Replica to be built in Liverpool


Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
>>It sounds like a bit of wishful thinking too.<<

While far from being a universal sentiment, a lot of us here are of the same opinion for the most part. Dave Gittins has a link somewhere to a website which had a listing, a very loooooooooooooooooooooong listing of replica schemes. All of them have come and gone without ever producing so much as a rowboat. A few of them may have been legitimate with legitimate meaning that there was a sincere business venture to build a replica even if the idea was hopelessly unrealistic. However, I suspect that most of them were just scams that had seperating some unsuspecting folks from their money as the real objective.
 

Ryan Thompson

Member
Dec 6, 2005
261
0
86
So basically the Liverpool thing is going to be a floating tourist trap/facade? Sad. There needs to be a real ship. Stop saying "it wouldn't work, nobody would buy a ticket" -- that is solid BS. People would be fighting to get tickets. And it wouldn't just be for the first trip. The movie made a billion dollars, right? The ship is an icon. There are going to be more than enough people out there with the money who would take a cruise. "There are restrictions that would make the ship change shape. Its nose would have to be angled for safety reasons, in case of a collision with another ship it wouldn't hit below that ship's waterline." Then do it. Whats the minimum angle allowed for the bow? There you go.

"Dave Gittins has a link somewhere to a website which had a listing, a very loooooooooooooooooooooong listing of replica schemes."

I'd love to see this. The fact people are building small-scale functioning replicas in itself says a lot.

http://www.solartanic.com/index001003.jpg

( www.solartanic.com )
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
>>saying "it wouldn't work, nobody would buy a ticket" -- that is solid BS.<<

No it isn't. Like it or not, this has been studied to death. If there was a large enough market out there to appeal to, there would have been a ship in the water by now. Don't confuse our own interest for that of the rest of the world. Fads come and go and as any Titanic society out there can tell you, the massive public interest has gone away. They have the drop in the membership roles to prove it.

As expensive as ships are and as slim as operating margins are known to be, a shipping line is not about to dump hundreds of millions and perhaps close to a billion dollars into something that they know bloody well won't pay.

>>The fact people are building small-scale functioning replicas in itself says a lot.<<

I'm afraid it doesn't. Lots of ships are popular subjects for models, including the HMS Victory, but that doesn't corrolate to a willingness to go to sea on the real thing.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,981
218
193
The replica web site is still around.

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

It will give some idea of the ratbags and charlatans who have proposed replica schemes.

I think if ever somebody was going to cash in on Cameron's flick, some cruise line would have hastily converted part of the accomodation in one of its ships to resemble part of Titanic as much as SOLAS would allow. If any owners thought of this, they must have decided it wouldn't pay.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
Quite a bit of promise...none realized...and dead websites documented there. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these blokes managed to raise some money for it either. If anyone cares to try and find that money, try a numbered bank account in Switzerland or the Cayman Islands.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,981
218
193
I couldn't find any mention of the Liverpool project on any of the sites that publicise the 2008 festivities. If anything is going to be built in time for 2008, they'd better start spoiling steel PDQ!
 

Ryan Thompson

Member
Dec 6, 2005
261
0
86
Here's an article on the Liverpool static replica. Its supposed to cost £270, which would be well over half the amount needed for the real thing.

Link

[Link edited to preserve the width format of the thread - PR]
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
Ryan, we've already seen what was basically the same article article (Just somewhat reworded) 15 months ago. You'll find the link to the version in The Belfast Telegraph in the first post above.

I can tell you with a very high level of confidence that you'll need way more then £540,000,000 to build a replica of the Titanic because of all the skillsets and tooling that would have to be revived on essentially a one time basis to build a riveted hull. And what a waste it would be since any near perfect replica would never ever be allowed to sail in any sort of commercial service since it would fail to meet SOLAS regulations in spectacular fashion.

Sorry if that doesn't sit too well, but that's the real world for you. No shipping line is going to invest big bucks in something they know would be a money losing illegal to operate white elephant.
 

Jim Hathaway

Member
Dec 18, 2004
311
0
86
"Sorry if that doesn't sit too well, but that's the real world for you. No shipping line is going to invest big bucks in something they know would be a money losing illegal to operate white elephant."
But if we could, think of all the people who would be clamoring to ride in steerage;-)
(The majority of the accomodations)
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
>>It wouldn't be a riveted hull, but one built in the same sectional manner cruise ships are being built in today. Thats not 'cheating', thats practical. Builders could order the sheet metal with 'bumps' in the right places, if they wanted to, for a more authentic look.<<

Then it just wouldn't be a faithful replica...but anything that would be legal to sail and appealing to a broad enough base of customers to make the ship pay wouldn't be. This, Ryan, is the point your missing.

