Titanic II to be constructed in China

[Cruachan]

[quote name='Norfolk Brit']Hang on a minute, who are you calling fat?:D

Sir Martin[/quote]

If the shroud fits...

:cool:

J

[BlueRiband]

[quote name='glojo']I agree with what you are saying especially the publicity part. My thoughts were surrounding the sincerity of the person placing the order...[/quote]

Palmer has two ore carriers either in contract or under construction with the same shipyard. So he's an established customer. However I'll grant you he also has a track record for grandiose schemes which never become reality.

[quote name='Sonofaswabbie']I am wondering where they are going to come up with the 1000 "colliers" to shovel the 825 tons of coal into the 159 furnaces round the clock while at sea for 7 days...[/quote]

The new vessel would be diesel powered. The short version to a long story is that it would be a modern ship made to resemble the original Titanic. If you are interested there are plenty of details easily found on the web.

[glojo]

[quote name='mariepr']Palmer has two ore carriers either in contract or under construction with the same shipyard. So he's an established customer. However I'll grant you he also has a track record for grandiose schemes which never become reality.



The new vessel would be diesel powered. The short version to a long story is that it would be a modern ship made to resemble the original Titanic. If you are interested there are plenty of details easily found on the web.[/quote]
Hi Marie,
Thank you for the reply and I am guessing sailors carrying bags of coal aboard Titanic II was a tongue in cheek joke. I think we can all accept that when it comes to taking on fuel they will instead be carrying jerry cans full of diesel or if in the UK I suppose we should call them 'pommy' cans!

[BlueRiband]

FWIW, the project has progressed to Deltamarin being signed to the [URL="http://www.deltamarin.com/uploaded/files/20130415_Press_Release_-_Deltamarin_Project_Development_Contract.pdf"]project development phase.[/URL]

[Subarctic]

[quote name='mariepr']FWIW, the project has progressed to Deltamarin being signed to the [URL="http://www.deltamarin.com/uploaded/files/20130415_Press_Release_-_Deltamarin_Project_Development_Contract.pdf"]project development phase.[/URL][/quote]

You can read the news directly from the design office:

[url]http://www.deltamarin.com/articles/blog/deltamarin-designs-titanic-ii/9-24[/url]

Mr Kanerva has answered a lot of questions from the public there. Edited May 5, 2013 by Subarctic

[BlueRiband]

Two new developments to report. Palmer has [URL="http://bluestarline.com.au/2013/05/6228/"]signed V.Ships Leisure[/URL] to manage Titanic II. Deltamarin is also to start model basin testing on the three pod configuration and general seakeeping of the hull design. There are now 130 comments on their [URL="http://www.deltamarin.com/articles/blog/deltamarin-designs-titanic-ii/9-24"]company blog[/URL] including those specifically answered by Markku Kanerva.

Of course the model basin testing could be the out... "We tried it and the necessary speed couldn't be achieved" or something to that effect. If this is a blow-hard publicity stunt he's investing an awful lot of professional resources into a blow-hard publicity stunt.

[glojo]

[quote name='mariepr']Two new developments to report. Palmer has [URL="http://bluestarline.com.au/2013/05/6228/"]signed V.Ships Leisure[/URL] to manage Titanic II. Deltamarin is also to start model basin testing on the three pod configuration and general seakeeping of the hull design. There are now 130 comments on their [URL="http://www.deltamarin.com/articles/blog/deltamarin-designs-titanic-ii/9-24"]company blog[/URL] including those specifically answered by Markku Kanerva.

Of course the model basin testing could be the out... "We tried it and the necessary speed couldn't be achieved" or something to that effect. If this is a blow-hard publicity stunt he's investing an awful lot of professional resources into a blow-hard publicity stunt.[/quote]


I guess I am now moving off of the fence and would not be surprised to see this cruise ship become a reality.

Do we think it will solely carry passengers across the Atlantic, or will it operate in a similar way to the Queen Mary 2 and only offer a limited number of crossings with the rest of the year seeing her visit numerous foreign ports around the World.

I am guessing the days of high speed crossings are over and today is it all about cruising at an economical speed?

Has the seven day crossing become the fastest crossing and I wonder if Titanic II would do this or the more leisurely 8 days that is slowly becoming more acceptable?

[BlueRiband]

[quote name='glojo']..Has the seven day crossing become the fastest crossing and I wonder if Titanic II would do this or the more leisurely 8 days that is slowly becoming more acceptable?[/quote]

It's not acceptable to me as I have specifically avoided the 8 day crossings. I'm not retired and even a three week voyage is pushing it for getting the time off. (Should a crossing would take 2-3 days longer than it did 100 years ago?!)

Burried somewhere in the Deltamarin blog was a comment that Titanic II is to be built to winter crossings. I doubt however she will be strictly a TA liner unless there is a demand for winter sailings. Cunard would do it if they could fill QM2 year round. After all, it's about making money and on a TA there is no place for passengers to spend money except on board.

[glojo]

[quote name='mariepr']It's not acceptable to me as I have specifically avoided the 8 day crossings. I'm not retired and even a three week voyage is pushing it for getting the time off. (Should a crossing would take 2-3 days longer than it did 100 years ago?!)

