Titanic sinking theory

[Feek]

I watched a dreadfully over dramatised program a few days ago about the Britannic. I was frustrated how they described her as the twin of the Titanic, lots of comparisons between them and didn't even mention Olympic. I suppose that's all because she outlived them both and was known as 'Old Reliable" which doesn't make a good story.

 

[Tefal]

It's a pity the lottery wasn't around then

I'd class her as mkre wildly unlucky than lucky

 

[kindai]

I spent many years looking into the Titanic and various theories, and while some may sound plausible, at the end of the day it comes down to that the ship hit the iceberg with so much force the hull panels were going to be opened at the seams regardless of other factors.

There was a documentary / experiment done not so long ago using the same quality panels and rivets, as well as higher quality rivets put under a hydraulic press.

Both times the rivets gave out long before the panels, and this was at something like 1/3 for the low quality rivets and 1/2 for the higher quality ones of the estimated force the ship hit the iceberg with.

Unfortunately there is no conspiracy or anything, it was just a tragic accident.

 

[Rroff]

Unfortunately there is no conspiracy or anything, it was just a tragic accident.

I've never looked into it in any depth but I read in passing some conspiracy theory about it being sunk on purpose to cover up the assassination of someone (supposedly one of the "elites") - backed up with something about radio/telegraph transmissions or something and timing of flares used and some other stuff can't remember details now. Probably a load of BS but the conspiracies go far beyond just the accident itself.

 

[Feek]

Yes, Rroff. Utter garbage.

 

[MadMossy]

how did these coal bunker fires start, i thought the fires in the boilers would have been fairly well back from the openiings, never mind the piles of fuel?

Explains it in the documentary, coal stacked by the tonne load can actually self ignite, coal at the bottom of the pile slowly heats up over days/weeks and can spread.

The coal was loaded onto the ship at least 3 weeks before it set sail and which point the coal could have started to smoulder and eventually ignite. It can burn at over 1000c so easily enough to warp/weaken steel plating.

 

[Big Spender]

Trump did it

 

[wolfie138]

Explains it in the documentary, coal stacked by the tonne load can actually self ignite, coal at the bottom of the pile slowly heats up over days/weeks and can spread.

The coal was loaded onto the ship at least 3 weeks before it set sail and which point the coal could have started to smoulder and eventually ignite. It can burn at over 1000c so easily enough to warp/weaken steel plating.

cheers bud, i never got to see the docu. very interesting - and a bit unsettling!

 

[The Funktopus]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/9801/felkins-9801.html

An article on the metal used in the titanic for those interested.



Puts the 'they used cheap crap steal' argument to bed, they used the best available at the time...

Just "tapping" a garbage barge in Valparaiso caused a rather alarming gash in the hull of one of the vessels I work on, and what was even more disconcerting was the fact that even with heating from an oxy-acetylene torch, the steel simply would not move back into place. Modern (Korean) ship building steel isn't all that either!

 

[Housey]

Just "tapping" a garbage barge in Valparaiso caused a rather alarming gash in the hull of one of the vessels I work on, and what was even more disconcerting was the fact that even with heating from an oxy-acetylene torch, the steel simply would not move back into place. Modern (Korean) ship building steel isn't all that either!

Ah yes, Valparaiso, the port that von Spee took his ships to after the battle of Coronel in 1914 and from whence he sailed shortly after to be sunk at the Battle of the Falklands later. Similar thing with the Falklands war in 1982 when we had ships cracking decks in bad weather due to metal problems and not being accustomed to the south atlantic. As you say the quality of ships is hugely variable.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Scania, your post #81 was very interesting reading. Thanks ☺

 

[Third Opinion]

I think another thing to remember that although the size and luxury of the three ships was ground breaking stuff at the time the actual design of the ships were very outdated.

Cunard was making faster and safer ships at the time although smaller and less luxurious. They were powered by steam turbines, the Olympic class had a steam turbine to power the central propeller but the work horses were the steam engines which were huge.

Olympic and Britannic were totally redesigned following Titanic's sinking when the conceded there were serious design flaws in the hull and bulkheads.

Britannic suffered the worse luck as they are 90% sure the water tight doors were open due to a shift change at the time of the explosion. Although the doors should have shut automatically when water entered there is a very good chance at least two bulk heads would have buckled jamming them open. This coupled with the portholes being left open sealed her fate.

Still Olympic had a long service and even survived being a troop ship in WW1.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

I'm not saying their wasn't a fire, as Jokester has said, it wasn't uncommon. But was that enough to make any difference to the 300ft of hull damage and breach of six compartments? No, of course not and that's why the official enquiry wasn't concerned about it.

From what I gather, the key point about the fire wasn't about hull breach, but the fact that they were shovelling the burning coal into the furnaces at a rate of knots in order to get rid of it (the fire also spread to a second bunker too). Due to the coal shortage at that period the evidence suggests Titanic had only sailed with 'just enough' to make the crossing.

The main point being that the Captain steamed at 20+ knots into an area where ice was known to exist. Why?

The proposed theory is that to maintain momentum and reach New York with the coal they had left they couldn't slow down because if they did, they wouldn't have enough coal on board to get the engines back up to speed.

