didnt the one in command(not the captain he was sleeping or something) slam one engine into full reverse? wich was an huge mistake
If Shipsim is any guide, we should know how long it takes for Titanic to turn..'
In 20/20 hindsight, it may have been better to hit the iceberg head-on..
I'm confused..
How is any of this going to change the outcome of the actual disaster, again? ::)
;D
I'm confused..from the grandaughter of lightroller ( i think its lightroller i didint spell right ) hench put her in reverse and hard a starbord then murdoch notice that they were turning the wrong way but it was to late
How is any of this going to change the outcome of the actual disaster, again? ::)
;D
Well if they just hit the bloody thing head on they'd of been fine
Not nessecarily - I mean if you scrape a car at 30 mile per hour you get less damage then colliding head on at 30 mph...
Not nessecarily - I mean if you scrape a car at 30 mile per hour you get less damage then colliding head on at 30 mph...
In a car that would be called a crumple zone..
I think ships have plenty of that.. :)
Depends what sort of stress the ship was designed for - I doubt the boilers would have liked it...
Wouldn't it helped if they altered course towards the iceberg and collided with it dead ahead? You would have less compartiments that would take water in. Same reason why ships steer head-on-head if they can't prevent a collision. i'm not sure about the Titannic's case since i've never read up on that subject but i was just wondering. :)
Consider the physics involved in bringing the mass of that ship, travelling at 21 knots, to a screeching halt in only a few tens of meters. Estimate the G force. There would likely be movement of heavy machinery and consequent fires. Many people would go flying and hit or be hit by hard objects.
Most marine architects who have studied that proposition concur that it is a bad idea.
Where did you find the 37 seconds? It doesn't even make sense because there was no fog, it was a cold and clear night and you should be able to spot a large object like that from some distance. 5 minutes at 20 knots makes sense.1) The iceberg was not able to be seen until 37 seconds before impact for these reasons:
I'd rather listen to the grandchild of officer Lightoller, and she has no reason to tell lies. When they continued sailing for about half an hour it certainly increased the damage as water was forced over the bulkheads. The flooding would take much longer if the ship didn't move, and she probably wouldn't even sink. That's what this Spambot is telling, and I believe her.
Well sorry mate, but I'm buying her story and not yours. I don't think she would disrespect the 1500 lives lost and tell lies only to make profit, she just thinks it's time to tell the truth.But why would her whole family wait until now, when she is coming out with a book, to tell this truth? White Star Line was absorbed long ago, and the men that she says the secret protected are long dead. Her story has many more holes than just the distance at which the iceberg was spotted. For instance, how could WSL engineer and execute a complete conspiracy within 24 hours, and how did the officers' testimony match so well with all of the passengers'?
I don't know why she waited, maybe she was unsure about writing this book, or let it rest.Binoculars would be no help in spotting anything because they narrow your field of vision. As for the 20 knots, it was common practice in those days to sail full speed a head through an ice field. Sounds like madness today, but back then, that's how officers were trained.
But anyway, they did keep sailing for some time after the impact, I'm sure you agree that it was a bad idea. And if the visibility was very poor, as you say it was, then the speed of 20 knots would be madness there and then in those days when they had nothing to help them except a pair of binoculars, and even today.
I'm not saying you're totally wrong though, I'm just saying her story does make sense.
The helmsman correctly interpreted the command and correctly excecuted it.You don't know that for sure. You seem to forget how easily they could have covered it all up assuming this was what actually happened.
And captain Smith did precisely what ship owner Bruce Ismay told him to do, which eventually led to the disaster. The captain sailed north into unsafe areas to shorten the distance, ignored iceberg warnings, still maintained 20 knots at night, continued sailing after the impact. The real tragedy is that he knew all of this was wrong. Smith was responsible for all the lives lost, but he paid for it with his own.It's list time again!
The thing is, you never really see people treating the disaster as if it were serious any more. People aren't nearly as respectful to the lives lost as they used to be. People already make tons of jokes about it, and we've already started to make jokes about 9/11 and other tragedies. I just wonder, how does time truly make a difference? The same amount of people were lost, if not 100 years ago but yesterday we would still be very respectful to it.Yes, but when today lives are lost, investigators look into the cause and the details for a better picture of how it occured and, in this case, what it was like.
I'm confused..
How is any of this going to change the outcome of the actual disaster, again? ::)
;D
But again, a captain who wants to live or keep his job does not sail a vessel that size into a field of icebergs at a speed of 20 knots, nor does he continue sailing after a major collision...a recipe for disaster.A captain in those days was told to keep moving full steam ahead through ice, and the engines were stopped early into the sinking. Keeping the engines going at all has a reason in itself, but it is some technical reason that I cannot recall, relating to the workings of that type of steam engine, I believe it was. As for the visibility of the iceberg, read this: http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page16.htm (http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page16.htm)
you should be able to spot a large object like that from some distance.
