then. The Queen Mary 2's gross tonnage is easily three times that of the Titanic. If you want to get a sense of the size of any Olympic class liner, all you need to do is find any medium sized cruise vessel in the 45,000 Gross register ton class.
 
We've stayed aboard Hotel Queen Mary at Long Beach a couple of times. One of the things pointed out on the tour is how much larger Queen Mary is compared to Titanic.

Also upkeep on museum ships seems to be a large problem. For example, closer to home, repairing the corrosion damage on the Battleship USS Texas was a very large expense .(And considerable time involved in towing and in drydock.)

[user] - No offense intended, lad !.. but I couldn't help but note your comment about "very unique".
The ex-Rev. George S. Healey (Richard Basehart) used the very same words in "Titanic" (1953) to
Julia Sturges (Barbara Stanwyck.) :)

Regards to all on this very unique website,
Robert
 
I would like for them to build a new titanic but this time the funnels wouldn't blow out smoke. And another thing i would like it to look modern. Also another color.
 
>>I would like for them to build a new titanic.<<

It's been done. No replicas mind you. That's just not going to happen. The one I saw was a modest tanker operating near the Persian Gulf.
 
Back
Top