dare i say it Titanic

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

Titanic....

Actually exceeded British Board of Trade regulations concerning lifeboats. The regulations of the time (based on gross tonnage, not passenger capacity) only required her to carry 16 lifeboats, and she had 20. While this does not excuse White Star Line, it does point to regulations not keeping up with the increased passenger capacity of North Atlantic liners.

I agree that the luxury of Titanic (and her nearly identical sister ship Olympic) was later surpassed. But these two ships (and their ill-fated sibling Britannic) were among the first super-luxury liners, offering comforts many people of the era had yet not experienced on land, let alone sea. It was not every day you could - as Lady Duff-Gordon did on Titanic - have hothouse strawberries in April. Having clean, smokeless, safe electric heat on-demand in your stateroom was previously unheard of. Having electric lighting as the sole illumination for all classes and all areas of the ship was pretty new. Being able to keep in touch with your business interests, family and friends on shore via Marconigram (wireless telegraphy) was a science-fiction wonder that had only been available for a few years at that time - it was the equivalent of a sat-phone today.

There were some things we'd consider "primitive" now, sure. Private baths were in only the most luxurious suites; everyone else bathed in bathrooms that had to be booked with a bath steward, even in First Class - an arrangement also common in luxury hotels on land at the time. But there was a swimming pool. There was a gym. A library. Cafes were open for between-meal refreshments. Fresh flowers were everywhere.

And for those who wonder why we still remember the Titanic disaster: We don't remember it half enough. The incompetent bureaucrats who did not require enough lifeboats for her are still with us in a new generation, making different laws, but paying no more attention to reality than they did in 1912. We thought Titanic was primitive in her safety features and that more modern ships would never fail so spectacularly - except that only this year, Costa Concordia could and did and capsized into the bargain, because modern ships are incredibly top-heavy, to accommodate today's demand for outside balcony suites. We're in a new century, but all we've accomplished is to invent new mistakes, because what we have NOT learned is how to stamp out incompetence, greed and hubris among our ruling classes.

And the biggest reason for remembrance is this: People died. One thousand, five hundred and fourteen of them, to be exact. The healthy ones froze to death in the icy North Atlantic. The older ones had fatal heart attacks as soon as they hit that freezing water. Some were electrocuted. Some were cooked alive by steam escaping from broken pipes. Some were crushed by fixtures breaking loose, by machinery, by pianos. And a few, trapped in spaces where there was still air, were turned into jelly by the pressure of the sea as Titanic plunged to the bottom. Those people did not deserve those fates; all they were trying to do was to get from one place to another. I think they will always deserve to be given a special place in our collective memory.
 
Anyone see Jame Cammerons, 2 hour national Geo special .."Titanic,The final Word" absolutely excellent show
 
This...

isn't about those that "didn't deserve to die", but about why people are so fixated on one blundered passage, on one cold night in the North Atlantic. History is rife with people and large groups who "didn't deserve to die".  It was from your failed "bureaucrats" that ocean liner safety moved to the next level. Most safety regulations are written from a long history of lost lives; witness OSHA & MSHA. More people are fascinated about the Captain's blunder on the Titanic, its owner's brag about being "unsinkable" and the fact that it was famous as a 'class level' ship for the idle rich, than anything else. To capitalize on the memory of the Titanic going down, ignores and belies all the other great ships that gave decades of meritorious service "after".  We're not talking the Holocaust here...there's always a certain amount of eminent danger when you board an ocean liner....you just hope you have a good ship, good crew, a good captain and a structured escape plan. The Titanic lowered many lifeboats into the water with just a few people in them...your death count would be quite different if each life boat and been loaded to capacity. No one can say with certainty what happened there....


 


The fact that the <a name="start_16598.177289">Costa Concordia was run aground has absolutely nothing to do with safety equipment or a faulty ship design. Any incompetent captain can run the greatest of ships into something-enough to cause a catastrophic event.  Not that many yrs ago, a commercial ferry off of Norway couldn't get her sea doors closed properly and the whole ship went down in minutes. It was one of the worse modern maritime disasters on record, killing over 500 people almost instantly. Do we see geographic specials and movies made about that event(?)...the answer is obvious.  </a>


 


Kevin


[this post was last edited: 4/16/2012-17:03]
 
Kevin:

Titanic hit an obstacle, which breached her hull. Sank.

Costa Concordia hit an obstacle, which breached her hull. Sank.

No one is lessening any other tragedy, or dishing out any disrespect to any other occurrence, or belittling any other ship's accomplishments. This is merely the centenary of Titanic's sinking, and that is what happens to be on our minds, and as friends, we thought we'd discuss it a bit.

Sorry if that's offensive to you.
 
What.....

is "offensive" to me is the prattling on about an ill-fated ship with bad metallurgy, a 'company man' captain that housed the idle rich and because of that, it captures so much attention & imagination. Considering all the greater ships that came "after",  I consider all the hullabaloo about the Titanic insulting to maritime history. Again, this isn't about the memory of the individuals who died on the Titanic, but about the foolishness & arrogance of the people responsible for her sinking.  It's really become more of a story about the decadent rich, ship owners and bureaucrats against those who were not....in simpler words,  the rich (and what they represented) against the working crew and people in steerage.  Looking at Britain today, 'class society' did not win out or keep the Titanic afloat..


 


Kevin 
 
Kevin:

Titanic's nearly identical sister ship, Olympic, sailed for twenty-four years without tragedy, even surviving a collision that breached two of her watertight compartments - BEFORE the retrofitting that was done after the loss of Titanic.

