Perhaps if some company made a movie about her or explored here in the same fashion as titanic it would also become popular. Maybe some military hospital ship thin red line like of thing..

A thought the name was changed because if Britannic had been on schedule it would have been the largest but due to titanics demise it was delayed and when it was launched it was't the largest.

Britannic was't bigger nor was Titanic bigger than Olympic the only difference was in weight Titanic was heavier than Olympic so was named the biggest and most luxurious. There wheren't much in the way of differences in titanic and olympics fittings indeed the only one a can see is the fact that Titanic had lamps on its dining room tables. But u can't prove they where even installed. So Titanic was heavier than Olympic but not bigger or more luxurious.

Britannic was the same size as the other 2 apart from being wider and yet again it was heavier than Titanic so it would of been the biggest but only down to weight.

But to aswer the form question yes it would have maybe Britannic may have been kept as a relic but a cant see that would have happened. A do know that the descion to scrap Olympic was controversal but it was seen in bad taste to keep a replica of the most famous ship ever to sink(Titanic) and the largest ship ever to sink (Britannic)

Hi!

*thought the name was changed because if Britannic had been on schedule it would have been the largest but due to titanics demise it was delayed and when it was launched it was't the largest.*

There's no evidence to support that IMHO. Even if Britannic had been in service by spring 1914, the German Imperator was slightly larger and had entered service in spring 1913.

*Britannic was't bigger nor was Titanic bigger than Olympic the only difference was in weight *

Britannic was wider, so she was bigger. There was another difference other than weight. But, then you say this later on, when you say:

*Britannic was the same size as the other 2 apart from being wider *

So, Britannic was bigger -- as you yourself have said. Maybe I misunderstood.

*but it was seen in bad taste to keep a replica of the most famous ship ever to sink(Titanic) and the largest ship ever to sink (Britannic)*

I haven't seen any source material from 1935 that supports that. Either way, Olympic was hardly a replica of Titanic; similar, yes, but then that was because she was her sistership.

Best wishes,

Mark.

Yes a should of sayed something like that but am sure everyone knows that they where similar. Also yes I did't make myself clear on the size I should of enfisised the fact that there was no diference in lenght so I contidicted myself but it was late so forgive me. Britannic was wider so therefore bigger although that is contridicting views I heard that she was 903 feet long but according to the plans ave seen there was no difference in length.
Also Mark you are right I've never seen any proof of that although I think it is reasonible to assume Gigantic was the nane sloted for the third. Comes from greek mytholigy Olympians (olympic) the titans (titanic) and the Giants (gigantic) but know one has foumd issmay writting the name was supposed to be Gigantic.

Good day , Bell.

IMO, The Titanic would have been scrapped a) the only reason the Titanic is so famous today is because it sank on it's 1st voyage and b) the lost of life.

Titanic, had she made it through WW-I would have probably been scrapped about 1936 (when Olympic was scrapped)
The major part of Titanic's fame is her sinking, had she had a long career, she would be remembered, but no more so than Olympic, Aquitania, Mauretania, etc.

Hate to say this but I think she would have been well and truly scrapped. Just something I've been thinking about. Any of you believe in history repeating itself out there?
Well, there's this new ship the Queen Mary 2 and it's the 'biggest most luxurious ship in the world'. Ring and bells?
I think it's silly for people to be tempting fate again even if she is 'fully equipped'

Most people forget that Titanic and it's sisters where never said to be unsinkable by either white star or harland and wolf. As far as I am aware it was in a magazine of the time which stated this. Apparantly they where 'practically' unsinkable but this was shortened. However neither parties denied the claim. So a don't think they where tempting fate but they where aragont.

She would of been scrapped because then she would be just another ship but this disaster was going to happen eventually. So perhaps it could of been Olympic that foundered or Britannic as it's originally intended to be a passenger liner. Or perhaps the disaster happened much later like on for example the Normandie.

Hi!

*Most people forget that Titanic and it's sisters where never said to be unsinkable by either white star or harland and wolf. As far as I am aware it was in a magazine of the time which stated this.*

To be fair, as George Behe has documented on his website, Captain Smith did state publicly that be believed the Olympic to be unsinkable, in either 1911 or early 1912. So you could say that White Star did claim that, if we consider that he was one of the company's employees. It depends on your view.

The Shipbuilder did indeed call the vessels 'practically unsinkable.'

Best wishes,

Mark.

Hi Mark not seen you on the site for a while gald to hear from you again.

I did know about smith saying that but according to a clause my cousin told me is that the views of the emplyees do not reflect the views of the company as a whole. It is a standars thing to do so, yeah according to ure view you can deduce in either way.

Bye