Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > General History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 11th, 2012, 03:54 AM   #11
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Florida
Posts: 1,308
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosin View Post
The two links are to the same site.
The first is the home page.
The second is a direct link to the message board, collision/sinking theories.
Enjoy.

Encyclopedia Titanica : Titanic Facts, Survivors Stories, Passenger and Crew Biography and Titanic History

Collision / Sinking Theories

Mosin
Thanks for the links.

Here are some interesting info I found in the above links, the two people involved in the thread discussions below appear to be very knowledgeable and popular as well (the yellow highlights are mine):

Thayer's account of list/turn: Tim Brandsoy

"He returned to the stateroom (C-68) to get his parents They went to the starboard side of A deck where John B. Thayer senior thought he saw small pieces of ice floating around, but Jack saw nothing. As they crossed to the port side they noticed that the ship had developed a list to port."

----


Collison: Samuel Halpern

"Did she handle sluggishly? Was there enough time to turn away for the bow to miss hitting the object? Was the ship really turning when contact with the ice was made? What was the time interval between the 3-bell warning signal from the crow's nest to ice contact? How much time before or after ice contact were engine orders sent down to the engine room? How do you resolve all the inconsistencies in the various testimonies given by witnesses, including the helmsman, lookouts, those below in the machinery spaces, and the ship's 4th officer?

The truth is we really don't know the details of what happened except that the ship made contact along it's starboard which caused fatal damage to the ship."

-----

My comment:

Is the opposition between the damage to the hull on the starboard side, and the list to port, evidence of any affects of the angle of the ice shelf beneath the ship leaning away from the upper portion of the iceberg? Or, am I just messing with the information to prove my wild and crazy concept? Until this thread, I never had any interest or knowledge of the facts involved in the Titanic sinking. From what I read in the above links this morning, there is much that contradicts itself. So, even a wild and crazy concept like mine may be valid.
PragmaticStatistic is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 11th, 2012, 07:08 AM   #12
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Florida
Posts: 1,308
Blog Entries: 1

A few minutes ago I thought of something that I should have included earlier. What impact would a 46,328 ton ship, traveling at 22 knots, have on a floating and drifting iceberg? Would it make the iceberg spin in the current, and in the process change the underwater ice shelf shape that is under the ship over a period of time. In other words, what impact would a rotating ice shelf of constantly changing elevations, being pushed by a sea current, have on the sinking ship?

I am simply amazed that none of the discussions on the other Titanic treads ever considered the impact of the iceberg on the ship beyond the initial contact.
PragmaticStatistic is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 11:57 AM   #13

tjadams's Avatar
Epicurean
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Texas
Posts: 25,369
Blog Entries: 6

Interesting
Full Titanic wreck site is mapped for first time | Fox News

and

What sank the Titanic? Scientists point to the moon | Reuters
tjadams is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 12:48 PM   #14

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,765
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by PragmaticStatistic View Post

I am simply amazed that none of the discussions on the other Titanic treads ever considered the impact of the iceberg on the ship beyond the initial contact.
My point exactly
larkin is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 01:05 PM   #15
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Florida
Posts: 1,308
Blog Entries: 1

Its coordinate has also been Google Mapped on my interactive map of Sunken Ships of the Atlantic.
PragmaticStatistic is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 02:08 PM   #16

Belgarion's Avatar
Cynical Optimist
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: Australia
Posts: 3,109

What do photographs of the wreck reveal? While the ship is in two main sections is there any evidence of the 'zipper' opening of the hull on the starboard side, or of the explosive release of air under pressure that would be the result of the bow section sinking rapidly in an almost vertical attitiude.
Belgarion is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 04:46 PM   #17

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,765
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarion View Post
What do photographs of the wreck reveal? While the ship is in two main sections is there any evidence of the 'zipper' opening of the hull on the starboard side, or of the explosive release of air under pressure that would be the result of the bow section sinking rapidly in an almost vertical attitiude.
Ballard and others looked but apparently the opening is below the mud and the split of the ship into two separate wrecks makes an assessment unlikely.
larkin is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 05:00 PM   #18
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Florida
Posts: 1,308
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarion View Post
What do photographs of the wreck reveal? While the ship is in two main sections is there any evidence of the 'zipper' opening of the hull on the starboard side, or of the explosive release of air under pressure that would be the result of the bow section sinking rapidly in an almost vertical attitiude.
See the web site Marconigraph by Parks Stephenson, who pretty much confirms my ice shelf theory a lot better than I ever could.

Then see the section titled, "3.0 Grounding"
  • Which explains the grounding with the ice shelf in detail.
PragmaticStatistic is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 06:46 PM   #19
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: San Diego
Posts: 2,155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alamo View Post
Recorded how many hours after the sinking? Seems a bit quick brother, didn't it take them four to pull the boats from the water? Likely weren't drawing diagrams immediately, just warming up freezing people and counting survivors.

Not trying to be contrarian, just struck me as a bit too soon.
Um... from the moment the Carpathia started picking up survivors, those survivors were asked to recount the sinking.

Thayer's account was identified by the seamen aboard Carpathia as being the most credible and detailed.
And the drawings were made literally that morning, to Thayer's recollections.

The compelling bit is that the story that got accepted was the Sank in one piece story. And Thayers account forgotten.

But when the wreck was found, the damage and position was exactly as would be expected based upon his description.
'
sculptingman is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 06:50 PM   #20
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: San Diego
Posts: 2,155

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve53 View Post
It could be seen against the stars. Not sure the phase of the moon.

I think the bottom keel plate plays a role here to. It was the first part laid for the ship, and I think it ripped off at some point and was found a distance away from the other two section.

That the open middle engineering sections filled rapidly and caused the ship to fold could have also caused the base plate to rip off.
The problem is the lack of damage to the base plate... in Cameron's reconstruction, the stern falling off should have BENT or folded the base plate down as the rest of the steel pulled apart from tensile forces.

But they weren't bent. A large section from the break was found unbent... as if its seams had torn from direct tension. This - plus the wide wedge shaped area of crumpled damage to the decks above this area all supports a hull busting at the bottom, first, with either end folding up
sculptingman is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
titanic, truth


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Two kinds of truth or two sides of truth? kowalskil Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 51 May 1st, 2014 03:18 PM
Titanic fans HERE??? Titanic 2 movie is here! Heidi XX History in Films and on Television 37 October 4th, 2012 09:50 AM
If The Titanic never sank. Inspiration Speculative History 35 October 24th, 2010 08:45 PM
Titanic. Toolbox123 General History 3 November 17th, 2007 08:51 AM
Titanic flaja General History 2 October 16th, 2006 03:36 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.