Burried somewhere in the Deltamarin blog was a comment that Titanic II is to be built to winter crossings. I doubt however she will be strictly a TA liner unless there is a demand for winter sailings. Cunard would do it if they could fill QM2 year round. After all, it's about making money and on a TA there is no place for passengers to spend money except on board.[/quote]

Excellent points and very wise words.

Unfortunately my questions can be seen as statements which they are not.

Eight day crossings are sadly slowly creeping in and it is looking like six day crossings are a thing of the past and now is seven the norm which sadly stops the true liner from performing at her best.

You make an excellent point about speeds getting lower and this is something that is happening in all walks of life.. Our train scheduling is slower now than when it was in the 1950's and yes I accept certain countries have amazing high speed trains but where I live the time it takes getting to our capital is longer than it was in the age of steam.

Warships are generally slower now than they were fifty years ago, merchant ships are also now going for economical steaming as opposed to qucker arrival times.

Will a 58000 ton vessel crossing the Atlantic in winter be as stable as a much larger ship, and will passengers accept any extra movement? I have read some really cruel criticism of the Queen Elizabeth making winter crossings so I dread to think what some folks will make of something even smaller. (I have also read some very complimentary reviews)

I have read that Titanic will have azimuth drives so will it have a similar rear end to the original Titanic or will we see a compromise similar to the the ocean liner?

[pepperrn]

[quote name='glojo'] I have read that Titanic will have azimuth drives so will it have a similar rear end to the original Titanic or will we see a compromise similar to the the ocean liner?[/quote]The designs show a "counter stern" as on the original. Above the waterline the two ships would look similar (but not identical).
However, the "rudder" is just a piece of upright steel "hanging" from the counter, it stops at the waterline, and does not move.
Seen from the side, below the waterline there is a very modern looking stern: a large area of horizontal flat steel above the three pods.
I could not work out from the drawing that I saw how they plan to introduce the modern square transom stern (that pods demand) below the water [I]and[/I] blend that with the traditional counter stern (almost pointed at waterline) above the sea.
How such a stern would behave in "following sea" conditions I cannot imagine.
QM2 ended up with a compromise stern that many find ugly, this planned "Titanic" stern could be far worse...
Best wishes. Edited May 20, 2013 by pepperrn

[wripro]

I still don't think this thing will ever be built. It's a brilliant marketing gimmick on behalf of the Australian billionaire behind it though.

[DDBINK1]

I wonder at the size of the Titanic II and wouldn't it be a smaller cruise ship/liner by today's standards and that might be a good market for it.??

[BlueRiband]

I wonder at the size of the Titanic II and wouldn't it be a smaller cruise ship/liner by today's standards and that might be a good market for it.??

 

There is a diagram which shows the overlap outline of both ships.

[DDBINK1]

What I was meaning about the size of the ship. The original was 46,328 Registered Tons, if the new one is similar in size then it would actually be a smaller cruise ship these days. So I was thinking it would be a possible market for it as the thing would not be one of those floating hotels that the newer ships are.

[pmb1]

I too am a Titanic II skeptic; I won't believe that the project is for real until Mr. Palmer has contracted with the appropriate Greenlandic authority to calve a corresponding Iceberg II.

[BlueRiband]

What I was meaning about the size of the ship. The original was 46,328 Registered Tons, if the new one is similar in size then it would actually be a smaller cruise ship these days. So I was thinking it would be a possible market for it as the thing would not be one of those floating hotels that the newer ships are.

 

She would be dwarfed by most of the cruise ships built within the last 10 years.

 

Cunard will just watch what unfolds and see if it affects market demands.

Payne himself, in a talk to Webb Institute students, said that QM2 exists only becuase of Cameron's film. So if a film about Titanic can inspire a successor to the QE2 how would the rebuild of the Titanic change transatlantic travel? Imagine Titanic II entering service with 6 day crossings while QM2 was doing 8 days! Cunard would have to speed her up. But far more than speed, Titanic II would help restore the elegance the even Cunard has now decided to be "too tight".

Edited May 23, 2013 by BlueRiband

[pmb1]

She would be dwarfed by most of the cruise ships built within the last 10 years.

 

Cunard will just watch what unfolds and see if it affects market demands.

Payne himself, in a talk to Webb Institute students, said that QM2 exists only becuase of Cameron's film. So if a film about Titanic can inspire a successor to the QE2 how would the rebuild of the Titanic change transatlantic travel? Imagine Titanic II entering service with 6 day crossings while QM2 was doing 8 days! Cunard would have to speed her up. But far more than speed, Titanic II would help restore the elegance the even Cunard has now decided to be "too tight".

I believe that a ship of Titanic II's relatively small size will go broke trying to run a year-round six-day trans-Atlantic service. Hey, there are many modern ships out there of Titanic II's proposed size and not one of them is attempting to make money on the North Atlantic. No doubt that an April 12 memorial cruise will be sold out every year, but what about the other 51 weeks of the year?

