Northwest's first ever 747

Originally posted by greekdude1
Was Ismay one of the survivors?

Yes, the coward stepped into a life boat and thus took the place of a woman or child.

Despite the fact it was clearly being shouted by crew members that the life boats were for “Women and children only”

Was Ismay one of the survivors?

Originally posted by Bmused55
The titanic class was not designed to turn effeciently at flank speed, which thanks to a big headed Mr Bruce Ismay the titanic was doing at the time of the incident. she should have been going a heck of a lot slower. But Ismay wanted the Titanic to get to new york in the fastest time possible. Being the owner of the ship he was able to “order” Captain Smith to light up all the boilers and head for NY at full speed.

Also, the iceberg lookouts were not issued with binoculars.

As with so many accidents its not just the one mistake that causes it, its several in sequence.

Agreed. Bruce Ismay was perhaps the most culpable person onboard that night. If only we had corporate manslaughter jurisdiction in 1912 ?

Originally posted by Ren Frew
You certainly could do, many factors were to blame including the crew’s inability to get the fecker to turn sufficiently quickly enough to avoid the ice.

Hey, this has to be the first ship discussion we’ve had on here… cool !:D

The titanic class was not designed to turn effeciently at flank speed, which thanks to a big headed Mr Bruce Ismay the titanic was doing at the time of the incident. she should have been going a heck of a lot slower. But Ismay wanted the Titanic to get to new york in the fastest time possible. Being the owner of the ship he was able to “order” Captain Smith to light up all the boilers and head for NY at full speed.

Also, the iceberg lookouts were not issued with binoculars.

As with so many accidents its not just the one mistake that causes it, its several in sequence.

Originally posted by Bmused55

So, you could say, its was something as small as a rivert (about the size of a pint glass) that sunk the Titanic.

You certainly could do, many factors were to blame including the crew’s inability to get the fecker to turn sufficiently quickly enough to avoid the ice.

Hey, this has to be the first ship discussion we’ve had on here… cool !:D

Originally posted by greekdude1
Rammed, meaning hit the iceberg head-on, as opposed to try and avoid it like they did, and subsequently lacerating half the hull of the ship?

Exactly. If they just rammed it, one mayber two compartments in the lower hull would have taken on water and thats it.

Instead, they opted to avoid and consequently rubbed the hull along a sharp ridge, cause not one gigantic hull but hundreds of small buckles in the hull platting. It was found that the rivets holding the massive iron sheets together were substandard. They sheared on impact in variouos places.

So, you could say, its was something as small as a rivert (about the size of a pint glass) that sunk the Titanic.

Originally posted by Bmused55
The Titanic… well if they had just rammed the iceberg she could have limped into port.

Rammed, meaning hit the iceberg head-on, as opposed to try and avoid it like they did, and subsequently lacerating half the hull of the ship?

Originally posted by Pembo330
The Olympic didn’t sink; its sister ship the Britannic sank during WW1 in the Med. The olympic survived until it was scrapped.

There was a documentary on channel 5 about this earlier this week.

Ah well there ya go, and now that you mention it….. it was the Titanic and Britannic that swapped names. Silly me

The Olympic didn’t sink; its sister ship the Britannic sank during WW1 in the Med. The olympic survived until it was scrapped.

There was a documentary on channel 5 about this earlier this week.

Originally posted by Ren Frew
Weren’t there three Titanic ships? What was the other one called … Britannic, Majestic or something ?

not sure, will look into this.

Weren’t there three Titanic ships? What was the other one called … Britannic, Majestic or something ?

Originally posted by Ren Frew
No, they sank because they had a shocking inability to quickly turn in the water owing to the rudder design.:(

With all due respect, the water mine was submerged (as they usualy are) thus hidden from view.

The Titanic… well if they had just rammed the iceberg she could have limped into port.

Originally posted by Bmused55
So, were the two vessels cursed as a result of their names being changed?

No, they sank because they had a shocking inability to quickly turn in the water owing to the rudder design.:(

Originally posted by steve rowell
Clipper Victor was in fact the first 747 to operate commercially, replacing N735PA Clipper Young America at short notice on it’s inaugural New York/ London service in the early hours of January 22, 1970 after teething problems with the latter’s P&W JT9 engines delayed the flight
N736PA’s name Clipper Victor was hastily overpainted with Clipper Young America just for the occasion.

Several years later it was destroyed in that tenerife horror.
One wonders, does the old fable of cursing a ship when you change its name realy hold water?
I mean check this out and make up your own mind.

The Titanic, we all know the story. But what not many people know is this:

Once the designs were finalised 2 ships of the Titanics design were built along side each other they were the Titanic and the Olympic.
Due to technical issues with the iron use for the contruction, Titanic’s construction was delayed. She would never be ready for the much hyped launch. However, sister ship OLYMPIC was almost complete. So they swapped the names about. OLYMPIC became TITANIC, TITANIC became OLYMPIC.

Titanic sunk on her maiden Voyage.
Olympic sunk after hitting a water mine in the first world war while serving as a hospital ship. She sank in 2 hours with the loss of about 600 lives.

So, were the two vessels cursed as a result of their names being changed?

Clipper Victor was in fact the first 747 to operate commercially, replacing N735PA Clipper Young America at short notice on it’s inaugural New York/ London service in the early hours of January 22, 1970 after teething problems with the latter’s P&W JT9 engines delayed the flight
N736PA’s name Clipper Victor was hastily overpainted with Clipper Young America just for the occasion.

The first airplane ‘delivered’ isn’t necessarily line number 2, with number 1 being the prototype.

Actually I read this while reading Hard Landing (by Thomas Petzinger)

Originally posted by starjet
The first 747 in service was destroyed at Tenerife.

The 747 involved in this accident on March 27, 1977 was N736PA Clipper Victor, and yes, after some extensive research, you are right, this was the first 747 delivered to Pan Am and the first aircraft to operate a revenue flight which was JFK to Heathrow

The first 747 in service was destroyed at Tenerife.

Originally posted by Tim Green
More likely Clipper America was renamed Juan T. Trippe.

To the best of my knowlege Tim, you are correct on this.