Talk:RMS Empress of Britain (1930)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not the Empress of Ireland's sister[edit]

This Empress of Britain is not the sister ship of the Empress of Ireland. There was another Empress of Britain that was launched in 1906. That ship was the Empress of Ireland's sister. Compared to the Empress of Britain in this article the Empress of Ireland had 2 funnels instead of 3, was about 1/3 as big and was launched 25 years earlier.

Third funnel[edit]

Is it true that the EofB's third funnel was like Titanic's fourth funnel - not a smoke-producing funnel? 04:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.4.237 (talk • contribs) .

I don't know for sure, but it's quite possible. A lot of ships were built like that, with a funnel as a dummy. Queen Mary was like that, with the third funnel being a dummy, and America had the first (of two) funnels as a dummy. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as you can see in the side elevation in the article, the third funnel does not contain boiler trunks. The Queen Mary's third funnel was partly functional though. John.Conway 10:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plausibly useful links[edit]

The process of changing the name of this article revealed a number of links. It is unclear whether these links should or should not be incorporated in the article's "See also" section. They are posted here for evaluation and review by other editors. --Tenmei (talk) 19:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following pages link to RMS Empress of Britain (1930) ...

Redundant useful links[edit]

Changing name from RMS Empress of Britain (1930) to RMS Empress of Britain (1931) because the disambiguation date was wrong -- should have been 1931, date of maiden voyage rather than launch date .... --Tenmei (talk) 20:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains[edit]

See explanatory comment at Talk:RMS Empress of Canada (1928) --Tenmei (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Error?[edit]

"...the Empress of Britain was ordered with outer steel plating double the thickness at the stem and for 150 feet (46 m) back at either side, up to the waterline."

Stern? Shouldn't that be bow? Jason404 (talk) 02:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have misread. It says "stem", not "stern", and stem = bow. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Largest ship sunk by u-boat?[edit]

The japanese carrier Shinano was also sunk by a submarine, and if I remember correctly she was both heavier and longer than the Empress (thus fulfilling multiple definitions of "largest"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.24.187.32 (talk) 10:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was the largest ship sunk by a "U-boat" which is the common name for WW1 and WW2 German submarines. Japanese submarines were commonly called I-boats.--Jackehammond (talk) 06:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Learn something new every day! I didn't know that about the I-boat name. Good to know for future reference. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Point taken, and didn't know about the distinction. Learn something new indeed! I do however think that it would simplify to add "a german U-boat" to avoid misunderstandings, as it has been done under "fate" to the right, and in multiple places in the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.235.239.187 (talk) 12:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New photo to add to the page[edit]

I have written permission from Canadian Pacific to use a photo from their archives of the Empress of Britain. I'm not sure how to add a photo - I can't make it work! Does anyone out there have some quick advice for me, please? Thanks very much. Ashley Bodiguel (talk) 23:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on RMS Empress of Britain (1930). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:RMS_Empress_of_Britain_(1930)&oldid=1212867773"