[glojo]

I believe that a ship of Titanic II's relatively small size will go broke trying to run a year-round six-day trans-Atlantic service. Hey, there are many modern ships out there of Titanic II's proposed size and not one of them is attempting to make money on the North Atlantic. No doubt that an April 12 memorial cruise will be sold out every year, but what about the other 51 weeks of the year?

I am only reading small snippets of Internet talk regarding this ship and is it solely going to carry out crossings of the North Atlantic?

 

Are they going to be six days duration?

 

I have heard the owner claim on the first crossing the ship will be escorted across the Atlantic west bound by the US Navy and they have invited the Royal NAvy to escort the ship for the return voyage.

 

I have an open mind regarding whether the ship will be built and am slowly drifting towards the corner that believes it may indeed become a reality. However will it be capable of regular six day crossings?? I am thinking of eastbound trips whjere it may well have to average probably a speed of 25 knots!!! The old Titanic could not reach that speed and could this ship? Are berths for the ships booked months, if not years in advance and any delays in arrival might have financial implications? (question)

 

All references I see regarding this new venture talk about a cruise ship as opposed to a liner carrying out a regular, scheduled all year round event but....... I look forward to folks kindly posting links that will answer my queries.

 

Compared to the larger cruise ships Titanic 2 is small but is she small compared to other cruise ships that ply their trade across the seven seas, my thoughts are she is most certainly not but that is me :)

[Cruachan]

...Compared to the larger cruise ships Titanic 2 is small but is she small compared to other cruise ships that ply their trade across the seven seas, my thoughts are she is most certainly not but that is me :)

 

Well, compared to the large ones she's small and compared to the small ones she's large. Job done!

 

:D

 

J

[glojo]

Well, compared to the large ones she's small and compared to the small ones she's large. Job done!

 

:D

 

J

My thoughts entirely :D Does this make her average sized ;)

 

I am impressed with the azipod technology that a significant number of modern cruise ships are now using and I see this ship will also take advantage of this type of propulsion.

[Cruachan]

My thoughts entirely :D Does this make her average sized ;)

 

Well, if she is built to the same gross as Titanic, she will be c45,000gt.

 

Based on a sample of 363 cruise ships currently in operation, the average gross tonnage is 52,107.

 

So, were she ever to appear "in the metal", she would be slightly below the average size for a modern cruise ship.

 

J

[glojo]

Well, if she is built to the same gross as Titanic, she will be c45,000gt.

 

Based on a sample of 363 cruise ships currently in operation, the average gross tonnage is 52,107.

 

So, were she ever to appear "in the metal", she would be slightly below the average size for a modern cruise ship.

 

J

Slightly under 'average' works for me.

 

Silversea Cruises has a ship that visit Antarctica and they boast the following figures:

 

Tonnage 6,130 GT

Displacement 1905 MT

 

If we look at the rest of that fleet then the ships are far smaller than Titanic. I have not compared her to any of the Fred Olsen ships but I just feel she is of a decent size for deep water cruising?

 

Not my idea of a modern cruise ship and definitely not something I would buy a ticket for but each to their own.

 

If and it is a BIG if.... If she were to do scheduled six day crossings then e would she be the only ship doing that? The Queen Mary 2 might just be able to do it in one direction on her diesel engines but eastbound trips would see her using the gas turbines to reach the very high speeds that would be required.

[Cruachan]

...Not my idea of a modern cruise ship and definitely not something I would buy a ticket for but each to their own...

 

Nothing on the face of this planet or any other one would persuade me to set foot on this lunatic's half-baked replica of a doomed ship and take part in his floating fancy dress party. At least not so long as a more pleasant alternative, like having red hot darning needles driven into my eyeballs, was available.

 

J

[glojo]

Nothing on the face of this planet or any other one would persuade me to set foot on this lunatic's half-baked replica of a doomed ship and take part in his floating fancy dress party. At least not so long as a more pleasant alternative, like having red hot darning needles driven into my eyeballs, was available.

 

J

Can I assume from your post that you will not be camping out to reserve a ticket for that inaugral cruise? :D:D

 

I'm with you on this and feel Richard Branson's idea of space flight is a better way of funding a new venture. ;) Hopefully this is not seen as advertising as this is not my intent.

[BlueRiband]

I believe that a ship of Titanic II's relatively small size will go broke trying to run a year-round six-day trans-Atlantic service. Hey, there are many modern ships out there of Titanic II's proposed size and not one of them is attempting to make money on the North Atlantic. No doubt that an April 12 memorial cruise will be sold out every year, but what about the other 51 weeks of the year?

 

It's very doubtful she would sail strictly as a North Atlantic liner. As for 6 day crossings, it's speculation on my part. (And some argue the ship's supposed construction is itself speculation.) There is simply not enough of a year round market to support the fares Blue Star Line would have to charge. Palmer will also want her to spend some time in the Australian market.

 

If the ship sails for two years and generates nothing but red ink, gets laid up for ten years before finally scrapped, he'll have nonetheless forever made a name for himself as the man who brought back Titanic. (How many of us know who he was or even cared until he announced Titanic II?)

Edited May 23, 2013 by BlueRiband