The Ship That Never Sank

[Jason D. Tiller]

quote:

why would they have 2 ships docked switching it occasionally when the Olympic only needed a propeller switch that would only take 2 days yet it took a whole week to do so?

So that the necessary repairs could be conducted and plus, it was a common practice in shipyards. A ship's propeller cannot be removed, without placing the ship in drydock. I've already seen that video and am well versed in this ridiculous theory.

Jorge, you're making something out of this that it's not. The ships were NEVER switched...guaranteed. Even IF it happened, the entire shipyard would have known about it before long.

Stop beating a dead horse, that's been dead for ages.​

 

[Jorge Gutierrez]

Why would it take a week to inspect a ship and fix whatever is wrong with it? It shouldn't take long to take a look at a ship fix what is wrong with it and sail it out...at least to my knowledge...and if you were to take a look at where the Olympic and Hawk has crashed it is obvious that it was in the same exact place that the Titanic crashed the iceberg. A true coincidence isn't it?

 

[Allan T Condie]

All Robin Gardner is interested in is making money out of fiction! There is no way on this earth that the ships were swapped - it would take a lot of wool to pull over the Surveyors eyes when the passenger certificate was issued to pass Olympic off as Titanic.

 

[James Smith]

​

quote:

​

Why would it take a week to inspect a ship and fix whatever is wrong with it? It shouldn't take long to take a look at a ship fix what is wrong with it and sail it out...at least to my knowledge...​

See​

​

Olympic & Titanic Reunion : Together For The Last Time

​

In short: The propeller work only took one day (March 3rd); but as Olympic was being removed from drydock on the 4th she grounded. They thus had to put her back in the drydock in order to inspect her hull for damage, which was done on the 5th; and Olympic left the drydock the next day.​

​

​

quote:

​

and if you were to take a look at where the Olympic and Hawk has crashed it is obvious that it was in the same exact place that the Titanic crashed the iceberg​

Whaaat? Olympic was damaged by the Hawke in her stern; the fatal damage to Titanic was in her bow.​

​

--Jim​

 

[Jorge Gutierrez]

Hey I don't know about you but i have seen people pull off things no one has ever thought of doing...i say that they were probably slick enough to pull it off...i mean it should not take long to inspect a boat and fix whatever it has wrong with it and get it to sail like i said before...

 

[James Smith]

Jorge, the amount of time it would take to inspect the ship was irrelevant.

If you read the link I gave you, you will see that the Olympic and Titanic could only be moved in and out of drydock at high tide, which occurs twice a day--one of which is at night, during which time there's no way any responsible ship handler would have tried to carry out an operation like that.

Once either Olympic or Titanic got into that drydock, the ship was basically stuck there for 24 hours.

--Jim

 

[Jorge Gutierrez]

Okay, have it stuck there for 24 hours, while you have it there for those 24 hours have it inspected and have every little problem that the propeller on the inside or the engine written down so then to have all replaced the next day. Like i said, it should not take long to do that. Besides, Titanic's last finishing touches was delayed since they had to repair Olympic. And Jim, the Olympic was damaged on the stern but also in the bow, exactly where the Titanic was damaged. Double check the video and the black marks are where the Olympic's damages are. It has a similar damage on the bow as Titanic, making it the weak spot.

 

[Mark Baber]

The grounding was on 4 April. She was unable to leave after she was inspected on 5 April due to weather. She finally left on the 7th, three days after she was originally ready to go. Sources: The New York Times, 5 and 6 March 1912; Chirnside's RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister; Eaton and Haas' Titanic: A Journey Through Time.

 

[Steven Hall]

Yes, what Mark Baber stated above (re grounding) is correct.
Re the damaged to Olympic on the forward starboard side: that was indicated in (repair) documents that 'were' held in H/W archives.
On another note. Its been hinted that all six blades were replaced on Olympic in March.
Knowing both ship quite well, there is little doubt Titanic lies at the bottom of the Atlantic.
Mark Chirnside is your Olympic specialist, so what he says I'd pay attention too.

 

[Jorge Gutierrez]

Haha...ok then..I will take his advice then. It was just a gut feeling i had anyway. By the way, do you guys know where i can get a Titanic r/c model for cheap?? I've been dying to get one of those. I have seen a video on youtube.com of a guy with a titanic model with working steam, running propellers and lights and ever since I have been dying to get one....

 

[Timothy Trower]

Jorge,

It really helps to be able to source your material properly, which is why you can trust what Mark Baber has written. At least in "The Riddle of the Titanic" Gardiner supplies footnotes that allow anyone with half a brain to go to the original source and see that he (Gardiner) used only the parts of the source materials that he wanted to. I can't speak as to whether "The Ship That Never Sank" has proper footnotes as well, but if it does, take the time to research back to the source materials through each point and have the satisfaction of yourself proving Gardiner wrong on his mistaken theory.

 

[Jorge Gutierrez]

Yeah thanks a lot i really needed it. And int my opinion the workers and sailors of the Titanic weren't that experience as i could have seen. The guy who would take care of the telegraph should have sent the warnings of the iceberg to the captain that the Californian was sending them instead of rudely telling them to shut up, and i think that the Titanic should have made a head-on collision with the iceberg that way only one of the compartments could be flooded and still make the trip. And if they were to to a complete left to avoid the berg then they should have went full speed rather then just putting it on reverse, that would just pull the iceberg closer to it and have it to ram against the iceberg...

 

[James Smith]

quote:

The grounding was on 4 April. She was unable to leave after she was inspected on 5 April due to weather. She finally left on the 7th, three days after she was originally ready to go. Sources: The New York Times, 5 and 6 March 1912;

--Jim​

 

[Mark Baber]

Oops! All of those dates should be March.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>And int my opinion the workers and sailors of the Titanic weren't that experience as i could have seen.<<

They weren't? You might want to start checking the biographies. A substantial number of these people had been at sea for nearly all their working lives. The issue was one of training to deal with specific emergencies and there at least, they were on the low end of the learning curve.

>>The guy who would take care of the telegraph should have sent the warnings of the iceberg to the captain that the Californian was sending them instead of rudely telling them to shut up<<

And if the Californian's operator had addressed his message as a master service message, which formally requires the Captain's attention, it might have happened that way. That Mr. Evans didn't do it that way, but simply broke in to the middle of an outgoing message and blasting the Titanic's eardrums out is what got him the rude response.

It wouldn't have really added that much to what was already known in any event. There were warnings that reached the bridge and the watch. Enough so that they knew when they would be in the region of ice, and the watch was given special instructions to be on the lookout for ice.

Bottom line: They knew.

>>and i think that the Titanic should have made a head-on collision with the iceberg that way only one of the compartments could be flooded and still make the trip.<<

Would it have? Edward Wilding thought the ship would have survived but also that the bow would have been punched in for a substantial distance. More then just one compartment.

>>And if they were to to a complete left to avoid the berg then they should have went full speed rather then just putting it on reverse, that would just pull the iceberg closer to it and have it to ram against the iceberg...<<

Huh??? On the matter of reversal, it's questionable to say the least that it ever even happened. If Dillon and Scott are correct, no engine reversal happened until after the accident.

As to the rest, this was kicked around at the British Inquiry and dismissed as a bad idea. Might I suggest that instead of getting hung up on the myth, that you start persuing primary source material so you can get a better sense not only of what really happened, but also how it was understood and percieved at the time. You can start with the inquiry transcripts themselves at http://www.titanicinquiry.org/