I'd rather listen to the grandchild of officer Lightoller, and she has no reason to tell lies.
A captain in those days was told to keep moving full steam ahead through ice, and the engines were stopped early into the sinking. Keeping the engines going at all has a reason in itself, but it is some technical reason that I cannot recall, relating to the workings of that type of steam engine, I believe it was. As for the visibility of the iceberg, read this: http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page16.htm (http://home.comcast.net/~georgebehe/titanic/page16.htm)Interesting how you pretty much ignored Subwolf's quite convincing statement:
And, for another thing, wouldn't 6th officer Moody, whose job was to watch he helmsman constantly to make sure orders are being carried out correctly, instantly see the mistake and correct it almost immediately? "... He was standing behind and/or to one side of Quartermaster Hitchens who was at the helm in the Wheelhouse," as Art Braunschweiger says in the TRMA forum topic I have linked to twice now.
Another interesting fact that support this book is that the captain of the Carpathia reported several icebergs as far as two miles away. This proves that the visibility was more or less normal at night in those weather conditions, clear skies and calm seas.
Interesting how you pretty much ignored Subwolf's quite convincing statement:I have a link at the end of the second paragraph to one person's essay on that idea.
But again, a captain who wants to live or keep his job does not sail a vessel that size into a field of icebergs at a speed of 20 knots, nor does he continue sailing after a major collision...a recipe for disaster.
If Shipsim is any guide, we should know how long it takes for Titanic to turn..According to RMS Gigantic's virtual trials, ShipSim has greatly underestimated Titanic's turning power.
In 20/20 hindsight, it may have been better to hit the iceberg head-on..
I have been on ships sailing through iceberg fields at higher speeds than that, and the captain kept both his job and his life.
Don't forget that everyone believed the Titanic to be "virtually unsinkable".
As I said above it is very easy to sit at home having commanded the Titanic in SS08 and think that you arequalified to second guess the people who were there, it is very easy to state things as facts when there is little or no evidence, it is very easy to apportion blame, but what does any of that achieve.
All the lessons which can be learned from the Titanic disaster have been learned, there is no point in dragging it up again and again.
Sounds like you failed to notice that another Titanic book has just been released, then a debate about this will be nothing but natural.Moving at 20 knots or more through an ice field was common practice. It is deemed unsafe today mainly because of Titanic's demise, but at the time, it's how captains were trained.
A passenger ship moving at 20 knots at night in an area like that with berg warnings issued would be concidered very unsafe. It will not happen today.
I'm only saying that what this Spambot says makes sense, and I'd rather listen to a grandchild of an officer who was on the bridge of the Titanic, than a bunch of people born 80 years later who think they know exactly what happened and calling her a liar. No thanks.
i figured it out one egine in full ahead the other egine in halg reverse hard a port when back of ship starts coming up to the berg you put the egine in reverse in full and turn hard a starbord to avoid a stern collison
However I am sure (this is my opponion only and no evidence) that Murdoch had enough knowledge about the engines and their influence of the course.
I don't think he knew enough about the ships handling and the engines performance. It was the ships maiden voyage so no one had any "experience" with the ship and her engines.
That is where we differ in opponion. Murdoch had served on the Olympic for almost a year so he should have some handeling knowledge of vessels of that size, and to how revolutions of engines influence the helm it should have been in his education as an officer.
Yes, in one case you get a ship with a damaged bow and passengers falling over and spilling their drinks..
In the other case, it's a matter of one flooded compartment too many, and a sinking ship..
I would agree, but wouldn't the bow tip over enough- just enough- that the water in the foward compartement spill over towards the next, and so on, still dooming the ship?Titanic was designed to have three or four of her front compartments flood, and still remain afloat. If you look at the Ship Simulator model of the ship, 3 compartments goes to the middle of the forward well deck, four takes you to the middle of the bridge. That's a pretty far way for an iceberg to go in a head on collision, even at 22½ knots.
Titanic was designed to have three or four of her front compartments flood, and still remain afloat. If you look at the Ship Simulator model of the ship, 3 compartments goes to the middle of the forward well deck, four takes you to the middle of the bridge. That's a pretty far way for an iceberg to go in a head on collision, even at 22½ knots.
But don't they go up as far as E-deck, so they weren't really watertight?Even so, Titanic was still designed to have as far back as her well deck, or even bridge, flooding, and live to tell about it.
Of course it doesn't. None of it really does. ;)
The key is... and don't tell anyone, cause it's a secret..
The bally thing sunk.. it's gone, it's been almost a century and no lesson yet still to be learned about that faithful night will change anything in modern shipping any more, all it does is make so-called Titanic buffs argue on message boards and make other people a lot of money by selling their books and DVDs.
And that's all there is to it. ;D :P
By the way, RMS Gigantic was RMS Mortanium, probably you already knew that ;D ::)What on Earth do you mean by that?
