Model Boat Mayhem

Mess Deck: General Section => Full Scale Ships => Topic started by: Just Add Water on May 26, 2015, 05:00:38 pm

Title: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 26, 2015, 05:00:38 pm
I Live only 15 mins by pushbike where the Titanic sailed from Southampton docks and I have in my possession a part of her, some of you may be interested in .

My Wife's Grandfather worked on the RMS Mauretania as a chef, and he was invited on board the Titanic as a guest to look around, when docked in Southampton, when he was in the First class area the naughty boy stole a coat hanger with a female clothing item still on it from a cabin.

We still have it here and.  It is probably the only one in existence today.

I often wonder how much it would fetch on Ebay sometimes.
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 26, 2015, 05:10:54 pm
I'm afraid it wouldn't be worth anything and certainly didn't come from the Titanic. Cunard White Star only came into existence during the mid 1930s when the Government forced the two companies to merge as a condition of giving a loan for the construction of the old Queen Mary.

It's also doubtful if it came off the old Mauretania as she was taken out of service in 1934. the same year that the companies merged.

Colin
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Netleyned on May 26, 2015, 05:17:05 pm
On eBay with your story you might tempt a gullible buyer
But as Colin says not worth a bean.

Ned
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 26, 2015, 06:17:52 pm
I'm afraid it wouldn't be worth anything and certainly didn't come from the Titanic. Cunard White Star only came into existence during the mid 1930s when the Government forced the two companies to merge as a condition of giving a loan for the construction of the old Queen Mary.

It's also doubtful if it came off the old Mauretania as she was taken out of service in 1934. the same year that the companies merged.

Colin




So my wife's Grandfather was lying then is what you are saying ?
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 26, 2015, 06:31:07 pm
Just spoken to my wife and her grandfather died in 1916.

?
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Neil on May 26, 2015, 06:35:13 pm
Colin didn't say that at all! he did say, that the company Cunard White Star didn't exist until 1934, certainly not in 1912, and if you look in any history book you will see Colin's facts are irrefutable.
Also White Star line didn't label anything on their liners without  embossing the White Star Pennant  on it. This ceased when they amalgamated with Cunard in 1934.

there are no arguments about the facts as they have been printed many many times over the years.
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: cos918 on May 26, 2015, 06:40:05 pm
cunard white star line from 1934 till 1949. That coat hanger would have been made some in that time period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunard-White_Star_Line

john
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 26, 2015, 06:41:09 pm
All I am saying is that it is historically impossible for a Cunard White Star coat hanger to exist in 1912 when the Cunard White Star company did not come into existence until 1934.

Back in 1912 Cunard and White Star were fierce rivals on the North Atlantic. Cunard was a British Company while White Star was owned by IMM which was an American group of companies although the ships were registered in the UK.

Your coat hanger would appear to date from sometime after 1935.

Colin
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 26, 2015, 07:22:30 pm
There is a further point that Mauretania sailed from Liverpool until the beginning of WW1 so I don't see how she could have been in Southampton at the same time as Titanic. Mauretania didn't sail from Southampton until after WW1

Colin
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: NFMike on May 26, 2015, 07:43:33 pm
So my wife's Grandfather was lying then is what you are saying ?

Since he died long before the hanger existed it must be a more recent person who has produced the story. Most likely several people actually, with an element of Chinese whispers rather than a deliberate fabrication I'd imagine.
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: TheLongBuild on May 26, 2015, 09:31:06 pm
Looking at other pictures ... from the QM

http://keithwaynemccoy.com/tag/cunard-white-star/

Theoretically if genuine it could have come from the RMS Olympic
or 1 of these


In service for Cunard White Star Line

Ship - year Built - White Star Service period - Tonnage

RMS Olympic 1911 193435 45,324 GRT
RMS Mauretania 1906 193435 31,950 GRT
RMS Adriatic 1907 Never entered service 24,541 GRT
Ceramic 1913 1934 18,400 GRT
RMS Berengaria 1913 193438 51,950 GRT
RMS Homeric 1913 193435 35,000 GRT
RMS Aquitania 1914 193449 45,650 GRT
RMS Majestic 1914 1934-36 56,551 GRT
RMS Scythia 1921 193449 19,700 GRT
RMS Samaria 1922 193449 19,700 GRT
RMS Laconia 1922 193442 19,700 GRT
RMS Antonia 1922 193442 13,900 GRT
Austonia 1922 193442 13,900 GRT
RMS Lancastria 1922 193440 16,250 GRT
Doric 1923 193435 16,484 GRT
Franconia 1923 193449 20,200 GRT
RMS Aurania 1924 193442 14,000 GRT
RMS Carinthia 1925 193440 20,200 GRT
Ascania 1925 193449 14,000 GRT
Alaunia 1925 193442 14,000 GRT
Calgaric 1927 Never entered service 16,063 GRT
Laurentic 1927 1934-36 18,724 GRT
RMS Britannic 1929 193449 26,943 GRT
RMS Georgic 1932 193449 27,759 GRT
RMS Queen Mary 1936 193649 80,750 GRT
RMS Queen Elizabeth 1940 194049 83,650 GRT
RMS Media 1947 194749 13,350 GRT
RMS Parthia 1947 194749 13,350 GRT
RMS Caronia 1949 1949 34,200 GRT

