Titanic Case Study

Introduction
In 1912 titanic sank with loss of numerous lives, the most prominent disaster of marine. That big
ship was considered by many, including designers of the ship and builders to be an unsinkable
ship. The project to plan and assemble the biggest and most powerful traveler liner on the planet
got much consideration and appreciation as a building accomplishment. However the advantage
acknowledgment of the project was doubtful. The incident of hitting an iceberg could really had
been normal and maintained a strategic distance from, yet most likely viewed as improbable to
happen given its enormous and solid structure. It appeared afterward resources that are important
to handle with the crises were not accessible at that time, which gets worse.
Commentary
According to the documentary project of titanic ship were the largest and the most expensive at
that time. Harland and Wolff was the builder of the ship. When they examine the blunder of the
project management, they came up with some interesting conclusion. In 1907 Cunard line built
the much larger ship Lusitania and Mauretania, they both were the high technology ship. So the
chairman of white star Bruce Ismay was under great pressure. So he met with Harland & Wolff’s
chairman for the strategy of new liner fleet. The sponsor of the Olympic-class ship was Ismay
and his project would improve the inferior services and market loss, white star board and pirrie
were the suppliers. The main focus of the project was luxury. The Olympic was 30% scale up
over Cunard’s ship and more capacity. Pirrie suggested implementing the new technology of
using wireless Marconi gram and davits & automated control systems. The profitability analysis
of the project had two year of breakeven. The richest man in the world J.P. Morgan funded the
project but not identified with it. They transform the business and replace the setting of previous
ship to luxury and it attracts the customer over speed. Project deliver three ships over seven years
considering the safety comfort and luxury and normal speed. The scope of project affect by the
emerging technologies to sale up the project. The cost estimation was based on past project
experienced but scaled up. Quality standards embedded the procurement of steel in the rivets,
plating and boilers. Both companies were industry leaders and expertise to identify and manage
risk. Andrew the project manager led the design based on the requirements and his design meet
the non-functional requirement of safety. He tests the worst case scenarios like grounding and
collision. From these output new technologies were selected for grounding double hull was most
effective and went further and design watertight compartment along the double bottom. Wireless
communication sent weather and ice reports 1000 miles away. White star had fully met the
regulation of the safety but had only 1178 boats for 3600 people. Ismay ordered the third ship
and also request three major changes to titanic; the first change is to increase the first class
accommodation by 100 , the second change was to create café Parisian and the third change
glazed open promenade deck ‘A’ to stop a sea spray. Three mechanisms were used to alter the
proximity of ice field lookout, ice bucket test and wireless Marconi gram. After collision they
start the engine and sailed off, as they going forward flood in the ship increasing and then ship
was doomed in 65 minutes before captain order lifeboats filled.
Findings
Economic: Roots of the disaster were created in the project, with compromises to the design
(safety features) and to the testing. Elevation of the expectation of end deliverable allowed
business pressure to override operational procedure.
Environmental: When the voyage of the titanic begins they do not have the binoculars to look
out for the iceberg. The mariners have to check the temperature of the water but the rope was
short to draw water.
Innovative aspect: The Marconi gram received warning from other ships but the operator were
overloaded by commercial traffic. Lack of stakeholder management and further compromises in
the implementation made the disaster inevitable. The new technology helps them but their
carelessness doomed their project.
Conclusion
At the end there are so many reasons behind the loss of ship one of them is the do not learn
lesson from the Olympic and Hawke collision both were seriously damage. When the voyage of
the titanic begins they do not have the binoculars to look out for the iceberg. The mariners have
to check the temperature of the water but the rope was short to draw water. The Marconi gram
received warning from other ships but the operator were overloaded by commercial traffic. Roots
of the disaster were created in the project, with compromises to the design (safety features) and
to the testing. Lack of stakeholder management and further compromises in the implementation
made the disaster inevitable
Recommendation
In huge project there are so many chances of loss, according to this project the project sponsor
rush into start the voyage of the ship and ignore the safety measures and other important thing
which leads that huge project into big loss. It’s better to make the project according to the scope
and fulfill ate its requirements so that it may safe from many hurdles and loss.

Titanic Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Titanic Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Titanic Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction

You might also like