I have never heard of the "RMS Mortanium"
This Ship has made quite a reputation for itself, plus as the media butted in and added in fancy words like practically unsinkable. Not putting many life boats because back in those days all people need it to know is that ships are unsinkable. They just added those lifeboats just for the hell of it so people could of gained a sense of safety. The finale tonnage of the ship as you all know was 45,000 Tons after they made some modifications to the ship to personalize it to suit people's basic needs. So after all this publicity, books, DVD's claiming to tell the truth, once again we are back to square 1
Sorry spelled it worng, it was Mauretania
RMS Mauretania (also known as the "Maury") was an ocean liner built by Swan, Hunter & Wigham Richardson at Wallsend, Tyne and Wear for the British Cunard Line.
The Olympic-class passenger liner, RMS Titanic was owned by the White Star Line and constructed at the Harland and Wolff shipyard in Belfast, Ireland.
The three Olympic class ships were built to rival the Cunard Line ones, Maury and Lusitania and Aquitania. And there was one that was changed, name wise, in the Olympic class, but that was the Gigantic which actually became the Britannic.
You're getting things mixed up I think, mate. :)
what sunk it was the captain and when it hit the material what it was made out of cracked and then the shockwave sent 3 million rivets lose
This Ship has made quite a reputation for itself, plus as the media butted in and added in fancy words like practically unsinkable.
I've heard many things tossed around about her that are really just nonesense, to be honest, RMSG. :P
She did take a lot of flooding though, I grant you that..
Just about 100% I think.. in the end.
It didn't make sense to you, because it is nonesense. ;) :lol:
That is wrong on so many levels, the one responsible for it should be ashamed of him or herself.
The one thing that made no sense to me was a theory that Bruce Ismay and Captain Smith were Jesuits and they intended to sink the ship.
Yeah, it's like Bruce Ismay told the Captain "YOU MUST BREAK THE SPEED RECORD CAPTAIN SMITH, OR SINK THE SHIP TRYING" OTHERWISE YOU ARE FIRED( no the exact words). At the time Captain Smith, must of had a lot on his mind therefore he was weak minded and the words controlled him throughout the journey. Some people say, he made it off the ship....in a discusied so no one will see him. In the movie I remember, Ismay approached the captain and was questioning him why aren't they going top speed? That must of pressured the captain and eventual gave in. In one of the scenes you can see Ismay looking back at the Titanic from a lifeboat with a very guilty look on his face like "what have I done" expression.
And another absurd thing, People happened to have found a man on an iceberg off the coast of Greenland, 'analyzed' him, and 'found' out that he was Captain Smith.
I wouldn't be too sure about that either ::)Yeah: His great grand daughter might have come out several years after his death, and made up a bunch of lies as part of a publicity grab for a book she'd be writing! ;D ;)
Yeah: His great grand daughter might have come out several years after his death, and made up a bunch of lies as part of a publicity grab for a book she'd be writing! ;D ;)
If Shipsim is any guide, we should know how long it takes for Titanic to turn..
In 20/20 hindsight, it may have been better to hit the iceberg head-on..
If I remember correctly, all of his children died without having kids of their own, one in war. I think he only has indirect descendants.
incapacitated, you say? That's rather mildly put.. ::)
I think you need to get some proper history books though, mate. Cause you're getting your wars and their statistics mixed up a bit.
That sinking of the Lusitania, which was presumably indeed carrying ammunition for the British army, was in 1915 and partly responsible for the USA to enter into WWI (controversially), and is thus not about WWII as such. The U-20 however was a WWII submarine.
It's been like 3 years since I read about this :doh:
I watched a movie on youtube called Murder on the Atlantic i think and it was about Lusitania being torpedoed by a German u-boat "U-20" As the U-boat was not having much luck they were thirsty for an target of big size, they had 1 torpedo, low fuel and supplies. So they shot a torpedo out setting it's speed at 30knts, as the liner was carrying ammunition at the time it was classified as a enemy ship. When the torpedo hit, the ship's speed was 18knts and funny thing they also yelled out hard to Starboard. She went down in 18 minutes, but here the captain did survive. When he was taken to court, he was going to be prosecuted because Naval High Command officer put a lot of dirt on him, but overall it was his fault for not doing enough to save the ship and taking so long to send the warnings. Overall in the finally result the theory was that the ship was hit by more than 1 torpedo, Captain did his best of his abilities and everyone went home. This was a mistake done by the U-boat's captain and this started the war with Germany, Americans and British were really angry now. The war With Germany took 5 years, 14 million civilians were incapacitated, I think 250 thousand American casualties and 15 or 14 million American soldiers returned home. Finally as the Russian Army was 200 meters from reaching Hitler as he married his love of his life, he pulled the trigger on himself to he head.
I watched 18 Minutes of Terror, which pretty much is the same. (except it doesn't have your accidental WW mix-up ;))