Olympic bigger than the Aquitania

[181218]

I understand a ships size is judged more on it's weight ? Hence if a ship weighs more then it can be classed as the largest in the world - no? However the Aquitania was longer and taller ( her bridge must be a good 2 decks above Olympic and Britannic so she would surly appear larger than Titanic, Britannic etc - to the human eye at least ? You can't 'see' weight, but you can see when something is taller or longer. This is why I always class the Aquitania as the larger. Maybe it just a few feet, tons or couple of decks hence the difference may not really worth talking about. Sorry to rant, I have talked about this before anyway Maybe I misread but I read in the the new Olympic class book that Olympic weighed more, so was she classed as 'larger' ?

 

[Mark Baber]

Hello,---

I understand a ships size is judged more on it's weight ? ... Sorry to rant, I have talked about this before anyway

Yes, you've asked a similar question before, in this thread. As was explained there, merchant ships are classified by tonnage, but that that's a measure of their volume, not their weight.

 

[Shiplover]

I understand a ships size is judged more on it's weight ? Hence if a ship weighs more then it can be classed as the largest in the world - no? However the Aquitania was longer and taller ( her bridge must be a good 2 decks above Olympic and Britannic so she would surly appear larger than Titanic, Britannic etc - to the human eye at least ? You can't 'see' weight, but you can see when something is taller or longer. This is why I always class the Aquitania as the larger. Maybe it just a few feet, tons or couple of decks hence the difference may not really worth talking about. Sorry to rant, I have talked about this before anyway Maybe I misread but I read in the the new Olympic class book that Olympic weighed more, so was she classed as 'larger' ?

Olympic still bigger though...and in my opinion more beautiful