Originally Posted by NCC320
Sorry, Chef and others....
It was a movie prop, maybe a good one, but neverless a movie prop. ........so what goes into the ship would have been determined by the naval architects or engineers.
Yes, I have said already that long ago. Movie's producers works on tight budgets and even if I don't think that comparison with "blocks of buildings that are really just fronts with no backs" is accurate. The boat had to be sailed thousands of miles before reaching the movie scenery and if the boat sunk in the way it would make for a huge loss regarding movie budget.
Anyway MGM had to be incompetent in what regards money if they had demanded to the NA that modified the plans, to use the same scantlings that were used on the original boat, taking into account the double of the displacement. The boat was, according with MGM plans, to last only the movie and be burned (as part of the original moviescript) in the end of it.
Even if built adequate to sailing with good weather till Tahiti, there was no need to design it to be able to sustain many storms and a long working life on the sea.
Doing so it would only be a waste of money and would show incompetence from the MGM production in what regards managing budgets. It is possible but very uniquely.
Regarding the boat being build in a reputable shipyard and there, the better they could according the plans, what I have heard and see leave me to believe that it was so, but that is not the point.
They had built accordingly with the plans that were not the original ones, (that were for a boat with half the displacement) but others made by a NA, taking as guide the original plans, but obviously different since the boat was much longer, wider and displaced the double.
The answer regarding if the boat was constructed as a movie prop or as a working boat destined to have a long life will reside on the plans that I don't know and if I did know, would not probably be able to say
. But they are probably still around, as the original Bounty plans and any NA specialized in that area will be able to answer that.
I don't know if the CG will be looking at that or not. As I have said, it is not pertinent to the main cause of the accident, since even a XX century steel ship would not be adequate to sail an Hurricane.
Originally Posted by NCC320
Chef....your question of what makes me qualified to speak.....you really don't want to go there. Can you answer the same question as it pertains to you?
I don't know if you are making it intentionally or not, but you are using the same intimidation techniques that others have used in this thread. Since you have referred a special qualification to access this matter, please tell what it is. Not being rude, but if someone says he knows better based on his qualifications, it seems to me it should say why