gaaboard.com

Is it me getting old and grumpy? But I couldn't give a flying f**k about some old ship built in a sectarian cesspit which is now at the bottom of the sea. I am sick to death listening to The BBC and UTV wittering on about it. Only the Irish could celebrate such a glorious failure. Sailed once sank once. As the man in the dinning room on the Titanic said to the waiter I know I asked for ice but this is ridiculous! Boom Boom.

(http://i325.photobucket.com/albums/k389/quantumleaping/553242_10150803001742812_775622811_11634537_942010258_n.jpg)

There were catholics who worked on Titanic.

And yes I'm intrested in Titanic have been for years. i'm looking forward to going to visit the iceberg building

Ould wans on Livewhine today saying the museum is a "disappointment". I didn't hear it all right but apparently they promote the stairway as the centrepiece of the whole thing, but it's not accessible when you go there - just a video presentation or something. Anyway - loads of fuel for "it's a disgrace, Joe", etc.

I had an interest in it but by Jaysus I am sick to the teeth with it on the media!!!

Quote from: Gaffer on April 12, 2012, 04:10:44 PM
I had an interest in it but by Jaysus I am sick to the teeth with it on the media!!!

+1

Quote from: ziggysego on April 12, 2012, 04:13:54 PM

Quote from: Gaffer on April 12, 2012, 04:10:44 PM
I had an interest in it but by Jaysus I am sick to the teeth with it on the media!!!

+1

+2

It was interesting to learn about as a youngster but i am just about sick to the balls of it. What I find annoying is that the local media, and bbc and UTV in particular, have been nothing more than tourist vehicles for the whole charade.

(http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/10645/Largest-Metaphor_jpg_445x1000_upscale_q85.jpg)

I tried to find some kind of resolution nearly a year ago - http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19397.0 - but it descended into a sectarian mudfight. Men were lost forever after the fall-out....

Quote from: ONeill on April 12, 2012, 04:23:31 PM
I tried to find some kind of resolution nearly a year ago - http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19397.0 - but it descended into a sectarian mudfight. Men were lost forever after the fall-out....

Ahead of your time. I'm sick listening to the whole thing. Regards employment practices at the yard they are well documented and undisputed. It still remains one of many vessals that sank, the unsinkable ship a prime example if ever there was one of the folly of man.

Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

There are a lot of untrue facts about the Titanic.

Whitestar never claimed the Titanic was unsinkable, The media created that when she sank.

There is a lot of intresting misfacts that you never here

Getting sick of hearing about the Addergoole 14 on the local radio station.

I am interested in the Titanic, but all this recent hype is beginning to annoy me.

This Titanic museum is more about a celebration rather than remembering the 1,500 people who went down with it, mostly the lower classes who were probably caged in like animals.

Personally though, I would be more inclined to believe the story that it was deliberately sank as part of an insurance scam.

Fascinated by it myself, but there's not too much hype in the US about it so far, beyond the re-release of the Cameron film, and a couple of documentaries on Nat Geo involving Cameron and Robert Ballard (he visited Belfast and interviewed descendents of H&W key personnel and showcased the legal trade in artifacts and the damage and desecration of the wreck by unregulated dives and artifact theft.

Quote from: oisinog on April 12, 2012, 07:53:10 PM
There are a lot of untrue facts about the Titanic.

Whitestar never claimed the Titanic was unsinkable, The media created that when she sank.

There is a lot of intresting misfacts that you never here

Bertie never said the economy was unsinkable.

Poor misunderstood Bertie.

I heard the mayor of belfast on the radio yesterday in new York. He was promoting and very proud of his city as he should be. I laughed to myself when he said to the interviewer " you don't sound very convinced".  Interviewer brought up the "troubles" and was quickly told they were well over.
Sounded like a fella that could do well in American politics, and is 28 years old which was very interesting.

Quote from: Hardy on April 12, 2012, 04:07:28 PM
Ould wans on Livewhine today saying the museum is a "disappointment". I didn't hear it all right but apparently they promote the stairway as the centrepiece of the whole thing, but it's not accessible when you go there - just a video presentation or something. Anyway - loads of fuel for "it's a disgrace, Joe", etc.

It's true, you need to be at least a z list celeb to get on the stairs. Hearing them say on the radio a few months back that childrens buggies were banned was enough for me. That and the extortionate entrance fee. Won't be near it, unless work sends me down.


(http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/multimedia/dynamic/00672/Titanic_Staircase_M_672540t.jpg)

Fury over JLS Titanic Belfast staircase visit

Row as pop pair get to re-create 'Jack and Rose' moment

JLS frontman Marvin Humes and his fiance Rochelle Wiseman, from The Saturdays, were so thrilled with their visit to Titanic Belfast, they tweeted a photo of themselves on the replica staircase.

But the picture of the couple at the city's landmark new building has sparked a furious reaction online.

The pair posed for their Jack and Rose moment on Friday, recreating the famous scene from James Cameron's epic 1997 film Titanic.

But readers on websites have hit out at the centre for allowing celebrities the chance to pose on the iconic staircase while paying visitors cannot.

The staircase, situated on the top floor conference and banqueting suite of the building, does not permit the public to view it on the usual tour — a decision that has already prompted controversy.

One reader posted: "Lucky them that they get to pose on the staircase when the rest of us don't!! Us commoners have to buy tickets for 'Staircase Sunday' if we even want to see the stairs."

Another said: "It's ridiculous that the staircase is being used to promote this attraction when it isn't included in the tour. False advertising methinks. Nice to see the class system lives on!"

The launch of Titanic Belfast was well received earlier this month , with thousands of international visitors descending on the city. Tickets have sold out until April 16.

On Sunday a spokesman for Titanic Belfast said it would be hosting 'Titanic Tea Parties across selected Sundays in May and June' — close to the staircase, asking visitors to check its website for details of what they have dubbed 'Staircase Sunday' events.

Sharing her picture on Twitter, Saturdays star Rochelle Wiseman wrote: "Big thanks to Claire & everyone at the Titanic tour #belfast for staying open late for us! Here's our Rose&Jack pic ;)."

She and Marvin were in the city ahead of the JLS concert at the Odyssey Arena.

Quote from: hardstation on April 12, 2012, 09:42:10 PM
I hate the Titanic.

Me too,sick to the balls with the whole thing.

I'm fairly interested in it but then I'm fairly interested in the stories around any of those type disasters. I can't stand the whole celebration theme though and this idea we should be proud of it, why exactly? It makes me cringe.

I only caught bits of that other thread about the museum - what was the conclusion, is it worth going to it?

Only oen good thing to have come from this:

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/Aaron1927/crispst.jpg)

These and the beef flavour ones are my crisp of choice at the minute.

Im starving and your putting crisp packets on here and ONeill is tweeting about ordering a chinese  :'(

I am interested in (though not obsessive about) the Titanic. As regards the Belfast Exhibit etc, I am holding off from expressing an opinion both until I've seen it, and also until I've seen how successful (or otherwise) it proves.

However I do get a bit pissed off when people spout opinions (either way) from a position of ignorance.

Quote from: BennyCake on April 12, 2012, 08:18:20 PMThis Titanic museum is more about a celebration rather than remembering the 1,500 people who went down with it...

Have you actually been to it yet?
I personally haven't, so I can't say whether it's a "celebration" or a commemoration.

Quote from: BennyCake on April 12, 2012, 08:18:20 PM... mostly the lower classes who were probably* caged in like animals.

I have been to a Titanic exhibition in London. One of the things I learned there was that by the standards of the day, 3rd Class ("steerage") on the Titanic far exceeded 3rd class on comparable ships, in terms of facilities and comfort. For example:
"67. Third-class accommodations of Titanic rivaled the first-class quality found on most liners of the late 1800s and were far more elegant than most second- and third-class accommodations on other liners in 1912."
http://www.reporternews.com/news/2012/apr/07/titanic-at-100-100-facts-that-tell-the-story/
Or:
"Third class on the Titanic was absolutely stupendous compared to the times. On the Titanic, third class accommodations were like that of second class of any other liner or shipping company. Though the White Star Line focused a lot on first class wealth, they did not do away with third class. The White Star Line knew that third class passengers were coming to America to start a new life and that they were moving all of their belongings across the Atlantic for a fresh start.
Third class berths were fairly luxurious in their own way, they provided electric lighting, heat, and wash basins. In fact the accommodations in third class were far better than the life they had left from where the came from."
http://titanicstation.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/third-class.html


* - Always a bit of a giveaway for a bullsh1tter... ::)

Quote from: BennyCake on April 12, 2012, 08:18:20 PMPersonally though, I would be more inclined to believe the story that it was deliberately sank as part of an insurance scam.

