|
Author
|
Topic: 100 years ago: Sinking of the RMS Titanic
|
Mike Isbell
Member Posts: 551
From: Silver Spring, Maryland USA
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 04-15-2012 08:37 PM
  
One hundred years ago, on April 15, 1912, ocean liner RMS Titanic sank after collision with an iceberg. More than 1,500 lives were lost in the shipwreck — 705 people were rescued.In 1965, the Gemini 3 spacecraft was given the name "Molly Brown" in honor of Titanic survivor Margaret "The Unsinkable Molly" Brown. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 04-15-2012 08:38 PM
Can someone explain the big fuss about the Titanic? The tragedy didn't put an end to ocean liners. The Hindenburg ended the airships on the other hand. So what's the big deal? |
canyon42
Member Posts: 238
From: Ohio
Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 04-15-2012 08:39 PM
Combination of a lot of things: number of people lost, maiden voyage, symbol of the height of luxury for the time, a fall due to hubris. Also serves as a sort of marker in time between the pre-World Wars era and more "current" times. Guess it's the sort of thing that you either "get" or you don't. As for me, it's been a fascination since the early '80s when they first started seriously looking for it. Actually just finished watching the movie with my daughters. |
ColinBurgess
Member Posts: 2031
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2003
|
posted 04-15-2012 08:46 PM
Curiously enough, the person after whom Grissom dubbed his craft with its unofficial name was Titanic survivor Margaret (Maggie) Brown. She was never actually known as Molly; that was just the name given to her in the later Broadway show and movie musical. For the sake of space history, however, Molly Brown sounds much better than Maggie Brown. |
ilbasso
Member Posts: 1522
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 04-15-2012 09:32 PM
I have just been re-reading "A Night to Remember." She is referred to throughout the book as "Mrs. J. J. Brown."There was a book published in 1898 called "Futility." In it, the new largest passenger ship in the world, an "unsinkable" 800-foot vessel carrying the cream of society, crashes into an iceberg on an April passage of the North Atlantic and goes down. There were not enough lifeboats on board. The name of the fictional ship: Titan. The parallels with the Titanic disaster only 14 years later were uncanny to the point of being disturbing. |
APG85
Member Posts: 306
From:
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 04-15-2012 11:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Can someone explain the big fuss about the Titanic? The tragedy didn't put an end to ocean liners. The Hindenburg ended the airships on the other hand. So what's the big deal?
I recommend you read "A Night To Remember" by Walter Lord (referenced in an earlier post). It might change the way you think about the Titanic. It's a compelling story that would be difficult to make up. You might see "what the big fuss" is all about, however you have to put yourself in those peoples position... on the decks of a massive ship, sinking into frigid water with hundreds of people making life and death decisions with each passing minute. Heroism, panic, cowardice, and the unbelievable sight of an 800' ocean liner breaking up and sinking. It's a fascinating story... |
gliderpilotuk
Member Posts: 3398
From: London, UK
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-16-2012 05:50 AM
...and the same could be said about many equally tragic maritime disasters, especially the Lusitania, or more recently, the Estonia.The Titanic story is unique for the impact it had on safety measures and the future design of ocean liners. Aside from that, the 100th anniversary is a great opportunity for commercial exploitation... film re-releases; new museums; dreary TV documentaries - at least here in the UK. |
Glint
Member Posts: 1040
From: New Windsor, Maryland USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 04-16-2012 10:43 AM
quote:
Originally posted by ilbasso:
There was a book published in 1898 called "Futility."
It's available online at Google Books. |
onesmallstep
Member Posts: 1310
From: Staten Island, New York USA
Registered: Nov 2007
|
posted 04-16-2012 03:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gliderpilotuk:
...dreary TV documentaries-at least here in the UK.
Actually, I found one shown here in the US, hosted by Len Goodman of 'Dancing With the Stars' no less (it seems he was a welder as a young man with Harlan & Woolf in London) quite touching and fascinating. He interviewed survivor and victims' families. |
canyon42
Member Posts: 238
From: Ohio
Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 04-16-2012 04:12 PM
I think with a little imagination some striking parallels can be made between the sinking of the Titanic and the space program, particularly the Challenger tragedy. Both were seen at the time as the epitome of high technology, and both were considered to be examples of how their respective voyages had become safe and "routine" by the public because of the latest technological advances. In both cases, a large part of the blame for the incidents can be placed on human hubris, as those in positions of decision-making chose to go ahead in spite of warnings from others. Finally, the public reaction (at least as conveyed by the media of the time) seems to have been very similar. In both cases much of the reaction seems to have been rooted in a sense of disbelief that "in this day and age" such a tragedy could have occurred. In that sense, I think that the impact on society as a whole was somewhat similar, with both serving as a jolt from complacency toward the dangers involved. |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3118
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-16-2012 06:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Can someone explain the big fuss about the Titanic? The tragedy didn't put an end to ocean liners. The Hindenburg ended the airships on the other hand. So what's the big deal?
