Hmm...what unlikely catastrophe will be its doom?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/clive-palmer-looks-to-build-new-titanic/story-e6frg8zx-1226342457309
QuoteClive Palmer looks to build new Titanic
by: Andrew Fraser
From: The Australian
April 30, 2012 10:10AM
AS he was announcing his aspirations for federal politics, Clive Palmer was also thinking of building this century's Titanic.
The Queensland mining magnate announced today he had signed a memorandum of understanding with Chinese state-owned company CSC Jinling Shipyard to build Titanic II.
Construction on the ship would begin at the end of next year. The ship would be ready for her first voyage in 2016.
Mr Palmer said he planned for it to be as close as possible in design and specification to the original Titanic.
The completed ship will travel from Shanghai to London, escorted by the Chinese navy.
It will travel from London to New York on its first passenger voyage.
Asked if the ship could sink, Mr Palmer told reporters: "Of course it will sink if you put a hole in it.''
He added: "It is going to be designed so it won't sink.
Rec Coverage 28 Day pass
"It will be designed as a modern ship with all the technology to ensure that doesn't happen.
"But of course if you are superstitious like you are, you never know what could happen."
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 30, 2012, 07:03:38 AM
Hmm...what unlikely catastrophe will be its doom?
Excessive hype it can't possibly live up to.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 30, 2012, 07:03:38 AM
Hmm...what unlikely catastrophe will be its doom?
Fuck off, Assburger.
Did they maintain the Irish drunk capacity in steerage?
Quote"It is going to be designed so it won't sink.
He just had to say it didn't he?
Quote from: Valmy on April 30, 2012, 07:49:16 AM
Did they maintain the Irish drunk capacity in steerage?
HEY NOW
Somebody's got to shovel the coal.
QuoteThe completed ship will travel from Shanghai to London, escorted by the Chinese navy.
Well, there shouldn't be too many icebergs there, so that should help. Might be good to avoid italian captains, too.
The Titanic was designed to not sink, too. Of course, it all depends on the ship being properly built to spec, and with Chinese outsourcing, what is the likelihood of that happening? :contract:
they'll build it on land, like that carrier mock-up in china, iirc.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 30, 2012, 07:03:38 AM
Hmm...what unlikely catastrophe will be its doom?
Sabotage.
That just doesn't make any sense.
The London to New York line that Titanic was built for essentially doesn't exist. What does exist are cruise ships - but a re-built Titanic would be far, far, far too small for such a role.
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 02:27:28 PM
That just doesn't make any sense.
The London to New York line that Titanic was built for essentially doesn't exist. What does exist are cruise ships - but a re-built Titanic would be far, far, far too small for such a role.
I don't know, really:
http://www.titanic-titanic.com/compare_modern_ships_to_titanic.shtml
It seems to be about average in terms of passenger capacities. Worst case scenario, it's unsinkable, so you could remove a few lifeboats to add extra space.
Quote from: viper37 on April 30, 2012, 02:47:44 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 02:27:28 PM
That just doesn't make any sense.
The London to New York line that Titanic was built for essentially doesn't exist. What does exist are cruise ships - but a re-built Titanic would be far, far, far too small for such a role.
I don't know, really:
http://www.titanic-titanic.com/compare_modern_ships_to_titanic.shtml
It seems to be about average in terms of passenger capacities. Worst case scenario, it's unsinkable, so you could remove a few lifeboats to add extra space.
But back in the day Titanic was packing in a bunch of passengers in steerage class. People wouldn't put up with those kind of conditions today.
Look at the gross tonnage. All of those boats are substantially larger. There are ships three times as large, but with the same number of passengers.
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 02:52:39 PM
But back in the day Titanic was packing in a bunch of passengers in steerage class. People wouldn't put up with those kind of conditions today.
Was it more crowded than an airplane?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 30, 2012, 02:59:35 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 02:52:39 PM
But back in the day Titanic was packing in a bunch of passengers in steerage class. People wouldn't put up with those kind of conditions today.
Was it more crowded than an airplane?
People put up with a crowded airplane because it gets them where they are going quickly.
ships don't.
Some people are afraid of flying.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 30, 2012, 03:08:02 PM
Some people are afraid of flying.
Sp people who are afraid of flying are going to flock to a boat named after the most infamous maritime disaster of all time? :hmm:
Phobias come in many different packages. :yes:
If the ship is too small you just build more of them.
Quote from: viper37 on April 30, 2012, 02:47:44 PM
It seems to be about average in terms of passenger capacities. Worst case scenario, it's unsinkable, so you could remove a few lifeboats to add extra space.
:lol:
evil
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on April 30, 2012, 03:25:42 PM
Quote from: viper37 on April 30, 2012, 02:47:44 PM
It seems to be about average in terms of passenger capacities. Worst case scenario, it's unsinkable, so you could remove a few lifeboats to add extra space.
:lol:
evil
Too soon? :unsure:
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 02:52:39 PM
Look at the gross tonnage. All of those boats are substantially larger. There are ships three times as large, but with the same number of passengers.
true, they are bigger, with less passengers, wich means more space than The Titanic. I don't think it'd be viable as a 2500 passengers cruise ship. 1500 tops, imho, to make some room for modern stuff, like an Imax theater room, a gym, a pool, a tennis court, etc. Then, can it be viable? I honestly don't know. Nor do I care, it's not my money :D
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 30, 2012, 09:17:33 AM
The Titanic was designed to not sink, too. Of course, it all depends on the ship being properly built to spec,. . .
If you want to be rigorous about it, you need to do a proper statistical comaprison against ships that were desgined to sink.
WHy build a close duplicate of the Titanic? What'll it be good for? And trusting the ChiComms to build it right? It won't sink, it'll fucking burn after its cardboard hull gets lit by a stray cigarette.
Well, it would be interesting to see them try and make money at this. They'd be selling the experience more than anything, but there's no way you get more than 7-800 passengers on that thing. You're going to have to make significant alterations, as the first class facilities will need to be massively expanded. In terms of amenities, 1912 First Class is 2012 Somewhat Adequate. I suppose you could keep steerage going by bringing illegal gypsy immigrants and Muslim terrorists to the US, as they don't mind living in their own shit.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 30, 2012, 07:03:38 AM
Hmm...what unlikely catastrophe will be its doom?
Chinese engineering.
Quote from: Neil on April 30, 2012, 07:53:11 PM
Well, it would be interesting to see them try and make money at this. They'd be selling the experience more than anything, but there's no way you get more than 7-800 passengers on that thing. You're going to have to make significant alterations, as the first class facilities will need to be massively expanded. In terms of amenities, 1912 First Class is 2012 Somewhat Adequate. I suppose you could keep steerage going by bringing illegal gypsy immigrants and Muslim terrorists to the US, as they don't mind living in their own shit.
Tamas is going to Britain!
Quote from: viper37 on April 30, 2012, 02:47:44 PM
Worst case scenario, it's unsinkable, so you could remove a few lifeboats to add extra space.
:XD:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 30, 2012, 06:22:28 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 30, 2012, 09:17:33 AM
The Titanic was designed to not sink, too. Of course, it all depends on the ship being properly built to spec,. . .
If you want to be rigorous about it, you need to do a proper statistical comaprison against ships that were desgined to sink.
Submarines aren't really comparable to cruise ships.
Quote from: Barrister on April 30, 2012, 03:14:28 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 30, 2012, 03:08:02 PM
Some people are afraid of flying.
Sp people who are afraid of flying are going to flock to a boat named after the most infamous maritime disaster of all time? :hmm:
Someone named a cruise ship The Spanish Armada?
The Kamikaze.
HMS P. Claudius Pulcher