Why waste your time on 100 year old conspiracies, when there are any number of other, more recent plots which would benefit from your knowledge, expertise and finely honed skills of forensic analysis eg 9/11, the Moon landings or the murder of Princess Diana...

Quote from: oisinog on April 12, 2012, 07:53:10 PM
There are a lot of untrue facts about the Titanic.

Whitestar never claimed the Titanic was unsinkable, The media created that when she sank.

There is a lot of intresting misfacts that you never here

Captain Smith Believed Titanic To Be Unsinkable

 
Washington Times

Tuesday 16 April 1912

That Captain Smith believed the Titanic and the Olympic to be absolutely unsinkable is recalled by a man who had a conversation with the veteran commander on a recent voyage of the Olympic.

The talk was concerning the accident in which the British warship Hawke rammed the Olympic.

"The commander of the Hawke was entirely to blame," commented a young officer who was in the group. "He was 'showing off' his warship before a throng of passengers and made a miscalculation."

Captain Smith smiled enigmatically at the theory advanced by his subordinate, but made no comment as to this view of the mishap.

"Anyhow," declared Captain Smith, "the Olympic is unsinkable, and the Titanic will be the same when she is put in commission."Why," he continued, "either of these vessels could be cut in halves and each half would remain afloat indefinitely. The non-sinkable vessel has been reached in these two wonderful craft."

"I venture to add," concluded Captain Smith, "that even if the engines and boilers of these vessels were to fall through their bottoms the vessels would remain afloat."

Quote from: Don Johnson on April 12, 2012, 10:40:58 PM
Only oen good thing to have come from this:

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/Aaron1927/crispst.jpg)

These and the beef flavour ones are my crisp of choice at the minute.

They would go down well.

(http://cdn.omg-facts.com/2012/4/3/372b58a8ebfaf2a0bd9d45655d5df35d)

Quote from: ONeill on April 12, 2012, 11:02:49 PM

Quote from: oisinog on April 12, 2012, 07:53:10 PM
There are a lot of untrue facts about the Titanic.

Whitestar never claimed the Titanic was unsinkable, The media created that when she sank.

There is a lot of intresting misfacts that you never here

Captain Smith Believed Titanic To Be Unsinkable

 
Washington Times

Tuesday 16 April 1912

That Captain Smith believed the Titanic and the Olympic to be absolutely unsinkable is recalled by a man who had a conversation with the veteran commander on a recent voyage of the Olympic.

The talk was concerning the accident in which the British warship Hawke rammed the Olympic.

"The commander of the Hawke was entirely to blame," commented a young officer who was in the group. "He was 'showing off' his warship before a throng of passengers and made a miscalculation."

Captain Smith smiled enigmatically at the theory advanced by his subordinate, but made no comment as to this view of the mishap.

"Anyhow," declared Captain Smith, "the Olympic is unsinkable, and the Titanic will be the same when she is put in commission."Why," he continued, "either of these vessels could be cut in halves and each half would remain afloat indefinitely. The non-sinkable vessel has been reached in these two wonderful craft."

"I venture to add," concluded Captain Smith, "that even if the engines and boilers of these vessels were to fall through their bottoms the vessels would remain afloat."

Captain Smith (assuming he said those things) was not speaking on behalf of White Star.

Anyhow, it seems the notion that icebergs weren't that  big a danger to shipping stemmed from an incident 43 years earlier, when another liner, the "SS Arizona" hit a berg but stayed afloat:

"On 7 November 1879, Arizona suffered a collision with an iceberg en route to Liverpool. [Owner] Stephen Guion was on board with two of his nieces. While the damage was severe, she remained afloat and was able to proceed to St. John's where she underwent temporary repairs before returning to Scotland. Guion advertised this near disaster as proof of Arizona's strength"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Arizona

The key difference was that the Arizona was steaming in thick fog, so no-one saw the iceberg until it hit head-on. Consequently, the bow of the ship took the full impact, so that it crumpled without causing major damage to the ship's bulkheads.

On the night of the Titanic's collision, there was no fog, but neither was there any moonlight either. As a result, the lookout was unable to see the iceberg in the distance, but did see it just before impact. He naturally shouted a warning, just in time for the ship to attempt evasive action.

However the ship was unable to avoid the iceberg completely, so that the berg tore a long hole in the side of the ship under the waterline, penetrating 5 adjoining compartments. The Titanic was built to withstand flooding in three compartments, but no more than that, so it was pretty unlucky all round.

Ironically, had the lookout not seen the iceberg at all, modern experts reckon that the ship was so strong that she would have survived a head-on collison with no major damage, and possibly few casualties (there were very few crew, and no passengers near the bow).

Apparently modern advice to shipping is that if a collision with an iceberg should prove unavoidable, ships should maintain a course so as to hit it head-on.  :o

Two sister ships were built by H&W around the same time but rarely get a mention.

Did Marvin from JLS say when the new album is due out?

She cannot sink, says official of White Star Line

"Absolutely no fear is entertained for the safety of the passengers."

P A S Franklin, Vice-President of the International Mercantile Marine, declared this morning that the Titanic was unsinkable, and that, notwithstanding the alarming reports of her collision with an iceberg, absolutely no fear was entertained for the safety of the passengers.

"While we have had no direct wireless communication from the Titanic," said Mr Franklin, "we are satisfied that the vessel is unsinkable. Our only reports thus far are from the Associated Press. The fact that the Titanic has sent us no wireless does not cause alarm. In the first place her failure to communicate with the line may be due to atmospheric conditions; and, in the second place, she may be too busy communicating with nearby ships.

"No one need fear that the Titanic will go down. Even though all her former compartments and bulkheads were stove in by the iceberg, she would still float indefinitely. She might go down a little at the bow, but she would float. I am free to say that no matter how bad the collision with an iceberg, the Titanic would float. She is an unsinkable ship.

"From the messages we have received we estimate that the Titanic is 1,000 miles from New York, in latitude 41.46 and longitude 50.14 west. That would make her 600 miles southeast of Halifax.

"The steamship Virginian, out of Halifax, should reach Titanic at 10 o'clock this morning. The Olympic, bound east, should make to the rescue at 8 o'clock tonight, and the Baltic, which had passed the Titanic, has put about and should join the rescuing fleet at 4 o'clock.

"We feel certain that all of the passengers will be landed safely in Halifax. Their relatives and friends need entertain no fears. From our revised lists we find that there are 325 saloon passengers, 300 second cabin passengers, and 800 steerage passengers."

There are fifteen bulkheads in the Titanic. Two of these are what is known as collision bulkheads, and the other thirteen are water tight and of the kind common to modern steamers. One collision bulkhead is in the fore part of the hull, fifty feet from the bow. It is of steel, with no inlet into the hold, and it is entered from the main deck when an examination is necessary. The other collision bulkhead is at the stern and also must be entered from the main deck.

The other thirteen bulkheads divide the hull of the Titanic into separate compartments and doors into these divisions can be closed separately or all at one time. The closing mechanism is hydraulic. It is said by marine engineers that there is no case on record in which any collision or other accident to a modern steamer has put this hydraulic mechanism out of commission.

There is, however, and element of weakness in the strongest of the water-tight bulkheads of even such a ship as the Titanic, which lies in the pressure resisting power of the bulkheads. While it is claimed that two compartments of the Titanic could be flooded with water without the vessel either sinking or losing steerageway, it is admitted that, were any of the compartments flooded with water, the pressure of water on those bulkheads might cause a leak which would admit water into the next compartment, and so on from one bulkhead to the next, until the hull was water-logged.

Builders of Titanic say she'd survive great blow

Belfast, April 15, 1912. — A representative of Harland and Wolff, the constructors of the Titanic, interviewed today, said that if the Titanic were sinking, the collision must have been of great force.

The plating of the vessel, he said, was of the heaviest caliber and even if it were pierced, any two of her compartments could be flooded without imperilling the safety of the ship.

At right: Clip from marketing brochure on Titanic and her sister ship: "As far as it is possible to do so, these two wonderful vessels are designed to be unsinkable..."

(http://archiveamericana.com/wp-content/uploads/titanic-designed-to-be-unsinkable.png)

I thought this was interesting. It supports the argument that the use of 'unsinkable' as promo before the sinking led to a relaxed attitude to the safety and evacuation procedures as she floundered. You'd need to make your own mind up about some of the material.

http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page2.htm

Quote from: Evil Genius on April 12, 2012, 11:30:09 PM

On the night of the Titanic's collision, there was no fog, but neither was there any moonlight either. As a result, the lookout was unable to see the iceberg in the distance, but did see it just before impact. He naturally shouted a warning, just in time for the ship to attempt evasive action.

However the ship was unable to avoid the iceberg completely, so that the berg tore a long hole in the side of the ship under the waterline, penetrating 5 adjoining compartments. The Titanic was built to withstand flooding in three compartments, but no more than that, so it was pretty unlucky all round.

