Titanic Struck By Torpedo Boat?

Status
Closed
Nov 2014
219
ph
#21
About as likely as being sunk by a giant meteorite. The wreck of the Titantic has been found, and there is no evidence of a torpedo damage, no reports of any explosion by any of the survivors that is typical of a torpedo attack, and no reason for anyone to torpedo the Titanic since there wasn't a war going on.

Further, submarines lacked the range to attack the Titanic where it sank, and there is no evidence of any kind of surface torpedo ship in the area that could attack the Titanic.

A meteorite of gold landing in my back yard is more likely.
Are you sure that Man really landed on the moon?🤔
 
Oct 2012
447
#22
I think it was the time travelers. You know, in the future when time travel is a commonplace and people are thinking: where should I go this time, maybe check Titanic at that faithful night?
Suddenly there are thousands of extra people at the decks, of course it will sink.
 
Nov 2010
7,257
Cornwall
#23
You are all missing the point - our Austrian friend in his long range sub timed his torpedo to conicide with the hitting of a dirty great huge iceberg. Sure know one would ever know but you have to question the waste of munitions :lol:
 

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,039
#24
Are you sure that Man really landed on the moon?🤔
Yes. Scientist can and do bounce lasers off a mirror left by the moon lsnding, they used it to accurately measure the distance of the moon to the earth. If you had a big enough telescope you could see the moon landing site if you looked. And all the Soviets had to do to.expose the fraud is monitor the radio signals from the moon, and say "Hey, there are no radio signals.coming from the moon! You Americans are lying about landing on the moon, Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!". But I guess the Soviets preferred to be show up and humiliated front of the world rather than expose American's hoax, because I guess it was the Soviet Union goal to be shown inferior to the Americas and losing the space race. The Soviets just were too noble and big hearted to expoze Americas cheating.
 

GogLais

Ad Honorem
Sep 2013
4,833
Wirral
#25
Are you joking, trolling, or on dope? Have you actually read any of the many *factual* accounts of the Titanic? A quick Google search turned up this in the first entry: "The wreck of the RMS Titanic lies at a depth of about 12,500 feet (3.8 km; 2.37 mi), about 370 miles (600 km) south-southeast off the coast of Newfoundland." Glancing at a map, that's at least 700 miles from New York, just roughly eyeballing it. In fact, if you measure 350 to 400 miles directly towards NY from Newfoundland, you still end up a good 200 miles short.

The encounter with the iceberg is VERY well documented by literally dozens of eyewitnesses. The lookouts spotted it at quite a distance, but the first officer (second?) was not able to turn the ship in time to avoid it. Ironically, some have said that if the lookouts had *not* seen it until much later, the ship would have rammed it head-on and could have stayed afloat.

Maybe you can find some nice flat-earth discussion board for your loopy fantasy stories? I just think you'd be happier there.

Matthew
FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!
 
Jul 2009
9,396
#27
The OP is correct that Austria (k.u.k. Kriegsmarine) had good torpedoes. Sooo...with that established, why would an Austrian torpedo boat be in the north Atlantic? Their operations, for numerous reasons, were confined to the Adriatic. The answer(s) to this should be good. :smirk:
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions