Paul Kirk
It would have been the ultimate New Year’s party – toasting in the millennium on board a ship once billed as the largest moving object in the world. But plans to rebuild the Titanic seem to have sunk while still in shallow water.
Nearly two years ago, in January 1998, CEO of the RMS Titanic Shipping Holdings, Sarel Gous, announced he intended to build a full-size replica of the Titanic in Durban harbour and set sail in late December 1999. With a huge advert he announced “The Titanic – a ship for the new millennium” and invited contractors to send R1 000 as a “registration fee”. The project, he, claimed would cost R2,6- billion.
In March, Gous announced he had secured the original plans for the Titanic from Harland and Wolff, the Belfast builders of the original Titanic. He announced this as a coup d’tat and proof he was serious about the project
But this week the Mail & Guardian also secured the plans for the Titanic. For the equivalent of R200 Harland and Wolff will sell anyone a framed copy of the original plans. The problem is that the originals are useless.
Said Malcolm Cobb, a shipping engineer of more than 20 years’ experience: “The original ship was made up of steel plates riveted together and the plates were built to imperial measurements. Today the plates are built to … metric measurements. The original plans are worthless, unless you can get Iscor to retool to old imperial measurements.”
Then, seemingly unaware that he had useless plans, Gous announced he was ready to commence building in July last year. He assured those willing to invest money in the scheme that the ship would be ready for the millennium.
“Christ, the original Titanic took 15 000 trained artisans over three years to build the hull alone. And they worked 18 hours a day at it. Durban doesn’t have 15 000 artisans to start with. Do you realise the biggest aircraft carriers are only slightly, very slightly bigger than the Titanic was?” said Laurie Richards, an English shipbuilder of over 30 years’ experience whose grandfather worked on the original Titanic.
Referring to the 18-month construction period, Portnet captain Rob van de Kroll said: “The time frame does seem a bit unrealistic.”
And not only the time frame was unrealistic. There are a few other problems with building a Titanic in Durban harbour. For a start, the harbour is too shallow by nearly 3m to allow the original Titanic in – or out if she were built here.
The harbour entrance is also too narrow to allow the Titanic out comfortably with her more than 30m width. And moving her 300m length around the harbour would be supremely difficult. The only slipway of any size in Durban harbour – owned by Dorbyl Marine – is less than one-seventh the size of the slipway the Titanic was built on. Increasing the length of the slipway would mean demolishing the southern freeway which links Durban with its airport.
Attempts by the M&G to contact Gous all came to dead ends. Neither he nor his company has a telephone number that Telkom could trace.
Attempts to contact Harland and Wolff failed as they have closed for the Christmas period. However, the company’s website makes no mention of the plan to rebuild their greatest creation.
Said Richards: “The Titanic, once finished, used 23 tons of soap on the slipway to get her into the water. I doubt this scheme could even raise enough soap to get it moving. It seems to be the last great pipe dream of the millennium.”