Ironically, had the lookout not seen the iceberg at all, modern experts reckon that the ship was so strong that she would have survived a head-on collison with no major damage, and possibly few casualties (there were very few crew, and no passengers near the bow).

The above information makes it pretty clear that -- even on a dark night -- icebergs can nevertheless be seen at distances of up to two miles from a shipboard observer. However, it is also pretty clear that an isolated iceberg with quirky physical characteristics (height, color, shape etc.) can sometimes avoid being seen by a ship's lookouts until that berg has moved far closer to a vessel than its more visible - but more distant -- neighbors.

It is this writer's opinion that, on the night of April 14, 1912, it was the *excellent* visibility (rather than *reduced* visibility) that was one of the primary causes of the Titanic disaster. The Titanic's officers were apparently so utterly confident of their ability to see icebergs at great distances that they maintained the Titanic's high speed in the mistaken belief that they would have plenty of time to alter course and avoid any berg that might appear directly in the path of the ship.

Researchers who have read the present author's book, "Titanic: Safety, Speed and Sacrifice" are already familiar with the evidence which suggests that the Titanic's lookouts may have sighted and reported three separate, distant icebergs that passed by the Titanic during the half-hour that preceded her encounter with the *fatal* iceberg at 11:40 p.m. The present author can't help but wonder if the sighting of these three 'early' icebergs at a considerable distance from the Titanic might have contributed to the overconfidence that was exhibited by the Titanic's officers that night. After all, if the lookouts were able to see three passing icebergs at distances of up to two miles from the ship, the Titanic's officers would have had no reason to believe that the lookouts could not see *all* icebergs at ranges of up to two miles -- which would have given the officers plenty of time and distance in which to alter the Titanic's course in order to avoid a potential collision.

Sadly, the Titanic's officers were mistaken in their belief that the night's crystal clear visibility would insure that their speeding vessel would be kept safe from all harm.

http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page16.htm

Just one man's opinion but interesting all the same.

Quote from: Evil Genius on April 12, 2012, 10:46:25 PM

Quote from: BennyCake on April 12, 2012, 08:18:20 PMPersonally though, I would be more inclined to believe the story that it was deliberately sank as part of an insurance scam.

Why waste your time on 100 year old conspiracies, when there are any number of other, more recent plots which would benefit from your knowledge, expertise and finely honed skills of forensic analysis eg 9/11, the Moon landings or the murder of Princess Diana...

;D

Holy god never in my life have i been as sickened hearing about something. Actually stopped watching the ITV an BBC news as much, due to the s**t they call "reporting" on this subject.

100000 tickets presold for the exhibit suggests a lot of people are interested.

It suggests the publicity sh*t worked. ;)

Funny quote form the Anderson Show the other day: "..thousands of Americans were surprised to learn that the sinking of the Titanic is a true story and not just a movie!"

O'Neill all the reports you provided are after the ship sank the media were putting their own spin on it.

No one ever claimed that the Titanic was "unsinkable". The quote, "practically unsinkable" was taken out of context. In 1911, Shipbuilder magazine published an article describing the construction of the Titanic. The article stated that when the watertight doors were closed, the ship would be "practically unsinkable".

It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

Certainly not the greatest ship of our time as it sank! It's a tragedy that so many died but, hey I only asked the question was it just me being grumpy? I guess you would say yes.

Quote from: Last Man on April 13, 2012, 09:29:49 AM
Funny quote form the Anderson Show the other day: "..thousands of Americans were surprised to learn that the sinking of the Titanic is a true story and not just a movie!"

Sums up the Yanks.

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 13, 2012, 11:10:41 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

Certainly not the greatest ship of our time as it sank! It's a tragedy that so many died but, hey I only asked the question was it just me being grumpy? I guess you would say yes.

Apples its split accross everyone. I have a friend who works in a hotel and she will kill the next person who mentions titanic to her.

I love my history which is why I am intrested in it

Quote from: laceer on April 13, 2012, 10:55:03 AM
It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Think you are wrong there Laceer. America doesn't "do failure" like we do here in Europe and whatever way you look at it Titanic was a complete and utter disaster.

Quote from: Canalman on April 13, 2012, 11:28:53 AM

Quote from: laceer on April 13, 2012, 10:55:03 AM
It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Think you are wrong there Laceer. America doesn't "do failure" like we do here in Europe and whatever way you look at it Titanic was a complete and utter disaster.

The film did pretty well in America though? I'd say America would "do" anything that would make a buck

Quote from: Last Man on April 13, 2012, 09:29:49 AM
Funny quote form the Anderson Show the other day: "..thousands of Americans were surprised to learn that the sinking of the Titanic is a true story and not just a movie!"

In fairness in a nation of c300 million people that is not too bad. Sad to say but I would be confident in saying that there are "thousands" in this fair isle of ours who think likewise.

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 12, 2012, 03:42:07 PMIs it me getting old and grumpy? But I couldn't give a flying f**k about some old ship built in a sectarian cesspit which is now at the bottom of the sea. I am sick to death listening to The BBC and UTV wittering on about it. Only the Irish could celebrate such a glorious failure. Sailed once sank once. As the man in the dinning room on the Titanic said to the waiter I know I asked for ice but this is ridiculous! Boom Boom.

Is your "sectarian cesspit" comment at the bottom of your distaste for all this attention on the Titanic?

For if it is, then you appear somewhat ignorant. Una Reilly*, founder of the Belfast Titanic Society, was on the radio earlier. She pointed out that a study of the 1911 Census reveals that not only were the streets around the shipyard religiously mixed, but even some of the houses, and that there were many Catholics who worked on the Titanic.

Which is not to say that everything was "fine and dandy" for Catholics at H&W at the time  - they certainly weren't - but it is a matter of historical record that it was a combination of the Home Rule Crisis later in 1912, WWI and the Troubles around Partition etc, which led to Catholics being put out of the yard (esp in 1921) and the movement of large numbers of Catholics from East to West Belfast.

And by the time these deplorable events had occurred, Titanic had already been built, sailed and sunk.


* - Ms. Reilly is herself a Catholic, having been inspired to research the history of the Titanic by the memory of her (Catholic) great-grandfather, who had worked on the ship for H&W.

Quote from: Canalman on April 13, 2012, 11:28:53 AM

Quote from: laceer on April 13, 2012, 10:55:03 AM
It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Think you are wrong there Laceer. America doesn't "do failure" like we do here in Europe and whatever way you look at it Titanic was a complete and utter disaster.

Perhaps a bit simplistic [bold]?

For example, Custer and the Little Big Horn, The Alamo, Pearl Harbor, the murders of Lincoln and JFK and the whole 9/11 Ground Zero attacks were all epic failures, but however they have been portrayed since, they can hardly be said to have been ignored.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vetaFnJ2TpQ&feature=related


Titanic 2

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 11:24:28 AM

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 13, 2012, 11:10:41 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

Certainly not the greatest ship of our time as it sank! It's a tragedy that so many died but, hey I only asked the question was it just me being grumpy? I guess you would say yes.

Apples its split accross everyone. I have a friend who works in a hotel and she will kill the next person who mentions titanic to her.

I love my history which is why I am intrested in it

I love my history as well but this is just a publicity and moneymaking scheme, which while I'm not saying is a bad thing it just doesn't "Rock my Boat".

Quote from: ziggy90 on April 13, 2012, 12:39:01 PM

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 11:24:28 AM

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 13, 2012, 11:10:41 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

Certainly not the greatest ship of our time as it sank! It's a tragedy that so many died but, hey I only asked the question was it just me being grumpy? I guess you would say yes.

Apples its split accross everyone. I have a friend who works in a hotel and she will kill the next person who mentions titanic to her.

I love my history which is why I am intrested in it

I love my history as well but this is just a publicity and moneymaking scheme, which while I'm not saying is a bad thing it just doesn't "Rock my Boat".

Belfast are not the only city using Titanic this year to boost tourisim.
Liverpool is also using Titanic and the only history there is that thats were the ship was registered

Quote from: Evil Genius on April 13, 2012, 12:10:05 PM

Quote from: Canalman on April 13, 2012, 11:28:53 AM

Quote from: laceer on April 13, 2012, 10:55:03 AM
It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Think you are wrong there Laceer. America doesn't "do failure" like we do here in Europe and whatever way you look at it Titanic was a complete and utter disaster.

Perhaps a bit simplistic [bold]?

For example, Custer and the Little Big Horn, The Alamo, Pearl Harbor, the murders of Lincoln and JFK and the whole 9/11 Ground Zero attacks were all epic failures, but however they have been portrayed since, they can hardly be said to have been ignored.

Missing my point EG.............. where did I mention "ignored".

For what it is worth  the examples you mention were acts of violence/"war" (loosely termed I know) and not for want of a better term a "natural disaster".

