Billionaire Professor Clive Palmer's Titanic II showcasing in Southampton delayed

Daily Echo: Billionaire's Titanic II showcasing delayed Billionaire's Titanic II showcasing delayed

A BILLIONAIRE’S plan to hold a special reception in Southampton showcasing a proposed Titanic II liner has been delayed until 2013.

Australian industrial magnate Professor Clive Palmer had hoped to stage a breakfast event at the city’s Grand Cafe this month to publicise his dream of building a full-scale replica of the ill-fated ship.

Similar events were due to have taken place on the east coast of the US.

But now his Blue Star Line shipping company has pushed the Southampton date back to March 5 because of the recent devastation caused in New York by Hurricane Sandy.

Prof Palmer said of the event: “Titanic began her ill-fated journey from the city’s port and more than 500 Southampton families were tragically touched by the 1912 disaster.

“While looking ahead to the exciting Titanic II project we shall commemorate the past by paying tribute to the courage of passengers, crew and artisans who contributed so much to the ship of dreams.”

Titanic II is scheduled to set sail from Southampton to New York on her maiden passenger voyage in 2016.

In April, 2012, Blue Star Line signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Chinese company CSC Jinling to build Titanic II, while plans for the ship have been commenced by Finnish-based marine design and engineering company Deltamarin.

As previously reported, it is already known the new vessel will mirror her predecessor’s dimensions, measuring 885 feet long and more than 173 feet high, although she will be slightly wider to improve stability.

The project aims to construct a 40,000-ton copy of the White Star ship which sank with the loss of 1,500 lives on her first Atlantic crossing from Southampton to New York after striking an iceberg.

Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations.

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:56am Sat 29 Dec 12

freemantlegirl2 says...

Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless? freemantlegirl2
  • Score: 0

10:34am Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
[quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed. southy
  • Score: 0

11:10am Sat 29 Dec 12

Cyber__Fug says...

southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors". Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 0

11:12am Sat 29 Dec 12

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
Read the last paragraph of the report.
There is a clue there!!
Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical.
Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]Read the last paragraph of the report. There is a clue there!! Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical. Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

11:45am Sat 29 Dec 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

They will have to wait for a suitable iceberg to form, the original seems to have vanished.
They will have to wait for a suitable iceberg to form, the original seems to have vanished. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

12:04pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II. southy
  • Score: 0

12:09pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.[/p][/quote]Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

1:07pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
Read the last paragraph of the report.
There is a clue there!!
Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical.
Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power
Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]Read the last paragraph of the report. There is a clue there!! Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical. Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power[/p][/quote]Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready southy
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.
The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment.
I have seen what happens to a welded ship
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.[/p][/quote]Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.[/p][/quote]The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment. I have seen what happens to a welded ship southy
  • Score: 0

1:26pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.
The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment.
I have seen what happens to a welded ship
Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.[/p][/quote]Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.[/p][/quote]The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment. I have seen what happens to a welded ship[/p][/quote]Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

2:00pm Sat 29 Dec 12

elvisimo says...

freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
Agreed. Almost as tasteless as titanic the musical.
[quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]Agreed. Almost as tasteless as titanic the musical. elvisimo
  • Score: 0

2:08pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.
The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment.
I have seen what happens to a welded ship
Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement.
If you had gone deep sea in your life then you will know that Rivited ships are much more prefered than welded ships to the seamen, rivited ships have give and take they are more plyable, welded ships are not they are more ridged and are more likely to fail.
The reason ships are not still rivited is because of quickness, its quicker to weld plates than it is to rivit, and welding means less people needed to build a ship, 1 welding team is 3 men, 1 rivit team is 8 men.
But I do not expect you to really know the difference about all.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.[/p][/quote]Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.[/p][/quote]The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment. I have seen what happens to a welded ship[/p][/quote]Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement.[/p][/quote]If you had gone deep sea in your life then you will know that Rivited ships are much more prefered than welded ships to the seamen, rivited ships have give and take they are more plyable, welded ships are not they are more ridged and are more likely to fail. The reason ships are not still rivited is because of quickness, its quicker to weld plates than it is to rivit, and welding means less people needed to build a ship, 1 welding team is 3 men, 1 rivit team is 8 men. But I do not expect you to really know the difference about all. southy
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