BTW, that image you have in your photobucket account is a drawing that was published in Popular Mechanics back in 1997. You'll notice that nothing has happened since then, but Popular Mechanics has quite the track record for failure in it's predictions.

>>But if we could, think of all the people who would be clamoring to ride in steerage;-) <<

And Jim raises an interesting point here. For all the press to the contrary, the glories of the Titanic were way over rated and most people would be shocked at just how small the cabins were. Even in first class, a lot of them didn't even have their own toilets! That any such accomadation wouldn't meet legal standards for habitability is obvious and the question of the steerage accomadation doesn't even bear discussion.
 

Dorothy Stout

Member
Feb 9, 2005
13
0
71
I may be missing something here but it's my understanding that it won't be a sea-going vessel but will be permanently moored at Liverpool docks.

It is purely a commercial venture with an assortment of restaurants, shops, bars and I believe an hotel.

Therefore all this talk of it not being seaworthy and uninhabitable is, I hesitate to say it, useless conjecture.
 
M

Mikael Jonsson

Guest
If they build it in Liverpool they will probably build it as they are doing in USA with the Branson project (http://www.titanicbranson.com) I hope they will build it like that one, but in full scale this time.

102167.jpg
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
>>I may be missing something here but it's my understanding that it won't be a sea-going vessel but will be permanently moored at Liverpool docks.<<

The problem here is that the vessel, seagoing or not, would have to meet some very stringent laws regrading safety and habitability, even as a static hotel. (And his thing would be afloat!) As a museum, the idea is nice in principle, but in reality, museum ships that are the real McCoy have a very difficult time making ends meet and some ultimately end up in the scrapyard despite some very determined attempts to save them.

>>Therefore all this talk of it not being seaworthy and uninhabitable is, I hesitate to say it, useless conjecture.<<

Some of what's been discussed here include proposals for an operational vessel that would be involved in the cruising trade, and therein lies the rub. Anything that would be legal to sail would bear only a superficial resemblance to the real thing, and anything that was a faithful replica wouldn't be legal to operate. I hope this helps explain things.
 
W

Wayne Keen

Guest
I have come to believe that a realistic replica, while it might be of intense interest to someone like myself, and most readers here, would probably do more harm than good to the legacy of the Titanic.

The expectation for the general public, established via movies, song and story, is probably hopelessly out of line with the reality.

I can just hear someone saying "*This* is what all the fuss has been about for nearly a century??? What a dump!"

Wayne

p.s. The dicussion on another thread about the Normandy in the present time crystallized my thinking in this area.
 
D

Donna Grizzle

Guest
Wayne...

I can just hear someone saying "*This* is what all the fuss has been about for nearly a century??? What a dump!"

Yeah, I can just picture that myself. That, and a room full of giggling teenagers and people on their cell phones telling their friends back home that they're "on the Titanic," and making silly jokes about having to get off in 2 hours, 40 minutes so they don't "go down with the ship," if they are even remotely aware of the history of the ship, that is. For people like us, it would be a dream come true to be able to walk into a recreation of that beautiful ship, but anything less than a faithful, seafaring, replication would be somewhat disappointing. Not to say that if they did build this museum/hotel version I wouldn't be first in line! I'd have been very well satisfied with being able to tour the movie set. I wish THAT could have been made into a permanent museum.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
381
283
Easley South Carolina
>>The expectation for the general public, established via movies, song and story, is probably hopelessly out of line with the reality.<<

I concur.

The glories of the Olympic class liners are way over rated in the modern day mythos surrounding these ships. They really weren't bad for the time and had quite a few creature comforts, but even in First Class, not ever cabin was a millionairre's suite. I think a lot of people today would be stunned find out just how small even some of the best cabins were. In that day and age, it was all accepted as a matter of course, but today, people like elbow room.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,981
218
193
The fabled luxury of Titanic is based on her 39 luxury suites, furnished in various styles, none of them nautical. Mustn't remind the customers that they have 4,000 metres of salt water beneath them!

Titanic was authorised to carry up to 905 first class passengers. Most of them slept in little cabins, some with bunks that folded up. Any half-decent modern motel would offer better facilties. Almost all the hype surrounding the ship is of quite recent origin.