My point is that no city in the USA with any shipbuilding history or any ambition to foster heavy industry etc in the future would imvho have any type of "celebration" of an iconic and expensively built ship that failed to even make its 1st journey.

As for the loss of life in the sinking I have no problem with that being memorialized as in Pearl Harbour. Manhattan etc.
Doubt all Americans regard Little Big Horn as an "epic failure". Always thought the Americans won that battle.

Mourning the dead I have no problem with, making a tourist attraction of it .................mmmm!

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 09:48:27 AM

No one ever claimed that the Titanic was "unsinkable". The quote, "practically unsinkable" was taken out of context.

How do you know that no one ever claimed that the Titanic was unsinkable before 1912?

The link I provided ( http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page2.htm ) indicates a plethora of such descriptions - even from survivors who wrote letters before they'd reached land - "...The 'Titanic' was considered a 'non-sinkable' boat."....

I understand the PR benefit to Belfast. I know it'll probably be an economic success over time. I know the intrigue it created coupled with Kate Winslett in the buff.

However - here is my reading:

The Titanic was substandard. Safety had been sacrificed in favour of luxury and the race to be the biggest and best. All the craic about compartments closing if in danger and double bottoms etc was pointless bunkum as it transpired. The crew failed. The boat failed. It was a tragic disaster. Even when leaving Southampton it nearly wrecked another boat. The unsinkable nonsense seemingly negated the need for extra lifeboats and effective evacuation procedures. It appears that even as it was looking like the yoke would definitely drown, with its snout struggling to stay afloat, some still thought it wouldn't. Even after it sank some believed it didn't because it couldn't surely.

H&W would've been better off building a few small boats to sail around Lough Neagh collecting eels for the international market. The Germans can't get enough of our eels yet we would rather have a fish supper. Even the pollan is a lovely fish fried and it's all ours. Titanic my hole.

Quote from: ONeill on April 13, 2012, 01:24:18 PM
I understand the PR benefit to Belfast. I know it'll probably be an economic success over time. I know the intrigue it created coupled with Kate Winslett in the buff.

However - here is my reading:

The Titanic was substandard. Safety had been sacrificed in favour of luxury and the race to be the biggest and best. All the craic about compartments closing if in danger and double bottoms etc was pointless bunkum as it transpired. The crew failed. The boat failed. It was a tragic disaster. Even when leaving Southampton it nearly wrecked another boat. The unsinkable nonsense seemingly negated the need for extra lifeboats and effective evacuation procedures. It appears that even as it was looking like the yoke would definitely drown, with its snout struggling to stay afloat, some still thought it wouldn't. Even after it sank some believed it didn't because it couldn't surely.

H&W would've been better off building a few small boats to sail around Lough Neagh collecting eels for the international market. The Germans can't get enough of our eels yet we would rather have a fish supper. Even the pollan is a lovely fish fried and it's all ours. Titanic my hole.

A feed of eels might have prevented them from getting cross and starting WWI. We'll never know.

Quote from: ONeill on April 13, 2012, 01:24:18 PM

However - here is my reading:

The Titanic was substandard. Safety had been sacrificed in favour of luxury and the race to be the biggest and best. All the craic about compartments closing if in danger and double bottoms etc was pointless bunkum as it transpired. The crew failed. The boat failed. It was a tragic disaster. Even when leaving Southampton it nearly wrecked another boat. The unsinkable nonsense seemingly negated the need for extra lifeboats and effective evacuation procedures. It appears that even as it was looking like the yoke would definitely drown, with its snout struggling to stay afloat, some still thought it wouldn't. Even after it sank some believed it didn't because it couldn't surely.

H&W would've been better off building a few small boats to sail around Lough Neagh collecting eels for the international market. The Germans can't get enough of our eels yet we would rather have a fish supper. Even the pollan is a lovely fish fried and it's all ours. Titanic my hole.

The Titanic was built for JP Morgan - the Bill Gates of his day - after H&W brought him to Belfast. There was not another shipyard in the world capable of building so large a ship and even then H&W had to build the world's biggest dry-dock for the purpose.

And if safety and standards etc were a concern, then these were driven primarily by the people who commissioned, operated and crewed the ship, plus the Government of the day, not the builders. For example, Lifeboat provision was well within the Board of Trade requirements; indeed, Lifeboats were not thought of in those days as a means of rescuing a complete ship's crew and passenger list. Rather, they were intended as a means of ferrying people back and forwards to other ships, or to land.

As for the "unsinkable" tag, that was a myth perpetuated before and after the event by others, not by H&W. In fact, when the designer Thomas Andrews was informed that five compartments had been breeched, he knew then that it must sink, and him with it.

As for the build standard, the Titanic was built by the same people, using the same methods and materials, and at the same time as eg the RMS Olympic:
"Olympic served a long and illustrious career (1911 to 1935), including service as a troopship during World War I, earning the nickname "Old Reliable." She was the largest ocean liner in the world for two periods in 1911–13, interrupted only by the brief career of the slightly larger Titanic."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Olympic

And as for being better off building "a few boats for Lough Neagh etc", Titanic was known to H&W as "No.401" for a reason i.e. there were 400 ships built by the yard before her. And that's before you get to all the ships which were built there afterwards, including for two World Wars and the more recent cruise industry, eg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Canberra

In fact, mention of the Canberra brings to mind another  piece of trivia to illustrate the scale of the Titanic etc. When Australia decided it needed a new bridge over Sydney Harbour, despite having enormous reserves of coal and iron etc, there wasn't a steel works in the entire country capable of building it. Instead the bridge had to be built in the UK and shipped out to Oz. And that was in 1932 - 20 years after little old Belfast was building the Titanic. And the Olympic. And the Britannic...

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 12:42:05 PM

Quote from: ziggy90 on April 13, 2012, 12:39:01 PM

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 11:24:28 AM

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 13, 2012, 11:10:41 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
Ya must watch a lot of news!! I haven't really heard a peep about it. Though I don't watch the news at all. If ya don't care about it why put up a thread about it and give it more attention? (well on here)

If the ship had have been built on the Liffey by a load of taigs and not too many prods would we be raving about it?

Wind your necks in. A few facts, the greatest ship built (of it's time) Built here on our wee island. Crashed on it's maiden voyage into an iceberg!! 1500 souls died and due to the deaths changes on design and health and safety measures were taken (namely adequate lifebouts) on new builds.

Certainly not the greatest ship of our time as it sank! It's a tragedy that so many died but, hey I only asked the question was it just me being grumpy? I guess you would say yes.

Apples its split accross everyone. I have a friend who works in a hotel and she will kill the next person who mentions titanic to her.

I love my history which is why I am intrested in it

I love my history as well but this is just a publicity and moneymaking scheme, which while I'm not saying is a bad thing it just doesn't "Rock my Boat".

Belfast are not the only city using Titanic this year to boost tourisim.
Liverpool is also using Titanic and the only history there is that thats were the ship was registered

It was on the local news last night that 75% of the interior of the Titanic was manufactured here in Birmingham & the Black Country.

Quote from: Canalman on April 13, 2012, 01:00:00 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on April 13, 2012, 12:10:05 PM

Quote from: Canalman on April 13, 2012, 11:28:53 AM

Quote from: laceer on April 13, 2012, 10:55:03 AM
It's about time this place cashed in on the story of the Titanic. If it had been built in America the theme park would be in its 50th year by now. Anything that brings money and/or jobs to this part of the world should be welcomed

Think you are wrong there Laceer. America doesn't "do failure" like we do here in Europe and whatever way you look at it Titanic was a complete and utter disaster.

Perhaps a bit simplistic [bold]?

For example, Custer and the Little Big Horn, The Alamo, Pearl Harbor, the murders of Lincoln and JFK and the whole 9/11 Ground Zero attacks were all epic failures, but however they have been portrayed since, they can hardly be said to have been ignored.

Missing my point EG.............. where did I mention "ignored".

For what it is worth  the examples you mention were acts of violence/"war" (loosely termed I know) and not for want of a better term a "natural disaster".

My point is that no city in the USA with any shipbuilding history or any ambition to foster heavy industry etc in the future would imvho have any type of "celebration" of an iconic and expensively built ship that failed to even make its 1st journey.

As for the loss of life in the sinking I have no problem with that being memorialized as in Pearl Harbour. Manhattan etc.
Doubt all Americans regard Little Big Horn as an "epic failure". Always thought the Americans won that battle.

Mourning the dead I have no problem with, making a tourist attraction of it .................mmmm!

The Americans got their arses handed to them at the Little Bighorn. However, they won the war with the Sioux within a couple of months. The massacre of the 7th Calvary galvinized public opinion against the Native Americans, especially with the news hitting the east cost on the centenery of the Declaration of Independence and Custer's already large celebrity.