oh ps Torchie1, there was mistakes made by mangerment when the Titanic was being built, not enough rivits was made and they ran out, so rivits that was meant for the Olympia was use, which was a different size.
The Titanic more than likely would not of sunk if the right rivits was used, but because there was some wrong rivits those rivits pop allowing more water in than the pumps could handle, so endding up filling up the flood compartments and flowing over the top into the next compartment.
oh ps Torchie1, there was mistakes made by mangerment when the Titanic was being built, not enough rivits was made and they ran out, so rivits that was meant for the Olympia was use, which was a different size. The Titanic more than likely would not of sunk if the right rivits was used, but because there was some wrong rivits those rivits pop allowing more water in than the pumps could handle, so endding up filling up the flood compartments and flowing over the top into the next compartment. southy
  • Score: 0

2:27pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations."

Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you.

Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".
Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor.
Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.
Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.
The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment.
I have seen what happens to a welded ship
Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement.
If you had gone deep sea in your life then you will know that Rivited ships are much more prefered than welded ships to the seamen, rivited ships have give and take they are more plyable, welded ships are not they are more ridged and are more likely to fail.
The reason ships are not still rivited is because of quickness, its quicker to weld plates than it is to rivit, and welding means less people needed to build a ship, 1 welding team is 3 men, 1 rivit team is 8 men.
But I do not expect you to really know the difference about all.
Even if it was possible, a riveted hull would cost between 8 and 10 times as much as a welded one, and then it would be highly unlikely that any classification society would approve a riveted hull of that size for passenger-carrying, deep sea use. Welding is therefore the only practical option. What made you assume there would be a need for riveters?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]"Titanic II, which will be powered by diesel engines, have a larger rudder and be equipped with a series of bow thrusters, cannot be an exact replica of the original vessel as she will have to meet stringent 21st century regulations." Just in case you don't understand that bit; let me help you. Its a replica that is being built using modern technology, ie using up to date procedures and materials so that is can sail and comply with modern day regulations. Therefore he will not require "1200 hot rivitors".[/p][/quote]Its not even a replica, its just the same basic design, its more of a successor. Clue is in the name, if its a replica it would carry the name Titanic and not Titanic II.[/p][/quote]Having gone full circle you have answered your own question about riveters, they are in the dustbin of history along with all of the other historical skills that no-one has any use for today.[/p][/quote]The thing is with rivited ships to welded plates ships, is the rivited ships can take a lot more punishment. I have seen what happens to a welded ship[/p][/quote]Virtually every vessel afloat today is of welded construction and simple statistics indicate that failures will occur but this isn't a reason to slip back to 19th century practices. Let's not forget that that the Titanic sank with a riveted hull which couldn't take the punishment that was meted out to it. I won't begin to confuse you with steel embrittlement.[/p][/quote]If you had gone deep sea in your life then you will know that Rivited ships are much more prefered than welded ships to the seamen, rivited ships have give and take they are more plyable, welded ships are not they are more ridged and are more likely to fail. The reason ships are not still rivited is because of quickness, its quicker to weld plates than it is to rivit, and welding means less people needed to build a ship, 1 welding team is 3 men, 1 rivit team is 8 men. But I do not expect you to really know the difference about all.[/p][/quote]Even if it was possible, a riveted hull would cost between 8 and 10 times as much as a welded one, and then it would be highly unlikely that any classification society would approve a riveted hull of that size for passenger-carrying, deep sea use. Welding is therefore the only practical option. What made you assume there would be a need for riveters? Stephen J
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Cyber__Fug says...

Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety. Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Sat 29 Dec 12

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
Read the last paragraph of the report.
There is a clue there!!
Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical.
Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power
Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready
Southy,
I reckon you should think again about using information from this so called 'font of all knowledge' who apparently provides you with so much of your misguided tosh.
The MOU with the CSC Jinling Shipyard was signed in April and the design detail has yet to be finalised so no actual work has started.
The announcement of final plans have already been delayed and the new date is February 26th in New York
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]Read the last paragraph of the report. There is a clue there!! Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical. Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power[/p][/quote]Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready[/p][/quote]Southy, I reckon you should think again about using information from this so called 'font of all knowledge' who apparently provides you with so much of your misguided tosh. The MOU with the CSC Jinling Shipyard was signed in April and the design detail has yet to be finalised so no actual work has started. The announcement of final plans have already been delayed and the new date is February 26th in New York phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one.
The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker.
The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock.
You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.[/p][/quote]Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one. The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker. The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock. You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship. southy
  • Score: 0

2:56pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
freemantlegirl2 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?
I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.
Read the last paragraph of the report.
There is a clue there!!
Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical.
Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power
Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready
Southy,
I reckon you should think again about using information from this so called 'font of all knowledge' who apparently provides you with so much of your misguided tosh.
The MOU with the CSC Jinling Shipyard was signed in April and the design detail has yet to be finalised so no actual work has started.
The announcement of final plans have already been delayed and the new date is February 26th in New York
plates are all ready being cut, this receptions was to announce the laying down of the keel date.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freemantlegirl2[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is ghoulish, insensitive and utterly senseless?[/p][/quote]I like to know where he going to find 1200 hot rivitors, theres no one left now that can hot rivit at the required speed.[/p][/quote]Read the last paragraph of the report. There is a clue there!! Anyway it is all a bit hypothetical. Chances of this project happening? About the same as TUSC coming to power[/p][/quote]Well thats good news for us then Phil, i been told that the steel plates are being cut and shape all ready[/p][/quote]Southy, I reckon you should think again about using information from this so called 'font of all knowledge' who apparently provides you with so much of your misguided tosh. The MOU with the CSC Jinling Shipyard was signed in April and the design detail has yet to be finalised so no actual work has started. The announcement of final plans have already been delayed and the new date is February 26th in New York[/p][/quote]plates are all ready being cut, this receptions was to announce the laying down of the keel date. southy
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Sat 29 Dec 12

southy says...

phil maccavity it is not unusal to cut plates way before a design is done, and well in avance ship builds like to have plates to be weathered before shaping and doing the final cut to size, weathering plates will show the weak spots
phil maccavity it is not unusal to cut plates way before a design is done, and well in avance ship builds like to have plates to be weathered before shaping and doing the final cut to size, weathering plates will show the weak spots southy
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
phil maccavity it is not unusal to cut plates way before a design is done, and well in avance ship builds like to have plates to be weathered before shaping and doing the final cut to size, weathering plates will show the weak spots
The fact is that no steel has yet been cut for this project. The specialist media would have reported it, especially for a high profile project like this, and they have not.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: phil maccavity it is not unusal to cut plates way before a design is done, and well in avance ship builds like to have plates to be weathered before shaping and doing the final cut to size, weathering plates will show the weak spots[/p][/quote]The fact is that no steel has yet been cut for this project. The specialist media would have reported it, especially for a high profile project like this, and they have not. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

5:33pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Of the Ilk says...

Why do you all argue with southy? - you know perfectly well that he knows everything and is an expert in all things technical, industrial, scientific and medical.
Why do you all argue with southy? - you know perfectly well that he knows everything and is an expert in all things technical, industrial, scientific and medical. Of the Ilk
  • Score: 0

9:51pm Sat 29 Dec 12

derek james says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one.
The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker.
The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock.
You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.
as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.[/p][/quote]Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one. The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker. The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock. You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.[/p][/quote]as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was. derek james
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Stephen J says...

derek james wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one.
The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker.
The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock.
You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.
as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was.
Rather like Southy himself, you're answering a question no one was asking. The real questions are 1) Was riveting ever a serious option for this project? Answer: no. 2) Has steel been cut yet for this job? Answer: no.
[quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.[/p][/quote]Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one. The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker. The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock. You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.[/p][/quote]as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was.[/p][/quote]Rather like Southy himself, you're answering a question no one was asking. The real questions are 1) Was riveting ever a serious option for this project? Answer: no. 2) Has steel been cut yet for this job? Answer: no. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

11:01pm Sat 29 Dec 12

derek james says...

