Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but let's fail to mention that JPMorgan died less than one year later in rome, Italy
morgan owned International Mercantile Marine Company, which owned white star (titantic).....the titantic going down was a financial disaster for IMM, (morgan) which was forced to apply for bankruptcy protection in 1915. Analysis of financial records shows that IMM was overleveraged and suffered from inadequate cash flow that caused it to default on bond interest payments. Saved by World War I, IMM eventually reemerged as the United States Lines, which itself went bankrupt in 1986. Morgan lost heavily on the deal.
But let's fail to mention J.P. Morgan was seen frolicking with his mistress 2 days later in France.
The answer has been posted in the specialized Titanic forums. I think you need to read more widely on this subject to be able to continue discussing this topic.
The answer has been posted in the specialized Titanic forums. I think you need to read more widely on this subject to be able to continue discussing this topic.
""""""Gardiner further hypothesizes that the ship that was hit by the Titanic(olympic) was the one seen by the Californian firing distress rockets, and that this explains the perceived inaction of the Californian (which traditionally is seen as failing to come to the rescue of the Titanic(olympic) after sighting its distress rockets). Gardiner's hypothesis is that the Californian was not expecting rockets, but a rendezvous.""""""
Researchers Bruce Beveridge and Steve Hall took issue with many of Gardiner's claims in their book, Olympic and Titanic: The Truth Behind the Conspiracy. Author Mark Chirnside has also debunked the switch theory.
There is also evidence that Gardiner's theory is not true. When parts of the wreck were recovered, the construction number 401 was found on all of them. 401 was the Titanic's construction number, the number of the Olympic was 400.
and as far as the insurance
it cost 7.5 million to build titanic...but it was only insured for less than 5 million....so they would take a 2,5 million dollar loss...meanwhile the damage to Olypmic was estimated to be 100k -150k (IMM (parent of white lines) has a net profit in 1910 of only 4 million....do you really think they could afford to take a 2-3 milion dollars loss in 1912????
Because I know how to research. I just told you how to do it. Do it and learn on your own. No one can think for you or read for you but they can tell you were to find information. Learn and be your own man instead of relying on others.
Because I know how to research. I just told you how to do it. Do it and learn on your own. No one can think for you or read for you but they can tell you were to find information. Learn and be your own man instead of relying on others.
Which Titanic forum? A link to your answer would be nice.
1. the olympic was smaller than the titantic (the 2nds olympic class and BIGGER ship)
Both vessels were identical from a visual perspective, having the same overall dimensions. The Titanic was larger by about 1000 Tons due mainly to the expansion of 1st accommodations. Only those intimately familiar with the construction of both ships could have discerned the difference, but certainly not the passengers. Since this was Titanic's maiden voyage, there could be no one actually familiar with both ships to draw a comparison other than those who built the thing, or the very few passengers and crew in the 1st Class section, and those builders would not be partaking in the luxuries incorporated in the expanded amenities offered on the new vessel's high dollar section reserved for the fortunate few.
What is another interesting twist .... the "Olympic" received a "refit" in 1912, after the sinking of the "Titanic", becoming larger as a result. This is documented, so later voyages would see a more "Titanic like" refitted version of the "Olympic" ... how interesting to those who might claim how the larger "Titanic" could not have gone unnoticed as it masqueraded as the Olympic for many years thereafter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
2. the olympic sailed until 1935
3. the third ship (originnally to be named Gigantic) the britanic, was constructed in 1914 with post-Titanic modifications...she struck a MINE and sank in 1916.....the remains (of the wreck) It was first discovered and explored by Jacques Cousteau in 1975
Olympic's first major mishap occurred on 20 September 1911, when she collided with a British warship, HMS Hawke off the Isle of Wight. Although the incident resulted in the flooding of two of her compartments and a twisted propeller shaft, Olympic was able to return to Southampton under her own power. . One crew member, Violet Jessop, survived not only the collision with the Hawke but also the later sinking of Titanic and the 1916 sinking of Britannic, the third ship of the class.
Olympic returned to Belfast, and to speed up her repair, Harland and Wolff was forced to delay Titanic's completion in order to use her propeller shaft for Olympic. In February 1912, Olympic lost a propeller blade, and once again returned to her builder for repairs. To get her back to service as soon as possible, Harland & Wolff again had to pull resources from Titanic, delaying her maiden voyage from 20 March 1912 to 10 April 1912.
the olympic was even painted camoflage during ww1
And all of this is relevant how? Or evidence of what? Nothing. If the ships were switched prior to the Titanic's maiden voyage, and the Olympic was actually the ship that sailed and subsequently sunk instead of the Titanic ... and the Titanic (masquarading as the Olympic) was refitted in 1912, making any differences undetectable for later voyages .... how would that effect any other portion of the history of the two ships? It wouldn't change a thing ... other than the insurance money paid to White Star Lines for the switched vessel.
Everything else would be the same. One ship sunk ... the other ship didn't. The only implications here is the insurance fraud, and the fact that lots of people lost their lives due to an intentional act, rather than an accident.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