Part of what makes the Titanic story so engaging is difference of opinions that it has created over the last 100 years

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 02:25:33 PM
Part of what makes the Titanic story so engaging is difference of opinions that it has created over the last 100 years

No, it definitely sank.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 13, 2012, 04:25:55 PM

Quote from: oisinog on April 13, 2012, 02:25:33 PM
Part of what makes the Titanic story so engaging is difference of opinions that it has created over the last 100 years

No, it definitely sank.

Are you sure?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxEMJD2Qlg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxEMJD2Qlg)

The late non-appearance of JP Morgan on-board, sounds very like the telephone calls to certain politicians on 9/11 and 7/7, not to attend certain places in New York and London.

Getting rid of opposers to the Federal Reserve who were on-board was a bonus.

(http://www.dailytorygraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG_0021-700x522.jpg)

My Dad worked in the shipyard in WW2. Some of the guys still there had worked on the Titanic. But they rated the Olympic, the Titanic was basically a copy, the engineering challenges came with the first one.

The ship was not believed to entirely unsinkable, but people believed that it would sink slowly, and so rescue ships could arrive. The compartment thing was designed for a head on collision, the compartments may even have been a disadvantage for an iceberg ripping along the side of the ship. Oddly enough if they had rammed the iceberg, everyone would have felt the collision but the ship might have taken longer to sink. In this case the prow of the ship would have been wrecked, but probably only the first two compartments, and it would have stayed afloat. One problem was the quality of the steel and the rivets in the hull, which were not the best. They knew this, as the Olympic had already had a collision and suffered some damage to the hull.  But still it took an improbable combination of bad luck to sink Titanic.

The unsinkable thing lead to there being not enough lifeboats. Perhaps the evacuation wasn't as good as it should have been, but without lifeboats did it really matter?

Still sick to my hole listening to it. Sorry EG I now truly believe the shipyards were a bastion of religious and political tolerance, there was no such thing as a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People and I also believe in Santa. But sarcasm aside I have no problem with the Titanic except it was a disaster and tragedy for those drowned, but the Irish, masters of the Moral Victory believe it's worth celebrating. And our press including the Beeb and UTV are in overkill overdrive.

QuoteThe Titanic was built for JP Morgan - the Bill Gates of his day - after H&W brought him to Belfast. There was not another shipyard in the world capable of building so large a ship and even then H&W had to build the world's biggest dry-dock for the purpose.

I can understand why H&W would be an attraction, the place where the titanic was built etc but I'm always a bit confused about what exactly we're suppose to be celebrating, is that it then?
Considering the shipyard's history I wouldn't be crowing too much. 

I am going to Titanic - The Musical in the Opera House. Just about to open a bottle of wine to prepare myself.

Quote from: Rois on April 14, 2012, 02:15:12 PM
I am going to Titanic - The Musical in the Opera House. Just about to open a bottle of wine to prepare myself.

You should have a cup of Titanic tea and maybe a packet of Tayto Titanic crisps before you go. I am sure there are other Titanic products.

If the wine goes down as well as the ship you'll have a great day. (Isn't it a bit early to be starting on the wine?)

Quote from: Rois on April 14, 2012, 02:15:12 PM
I am going to Titanic - The Musical in the Opera House. Just about to open a bottle of wine to prepare myself.

I'd have a second if I was you!

Quote from: Agent Orange on April 14, 2012, 02:22:26 PM

Quote from: Rois on April 14, 2012, 02:15:12 PM
I am going to Titanic - The Musical in the Opera House. Just about to open a bottle of wine to prepare myself.

You should have a cup of Titanic tea and maybe a packet of Tayto Titanic crisps before you go. I am sure there are other Titanic products.

If the wine goes down as well as the ship you'll have a great day. (Isn't it a bit early to be starting on the wine?)

Tayto Crisps, my fav. Though not them ones from the South. Northern Tayto are better. You can, apart from taste tell the difference from both, the Ulster crisps are a bit of an orange colour. :)

Quote from: hardstation on April 14, 2012, 11:17:24 PM
It may be about to kick off on twitter....

@TitanicRealTime

There's a vibration in the cabin and not a sex toy to be found.

(http://runnersnewgroove.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/shit-just-got-real.jpeg)

Quote from: Tony Baloney on April 14, 2012, 11:18:14 PM

Quote from: hardstation on April 14, 2012, 11:17:24 PM
It may be about to kick off on twitter....

@TitanicRealTime

There's a vibration in the cabin and not a sex toy to be found.

National Geographic have been doing it for a couple of weeks now on Twitter.

#Titanic100live

I see ONeill was right about the "unsinkable" ship.

Programme on More4 now. Bad rivets used in the curved parts of the ship because they were easier to put in manually and the machine couldn't curve.  :-\

I am sick to the teeth listening about the titanic, couldn't give a flying f**k as someone has already said we must be the only place in the world to celebrate failure. This place in Belfast that was opened apparantly has to get 300,000 people through the door every year to make it worthwhile. It will be another White elephant like the millennium dome, another big waste of tax payers money

Well that's nearly it untill another 100 years, looking forward to it.

I see BBC presenter Andrew Marr called Titanic commemorations 'sordid and tasteless and very dull', asking where does it end will we see documentaries about air crashes in the future.

Good man yerself Andrew!!

The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

(http://memearchive.net/memerial.net/231/i-love-colouring.jpg)

Just saw this. Did anyone do anything to celebrate the Titanic?

Quote from: Olly on April 16, 2012, 05:16:39 PM
Just saw this. Did anyone do anything to celebrate the Titanic?

Yea, I went to watch Mayo beating Kerry.

Quote from: muppet on April 16, 2012, 05:28:31 PM

Quote from: Olly on April 16, 2012, 05:16:39 PM
Just saw this. Did anyone do anything to celebrate the Titanic?

Yea, I went to watch Mayo beating Kerry.

Kerry = Cruising, practically unsinkable?
Mayo = Iceberg. Gone in the heat of the summer?

Quote from: Applesisapples on April 14, 2012, 11:22:45 AM
Still sick to my hole listening to it. Sorry EG I now truly believe the shipyards were a bastion of religious and political tolerance, there was no such thing as a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People and I also believe in Santa. But sarcasm aside I have no problem with the Titanic except it was a disaster and tragedy for those drowned, but the Irish, masters of the Moral Victory believe it's worth celebrating. And our press including the Beeb and UTV are in overkill overdrive.

Not in 1912 anyway.

Quote from: LeoMc on April 16, 2012, 05:32:34 PM

Quote from: muppet on April 16, 2012, 05:28:31 PM

Quote from: Olly on April 16, 2012, 05:16:39 PM
Just saw this. Did anyone do anything to celebrate the Titanic?

Yea, I went to watch Mayo beating Kerry.

Kerry = Cruising, practically unsinkable?
Mayo = Iceberg. Gone in the heat of the summer?

;D very good

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 16, 2012, 07:34:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Dunno, some journalist had it on Twitter earlier. They have been off for two weeks and their first bit of business was a chat about the Titanic.

@DianaRusk
After a two week recess, the assembly meets today for four hours. An hour and a half of which is dedicated to the Titanic.

That's what you'd call effective representation.

Quote from: Maguire01 on April 16, 2012, 09:03:27 PM
@DianaRusk
After a two week recess, the assembly meets today for four hours. An hour and a half of which is dedicated to the Titanic.

That's what you'd call effective representation.

Yeah it was from Rusk where I read it.

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 07:52:50 PM

Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 16, 2012, 07:34:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Dunno, some journalist had it on Twitter earlier. They have been off for two weeks and their first bit of business was a chat about the Titanic.

Not any auld chat! Some DUP fella wants a Titanic memorial at Stormont because there just hasnt been enough public money spent on it. Some other Alliance chap wanted to red up Andrew Marr. Some outfit.

Quote from: Tony Baloney on April 16, 2012, 09:26:01 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 07:52:50 PM

Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 16, 2012, 07:34:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Dunno, some journalist had it on Twitter earlier. They have been off for two weeks and their first bit of business was a chat about the Titanic.

Not any auld chat! Some DUP fella wants a Titanic memorial at Stormont because there just hasnt been enough public money spent on it. Some other Alliance chap wanted to red up Andrew Marr. Some outfit.

I read that about the proposal for a memorial in Stormont - ridiculous - they've just unveiled a memorial outside the city hall. Enough is enough.

Quote from: Maguire01 on April 16, 2012, 09:40:38 PM

Quote from: Tony Baloney on April 16, 2012, 09:26:01 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 07:52:50 PM

Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 16, 2012, 07:34:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Dunno, some journalist had it on Twitter earlier. They have been off for two weeks and their first bit of business was a chat about the Titanic.

