4 ms·

I'm only a few episodes in but so far it seems reasonable. It doesn't involve intentially killing the people, since if the ship didn't hit an iceberg there wou

I'm only a few episodes in but so far it seems reasonable. It doesn't involve intentially killing the people, since if the ship didn't hit an iceberg there would have been time to rescue them.

hef19898 4y ago
Let's assume the complete BS theory for a second. It would mean to switch two huge ships without anyone noticing. Repainting, changing the interior and all that involves a shipyard. Once that is done successsfully wothout anyone wondering why they are painting Titanic over the letter Britannic or something else, nobody in the crew should realize it. It wouod also mean the naval architect of those ships is in on it as he was onboard. Then it means having some ships in port on stabd by for the rescue ops, again hard to ccordinated without anybody on those ships eondering why they are still in port. In port, well, that it self is stupid. Why not have them on route and near by the Titanic when you scuttle her? Because scuttling is what you have to do, on high seas, without the people opening the valves to turn on you later. And why? Because unless there is some other shipping towing an iceberg to the Titanic to convenently hit, how exactky do you sink a perfectly good ship? So it either all of that, or it is just an accident caused by bad technology, bad practices, incomoetence, corporate preasure ans greed and bad luck. Your pick on what you want to believe.
- akvadrako 4y ago
  Many of your questions indeed have already been answered in the first few episodes. Just a few quick points: > Repainting, changing the interior and all that involves a shipyard. The ships were in shipyards together after the damage to the Olympic, and major parts were swapped between them. Sure, many people would notice. > Why not have them on route and near by the Titanic They were meant to have ships nearby. > how exactly do you sink a perfectly good ship? The iceberg wasn't meant to sink it. When the ship left port, there was a large fire on board, one that had been going for days or weeks.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    Ah, I wondered when you would bring up the tremendously dangerous, and absolutely normal for the time, bunker fire. Guess which bunker was emptied first, ad was common practice on coal fired ships? I assume next in line will the pictures showing the extensive heat damage on the hull caused by that fire. Those damages you only see in one picture of a whole sequence when the Titanic left port and simple shadows.
    - akvadrako 4y ago
      I don't know about damage to the hull but at the official investigation they did mention the fire was bad enough they needed to cut holes in a bulkhead for the smoke to escape. And those two sections, if flooded, would be enough to sink the ship. I'm not sure if that's the theory on how it was supposed to happen.

I'm only a few episodes in but so far it seems reasonable. It doesn't involve intentially killing the people, since if the ship didn't hit an iceberg there would have been time to rescue them.

hef19898 4y ago

Let's assume the complete BS theory for a second. It would mean to switch two huge ships without anyone noticing. Repainting, changing the interior and all that involves a shipyard. Once that is done successsfully wothout anyone wondering why they are painting Titanic over the letter Britannic or something else, nobody in the crew should realize it. It wouod also mean the naval architect of those ships is in on it as he was onboard. Then it means having some ships in port on stabd by for the rescue ops, again hard to ccordinated without anybody on those ships eondering why they are still in port. In port, well, that it self is stupid. Why not have them on route and near by the Titanic when you scuttle her? Because scuttling is what you have to do, on high seas, without the people opening the valves to turn on you later. And why? Because unless there is some other shipping towing an iceberg to the Titanic to convenently hit, how exactky do you sink a perfectly good ship? So it either all of that, or it is just an accident caused by bad technology, bad practices, incomoetence, corporate preasure ans greed and bad luck. Your pick on what you want to believe.

akvadrako 4y ago
Many of your questions indeed have already been answered in the first few episodes. Just a few quick points: > Repainting, changing the interior and all that involves a shipyard. The ships were in shipyards together after the damage to the Olympic, and major parts were swapped between them. Sure, many people would notice. > Why not have them on route and near by the Titanic They were meant to have ships nearby. > how exactly do you sink a perfectly good ship? The iceberg wasn't meant to sink it. When the ship left port, there was a large fire on board, one that had been going for days or weeks.
- hef19898 4y ago
  Ah, I wondered when you would bring up the tremendously dangerous, and absolutely normal for the time, bunker fire. Guess which bunker was emptied first, ad was common practice on coal fired ships? I assume next in line will the pictures showing the extensive heat damage on the hull caused by that fire. Those damages you only see in one picture of a whole sequence when the Titanic left port and simple shadows.
  - akvadrako 4y ago
    I don't know about damage to the hull but at the official investigation they did mention the fire was bad enough they needed to cut holes in a bulkhead for the smoke to escape. And those two sections, if flooded, would be enough to sink the ship. I'm not sure if that's the theory on how it was supposed to happen.