hidden hit counter


HOME

 

FORUM ARCHIVE

 

CAD PLANS

 

TECH FEATURES

 

ADMIN 1

 

ADMIN 2



Top The TRMA Discussion Forum topic #31948
View in linear mode

Subject: "RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast" Previous topic | Next topic
Lord MorbiusSat Aug-22-09 12:36 PM
Member since May 06th 2007
439 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#31976, "RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast"
In response to In response to 13


          

Nice snaps Roops.

Keith, Roops, i'll be in touch with you guys real soon about all this.

hypothetical conversation between Heritage enthusiast and Nomadic Trust member... Be warned, its long! :-)

I would like to state that this is completely fictitious (to the best of my knowledge hehe) and not attributed to any real individuals. It may however provide some of you folks with a clearer idea of how many see the current Nomadic situation.

HE: Hey, Nomadic is back in Belfast, this is great, when will she be restored?
TM: 2011.
HE: 2011!!! wow how can a bunch of folks who have mostly never demonstrated any prior interest in maritime heritage and have no knowledge of historic ship restoration get the job done in 18 months when most other restorations have taken 15, 20, 30 or more years? It sounds incredible.
TM: It is not going to take 18 months.
HE: Well now that sounds a bit more realistic, how long is it going to take then?
TM: 6 months!!!
HE: WHAaa?
TM: Yes, you see it will probably be another year before we get all the consultants reports in, raise enough money and complete tenders for the work to begin.
HE: how do you ever hope to make those targets, it seems ludicrous!
TM: We are confident of meeting our objectives of completion in 2011.
HE: But how could you possibly be? How can an entire historic ship be sensitively and authentically rebuilt in 24 weeks? what are these absurd ideas based upon?
TM: We are confident that the ship will be completed by 2011, no further comment!
HE: Very well then, what kind of restoration level is planned for the ship?
TM: We have not made a firm decision on that yet.
HE: But the Nomadic has been back in Belfast for over three years, are you saying that you still, after all that time, don't know what you are going to do with it yet?
TM: Well i don't think i would put it like that exactly.
HE: Well how would you put it?
TM: It's a rather involved project, these things take time!
HE: Well is it going to be a complete ship again? Will there be steam? Nomadic IS a steam ship after all!
TM: Currently there are no plans to install any operational machinery or steam plant.
HE: But how can that be considered a restored ship? Engines are the heart of the ship.
TM: Ahh well you see Nomadic is not actually a ship.
HE: WHAaaa? what do you mean?
TM: Well when her powerplant was removed she was removed from the register of vessels... she is now officially designated as a hulk! So she is not really looked upon in ship terms by the law.
HE: But numerous reports and experts have said that she is more than worthy and capable of being reinstated as a seagoing vessel!
TM: I don't wish to go into all that, besides that sort of thing would complicate the business plans we have developed, making it more difficult to meet our goals.
HE: And what are those?
TM: To be finished by 2011!!!
HE: Don't you think it would be better to settle on what is best for the future of the ship and accept, like all other restoration efforts, that this is going to take as long as it takes?
TM: I'm afraid that would impact negatively on the core principles of our restoration and funding plans.
HE: Which are what exactly?
TM: To be done, dusted, collect our medals and out of there by 2011!
HE: O.K, O.K. but surely you must admit that a fully restored and complete restoration would be better for the ship, even as a tourist draw?
TM: It is a romantic idea but i'm afraid it would cost just too much, engines for example would cost millions according to our consultants.
HE: But those consultants had no experience of historic ship restoration is that not right? And even they, in their 30,000+ report of 2007, acknowledged that a fully operational ship would undoubtably offer greatest potential of longterm success if the required funding was in place.
TM: Yes but buying engines would add millions to the cost.
HE: But it has been established that suitable engines and all steam plant is available at less than a tenth of those crazy estimates! Is'nt it true that these experts quoted a full restoration at 40,000,000 without even visiting the ship to inspect it first? It was all guesswork by people who were out of their depth is'nt that right?
TM: We have full faith in our people and stand by the report.
EH: Well then why, when everybody blew a gasket over this crazy 40,000,000 figure, did some chap eventually take a walk around the ship for an hour or so and decide to knock 12,000,000 off the estimate, just like that!!!
TM: I am not at liberty to delve into that.
EH: There is something not right here. An entire period steam power system was offered to you for less than it is costing to employ the current fund raiser and project manager on a two year contract and all you can do is think up reasons not to accept it. Something is wrong.
TM: According to our consultants there is not adequate justification for installing engines, that sort of thing is not important to visitors.
EH: Surely you must be either mad or joking, were visitors ever asked?
TM: Oh yes there was a survey carried out in 2007.
EH: Now we're getting somewhere, were people asked if there should be engines in the ship? Surely one of the most obvious questions bearing in mind the ongoing controversy surrounding the issue.
TM: Er... no!
EH: NO!!! i am really getting the impression that there is some sort of concerted plan to actively avoid this issue.
TM: Thats, er... ahem, a ridiculous idea. Visitors were after all asked if they thought the ship should be fully restored.
EH: Oh really, thats encouraging, what were the findings?
TM: 52% said yes.
EH: So the majority DO want the job done right, surely that should settle the matter then, so whats the problem?
TM: Well our advisors indicate that although it was a majority, it may not be a big enough majority to justify bothering with all that complicated steam engine business.
