New Titanicfeasible or folly


Steve Olguin

Member
Mar 31, 2005
347
0
86
I have friends who live in Las Vegas, and apparently there is a plan for a land locked replica built around a large pool of water. The early plans call for a large lake-like body of water which would represent Southampton Harbor. Surrounding this would be tastefully done shopping and eating areas, entertainment venues, more possible hotel rooms with views of the starboard side of the ship, a ferry to take passengers from Titanic to the other side of the harbor, a tall building near the port stern featuring another 800 hotel rooms with sweeping views of the ship.... My friends husband works in real estate and this one of the projects under consideration, I am assuming the financial backers are still falling into place.

Rumors... Rumors?
Sounds okay, but I am not believing anything till I see it in print.
 

Ryan Thompson

Member
Dec 6, 2005
262
0
86
I read a newspaper article back in 1997 or 1998 talking about a major cruise line (I forget which) is planning on building a cosmetic replica of the Titanic and holding its maiden voyage in 2012. The ship is going to cost about $500 million, which sounds like a LOT, but its about average for a cruise ship that size.

The key word here is 'cosmetic' -- it will most likely have modern engines, rather than coal-fired, for example.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,620
424
283
Easley South Carolina
Ryan, that article was probably based on a spread put in Popular Mechanics in 1997 and so far, nothing has been heard of the idea since. No prospectus has been offered up, no plans have been drafted, no requests for proposals, no contracts put up for bid, and no steel being cut, much less being cobbled together in some form that has a passing resemblance to a ship.
 

Ryan Thompson

Member
Dec 6, 2005
262
0
86
I know people on here have poo-pooed the idea of a cosmetic rebuild of the ship, but I think its very possible and realistic. In another thread, somebody said the bow of the ship would have to be slanted forward like a modern cruise ship due to maritime law (?) as well as the forward-facing windows. I don't see how these, at least the windows, couldn't be carefully incorporated into a rebuild of the ship. Any idea on why the bow has to be slanted forward?
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,988
223
193
The bow must be angled to prevent it acting like a great big axe in a collision. That was learned the hard way. The bow of a modern ship must behave like the crumple zone on a modern car. The windows are angled to reduce confusing reflections.

Even a land-bound replica would come up against building regulations. It would be even worse than usual because of the unorthodox design. Building a conventional public building is bad enough. Imagine trying to get a static Titanic past city authorities.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,620
424
283
Easley South Carolina
>>but I think its very possible and realistic.<<

If it was...and more to the point...if there was substantial cause to believe that the whole thing would turn a profit rather then being an expensive and money losing white elephant, there would already be a ship in that water carrying out trade, right now.

All other considerations aside, this is a key point that a lot of proponants of a Titanic 2 duplicate/replica tend to miss. Shipping lines are not interested in much of anything that doesn't involve entering dollar figures in black ink in the ledger book so they pay very close attention to market trends and the desires of the people who take cruises or who express a desire to do so.

It comes as a shock to any number of Titanic enthusiasts that our common interest in this ship is just not widely shared by the public at large, but it isn't. It's very much a niche market and it's not large enough to justify an investment that would never show a positive return.

On the matter of bow forms, my understanding is that the requirement for a slanted bow is to minimize potential collision damage. A straight bow would punch a hole in the side of a ship all the way from the top to the bottom. regardless of the speed of the ship that hits the other.
 

Noel F. Jones

Active Member
May 14, 2002
857
0
0
"On the matter of bow forms, my understanding is that the requirement for a slanted bow is to minimize potential collision damage. A straight bow would punch a hole in the side of a ship all the way from the top to the bottom. regardless of the speed of the ship that hits the other."

I haven't gone into the legalities of this but I would conjecture that the overhang of the raked bow must inter alia equal if not exceed the extension of the bulb below or at the waterline.

Rake of stem notwithstanding, by reason of the bulb a vessel run down would still suffer a potentially fatal bilging below the waterline in addition to damage at the stringer plate. A straight stem on the other hand would 'merely' tend to join those two areas of damage, with perhaps lesser overall intrusion but at greater risk to people in any accommmodations in intervening decks.

This, I would conjecture, is the principal logic of any regulatory imposition of the raked stem on ship design.