Not any auld chat! Some DUP fella wants a Titanic memorial at Stormont because there just hasnt been enough public money spent on it. Some other Alliance chap wanted to red up Andrew Marr. Some outfit.

I read that about the proposal for a memorial in Stormont - ridiculous - they've just unveiled a memorial outside the city hall. Enough is enough.

Would be another photo opportunity though.

Clowns at stormont. SF mayor of Belfast no better. Whole thing is a feckin disaster.

The Times - Kevin Maher

Now that "Titanic Day" has finally passed, and that we've all duly bowed our heads in remembrance of the 1,500 souls who perished so tragically in the icy waters of the North Atlantic, can we all get together as a global community, join hands and solemnly say the words "Never again"?

Never again will we allow ourselves to indulge in a month-long spectacle of such abject breast-beating idiocy as to be almost incomprehensible. The TV shows, the documentaries, the newspaper features and the movie re-release.
Between you and me, I simply don't get it. Ship sinks a hundred years ago. Lots of people drown. And?

Why, for instance, don't we get equally wobbly-lipped when we remember the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 (death toll: 1,198)? Or the Tenerife airport disaster of 1977, when two fully loaded jumbo jets crashed into each other on the runway of Los Rodeos Airport, killing 583 passengers?

Or the Piper Alpha disaster? Or the Hindenburg? Or the freak lightning strike that hit a munitions dump in the Palace of the Grand Masters in Rhodes in 1856, killing the 4,000 people who were gathered in the adjacent church?
But no, say Titanic enthusiasts, Titanic is different because it's about man's hubris and his Promethean belief in technology over the power of Nature, and it's got real human drama, and the quintessential "what would I do?" lifeboat dilemma too. Which is all utter nonsense.
The narrative of the Lusitania disaster contains all the above, but with a bonus dollop of political intrigue and pivotal questions about how many of the passengers knew that their ship's hold was full of US munitions bound for the war effort, thus making her a juicy target for the U-boats that eventually torpedoed her off the southern coast of Ireland.

Equally, the Tenerife crash even has its own iceberg, in the form of a thick and inexplicable fog that suddenly blanketed the runways — you can picture the movie now, can't you? The pilots saying, "I've never seen anything like it!" The control tower bamboozled. And then suddenly, the worst.
Ultimately, I blame the movies. Or, at least, I blame James Cameron's insufferably saccharine Winslet and DiCaprio love-in, Titanic. Until the arrival of that film in 1997 it seemed that the preservation of Titanic lore had been confined to a few bearded nerds with crazy stares and questionable social skills, much like Cameron himself.

But then (and this is what actually happened) at the exact same cultural moment, computer-generated movie effects peaked, thus allowing Cameron to deliver previously unimagined disaster spectacle, plus Hollywood studio marketing departments began to actively target the profitable yet neglected teenage-girl demographic (hence the ramping up of the film's love story), plus the pre-release publicity around Titanic, which concentrated on the fact that it had become the most expensive movie ever filmed, created a wildly contagious curiosity buzz that ensured a mammoth opening weekend, if nothing else.
In the end, of course, the entire planet went to see Titanic, and often two, or three, or ten times (it made $1.8 billion on its initial release). Inevitably, the real-life tragedy, in the hearts and minds of millions of people, was magically transformed into a thing of numinous mystery, defined only by the weeping face of Kate Winslet and the preternatural warbling of Celine Dion.
Even those who decry the movie today cannot deny that it is has essentially become a monumental PR campaign for Titanic-ites everywhere.

Yet surely it's better to remember that it's also a lie? That Titanic is just a ship that sank. And that the Lusitania centenary is only three years away. And counting!

The real story on RTÉ now. In case you don't know the story.

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 07:52:50 PM

Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 16, 2012, 07:34:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 16, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
The aren't finished with it yet, the MLAs in Stormont are having a 2 hr debate about it this morning. I can just imagine them sitting with a Titanic colouring in book.

A 2hr debate about what exactly?

Dunno, some journalist had it on Twitter earlier. They have been off for two weeks and their first bit of business was a chat about the Titanic.

Wouldn't want them overdoing it on their 1st day back!

Quote from: armaghniac on April 16, 2012, 10:38:45 PM
The real story on RTÉ now. In case you don't know the story.

Fire up a *spoiler alert* in case you mention the ending  ;)

QuoteFire up a *spoiler alert* in case you mention the ending

Hard to know at this stage, a lot of pumping going on.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 16, 2012, 11:53:08 PM

QuoteFire up a *spoiler alert* in case you mention the ending

Hard to know at this stage, a lot of pumping going on.

Are you sure you're not watching James Cameron's Titanic?

QuoteAre you sure you're not watching James Cameron's Titanic?

No.  :)


Although that film has its knockers, it wasn't the worst.

I won't reveal the ending of the one I was watching.

It was on Channel 5 yesterday.

Things get heated between Colin and Philip on the Titanic coverage debate.

Stephen Nolan - BBC Radio Ulster (http://audioboo.fm/boos/757594-things-get-heated-between-colin-and-philip-on-the-titanic-coverage-debate)

I hear even Celine Dion's sick listening to her own song. Says they play it in every restaurant she shows up in as if they're paying "tribute" to her, little do they know she can't abide the bloody thing and even hates having to sing it now. And who can blame her? True story.

Quote from: Eamonnca1 on April 17, 2012, 05:39:48 AM
I hear even Celine Dion's sick listening to her own song. Says they play it in every restaurant she shows up in as if they're paying "tribute" to her, little do they know she can't abide the bloody thing and even hates having to sing it now. And who can blame her? True story.

She told you herself?

QuoteSays they play it in every restaurant she shows up in as if they're paying "tribute" to her, little do they know she can't abide the bloody thing and even hates having to sing it now.

I'd say she gets a sinking feeling when it starts up in a restaurant.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 17, 2012, 12:28:02 AM

Although that film has its knockers, it wasn't the worst.

I bet they're not as good as Kate's. Quite frankly I blame those two things for the whole sorry waste of money that is the Titanic guff that's all over Belfast.

Quote from: sheamy on April 17, 2012, 09:36:40 AM

Quote from: armaghniac on April 17, 2012, 12:28:02 AM

Although that film has its knockers, it wasn't the worst.

I bet they're not as good as Kate's. Quite frankly I blame those two things for the whole sorry waste of money that is the Titanic guff that's all over Belfast.

You dont think it would be more appropriate to blame the arseholes who are trying to create a tourist industry out of a tragedy caused in part by cost cutting and poor engineering?

You dont see the home of Boeing celebrating air crashes ffs, the whole thing is ridiculous. It all comes down to 'Norn Irn' being a shitty state which has f**k all decent culture so feels the need to latch on to any spurious shite that comes along, and if that just happens to be a bastion of protestantism, all the better

Quote from: haranguerer on April 17, 2012, 10:49:12 AM
It all comes down to 'Norn Irn' being a shitty state which has f**k all decent culture so feels the need to latch on to any spurious shite that comes along, and if that just happens to be a bastion of protestantism, all the better

That is it in a nutshell haranguerer. It's the absence of a culture which gives rise to this kind of shite. There is a culture which is both historically rooted and modern. It's a gaelic culture but that's the culture that dare not speak its name. When you suppress that, you get sunken boats in its stead.

There is worldwide interest in the titanic story - its hardly just the pro-proddy northern conspirators.
Yesterday in NY a ticket for the titanic maiden voyage was auctioned for  $56,250, and a menu from the ship for $31,250.

You dont have to like it, but some of the gurning about it like nobody in the world is interested is simply ridiculous.

Quote from: sheamy on April 17, 2012, 11:02:27 AM

Quote from: haranguerer on April 17, 2012, 10:49:12 AM
It all comes down to 'Norn Irn' being a shitty state which has f**k all decent culture so feels the need to latch on to any spurious shite that comes along, and if that just happens to be a bastion of protestantism, all the better

That is it in a nutshell haranguerer. It's the absence of a culture which gives rise to this kind of shite. There is a culture which is both historically rooted and modern. It's a gaelic culture but that's the culture that dare not speak its name. When you suppress that, you get sunken boats in its stead.

Exactly,


Northern Ireland, celebrating death and tragedy since 1921.

I hear the Belgians are starting work on the 'Zeebrugge Ferry' quarter shortly

Quote from: nifan on April 17, 2012, 11:12:23 AM
There is worldwide interest in the titanic story - its hardly just the pro-proddy northern conspirators.
Yesterday in NY a ticket for the titanic maiden voyage was auctioned for  $56,250, and a menu from the ship for $31,250.

You dont have to like it, but some of the gurning about it like nobody in the world is interested is simply ridiculous.

Theres interest in many things, and there are people who collect many things. Not all of them have an expensive tax payer funded centre, nor weeks of wall to wall coverage on two regional channels.

