Titanic 2 not a replica

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Unlike modern ships, the bow of Titanic did not have much of a 'flare' at all. I suspect her forecastle-deck would have been very wet indeed when heading into huge Atlantic seas during a big winter storm.<<

Other ships of this era had much the same bow form and they did have the problems you described. Some of them had the broken windows up forward on the superstructure at the end of some of the more interesting crossings to prove it.

 

[Aly Jones]

Micheal-i think i know what you a talking about.I did see a ship that was built for the antarctica*i think*and the bottom of the bow was a huge long think steal tube thing on the end.Is that what you were talking about an ice breaker?

Jim-Yes, you are right before i was born. Captain excellant!Did you work for the cunard line?Do you look like captain Smith? How about you're unifrom,is it the same as 1912?
How about the bridge in 1962,if i can remember correctly British ships like the First Queen Mary still had those telegraphs [ding dong things]and a woodern wheel well a bit more modern than Titanic was,is that right,was the bridge kind of like the Titanic!Was it sad when you went passed the Titanic spot?
Sorry for all the questions ,i just never spoken to a captain before, so i'm a bit excited.

 

[Jim Currie]

Hello Alyson.

No,No and No. to your first three questions
To your next three: yes, yes and no.

Don't get too excited about talking to 'captains'.
Most of us are just 'old hulks' who've been on the beach too long - living off memories of bygone times. However we do enjoy a little flattery now and then and the odd bit of respect such as you are conveying. Thanks for that second bit - it's very unusual nowadays - some of your elders and peers could learn from you.

 

[Jim Currie]

Michael:

Even the bow flare didn't always solve the problem. I remember that many ships in the 50s and 60s had 'V' shaped vertical wash-plates- 2 or 3 feet high with the point of the'V' situated on the centre-line facing toward the bow and the 'arms' angled outward and aft toward each side of the deck.. These were welded to the fore-deck and to the forecastle-head deck. Their purpose was to divert a rogue sea back over the side. They were mostly fitted to oil and bulk carriers.
The problem of such seas coming on board increased as ships got longer. The flared bow was fine for head-on stuff.
The bigger the cargo ship - the more able she was to ride out big seas on the bow but then, such seas would by-pass the flare and as the ship dipped her 'shoulder' into the swell,the problem of a solid sea on the fore-deck became very real. In addition; there might just be a 'bonus' in the shape of a reflected bow wave being flung back on deck by another sea approaching broad on the same side.
As intimated; the foregoing was mainly a problem on cargo ships but I seem to remember one of the 'Queens' sustained damage to accommodation and/or bridge-front windows during an Atlantic crossing back in the 50's or 60's but can't be certain of it.

Cheers!

Jim.

 

[Aly Jones]

Hey ya Jim-I don't mind talking to older members.
Iv'e always been interested in officers since i learnt about the Titanic, well James moody and jack phillips and of cause Captain Smith is the main officer i think about most times.That's why i'm so exicited to talk to you.You're a captain just like how captain smith was,like you come from the gentlemen years,now i now how captain Smith would of sounded like!
Don't worry,i love History so i'm suited talking to you mature guys and yes i do think more younger people should show more respect.
You can talk about you're whole carrier of being a captain.Captain history in you're days i'm very interested in.So don't worry you'll never bore me,infact i'll bore you before you'll bore me LOL.
It's an honour Jim.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>As intimated; the foregoing was mainly a problem on cargo ships but I seem to remember one of the 'Queens' sustained damage to accommodation and/or bridge-front windows during an Atlantic crossing back in the 50's or 60's but can't be certain of it.<<

I think that was the Queen Mary. The Aquatania had a similar incident back in the 30's. I'm amazed at how many people think sheer size gives a ship some sort of magical immunity to the ocean.

>>and the bottom of the bow was a huge long think steal tube thing on the end.Is that what you were talking about an ice breaker?<<

Not quite. It might help if I saw the photo you're referring to but it sounds to me like you're talking about the bulbous bow. The bulb below the waterline just helps the hull slip a bit more efficiently through the water since it produces a lot less resistance.

 

[Aly Jones]

Oh ok then!Sorry but i have no idea how to put a pic in my post!so that's what that is for.
I thought after the Titanic sank,they proofed on the ship design by adding a pointed bow and an icebreaker to protect the bow,boy i was wrong!
What you just said sounds like we are talking about the same thing!

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>What you just said sounds like we are talking about the same thing!<<

Possibly. Keep in mind that the bulbous bow form was a later development, and an evolutionary one at that. You didn't see a lot of that before the Second World War.

 

[Jim Currie]

Here's one I made earlier (as they say)

 

[James A Alley]

Here is my version of a Titanic 2 concept slightly larger than the original ship but meets best of both eras modern and titanic eras. also includes a shipboard titanic memorial.

Titanic Memorial below

i do realize that white star line is part of Cunard

 

[Jerry Nuovo]

James, The ship should have 4 funnels like on the original Titanic and if the ship is built and used as a Transatlantic Liner, the lifeboats would have to be located higher up on the ship just like the lifeboats on the QM2.When the QM2 was constructed several years ago,Cunard did ask and received a waiver from the Coast Guard to allow the lifeboats to be located higher up on the ship as compared to other Cruise Ships because the rough North Atlantic waves could damage the lifeboats.This has happened to the QE2. Regards,Jerry

 

[James A Alley]

Adding four funnels to the ship (i created) didn't make sense in a modern standpoint because there is no need to have more than one funnel on a cruise ship/ocean liner/ship they take up space and would not fit with a standard modern design they did however go wonderfully with a classic 1910s era ship. Queen Mary 2 herself only has one (main funnel) and two smaller white ones (if they can be considered funnels) I couldn't achieve the same look with two smaller funnels. The Lifeboats on this ship are 40ft high and built inside the beam of the ship giving some protection from waves i widened the ship from the original titanic design for this reason this also gave me room to add new staterooms and suites. SOLAS 49 FT Queen Mary 2 82 FT) I do realize i should have made the lifeboats should have been higher. the ship looks this way to stay similar to the original titanic design

 

[Nick Silva]

Posted on November 14th 2011 at 8:01 pm. I think we should make a ship with a name from White Star Line that was'ent used but thought of.(ex;Gigantic)Make her have One funnel at the back and look like the QM2 but with Titanic's colours. Don't you think that's a good idea?

 

[Stefan Fordham]

Why exactly do the Queen Mary ships need funnels? They're not steam ships, are they?

 

[Dave Gittins]

Modern cruise ships actually have many funnels, maybe a dozen or so. The single funnel that surrounds them conceals them from the public because they look like something from an industrial estate. Sometimes the 'funnel' is no more than a metal lattice works affair that looks solid from a distance.