What's next for the wreck?

Dec 2, 2000
58,588
378
283
Easley South Carolina
>>I am sure we have many members who had not heard of the project.<<

That wouldn't surprise me in the least. Historical memories seem to be pretty short these days. However, I suspect you'll find quite a few members of this forum have heard of it, but then maritime history is something people here tend to take a deep interest in.

Mention the Glomar Explorer to Joe and Jane Sixpack on the street and you'll likely get nothing more then a blank stare.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,588
378
283
Easley South Carolina
From the Olympic? I suppose if they were still useful, they might have been auctioned off with the rest of her fittings when the ship was scrapped. That or they were relegated to some backwater part of the shipyard to rot, or were simply broken up.

I don't know that anybody's even bothered to look into it.
 
Jul 9, 2002
119
0
146
I have heard an Unsubstantiated rumour that the Olympic Boats were bought by a private Collector when She was scrapped. According to this rumour, he / she was an avid Titanic Historian and knew that this would be one way of owning a very small peice of her History, even if it was through Olympic. Apparently, the wealthy new owner of the boats kept them in his backyard for several years, always doing upkeep on them and giving them a fresh coat of paint every year. When they died in the early 70's, his children or whoever, gave them away (or according to some, cut them up for firewood!)and thought nothing of it! Now as I said, ALL of this is unfounded rumour and has never been proven. I just heard it somewhere once a while back and thought you all might like to hear it!
 
T

Tom Pappas

Guest
That would be worth researching further - after all, at least some of Oly's boats might have been recycled from T herself.

What a find that would be!
 
Jan 5, 2001
2,299
97
178
Hi!

I'm in much doubt on the question of Titanic's boats -- personally I think it's very thin ice to claim that they were on Olympic anyway. Olympic had new boats fitted as a temporary measure by April 24th 1912, when Titanic's were still in New York (and had been for four days); if reports about Titanic's boats being in New York until late in 1912 are correct, then it seems even more unlikely. From my recollection, the Harland & Wolff correspondence does not mention anything about boats being reused on Olympic in 1913 -- indeed, there was a struggle to manufacture *new* ones in time. Olympic also saw some big changes in lifeboats both during the war, in the 1920s, and even in the 1930s when some were removed.

With regard to Olympic's lifeboats in 1935 and what happened to them, I have a good numbers of sources about this period and cannot recall any mention of what happened to the lifeboats themselves. If the experience of other fittings is anything to go by, they might not have survived the war -- or they might have been burnt. Frankly, it's not something that's particularly interested me. If I come across any mention I'll post it -- and if anyone else does, I for one would be interested in their posting it. No doubt everyone here will.

Best regards,

Mark.
 

Dennis Smith

Member
Aug 24, 2002
166
0
146
Hi All,
Thought I`d mention this, not sure if it`s the truth or not but...
While I was at sea I sailed with a 2nd mate who used to take angling parties out when on leave. As I did the same, we got talking about small boats, I mentioned that my mother in law had owned a 27 foot ex ships lifeboat (built in around 1927) and he said he had also got one but he knew the name of the ship it had come off and he told me it was the Olympic. I knew no details of the Olympic at that time ie. Big T`s sister, but I did realise that it was one of the White Star Line`s ships. For your info this guy - Willie something or other lived in the Shetland Islands in the North of Scotland.

Best wishes and Rgds

Dennis
 
Jan 5, 2001
2,299
97
178
Hi!

Thanks for your posting, Dennis. I wish I had my detailed 'lifeboat specification notebook' with me, as it details Olympic's boat outfit at various times. Suffice to say, I seem to recall that several of Olympic's boats were 27 feet in length -- and 1927 seems a likely build date since other changes (like upgrading the motor boats' equipment, and Marconi equipment) took place around that time. I'll have to remember to check it.

Best regards,

Mark.
 

Tim Foecke

Member
Mar 9, 2006
133
0
86
In the respect that a microbiologist, an archeologist, and a naval officer are giving opinions regarding the collapse of the wreck, and that it has nothing new in the story.

Yes, the wreck is collapsing, and once all the members reach a certain slenderness, there will be an exponential increase in gross collapse events. Then things will calm down after the next 25-40 years after most of the potential energy is gone with collapsing, and the debris pile will slowly rust into iron ore over the next century or so.

Roy says that he sees lots more rusticles, and claims it is rusting at 600 pounds per day. Heck, if you just take the likely surface area of the steel that is exposed to sea water, and use the textbook corrosion rate of mild steel in sea water (o.1 mils per day), you get about 1000 lbs per day. Nothing new here. And Roy has never proven that the corrosion rate is increasing, that the bacteria concentration is increasing, or that they are eating the ship. Rusticles form and fall off all the time. Thats where you get the floc piles along the sides of the hull. He has no way of knowing, from 3 glimpses over 7 years, whether his data means anything or not.

The ship is progressing into oblivion in just the way that a metallurgist and mechanical engineer would tell you it would.

The only thing of interest in the article was the observation of all the beer bottles from one of the RMSTI's officer's son's band on one of the expeditions. Glad someone finally pointed it out, even if he didn't get the source right.
 
Feb 21, 2003
89
0
76
What about the part of the article that stated that there had a 'submersible accident' and on another salvage expedition they brought on half dozen pieces?(of what part of the submersible recovered was not mentioned)

Also was mentioned that there are 'nearly a dozen plaques and artificial flowers that litter the wreck. Since when was a 'memorial plaque' litter?

This story reminds me of something that George T. and RMST Inc. would have put out a few years ago, when they were busy justifying their salvage operations.

There was also a mention about the Crow's Nest. We know that between 1985 and 1987 that the CN fell off the mast down into the hold. But if you read the article is seems like they are trying to tell us that 'rusticles' got the CN. And that it just 'vanished' within the last decade.

Tim, you are right. There is nothing new in this article, Titanic is slowly deteriorating as she is supposed to do.
 
Jul 12, 2003
500
1
86
Do you think people are just writing things about the ship hoping to be the first to bring "new" news to light about the Titanic...like thinking that something they are theorized suddenly becomes truth? (I hope that I have worded my question in an understandable way).
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
1
166
Thanks, Tim.

Susan - I saw some of the 'half dozen pieces' on the QM on one of my trips there, though I don't specifically recall which year. Aluminum sheets, maybe a foot wide, 3 ft. long. Engine housing, maybe?

And considering the size of the wreck, I wouldn't call 'a dozen plaques' litter. The beer bottles, yeah.
 

Tim Foecke

Member
Mar 9, 2006
133
0
86
Point of order: the "wreck falling apart" bit from a couple of years ago was RMSTI post-Tulloch. It was Gellar.

As for Roy Cullimore's statements. He has a tendency to wax poetic, and says things that are pure speculation and way out of his field of knowledge.
 
J

João Ricardo Alves de Oliveira

Guest
Hey Guys!
I Heard at this moment from a explorator of the last expedition to the titanic that finished on July that the titanic bow is like the titanic stern! The wreck of the Titanic is most certainly deteriorating very fast - it
won't be too many years before the bow is
unrecognizable, like the stern is now.
 
Aug 3, 2003
9
0
71
Hi all,

This is my first post here so I hope you'll be gentle if I say something stupid. Has anyone publicly advocated applying for UNESCO World Heritage Site status for the wreck?


Though given RMSTI's status now perhaps this is not practical.