TITANIC....Replica / New build

Funny political stunt to align yourself so publicly with something that has become a watchword for hubris turning to nemesis and ultimate tragedy...

Tom

 

No publicity is bad publicity...how else was he going to fire his name around the world, let alone across Australia?

 

Hey, 'there's no such thing as bad publicity' works for a certain Irish airline, does it not?

 

It seems to be a reality(?)

https://www.lonelyplanet.com/news/2018/10/18/new-titanic-voyage-dubai/
......And a bit more expensive than the P2 project

Knut

 

I assumed something must be happening with the project as it got a mention on the Breakfast Show on Radio Caroline this morning. As the presenter of that show lives in Los Angeles (and does the programme from there), it must have been mentioned in the US media in the last few days.

 

I'll believe it when I see it! I've crossed the Atlantic a few times in Queen Mary 2. Be interesting to see if this future ship can sustain regular trips across the pond!

 

...it will be powered by a diesel engine, hmm... a bit thought-provoking in this enviromental times...

That said I definitely think it would be an impressive sight if it becomes a reality.

Knut

 

I will believe it when I see it, but I can imagine it would be popular. A real shame the Titanic sister ship Olympic was never kept as a static museum ship. It was just scrapped in the mid 1930s. Imagine what a popular attraction it would be today.

 

Most new ships are Knut. Modern marine diesels can burn fuel with a very low sulphur content the % of which has been continuously lowered in stages over the last couple of decades. The next big step is 2020 when even stricter levels come into force.

You may find this interesting...

http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Sulphur-2020.aspx

 

Thanks John!

 

At least this replica does appear to be being built......
https://twitter.com/RomandiseaT2
Though it isn't going to be sailing off anywhere and there haven't been any updates since July this year!

 

Interesting...although current reports show the resort project has stalled due to finance difficulties.

 

Same, but if it does become reality would be interesting to see those two side by side! In the comparison mock ups I've seen the top deck of modern cruise ships is level with the top of Titanic's funnels. It fascinates me how top heavy ships like QM2 look compared to the old liners, though I guess they are wider as well.

 

There had been "talk" at the time of H.M. Government and/or the Italian Government taking Olympic, Mauritania [not to be confused with the latter Clyde build 3 funnel liner] and Aquitania on as fleet auxiliaries/ troop transports. As they could transport a brigade each that's 2-3,000 men each...... As things turned out the first two went for scrap. Aquitania was to have been withdrawn in 1938-9 once the two Cunard Queens were introduced to service. But was actually taken into Military service as a troop ship on account of the start of the Second World War. At the end of the War the Canadian Government used her to transport their troops home 1945-50, then in 1950 Aquitania was finally withdrawn and scrapped.m Well and truly a case of so near, so far preservation wise.........

 

Neither Mauritania's were built on the Clyde, or three funneled. The first (4 funnels) was built on the Tyne and the 2nd (two funnels) was built on the Mersey.

 

QM2 is vastly different to the other cruise buckets, her hull is twice the thickness and overall she has 40% more steel in her design. Capable of over 30 knots, her design cruise speed was 26 knots...much faster than a 'normal' cruise ship. She is a true liner, built to take a pounding from regular North Atlantic voyages. I've met her designer, Stephen Payne a couple of times, fascinating man! The ship is designed for a 40 year life and so far she is doing ok! Oh...and her beam is 135 ft (41m) compared to Titanic 92.5ft (28.2m). A force 10 on the Atlantic doesn't bother QM2 much, she pitches a little (just like all ships) but the roll is well dampened by stabilisers. I thoroughly recommend a crossing to/from NYC in her...one of life's great travel experiences and not as expensive as you would think!

 

About the same as the original Queen Mary then? Though of course that was a different time, pre airliners when speed mattered. I remember watching a documentary where they said after a brief period of contesting the Blue Riband, Cunard and the French with Normandie agreed a 'truce' as it wasn't economic for them to run at their top speeds all the time in regular service. Anyway, I will have to make the effort to see QM2 in the metal some day. Looking online, at the moment she is into a 7 day crossing from New York to Southampton - if I remember rightly Titanic would've done it in 5 days if she got to NY. Again a completely different era!

 

Yes, she sails well below her top speed for fuel economy and it's an extra days taking from passengers (she used to do it in 6 days until 4/5 years ago). The original Mary was the first ship to cross in less than 4 days but the average fuel burn from a single crossing was 9000 tons! The other big difference is that the current turnaround time is approx 12 hours, whereas back in the day it was 2/3 days!

Best time/place to see the QM2 is mid-summer from the end of Town Quay, Southampton. She comes into sight around 05.45 and swings to go into her berth right in front of you...an awesome sight!

https://johnleyland.smugmug.com/Ships/Southampton-August-2018/i-vwLw6ZJ/A

 

OK I got it wrong as to where the second Mauritania was built. But didn't mention that the first had been built by Swan Hunter & Wigham Richardson at Wallsend on Tyne.

 

Comments upthread - in 2012! - regarding Chinese build quality.

I sailed on 2 brand new Chinese built ships in 2014-16; indeed the first one I joined in Egypt on her delivery voyage to Europe, and was responsible for her commissioning into service, including bringing her LNG fuel system into operation. (These two, sister ships, were the first non-LNG gas tankers to use LNG as their primary fuel. Market leaders).

The build quality is awful - and the bolts holding the pipework together in the machinery spaces - they may have been marked as a particular grade, but they were nothing like what they were supposed to be. Fortunately her cargo systems - designed to carry liquid Ethylene at -103 Deg.C., were produced in Europe, shipped out to the yard and installed by Makers' staff.

As for ordinary Chinese steel plate - the ships are designed for a 25 year life - I can see massive problems from age 15, if not earlier...