Thats not to even mention that a lot of the interest is because the ship was supposed to be unsinkable, but sank on its first voyage. The yard, workers and city that built it should actually be embarrassed of such a perfect failure.

But what is really annoying is the amount of promotion. There may be some interest NIfan, but do you honestly think it deserves the amount of coverage its getting on two regional channels? Its sickening and patronising to see these agencies combine to try to whip up interest to justify an expensive white elephant.

I for one cant wait until the building is sold off, for its stunning, and it will be good to see it used for something that actually gets people in sustainably.

Quote from: Eamonnca1 on April 17, 2012, 05:39:48 AM
I hear even Celine Dion's sick listening to her own song. Says they play it in every restaurant she shows up in as if they're paying "tribute" to her, little do they know she can't abide the bloody thing and even hates having to sing it now. And who can blame her? True story.

She's sick of hearing it?! How does she think the rest of us feel, hearing that whiney voice of hers?!

Anyone wants an idea of how to breath life into a dull industrial city need look no further than Bilbao in the Basque Country.

That was kick started by the creation of the  Guggenheim Museum, which like the Titanic Building, is a fantastic piece of architecture. Its use as a modern art gallery is also dynamic and forwarding looking.

Like haranguerer, I also look forward to the day the Titanic building is used for something sensible and less grotesque. Unfortunately that might be harder to achieve now.

Unlike Belfast, Bilbao followed up with an award winning state of the art rapid transit system. If you want to bring tourists and jobs, get the basics like this right first, not some sham of a branding process. 

QuoteNorthern Ireland, celebrating death and tragedy since 1921.

What about 1690? (Whataboutery being also a local cultural trait)

Our time

(http://ulster.gaa.ie/wp-content/themes/ucgaa_v2/img/uc_champ_launch_web_banner_01.jpg)

Our place

I nearly f*cking cried when I saw that earlier Ulick...I totally give up

Are they actually using the  'Our time Our place logo?'

f**k me, what a disaster. Such a parochial f**king logo - like the harp one which ensured I never drank it again - 'Its 'our' thing'. Inward looking Norn Irn shite

Quote from: haranguerer on April 17, 2012, 05:12:41 PM
Are they actually using the  'Our time Our place logo?'

f**k me, what a disaster. Such a parochial f**king logo - like the harp one which ensured I never drank it again - 'Its 'our' thing'. Inward looking Norn Irn shite

Nothing to do with the fact that it tastes like pish.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 17, 2012, 10:49:12 AM
You dont think it would be more appropriate to blame the arseholes who are trying to create a tourist industry out of a tragedy caused in part by cost cutting and poor engineering?

You dont see the home of Boeing celebrating air crashes ffs, the whole thing is ridiculous. It all comes down to 'Norn Irn' being a shitty state which has f**k all decent culture so feels the need to latch on to any spurious shite that comes along, and if that just happens to be a bastion of protestantism, all the better

I mind them talking about this on TalkBack years ago.  They were talking about some place in Down that had a tour guide paid a full time wage to talk to tourists about the place's connection to Beatrice Potter. Its claim to fame was that she stayed there for a few summers, and that was about it.  The north's full of that sort of thing. Any tenuous connection to anything reasonably well known and they try to turn it into a tourist attraction. I'm surprised there's not a DeLorean Visitor's Centre in Dunmurry. (Please don't tell them I said that or it'll put ideas in their heads.)

Sure there are murals on the Falls Road purely to attract tourists.

Quote from: Minder on April 17, 2012, 05:46:00 PM
Sure there are murals on the Falls Road purely to attract tourists.

The majority aren't there for the tourist, but as a form of expression.

Quote from: ziggysego on April 17, 2012, 05:54:38 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 17, 2012, 05:46:00 PM
Sure there are murals on the Falls Road purely to attract tourists.

The majority aren't there for the tourist, but as a form of expression.

Do the murals prove the existence of God, that is the question?

Quote from: ziggysego on April 17, 2012, 05:54:38 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 17, 2012, 05:46:00 PM
Sure there are murals on the Falls Road purely to attract tourists.

The majority aren't there for the tourist, but as a form of expression.

Disagree, they are there for the Black Taxi Tours.

@glinner It is now 100 years from the day that everyone started getting sick of hearing about the Titanic

Quote from: muppet on April 17, 2012, 05:59:08 PM

Quote from: ziggysego on April 17, 2012, 05:54:38 PM

Quote from: Minder on April 17, 2012, 05:46:00 PM
Sure there are murals on the Falls Road purely to attract tourists.

The majority aren't there for the tourist, but as a form of expression.

Do the murals prove the existence of God, that is the question?

Well some say there's no other way of accounting for murals.

Oh wait ... that's morals.

Oh - I think I've just repeated your joke.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 17, 2012, 12:37:56 PM

QuoteNorthern Ireland, celebrating death and tragedy since 1921.

What about 1690? (Whataboutery being also a local cultural trait)

What's next? We'll be celebrating the hunger strikes next, have bloody tourist going up and down the Falls road looking at shitty murals and driving them to the worst kept grave yard in Western Europe!!

Although I really can't see that taking off :o

Ya never know, they might celebrate the Easter Rising FFS

Quote from: Hardy on April 17, 2012, 07:11:45 PM
Oh - I think I've just repeated your joke.

Its ok, you need a laugh after Banty.

Surely the biggest joke is Titanic 3D. Who would go to see this?

Spoof trailer below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJxj1mou03M

If you dig through the morass of indulgent crap you can find the odd interesting piece, last night's programme about Thomas Ryan the Askeaton farmer who sucessfully sued the White Star Line over the loss of his son was an interesting story spoiled a bit by the simpering of the presenter, Julie McCullough, who kept referring the "Ireland" as if it was somewhere south of Uruguay.  Also of course they had to shoehorn in the new Titanic building in Belfast when it really had feck all to do with the story.  Also on Monday there was a drama about the official inquiry into the loss of the Titanic specifically the role of the Californian and its captain Stanley Lord.  Not brilliant but interesting nonetheless.

(http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnjq4yrZmq1qzamioo1_500.jpg)

There was one of these at a commemoration event in Antrim's Loughshore Park paid for by the Council...I think we can close the thread now.

The above is a legend in tastelessness, it gives you a sinking feeling.

In response to Titantic the 3D version, here is the 1D version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD3QfJnn2-Y

Theres certainly going to be many interesting stories, but to pump millions in to attempt to create a tourist industry around it is stupid and ridiculous. The Beatrix Potter thing doesnt surprise me either - anything that may seperate Norn Irn from its actual heritage is grabbed at.

Is the visitor centre at Eamhain Macha still open? Would the injection of a few hundred million not have made the historic home of Irelands kings a world beating tourist attraction, which has more than tenuous (and not embarrassing) links to something tangible??

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 11:12:53 AM
Theres certainly going to be many interesting stories, but to pump millions in to attempt to create a tourist industry around it is stupid and ridiculous. The Beatrix Potter thing doesnt surprise me either - anything that may seperate Norn Irn from its actual heritage is grabbed at.

Is the visitor centre at Eamhain Macha still open? Would the injection of a few hundred million not have made the historic home of Irelands kings a world beating tourist attraction, which has more than tenuous (and not embarrassing) links to something tangible??

What do you have in mind?

Quote from: sheamy on April 17, 2012, 11:41:43 AM
Like haranguerer, I also look forward to the day the Titanic building is used for something sensible and less grotesque. Unfortunately that might be harder to achieve now.

I don't think the purpose of the building is grotesque. It was the fanfare around the whole Titanic subject - the MTV concert, the constant BBC/UTV coverage - that was less tasteful.  The building is fine. It's already being used for numerous different kinds of events and will continue as a 'museum' as long as the demand is there.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 11:12:53 AM
Is the visitor centre at Eamhain Macha still open? Would the injection of a few hundred million not have made the historic home of Irelands kings a world beating tourist attraction, which has more than tenuous (and not embarrassing) links to something tangible??

A few hundred million? The Titanic thing was only around £80m!
Also, whilst your proposal might be nice, I can't see the demand.

(http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/543616_434587286556021_312267482121336_1882231_1736939949_n.jpg)
The cameraman got a good angle on the sign!

Quote from: LeoMc on April 18, 2012, 04:56:56 PM

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 11:12:53 AM
Theres certainly going to be many interesting stories, but to pump millions in to attempt to create a tourist industry around it is stupid and ridiculous. The Beatrix Potter thing doesnt surprise me either - anything that may seperate Norn Irn from its actual heritage is grabbed at.

Is the visitor centre at Eamhain Macha still open? Would the injection of a few hundred million not have made the historic home of Irelands kings a world beating tourist attraction, which has more than tenuous (and not embarrassing) links to something tangible??

What do you have in mind?

Interactive galleries, 3d holograms, banqueting halls, that kind of thing, y'know?