EH: I have seen this survey and the way it was worded. Do you think that if the issue of steam capability and restoration level had not been underplayed that the figure of 52% would have been significantly higher?
TM: I couldn't possibly speculate on that. The bottom line is that a proper restoration would unrealistically stretch our funding prospects, especially bearing in mind the limited timeframe.
HE: Does this not suggest that the restoration should be planned over a more realistic timeframe? You could set your sights high and do a much better job... is'nt that what everyone else does? No other restorations, of any type, set deadlines like this... the whole thing certainly seems very odd indeed.
TM: We would like the ship finished to celebrate her centenary.
HE: But why can't the ship be celebrated, finished or not? You have already claimed unqualified successes of both occasions when the ship has opened to the public... and the restoration has not even started yet!!! What you seem to be saying is that you to plan to celebrate Nomadic by making a rushed and half baked job of her restoration against the wishes of supporters and advice of genuine experts?
TM: The Nomadic Charitable Trust are fully committed to the restoration of SS Nomadic.
HE: Well then why does the whole project seem so lacklustre and confused?
TM: I can assure you that we are all working very hard, you are obviously not aquianted with the complex dynamics of the operation.
HE: Then why don't you explain them to me? Why is everything shrouded in such mystery?
TM: I really wouldn't say it is like that.
HE: Then why don't you publish what goes on and is decided at your Trust meetings? They are all held in private. The ship is owned by the public after all and a lot of public money continues to go into what the Trust does.
TM: You must understand that a lot of these things are very sensitive.
HE: In what context? I don't think Nomadic represents a national security threat and yet it seems to be run like a covert MI5 operation!
TM: I don't think that is a fair Comment.
HE: Well then why does absolutely everything suggest the complete opposite to what you are saying?
TM: I don't believe that is the case.
HE: Hold on then, let me think. All Trust meetings and decisions are held in secret, or at least behind closed doors and not published. Detailed accounts are private or hard to obtain and make sense of. Little or no information about what is being done to the ship is available. What is planned or what Trust members or people on the payrole are actually doing or have done is a mystery. The only announcements are vague sound bites that do not inform the public and skirt around the issues that everybody wishes clarified. The Trust has never engaged in public discussion about the ship, it's future or the restoration. There is no official medium through which to openly question, enquire or express views on the project. The Trust website is unresponsive and totally lacking in relevant ongoing information regarding the ship. Nowhere is opportunity given to comment, discuss, leave suggestions or ask questions openly. The Trust now have a Facebook page, a worldwide facility for socialising, talking and networking - and yet all functions allowing people to leave comments, engage in discussion or talk about the ship are disabled!!! These are the bare facts of the matter, does this sound normal?
TM: The Trust are completely committed to Nomadic.
HE: Some people are saying that elements within the Trust have always had ideas about how easy, fast and commercialised they want to make this project and that it has little to do with maritime heritage, public opinion or what is best for SS Nomadic.
TM: I have already stated that the ship is to be completed by 2011. There is a limit to the funds we can hope to raise within that timeframe. Compromises may have to be made in order to satisfy that criteria but we are completely committed to the restoration of SS Nomadic.
HE: But can't you see that those criteria are flawed? They conflict with the whole ethos of the project, are counter productive and make no common sense. The whole thing is in danger of descending into an embarrassing fiasco. That would be a shameful crime.
TM: I really don't think that is correct, we are confident that we are on track, the project is already a huge success.
HE: but how can you stand there and say that? It is totally at odds with what everybody can plainly see! Isn't it true that virtually everybody who had genuine passion and enthusiasm for the ship has been frozen out in favour of highly paid consultants and companies who will not question the Trust? The whole thing bears a shady whiff of manipulation and cronyism. It has been suggested that if everything was brought out into the open a number of prominent people might be shown in a very dim light and a lot of folks would be outraged, is that why everything is so furtively stage managed by a small group and kept under strict wraps? The Trust has always refused to engage with or even acknowledge the existance of alternative opinions, views, advice or support, nevertheless they have consistently failed to satisfactorily explain the method or basis behind their own strange behavior and bizarre logic. Even the countless volunteers and original fans have all deserted in disgust or been given the brush off when they began to put two and two together. How is any of this ever likely to succeed under these circumstances? How can Nomadic possibly reach her potential when all those who know the ship best are treated like impertinent upstarts and troublemakers? How can any of this be to the benefit of the community when they are actively excluded and enthusiasts are viewed as an interfering niusance? When will the authorities realise that their expectation of complete unquestioning deference as the price of involvement is a filter which has removed all those with real love and a conscientious sense of responsibility towards the ship and the protection of our heritage? Is that the whole point? Is Nomadic to become a sacrifice on the alter of ego, arrogance and the prospect of easy money for a hand picked few? Surely things must change very soon, if only to dispell growing ill will and introduce some faith and transparency to the whole thing. What is it going to take in order to fix all this, a public enquiry?
TM: The Charitable Trust is commi...
HE: Oh i give up!

