Why don't Cunard go back to the old name Cunard White Star


Grant Carman

Member
Jun 19, 2006
348
1
121
Kyle

What I meant was that the UK Government was guilty of not providing her an armed escort, in waters that were known to be patrolled by German submarines. When the ship was sunk, they blamed the Germans, without admitting their own role in it.

Also, there is some debate about whether the Captain or the Admiralty ordered the ship to go at a reduced speed. if she had been going at her top speed through those waters, as she had previously done, then the sub would never have been able to catch her.
 
K

Kyle Johnstone

Guest
Hi Grant
I understood your point, it's just that
I like playing devil's advocate and that doesn't always translate so well.
proud.gif
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,113
35
398
>To try and put it in modern perspective, if an airplane crashes because of a wind shear, would you switch airlines?

A better analogy is, if a major airline is driven into bankruptcy by public boycotting after a retaliatory act of terrorism reveales a MASSIVE disregard for safety (The highly publicized bomb sniffing dogs that were purchased from a kennel for cosmetic reasons and never actually trained at bomb sniffing, comes to mind) would it be a good idea for....say...EncyclopediaTitanica Air to begin touting its "Fine Pan Am Service?" in the hopes that the remembered glamor of the one time transatlantic Clippers would overshadow Lockerbie in the public mind?


My point is/was VERY few people have ever heard of "White Star" outside of shipping circles, and those who HAVE, nine times out of ten associate it immediately with the Titanic.

>I don't think its fair to mention Britannic since she was a war loss.

Not the circumstances. Just the fact that she is yet another lost liner with which the words "White Star" are linked.

>As for Cunard, there was a lot of blame to go around for the Lusitania, but it's only recently that it has come to light that the British Gov't didn't provide support for her, even though they knew she was a target. It was easier to spin her as an innocent victim of the "deadly Huns". That served the war effort much better.

Not true at all. First of all, there were at least a dozen allied liners- many slower than the Lusitania- in service at the time, none of which got escorts. It would have seemed even MORE suspicious if the Lusitania HAD been provided with one. (And, a minor point- there WAS a military vessel which ran parallel to the vessel for a time that morning, witnessed by early risers among them Mr. and Mrs. Naish and Mr. and Mrs. Thompson) And this has been known since 1915- it was never any secret- so except in the geological sense this cannot be called a recent revelation.

>Also, there is some debate about whether the Captain or the Admiralty ordered the ship to go at a reduced speed. if she had been going at her top speed through those waters,

She was going at about 15 knots. Her maximum possible speed in May 1915 was 18 knots. Much more on this point later~ we discovered something new and interesting regarding her power and lack thereof.

>if she had been going at her top speed through those waters, as she had previously done,

She had not run at full speed since August 1914. On her first wartime eastbound, one of her turbines was damaged. And, I suspect not repaired, because from that point on she ran on a 7 day, 18 knot, schedule.

Not to defend Turner- an idiot- but his excuse about not wanting to reach Liverpool with a bad tide rings true. The waters outside of Liverpool were hazardous enough that on her final departure under Captain Dow, she had left her berth at normal time then idled in the Mersey with steam up until darkness fell~ at which point she fled at full throttle, carrying her pilot with her to New York. NOT a place where one would want to be caught in a holding pattern waiting for a favorable tide.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
830
563
Easley South Carolina
>>What I meant was that the UK Government was guilty of not providing her an armed escort, in waters that were known to be patrolled by German submarines.<<

Exactly what sort of armed escort could have been provided and from where? There weren't many armed vessels of any sort in Queenstown, and the Lusitania could have outrun the lot.
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,113
35
398
>Yes, Cunard has decided to advertise the fact that they have "White Star Service".

Was thinking, more, about how this has overtones of "grasping at straws" for no apparent reason; Cunrd having cornered the market on "service" by default after the withdrawal of the superior Italia and CGT.

White Star, realistically, defunct since 1934, technically dead since 1960....hmmmmm......this is like a car company using "Fine Pierce-Arrow Craftsmanship" as a selling point (one of the Big 3 Luxury Makes and defunct since 1938) or "Bold DeSoto-like Styling" (DeSoto, dead since November 1960)as a tagline. The vast majority of people would not get the reference, or particularly care if they did. Or, better yet, this is like Ford saying "In the Tradition of the Edsel" or GM saying "Educated at Our Corvair Academy" and, in either case, honestly believing that anyone outside of the circle of buffs will remember those particular cars fondly or forget the major disasters they represented.

Reviving the Queen Mary name was smart. "Civilians" (so to speak) get the reference, and recall the original ship fondly. Rather like Ford hauling the name "Thunderbird" out of retirement at some point in the near future~ it carries no real negative connotations. White Star, like it or not, immediately conjures up the thought of death at sea....nearly everyone capable of recalling the glory days of the company is now dead, leaving the Titanic as the general public's major frame of reference.


In the film world, this is the equivalent of "Not Since Ishtar Has a Film Had Such Scope" as a tagline.

Politics? "Has the Potential to be the Next Wilbur Mills."
 

Peter Stevens

Member
Jul 30, 2008
2
0
71
Hello Folks,
Hmmmmm, as an ex 1st Class waiter aboard Caronia (II), I can't resist posting a reply here. I think it should be remembered that the Cunard publicity department are populated by people who have very little clue about the _actual_ history, catering or otherwise. Anyone who still baulks at the thought that John Prescott, considering his 1966 antics, was invited to launch Caronia III will know _exactly_ what I mean!

These items aren't provided for "knowlegeable" people, they're meant to add "pazzaz" as bait for new people's money.

As a old Caronian, my feeling on the topic is that restaurant food and service aboard belonged far more a "Caronia" tradition than Cunard one. It was down to the power and influence of, along with the collaboration between, the Executive Chefs and Restaurant Managers that built the tradition. The only things that were "White Star" were items of silverware hurriedly put aboard from shore stores at a time of severe shortages.
 

Jerry Nuovo

Member
Jan 18, 2003
700
2
183
New Jersey,USA
So can it be correct to say that today's Cunard uses the phrase "White Star Service" in its brochures because of the popularity of a certain movie released a little over 10 years ago and both the name of movie and the name of the historical ship in this movie is the same name that starts with the letter T? Jerry
 

Similar threads

Similar threads