It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Researchers Bruce Beveridge and Steve Hall took issue with many of Gardiner's claims in their book, Olympic and Titanic: The Truth Behind the Conspiracy. Author Mark Chirnside has also raised serious questions about the switch theory. It should be noted that the Titanic and Olympic were not fully insured. Lloyd's of London did not have sufficient underwriters in the insurance world of over a century ago to offer full coverage. In this case, an insurance scheme seems highly unlikely to yield adequate payout. Numerous expert historians and builder's documents affirm that a multitude of subtle differences in construction of the two ships makes a switch improbable to have gone undetected. While few components bore the ships names, most were cast or stamped with the builder's designated hull numbers, again making a switch unlikely.
originally posted by: ionwind
Also, how did they keep over a thousand workers quiet while they made the switch?
Betraying an almost total ignorance of ships and shipbuilding in general, Gardiner asserts that all that was necessary to accomplish this identity switch was exchanging those parts of the ships which bore the vessels’ names: name plates, bells, navigation equipment, lifeboats, and any interior signing bearing the name Olympic or Titanic. This, of course, completely ignores the physical differences that already existed between the two ships, for example, the completely reworked accommodations on B and C Decks, which dramatically altered the number and arrangement of the windows and portholes on both decks; the extended enclosure aft on C Deck, the different arrangement of ventilators, fans, piping and machinery on the Boat Deck; the difficulty in changing the shell-plating at the bow and stern which bore the ships’ names (the names weren’t just painted on the plates, they were cut into the plates in letters four feet high and one-half inch deep). But hey! It’s a conspiracy theory–why let something as mundane as facts or the truth get in the way of a good fantasy, right? One last minute alteration was made to the Olympic–supposedly now the “Titanic”-which was done to forever make her distinct from her sister–and at the same time assure that everyone would know that the ship which was to be sunk was indeed the “Titanic.” The forward two-fifths of her Promenade Deck (B Deck) were enclosed by steel screening and glass windows. (Just in passing, Gardiner also forgets to explain how this switch was to be concealed from the shipyard workers who were working on the two ships–some 15,000 of them–for that matter.
originally posted by: jaffo
Sorry, but this idea has been completely and utterly debunked in every sense of the word. Both wrecks are extremely well known at this point and there is no doubt whatsoever that they are each what they are claimed to be.
originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
What? You said olympic was 400 and titanic was 401 and then say the prop showed 401. Where's the discrepancy? 401 hull on the titanic and 401 on the prop bear each other out. And your post got stars showing poor reading comprehension of those who starred you.
r reply to: ionwind
originally posted by: Nola213
a reply to: ionwind
If you had watched the video. Or even the first 15 minutes, you would hear the explanation for the 401. Supposedly the Olympic was fitted with one of the not yet completed Titanics props on the starboard side. Because the starboard prop on the Olympic was destroyed leaving NY harbor. Hence the 401 on the Olympic (Titanic).
I don't agree with this conspiracy theory, but they do have a theory as to why the 401 is there, and could/should have been there.
One difference was their propellers, or screws: the pitch of the two ships’ screws were different. This is, the size, shape, and angle of the propeller blades were slightly different, altering the amount of thrust each screw created as it turned in the water. Obviously screws of different pitches could not be used on the same ship, as it would create not only differential thrust problems for handling the ship, it would also create severe, even potentially dangerous, vibration.