Noel
 
May 1, 2010
216
0
46
Most of what I have read in this thread here seems a bunch of fol-de-rol regarding building a replica of the ship. However, I can certainly visualize seeing something like a "Titanic" casino and hotel, modeled after the real thing on the Las Vegas strip. Or at least "The Titanic Experience" in the same way of "The Star Trek Experience" at the L V Hilton. Is this more poppycock? If they can make an Eiffel Tower, the New York skyline, a pyramid, or an indoor air-conditioned version of Venice complete with gondolas, a "Titanic" does not seem too far-fetched.
 
May 1, 2010
216
0
46
>>>On the matter of bow forms, my understanding is that the requirement for a slanted bow is to minimize potential collision damage.<<<

Interesting explanation, Brings to mind the turn-of-the-century dreadnoughts with their ramming bow. Plenty of potential damage there, eh? I guess the ship designers of the time decided that design was maybe not a good thing after all. They sure have changed over the years, from the dreadnought bow, to the plumb bow, to the raked bow, bulbous bow, clipper bow, etc.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,988
223
193
If you give up on any serious attempt to replicate the ship you can get away with a lot. You could make a hotel or whatever that met building regulations and then tack on things vaguely like Titanic. The result might look like this restaurant in Williamstown, Australia.

100876.jpg
 
May 1, 2010
216
0
46
>>>The result might look like this<<<

Good, Lord, that is pathetic. I was thinking of a state of the art place like the hotels and casinos on the Las Vegas Strip, Where money seems like no object. The bigger and more garish the better!
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,988
223
193
Pathetic or disgraceful it may be, but it exists and makes a profit, which is more than grandiose pie-in-the-sky schemes do. It conducts roll-playing sessions, where Titanic fans dress in 1912 style.

I believe it existed before Cameron's flick.
 

Ryan Thompson

Member
Dec 6, 2005
262
0
86
Williamstown is a tiny 'village' northeast of Adelaide, a large port on the central southern Australian coast. Anybody know what the name of that restaurant with the ocean liner-shaped building is? The reason I'm asking is I have Google Earth and I'm curious what it looks like from above.

Thanks,
Ryan Thompson
 

Cliff W West

Member
Jan 28, 2008
25
0
71
Some have brought up the subject of recreating the Titanic as it was in 1912. IMHO that would be great as the blueprints and other data are still available.
The safety modifications of course would be required. Watertight bulkheads to the top of the ship, double hull,enough lifeboats, and so on.
The original fittings and interior furnishings would also be required to accurately recreate the ship.
 

Eric Longo

Member
Aug 13, 2004
888
0
86
Hi Cliff,

that would perhaps be impossible. Between what you'd have to modify with the safety regulations such as the staircases etc, and what you could not get such as old growth woods and the old world craftsmanship to work them the resulting ship would bear little resemblance to the original. And I could be wrong but I think the actual ship and the blueprints differed - some things seen in the wreck don't align with the blueprints if memory serves.

Best,
Eric

[Moderator's Note: This post and the one above it, originally posted as a separate thread outside of this subtopic, have been moved to the pre-existing one discussing the same subject. JDT]
 
Apr 28, 2008
1
0
31
Greetings folks...I am a new member on the website and I have a question....There was talk some time ago about a company building the Titanic again...to todays standards & requirements. Anybody have any info on this or a website to go to?

[Moderator's Note: This message, originally a separate thread under "General Titanica," has been moved to this pre-existing thread, the most recent of several addressing the same subject. MAB]
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,988
223
193
This is one of those things that are so silly as to be not worth discussing. See this site for all the ratty ideas that were hatched in the wake of Cameron's flick.

http://www.put.com/gigantic/

For many reasons, mentioned above, nothing ever came of these schemes, some of which were dreamed up by teenagers without $1 between them.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,620
424
283
Easley South Carolina
>>There was talk some time ago about a company building the Titanic again...to todays standards & requirements.<<

Not happening Timothy. See the discussion above and the link Dave Gittins just provided. This whole rediculous notion was at the hight of it's popularity around the time Cameron's Titanic came out. That's when an article with the proposal...which went absolutely nowhere...was published in Popular Mechanics.