However.. As some say  :police: It was the Olympic which sank and the Titanic became the Olympic so in theory from a conspiracies groups  point of view it could well have come from the Titanic  8) 8)


Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: html on May 26, 2015, 09:52:38 pm
They also did not name any items in their ships, like cups saucers etc after the ship, this allowed them to move these items from one ship to another if required. So there is actually no way of knowing what ship items came from
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 26, 2015, 10:05:33 pm
After the merger ships would have carried on using their original equipment until such time as replacements were needed or the vessel underwent a major refit.
Colin
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: merseyferry on May 27, 2015, 05:31:16 am
found this on ebay..http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Cunard-White-star-1-Atalanta-Cleaners-ltd-Sale-wooden-coat-hangers-/400925613458?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item5d59075d92 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Cunard-White-star-1-Atalanta-Cleaners-ltd-Sale-wooden-coat-hangers-/400925613458?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item5d59075d92).. back 1s similar
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 27, 2015, 07:00:05 pm
However.. As some say  (http://www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/Smileys/classic/police.gif) It was the Olympic which sank and the Titanic became the Olympic so in theory from a conspiracies groups  point of view it could well have come from the Titanic  (http://www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/Smileys/classic/cool.gif) (http://www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/Smileys/classic/cool.gif)

I will ask the family, But he was in Southampton at the time of the sailing, that is true.
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 27, 2015, 07:01:32 pm
There is a further point that Mauretania sailed from Liverpool until the beginning of WW1 so I don't see how she could have been in Southampton at the same time as Titanic. Mauretania didn't sail from Southampton until after WW1

Colin



He was in Southampton at the time, not on the ship.
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 27, 2015, 07:54:27 pm
Quote
He was in Southampton at the time, not on the ship.

Your original post rather implies that he was on the Mauretania at the time which is a bit confusing. However if he was in Southampton at the time then he may indeed have visited the Titanic as you say - but he certainly didn't make off with that particular coat hanger.

Colin
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 28, 2015, 04:55:26 pm
Your original post rather implies that he was on the Mauretania at the time which is a bit confusing. However if he was in Southampton at the time then he may indeed have visited the Titanic as you say - but he certainly didn't make off with that particular coat hanger.

Colin








I also forgot to tell you he was also a secret time traveler, I am afraid you all have, we weed on on my Wife's bonfire :-(
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Neil on May 28, 2015, 05:15:52 pm
also forgot to tell you he was also a secret time traveller,

if he was, why didn't he inform Captain  E J Smith of the imminent danger the guy was sailing into, and avert total disaster...............then we wouldn't have been having this conversation in the first place  {-) {-) {-) %% %% %% %%
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: plastic on May 28, 2015, 05:32:24 pm
I thought everyone knew that a professional time traveller would never interfere with historic events.  :-)
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Netleyned on May 28, 2015, 06:07:04 pm
Obviously not but the sonic screwdriver would
have melted the ice in the rather oversized G & T.

Ned
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 28, 2015, 06:16:12 pm
if he was, why didn't he inform Captain  E J Smith of the imminent danger the guy was sailing into, and avert total disaster...............then we wouldn't have been having this conversation in the first place  {-) {-) {-) %% %% %% %%

DOCTOR WHO, told him never interfere with the future. If remember his reply was Tommy! and Roger Daltry said where is the ice for my gin?   
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: davidm1945 on May 28, 2015, 07:54:33 pm
DOCTOR WHO, told him never interfere with the future. If remember his reply was Tommy! and Roger Daltry said where is the ice for my gin?   

Can I have some of whatever it is that you are on? Powerful stuff.... O0

Dave
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: derekwarner on May 29, 2015, 12:15:52 am
 :-) .... "we weed on on my Wife's bonfire" .....is that like piddling on a grass fire?  :embarrassed:.......could always use the coat hanger of questionable age as kindling   O0.....Derek
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Rottweiler on May 29, 2015, 12:56:50 am
I dont think its a coathanger at all Derek,its a boomerang! Well at least the replies keep coming back!
Mick F
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: vnkiwi on May 29, 2015, 01:56:08 am
That would be the aussie connection then
 :-))
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Neil on May 29, 2015, 12:48:04 pm
I dont think its a coathanger at all Derek,its a boomerang! Well at least the replies keep coming back!
Mick F


aarrrrgggggghhhhhhhhh.......that 2was the worst of the lot,  {-) {-) {-)
Title: Re: RMS TITANIC.
Post by: Just Add Water on May 29, 2015, 03:46:13 pm
My Wife is gutted, that the, said boomerang, kindling thing is worthless, Her time traveling grandfather was obviously a bit of a scoundrel on the high seas.
I fear he may have been a bit of a fibber also. This I cannot confirm as the said Time traveler, was here last Thursday, and was a bit dismayed we found out  :embarrassed:

Or was it Sunday, hmmm never checked my watch, as it is always wrong.

Bernie.