Considering you would have had " to take one of these smaller IMM vessels" do you think you would have gone ahead on your voyage anyway ?Having to replace Titanic with Majestic must have been a tough blow for White Star, particularly if they were trying to cement brand loyalty. There was a far cry between the type of passage one could expect from an Olympic class liner, and Majestic--the Majestic having been built in 1889.
Furthermore, White Star would suffer more with the loss of Britannic in the First World War. Basically, they had to go an entire decade with only one large modern liner, but I suppose this was partially true of Cunard as well. Cunard lost Lusitania during the war, but Aquitania, which was finishing her fitting out (much like Britannic) in August of 1914 survived. Meaning pretty quickly after the war Cunard was able to restart at least her two ship express service.
Cunard did have to wait to start her three ship express service though with the loss of Lusitania. Having purchased Imperator from the British government and re-christening her Berengaria, it turned out she needed an extensive rebuild before she was ready to actually enter service for Cunard.
Incidentally, I forgot about the IMM angle. White Star *could* easily re-book people on other IMM ships, but in addition to what you pointed out, Sam, regarding the reluctance to board ships with inadequate lifeboat capacity immediately after Titanic sank, I assume many people booking passage on a large modern liner--and paying a premium--were doing so on purpose.
Given this, had I purchased passage on Titanic's return voyage, I would be pretty irritated to now how to take one of these smaller IMM vessels, which had far fewer amenities, was far slower, and much more prone to roll around in the ocean and make passengers sick for half the voyage.
Well, that all depends on why you were traveling, and any other arrangements you had made. I am sure some would simply cancel the voyage; however, if you had made it all the way to New York from Kansas by rail, or were traveling for business. then probably.Considering you would have had " to take one of these smaller IMM vessels" do you think you would have gone ahead on your voyage anyway ?
I think the difference would be in whether you consider whether the persons were concerned about the reason for their journey.Many immigrants would just want to get to the USA or to Canada and start their new life. Not everyone would care about whether vessel X was more luxurious, fast and up-to-date than vessel Y.
I don't think it is entirely true that immigrants would not care which vessel they were traveling on. This is exactly why the dummy funnel was added to the Olympic class vessels--for marketing reasons, White Star felt that immigrants felt more secure on four funnel liners. In addition, this is also why third class passage on an Olympic class liner was considerably more than on a smaller immigrant boat, and why White Star invested in improving the amenities and travel experience of third class passengers.I think the difference would be in whether you consider whether the persons were concerned about the reason for their journey.
The west bound immigrants would not care what type ship they would take.
Their aim was just to be to get to the United States or Canada.
Besides most of them probably had no idea of what ships and ocean voyages were like.
So it would make no difference to them as to what kind of ship on which they sailed.
Eastbound passengers , I think , would be mostly those of at least the upper class or rich who were traveling for pleasure and would be more discerning .
I would have to review the 1997 "Titanic" but I think there might have been somewhere in the movie why or how "Jack Dawson" got to France in the first place ?
I have read that there were reports that RMS Queen Mary had rolling and vibration problems.You took the ship that fit your schedule. You took the ship that fit your budget. You took a ship you'd previously enjoyed good service on, You took ships that were "Good sea boats."
You didnt take a ship for social cachet. That was the stuff of publicity blurbs and doddering "Before the revolution we used to own all this" tomes cranked out in the 1970s. People did not snicker behind their fans because you arrived on the Alopetia and not the socially correct Hydrocephalic,
Stability at sea was a far greater factor than "Luxury." The ships were not particularly luxurious when compared to even midblock hotels. Elevators were exciting when the Collins ships appeared. There was nothing aboard the Olympic class ships that would cause even the most easily impressed small town baron to stare with wonder and disbelief. The New Cornhusker Hotel back home offered bigger rooms, en suite bath and toilet, larger beds than the ship did. What the traveller wanted was not to spend five of seven days violently ill.
Some believed that big ships were steadier and less prone to vibration. Some were. Some, however, were not
Is it true that during her sea trials they managed to get the Lusitania's engines up to about twenty seven or twenty eight knots or so but the stern of the ship was shaking alarmingly ?Queen Mary wallowed in the roll, quite frighteningly,
Normandie vibrated. A letter sold on eBay described how the vibration had finally caused the author to vomit. She then scrawled I HATE THIS SHIP up the margin.
Lusi. Winter 1915, Violent storm. The one planned event of the crossing- the charity concert- was literally kneecapped when one of the celebrities was hurled from his berth. The others were sick. In the end, singer Elsie Janis did a long set, and a well-travelled passenger imitated the whoops and cries of African and Indian fauna. Such was the glamourous world of belle epoque first class.