About as helpful and sensitive as asking: "Seven dead in Challenger - what's the big deal?" What sets the Titanic apart even from other maritime disasters is the enormity of the death-toll (many more than Lusitania or Estonia) and the belief beforehand that the ship was unsinkable. No ship has ever been thought unsinkable since Titanic (with good reason, as recent events have confirmed). By way of comparison, I believe the largest death-toll in an aviation accident to date has been 570 in the Jumbo jet collision on Tenerife in 1977. And, yes, the Titanic anniversary has been exploited by many for commercial gain. I write this a few miles from where the Titanic was launched. Like many others who live in Belfast, I quietly acknowledged the anniversary and the enormity of the tragedy. It was an event to be commemorated, not celebrated. |
NC Apollo Fan
Member Posts: 261
From: Belmont, NC USA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 04-17-2012 10:43 AM
It also took Titanic some time to sink, which set it apart from many other maritime disasters (and disasters in general). This time allowed for the heroism, cowardice, and human drama that has been mentioned above. People had time to make choices, to think about what was happening, and to contemplate their fate. It also allowed the eventual survivors to be the storytellers of what unfolded when people of all classes and backgrounds were faced with the unthinkable. Other disasters have had greater loss of life, and others have been caught on film - but what I think sets Titanic apart is the fact that passengers had nearly three hours to decide whether they were going to try to survive or go down with the ship to let others live. That, to me, is very compelling. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 04-17-2012 02:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Blackarrow:
About as helpful and sensitive as asking: "Seven dead in Challenger - what's the big deal?"
Are there any plans to auction off Challenger's debris? quote:
Originally posted by Blackarrow:
What sets the Titanic apart even from other maritime disasters is the enormity of the death-toll (many more than Lusitania or Estonia)(...)
That's what I thought and explains my astonishment at all this Titanic anniversary buzz. But I guess if 20 people had died, it wouldn't be such a "big deal". |
uk spacefan
Member Posts: 168
From: London
Registered: Jan 2007
|
posted 04-17-2012 04:26 PM
What also seems incredible is that 100 years after Titanic the loss of the Costa Concordia took place in January with around 35 people dead when the ship hit a rock. Human error and cowardice on the captain's part have played a role in the Concordia disaster. |
Dave Clow
Member Posts: 236
From: South Pasadena, CA 91030
Registered: Nov 2003
|
posted 04-17-2012 04:29 PM
History Channel, National Geographic and the other cable networks have been running remarkable documentaries around the 100th anniversary. I found out a few things I hadn't known, among them that Bob Ballard's expedition wasn't primarily about finding Titanic, it was about locating and examining Thresher and Scorpion for clues. They also suggested that rumors of compromises or shortcuts in construction on Titanic were untrue and that the ship actually outperformed expectations. One thing of direct interest to us here is the ongoing looting of the Titanic site. The ship and the debris field remain as they always were, a grave; but continued expeditions by souvenir hunters have damaged the wreck, and also taken trophies that many people feel appropriately belong where they are. The day might come when the landing sites for the Apollo missions are treated the same way. Imagine someone lifting the over-boots from where they were left by Armstrong and Aldrin, Shepard's golf ball, Scott's Bible, or Schmitt's hammer. |
canyon42
Member Posts: 238
From: Ohio
Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 04-17-2012 05:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Are there any plans to auction off Challenger's debris?
Is there anyone here who has serious doubts that people would indeed be doing this if it was legal?Otherwise, I have to admit I don't really understand the point of this particular question. If you don't "get" the fascination some have with the Titanic, that's fine, but what does whether it and/or the Challenger having auctions of "debris" have to do with interest levels in the topics? |
Dave Clow
Member Posts: 236
From: South Pasadena, CA 91030
Registered: Nov 2003
|
posted 04-17-2012 07:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Can someone explain the big fuss about the Titanic? The tragedy didn't put an end to ocean liners. The Hindenburg ended the airships on the other hand. So what's the big deal?
The ship, the loss, the history all embody some tragic human failures — hubris, mostly. The ship's name and its supposed unsinkability; the decision to make haste in a dangerous place; the lack of preparation; the needless losses; the combination of freak calm on the water, a moonless night and no binoculars in the crows' nest; the names we remember like Astor and Widener, and the many we don't who died just as cruelly... it's Greek mythology happening before us in our own time, and a vivid reminder that pride goeth before a fall now as surely as it did for the ancients. |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3118
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-18-2012 05:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Are there any plans to auction off Challenger's debris?
I suggest you check out the thread "How to Identify a Piece of Shuttle Challenger" on "Opinions and Advice." |
advertisement