- Mervyn.

Mervyn Pritchard
Former Maintenance Officer
SS Nomadic.

  

Alert | IP Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast [View all] , Roo, Wed Aug-19-09 02:13 PM
  RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, titanorac9370, Aug 20th 2009, #1
RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Morten Jensen, Aug 20th 2009, #2
      RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 21st 2009, #3
           RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 21st 2009, #4
           RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Mick, Aug 21st 2009, #5
           RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, keefs, Aug 22nd 2009, #6
                RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Jonathan, Aug 22nd 2009, #7
                     RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, keefs, Aug 22nd 2009, #8
                          RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Jonathan, Aug 22nd 2009, #9
                               RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, keefs, Aug 22nd 2009, #10
                                    RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Jonathan, Aug 22nd 2009, #11
                                    RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 22nd 2009, #12
                                         RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, keefs, Aug 22nd 2009, #13
                                              RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Lord Morbius, Aug 22nd 2009 #15
                                              RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, titanorac9370, Aug 22nd 2009, #16
                                                   RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 22nd 2009, #17
RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 22nd 2009, #14
RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, J. Kent Layton, Aug 22nd 2009, #18
      RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Roo, Aug 29th 2009, #19
           RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, J. Kent Layton, Oct 29th 2017, #20
                RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, bpread, Oct 29th 2017, #21
                RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, VonHoldinghausen, Nov 03rd 2017, #22
                     RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Ralph Currell, Nov 03rd 2017, #23
                          RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Ralph Currell, Nov 04th 2017, #24
                               RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Morten Jensen, Nov 05th 2017, #25
                                    RE: SS Nomadic In Dry Dock, Belfast, Ralph Currell, Nov 05th 2017, #26

Top The TRMA Discussion Forum topic #31948 Previous topic | Next topic


Titanic artwork at top of page is owned and copyright of Stuart Williamson and is used with permission.