Things happen that no one can foresee. Titanic ran into an iceberg where there wasn't supposed to be an iceberg, exactly as Costa Concordia ran into rocks where there weren't supposed to be any rocks. Neither vessel's captain had her exact position correctly determined, either - despite state-of-the-art resources being available in both instances.

Yes, hubris was involved in the loss of Titanic. Hubris is also involved in building ships that are four times as tall above the waterline as they are below, as many, including Costa Concordia, are today. Costa Concordia was the warning bell that today's profiteers are ignoring - we will one day have massive loss of life resulting from these too-tall ships. ELEVEN ships were known to have been lost to icebergs before Titanic - all in the same general area Titanic went down - and no movement of passenger lanes southward was undertaken, nor were any lifeboat regulations changed.

I understand you're unhappy about the focus Titanic is getting. But what I would suggest we all worry about is that nothing really important has changed since April 15, 1912.
 
If...

nothing has changed since 1912 as you suggest, then it would be common place today for luxury liners to go down.  Not only is it uncommon, but a HUGE media circus if anything happens to a luxury liner at sea. The possibility of disaster by your estimation  would be akin to something worse than riding on Amtrak. Instead, people did listen; many, many maritime safety laws were passed and equipment revised/modernized for the greater good of keeping people alive and rescue-able on big ships.  It's foolish to even begin to compare today's ships and their navigational/safety devices to even 40yrs ago, let alone the Titanic primitive system. Would you travel on a luxury liner today in the North Atlantic with just crew 'watching' for icebergs and telegraphing other ships if they had 'seen' any(?) of course not. 


 


I don't agree that modern luxury liners are incapable of safety measures to prevent what happened to the Titanic, or that the bureaucrats related to luxury liners are out to get us.  Are you seriously trying to maintain that in today's PC conscious societies, maritime boards and regulations are going slack and that your too-tall-above-waterline ships are all accidents waiting to happen? The only thing I'm seeing is that captains aren't the seaman of lore and are making bad decisions.... possibly because of the international standards of their training in dubious places. The seas aren't any calmer today (actually worse weather) and there's a hell of a lot more big ships on them than ever before. You should be more worried about an archaic system where a dubiously trained captain has final word over his crew & passengers.


 


Kevin 
 
Sorry to upset the apple cart, but I had great, great relatives who died on that ship - that's one reason alone to why I don't like the constant reminder. Titanic in all the films made isn't about celebrating a great ship or a great design, it's just another reminder of a tragedy - and in most British people's minds - unless of course you like ships and other maritime transportation. Of course the famous U.S film with Leonardo & Kate was a love story portrayal but the quality and near reality of the actual ship was pretty much spot on to what the original was like.
 
Why Don't We....

Just ask that a moderator lock or delete this thread, since those of us who wanted to discuss an historic event presently on many peoples' minds seem to be infuriating and upsetting two posters who could have simply clicked over to threads more to their liking?

Grrh!
 
Titanic

The story of the Titanic, as Walter Lord so aptly put it over 55 years ago, is really the story of the last night of a small town. Here we have a ship, built in the yards of Harland & Wolff at Belfast to the highest standards of the day, half again as large as any ship that had preceded it. Both she and her sister Olympic were considered the greatest technological achievements in marine engineering that the world had ever known. The highly respected periodical "The Shipbuilder" routinely published "Special Souvenir Numbers" marking the entry on service of such ships and in 1911, published one for the Olympic (entering service) and Titanic (building). These covered everything about the ship - from details of framing, plating and boilers to details of carpet and upholstery. It was this publication, not the White Star Line, that stated "by simply closing a switch controlling the watertight doors, make the ship practically unsinkable". For several decades, ships had grown ever larger, faster and more luxurious. It was the routine marine practice of the day to follow sea-routes known as "tracks" at speed in most weather and conditions. This was considered safe practice precisely because nothing had ever happened to make it seem otherwise. Shortly after the turn of the century, the miracle of wireless telegraphy had made communication at sea a reality, and via relay service, communication with land as well. It made the world seem a smaller place, and the sea lanes safer still. The Titanic had the misfortune to encounter on her maiden voyage what nothing before her had, and in a most unusual setting - no moon, a bitter cold night, a flat-calm sea, and an absence of other ships nearby in wireless communication. It is a story of "if onlys" in abundance, one of great valor and great cowardice, of arrogance, complacency and tragedy. One could not create a more compelling story if they tried, and therein lies lies its great power even one hundred years later.
 
That is a very interesting question. I've never thought of Vacuum Cleaners being on the Titanic, but there must have been, and going by the size of her, there would have been a lot of them.

I'm pretty sure if they could get cameras into the cleaning rooms of the wreck they would see some intact classics.

If they could remove them and bring some to the surface that would be even better.

Being HOOVER'S they would probably just need a new bag and belt to get back into use, ha ha ha!
 
<a name="start_16598.177341">"Why Don't We....

</a> Just ask that a moderator lock or delete this thread, since those of us who wanted to discuss an historic event presently on many peoples' minds seem to be infuriating and upsetting two posters who could have simply clicked over to threads more to their liking?

Grrh!"



 


Which completely ignores the fact that somebody else could have had a valid, different opinion than yours. 
smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif
   There are no right or wrong answers here about the Titanic...not after 100yrs-just opinions.
You should have let it go like you said you were going to...that says a lot about your character and about trying to run others off that don't agree with you.


 


Kevin



 



 
Kevin:

I think there's rather a difference between holding a different opinion and telling others they really don't need to be talking about what they're talking about because it doesn't meet your personal standard for a great ship.

Oh, and are you aware that the Queen Mary you hold up as an example of a great ship was built of precisely the same steel from precisely the same mill as Titanic, that nadir of the metallurgical arts?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top