Stephen J wrote:
derek james wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one.
The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker.
The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock.
You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.
as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was.
Rather like Southy himself, you're answering a question no one was asking. The real questions are 1) Was riveting ever a serious option for this project? Answer: no. 2) Has steel been cut yet for this job? Answer: no.
i think you'll find the discussion drifted to the merits of rivetting vs welding, even in a low wage economy like china rivetting was never a serious option for cost purposes, presumably the steel plates would be overlapping if rivetted or edge prepared for butt welding, the fact remains i would wager rivetting is a superior form of construction but in today's financially constrained society is unlikely to be used again
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.[/p][/quote]Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one. The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker. The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock. You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.[/p][/quote]as a structural engineer i can confirm there is some truth in what southy says there have been instances of welded ships sinking without trace in the past (no doubt in storms) it's the same with buildings a bolted/ rivetted building will behave better in an earthquake than a welded one. the reason none of the new liners (or floating blocks of flats as i prefer to call them) has sunk i would wager is because with modern technology (gps, radar, sonar?) none of them have been in a situation that titanic was.[/p][/quote]Rather like Southy himself, you're answering a question no one was asking. The real questions are 1) Was riveting ever a serious option for this project? Answer: no. 2) Has steel been cut yet for this job? Answer: no.[/p][/quote]i think you'll find the discussion drifted to the merits of rivetting vs welding, even in a low wage economy like china rivetting was never a serious option for cost purposes, presumably the steel plates would be overlapping if rivetted or edge prepared for butt welding, the fact remains i would wager rivetting is a superior form of construction but in today's financially constrained society is unlikely to be used again derek james
  • Score: 0

8:30am Sun 30 Dec 12

Cyber__Fug says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.
Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one.
The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker.
The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock.
You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.
I can assure you that all of the Technical Mangers involved in Shipmanagement HAVE been to sea, I do not know one that hasn't.... but do doubt you will have met one of the bridge over the river test that told you his life story.

As I said, I have been involved in the industry for many years and speak to these people on a regular basis. But hey, you are the expert here !!!!!

One day you will actually acknowledge that you are not the font of knowledge that you think you are and just a frustrated little n'er-do-well that can't accept other people that have achieved !
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: Being involved in shipping, including building and repair for the past 25 years I cant say that I have ever heard any one express a preference over this (riveting).... I have also just checked with a friend of mine who is a Technical Director of an multinational shipping company (and a fellow of Rina) who has said that even if riveting was cheaper it would not be considered in today's construction due to the current advanced processes and legislation surrounding safety.[/p][/quote]Cyber it would be considered, the only real thing that stops rivited ships being made to-day is the cost of building one, and the time it takes to build one. The beauty of a rivited ship is that when a ship is being twisted in a storm, the plates have movement room, a welded ship plates do not and would give a lot quicker. The trouble with Technical Directors is that they don't go to sea, they are land lock. You talk to any seaman that as served on both rivited and welded ships and ask them and they will come back with the answer give them a rivited ship.[/p][/quote]I can assure you that all of the Technical Mangers involved in Shipmanagement HAVE been to sea, I do not know one that hasn't.... but do doubt you will have met one of the bridge over the river test that told you his life story. As I said, I have been involved in the industry for many years and speak to these people on a regular basis. But hey, you are the expert here !!!!! One day you will actually acknowledge that you are not the font of knowledge that you think you are and just a frustrated little n'er-do-well that can't accept other people that have achieved ! Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Sun 30 Dec 12

Lockssmart says...

I'm awaiting MGRA and ginger_cyclists view. They seem to know what is best whenever there is a problem.
I'm awaiting MGRA and ginger_cyclists view. They seem to know what is best whenever there is a problem. Lockssmart
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree