hi there im a new member just signed in. but been popping for a while now. i for one believe that it could of happened.

Hi Superbowl!

'When the Olympic had the incident with the Hawk it had to have some of the hull fixed. they also had to mend the hull under the waterline in the same place were the Titanic hit the iceberg.Was this an area that was no longer strctually sound.'

The Olympic's damage was concentrated at the stern. It's generally accepted that Titanic hit the iceberg and damaged her bow. Therefore the first part of your statement is untrue.

Best wishes,

Mark.

Hi Janeway!

Welcome aboard.

You may find my thoughts, and others', in the following thread of interest:

http://www.titanic.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=851&forum=1&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=90


Best wishes,

Mark.

I think your wrong. there are blueprints of the olympic out there which shows wot part of the hull was replaced. and it did have parts fixed on her bow.

Hi!

'there are blueprints of the olympic out there which shows wot part of the hull was replaced. and it did have parts fixed on her bow. '

It's quite an amusing topic. Is there any primary source evidence that indicates that the bow damage was caused in the Hawke collision? Does any of the testimony given by the Hawke's officers in 1911 back up the assertion that their ship damaged Olympic's *bow*? Does anyone other than Gardiner assert that this bow damage was caused during the Hawke collision?

When I was researching the Olympic for my Olympic history, I came to believe that the answer to all of those questions was 'no.' If you have any primary source evidence, rather than suspicion or 'opinion' as to the bow damage, then by all means present it -- with a specific citation. Meanwhile, I think it's rubbish -- as, to my knowledge, does everyone bar Gardiner who has actually researched the Hawke incident.

It's all too easy to say something is incorrect, but unless you cite any primary source evidence a number of people will simply dismiss what you are saying.

Best wishes,

Mark.

It was on the sky 1 program "you were on"

Hi Superbowl!

The documentary is not a primary source -- who said it on the program, and did they identify their source?

As for the quotes, around 'you were on' -- as I have already said, I was not in the final cut, but provided historical support. I take it that the quotes mean you doubt my word -- I think it's very rude of you to imply/call me a liar.

Mark.

no but ave heard of a secondary source lol especially that sky program it was a bit dodgey dont use it as a basis for ure views. It was the presenter that said it and no he did't identify where it came from he just said it was recentley released