Titanic: Blood and Steel


DavidHR

Member
Dec 23, 2019
2
1
1
Johannesburg, South Africa
Hi All,
I am not sure if this thread is still alive, but I have just watched the series on Amazon Prime and I noticed a few issues that I like to hear other people's opinion on. Before the launch, they refer to her at "Titanic". Surely, she was 401 until launched. It would have been poor form to use her name before the formal naming ceremony. The talk of the next ship as "Gigantic". The next ship to built for the White Star was the "Britannic". Why not use that name?
Were H&W really so aware of the safety issues during the construction of 401? Is that just creative licence? The inquest did not mention any of this and nobody came forward at the time saying that the shipyard knowing used substandard rivets.
In the launch shots, it shows the superstructure already in place complete with the four distinctive funnells. However there is a scene before the launch when they show the fully assembled boilers in a shed. I understand that the boilers, the triple expansion engine and the turbine were all added after launching. How could that be done with the upper decks already in place? What would the build sequence be?
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
5,039
292
353
There are several things here. Titanic was launched with the sides of the superstructure in place but with large holes in the decks. These enabled the boilers, etc, to be lowered in by a floating crane. The funnels were added very late in the building.

All the ships were named very early in the planning stages. Photos show big notice boards erected in front of each ship as they sat in the gantry. They show the name of the ship and the White Star name.

The Gigantic story is a fairy tale. There is not a single record of the name from H & W or White Star. It's source is found in papers and magazines, usually accompanied by ridiculous dimensions. Some years ago, I found a reference that shows the third ship was called Britannic at least as early as May 1911. At the US inquiry, Bruce Ismay mentioned that Captain Smith had been the master of "the old Britannic". He knew the new ship was to be a new Britannic. Like the other ships, Britannic was built behind a big sign with her name on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Nov 14, 2005
1,539
638
248
Hi All,
I am not sure if this thread is still alive, but I have just watched the series on Amazon Prime and I noticed a few issues that I like to hear other people's opinion on. Before the launch, they refer to her at "Titanic". Surely, she was 401 until launched. It would have been poor form to use her name before the formal naming ceremony. The talk of the next ship as "Gigantic". The next ship to built for the White Star was the "Britannic". Why not use that name?
Were H&W really so aware of the safety issues during the construction of 401? Is that just creative licence? The inquest did not mention any of this and nobody came forward at the time saying that the shipyard knowing used substandard rivets.
In the launch shots, it shows the superstructure already in place complete with the four distinctive funnells. However there is a scene before the launch when they show the fully assembled boilers in a shed. I understand that the boilers, the triple expansion engine and the turbine were all added after launching. How could that be done with the upper decks already in place? What would the build sequence be?
She was known as and named Titanic well before the launch. She was refered to as such numerous times in the press during her construction. Anyway, Welcome to the board...Cheers.
P.S....there are many photos of Titanic during construction with her name on the side. Many say these photo's are doctored with the name added. Some I believe are from the looks of them. Others I'm not so sure. They could have been temporary for the photographers then painted over. Or just to make sure some poor newbie went to the right ship. You know what happens when you go to the wrong ship!
 

Attachments

  • YuqzQFTnVnpj4t8jy6h5POXyCaHtrhBhdlo-_IohbdQ[1].jpg
    YuqzQFTnVnpj4t8jy6h5POXyCaHtrhBhdlo-_IohbdQ[1].jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 52
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
C

Celtic Spirit77

Guest
I never knew why Blood and Steel wasn't aired on TV here in the UK. After watching a few episodes some years ago on youtube, I finally found the Bluray as a German import with English audio from Amazon.

I quite enjoyed the series, despite its inaccuracies. Derek Jacobi made a fantastic Lord Pirrie. (I doubt the real Pirrie sounded like a Shakespearean thespian, though...) Good cast, especially the Northern Irish actors. The CGI used for the ships in various stages of construction was well done, too.

Kevin Zegers, as metallurgist Mark Muir, was too "Hollywood pretty boy" to be realistic... Blood and Steel's answer to Leo DiCaprio? Some social inaccuracies around interactions between men and women in the 1900's - unmarried, unchaperoned couples kissing in public, etc. The Italian family storyline was not needed, imo. And not one scene was shot in Belfast - the filming locations were Dublin and Hungary, of all places.

The characterisation of Thomas Andrews was a bit of a problem. The script writers made him grumpy and irritable for most of the series, and only in the last few episodes did he mellow and become more like the Andrews we've all heard about. Despite that, Billy Carter made an authentic Andrews; he had the look, the passion, and the accent.

The final episode really irritated me, though - since when did paying passengers embark on Titanic from Belfast...??? There's no Southampton featured whatsoever!
 

Similar threads

Similar threads