Maguire - I dont believe the demand for the titanic is sustainable. Theres nothing wrong with trying to capitalise on something that has captured the public imagination, and if theres money to be made by someone, then fair play. However, to put well over £100million (check it), of public money into one very fragile, tenuous, and somewhat tasteless basket, seems downright stupid, and I think if they were willing to show this level of support to some tourist project, they could have picked a much better theme to champion.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 09:50:16 PM
Maguire - I dont believe the demand for the titanic is sustainable. Theres nothing wrong with trying to capitalise on something that has captured the public imagination, and if theres money to be made by someone, then fair play. However, to put well over £100million (check it), of public money into one very fragile, tenuous, and somewhat tasteless basket, seems downright stupid, and I think if they were willing to show this level of support to some tourist project, they could have picked a much better theme to champion.

I don't know whether it's sustainable in the long term as a visitor centre either. But it was built, as you say, to capitalise on an existing interest. I'm not sure you can manufacture a significant interest from nothing just as easily. Have you anything else in mind that could become an attraction for 300,000 visitors a year?

Not sure it's a waste of money even if it isn't sustainable as a visitor centre either - the Millenium Dome in London was labelled as such and has managed to reinvent itself as a very busy concert venue. If over 10 years or so the visitor numbers plummet, it doesn't necessarily mean that £Xm was wasted on what is a great piece of architecture.

And when I checked, the building cost £77m - £60m public and £17m private.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17552802

Quote from: sheamy on April 18, 2012, 09:23:42 AM
(http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnjq4yrZmq1qzamioo1_500.jpg)

There was one of these at a commemoration event in Antrim's Loughshore Park paid for by the Council...I think we can close the thread now.

You think that's bad? Wait to you see this....

(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/BWzsxsobQw85C.nxKo76vA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://l.yimg.com/os/251/2012/04/13/tubtanic-jpg_104314.jpg)

(http://zedomax.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/ginandtitonic-1.jpg)

(http://totallytop10.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/titanic-skull-money-box.jpg)
A money box

Vegas does it best, boys.  The hot dawgs go on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp1vASIwe4M)

Quote from: Maguire01 on April 18, 2012, 11:13:28 PM

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 09:50:16 PM
Maguire - I dont believe the demand for the titanic is sustainable. Theres nothing wrong with trying to capitalise on something that has captured the public imagination, and if theres money to be made by someone, then fair play. However, to put well over £100million (check it), of public money into one very fragile, tenuous, and somewhat tasteless basket, seems downright stupid, and I think if they were willing to show this level of support to some tourist project, they could have picked a much better theme to champion.

I don't know whether it's sustainable in the long term as a visitor centre either. But it was built, as you say, to capitalise on an existing interest. I'm not sure you can manufacture a significant interest from nothing just as easily. Have you anything else in mind that could become an attraction for 300,000 visitors a year?

Not sure it's a waste of money even if it isn't sustainable as a visitor centre either - the Millenium Dome in London was labelled as such and has managed to reinvent itself as a very busy concert venue. If over 10 years or so the visitor numbers plummet, it doesn't necessarily mean that £Xm was wasted on what is a great piece of architecture.

And when I checked, the building cost £77m - £60m public and £17m private.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17552802

More bullshit from the local media then'. This is from here www.titanic-foundation.org - FAQs (cant link as its a downloaded file)

'How much will Titanic Belfast cost?
The cost of the building is £97 million (including VAT and in kind contributions from Belfast
Harbour Commission).'
'
Add in the other work on the titanic project and its well above £100m.

This 300,000 visitors a year figure is never going to happen with this project. And its probably easier to manufacture significant interest out of 'nothing' than it is to latch onto something. Any visitors centre is gonna struggle, becuase no matter how good they rely on an exisiting interest, which already limits your market, (or exisiting trade, as in an already high volume of tourists, which we dont have). Noone is going to go on holiday to the titanic centre - many people go on holiday to eurodisney. They should have looked for something that was an attraction in itself, be it a theme park or similar.

We've got the odyssey, which is already one white elephant being made less so by its suitability as a concert venue, and there are a few more dotted round the city - these concerts will have to be spread very thinly.

If it wasnt such a great piece of architecture, I dont think there would be half the desire to defend the project. And it certainly is a great piece of architecture. But I dont think using public money chasing a tourism project that seems certain to be doomed to failure from the outset, is that sensible.

(http://www.thai-tanic.com/images/logo_banner.gif)

http://www.thai-tanic.com/

Alex Attwood has just announced a £300m visitor centre is to be built in Derry to celebrate the sinking of a German U-Boat in Lough Foyle in 1945. Mr Attwood claims this will give the North West a greater share of the lucrative German All inclusive Market  and help sustain Derry's Hotels when the City of Culture ends.

The Goebbels take on things http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accqYs7CLYE

The film was not released in Germany as the scenes of disaster were a bit close to the bone in 1943.

The boat used in filming this was filled with concentration camp prisoners in 1945 and sailed into the Baltic, where the RAF bombed it and 3 times as many people died as on the Titanic.

Quote from: sheamy on April 19, 2012, 09:16:30 AM
(http://www.thai-tanic.com/images/logo_banner.gif)

http://www.thai-tanic.com/

That has been there for years.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 19, 2012, 07:25:20 PM
The Goebbels take on things http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accqYs7CLYE

The film was not released in Germany as the scenes of disaster were a bit close to the bone in 1943.

The boat used in filming this was filled with concentration camp prisoners in 1945 and sailed into the Baltic, where the RAF bombed it and 3 times as many people died as on the Titanic.

Fascinating story that, missed the documentary they showed on it recently.

Another film made about the titanic was  Saved From the Titanic, starring an actual survivor - Dorothy Gibson - and made less than a month after the disaster - she even wore the same clothes she was wearing! Her life after the titanic was pretty insane as well.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 19, 2012, 08:57:36 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on April 18, 2012, 11:13:28 PM

Quote from: haranguerer on April 18, 2012, 09:50:16 PM
Maguire - I dont believe the demand for the titanic is sustainable. Theres nothing wrong with trying to capitalise on something that has captured the public imagination, and if theres money to be made by someone, then fair play. However, to put well over £100million (check it), of public money into one very fragile, tenuous, and somewhat tasteless basket, seems downright stupid, and I think if they were willing to show this level of support to some tourist project, they could have picked a much better theme to champion.

I don't know whether it's sustainable in the long term as a visitor centre either. But it was built, as you say, to capitalise on an existing interest. I'm not sure you can manufacture a significant interest from nothing just as easily. Have you anything else in mind that could become an attraction for 300,000 visitors a year?

Not sure it's a waste of money even if it isn't sustainable as a visitor centre either - the Millenium Dome in London was labelled as such and has managed to reinvent itself as a very busy concert venue. If over 10 years or so the visitor numbers plummet, it doesn't necessarily mean that £Xm was wasted on what is a great piece of architecture.

And when I checked, the building cost £77m - £60m public and £17m private.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17552802

More bullshit from the local media then'. This is from here www.titanic-foundation.org - FAQs (cant link as its a downloaded file)

'How much will Titanic Belfast cost?
The cost of the building is £97 million (including VAT and in kind contributions from Belfast
Harbour Commission).'
'

From your source - Titanic Belfast is being funded through a public/private partnership, made up of:
• DETI (£36.95m)
• Titanic Quarter Ltd (£16.35m)
• Belfast Harbour Commissioners (£13.6m)
• Belfast City Council (£10m)

It's £77m in actual money - as I understand it, the 'in kind contribution' would be the transfer of land that was already in public ownership, so that's really an academic number - it's not a cost to the public purse unless there was a private sector buyer ready and willing to pay £20m for that particular plot of land.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 19, 2012, 08:57:36 AM
This 300,000 visitors a year figure is never going to happen with this project.

On what basis do you make that claim? W5 has 250,000 visitors a year. It's not difficult to imagine the Titanic building to have marginally more visitors.

Quote from: haranguerer on April 19, 2012, 08:57:36 AM
We've got the odyssey, which is already one white elephant being made less so by its suitability as a concert venue, and there are a few more dotted round the city - these concerts will have to be spread very thinly.

The Odyssey is a white elephant? How so? I don't believe it has required any public money since it opened. It appears to be operating as a successful business.

And just because I mentioned that the Millenium Dome was transformed into a concert venue doesn't necessarily mean that this venue would follow in the same footsteps - it was just an example of how the use of places can change over time.

Hitler gives his view about the new Titanic Centre in Belfast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdp40kuXOb8&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdp40kuXOb8&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Quote from: ziggysego on April 22, 2012, 12:06:09 AM
Hitler gives his view about the new Titanic Centre in Belfast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdp40kuXOb8&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdp40kuXOb8&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Outstanding