With a ship full of high society, and the overall mindset and culture at the time, it is understandable why this outcome was 'unacceptable' for a world leading ship on it's maiden voyage.........

Big money was at stake, and WSL competetors were chomping at their heels.

The fire didn't change the damage caused by the iceberg, but it did contribute to the arguably reckless entry ino an area known for icebergs (ice reports were even provided prior to the Titanic getting there, from what I gather).

Well at least that is what I took from the documentary.

 

[Gee]

Wall of text here peeps but a very interesting read.

Courtesy of https://www.reddit.com/user/pheosang

The stokers had been combatting the fire ever since Titanic arrived in Southampton to take on supplies before passengers boarded, and they had just extinguished the fire mere hours (I believe 6 or so) before the ship collided with the iceberg. To do this, they shifted coal that was not on fire over to the Port Side coal bunker for Boiler Room 6. It was then that they got the fire under control and everything was all well in Boiler Room 6 finally.

BUT! All of that extra weight shifted over to the port side of Boiler Room 6 caused the ship to list (lean) to port (left) by around 2.5 degrees. Passengers had even started to notice by Sunday noon. Surviving passenger Lawrence Beesley noted that as he was at lunch with a group of other passengers they noted that if they looked out the Port windows they could not see the horizon, only the sea. If they looked out of the Starboard (right side) windows they couldn't see the sea, only the sky.

This would mean that the ship was listing to the left, but not by a huge margin, as most passenger didn't even notice.

What makes this lean to Port important is.....the iceberg strike. The coal had not yet been moved back to starboard at the time of the collision, and so the ship was still listing anywhere from 2-2.5 degrees to Port.

Quartermaster Hitchens later testified that at roughly 11:45PM (5 minutes after the collision) that Captain Smith re-entered the Bridge and noted there was a 5 degree list to starboard (right).

Meaning that the ship went from a 2-2.5 degree list to Port to a 5 degree list to starboard in only 5 minutes.

Why is that initial port list important, you might ask? What would happen if it weren't there, and the ship had struck the iceberg at an even trim. Assuming that the force of the water caused the ship to take on the same degree of downward movement, Titanic would be suffering from a 7-7.5 degree list to starboard in only 5 minutes after hitting the iceberg.

At that severe of a list, lifeboats on both sides of the deck would find it very troublesome to launch, not to mention that they had to be readied yet. On the port side the boats would be practically grinding along the hull as they lowered, where on the starboard side they would be swinging anywhere from 10-15 feet away from the boat deck edge, pretty much guaranteeing that anyone to board a lifeboat would have to have the athleticism of a gymnast or they would simply not be able to enter.

And here is an even scarier scenario. As a ship sinks, its center of gravity is constantly changing. It moves from near the bottom of the ship to up near the top as more water floods in, this is hastened by lists. Which is why if you've ever taken a ship model, or seen videos of ships sinking on youtube they always roll over on one side.

It is now 11:45PM. Everyone on board is aware of a frightening list developing to starboard, but instead of stabilizing at 7-7.5 degrees it gets worse. As the center of gravity rises, the ship continues to roll over to starboard, eventually laying over all the way on its side where it then proceeds to sink beneath the waves at roughly 12:00AM - 12:10AM.

Why is this such a scary scenario? Besides the obvious reasons....the first lifeboat never left Titanic until 12:40-45AM. And the first confirmed wireless signals calling for help left only a few moments later. Captain Smith was not aware that the ship was doomed until 12:15AM - 12:20AM...

To put it shortly, the fire saved Titanic by causing the port list before the collision ever took place. If it had not had been for that fire, Titanic may have very well slipped beneath the waves with a 100% mortality rate, and not a single piece of evidence to suggest that she'd gone down. It would have become a ghost ship, and would likely still remain hidden on the ocean floor to this day.

Some more very good posts by the same user in the thread on r/worldnews: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/5lf41g/titanic_sank_due_to_enormous_uncontrollable_fire/

 

[ubersonic]

I watched a dreadfully over dramatised program a few days ago about the Britannic. I was frustrated how they described her as the twin of the Titanic, lots of comparisons between them and didn't even mention Olympic.

It's quite comical when they always assume that as the three ships were of the same class they must have been identical, in reality due to Titanic hitting the sea bed before Britannic hit the water there had been major improvements to the design.

While Olympic received numerous improvements in her post Titanic refit, Britannic being still in the early construction phase also received core design changes, to the point where it would have survived the same iceberg collision.

 

[Scania]

Scania, your post #81 was very interesting reading. Thanks ☺

Thanks.

Wall of text here peeps but a very interesting read.

Courtesy of https://www.reddit.com/user/pheosang



Some more very good posts by the same user in the thread on r/worldnews: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/5lf41g/titanic_sank_due_to_enormous_uncontrollable_fire/

Interesting but flawed theory I feel, it was common and documented for Olympic to regularly develop a slight but perceptible list on her voyages, the boiler room crews (or Blackgang as they were known) were supposed to empty the bunkers in a specific pattern to stop the ship developing a list due to uneven balance on each side of the vessel, fuelling such coal hungry furnaces was time consuming and backbreaking work, in truth they barely had the time and strength to get the coal from the nearest bunker into the furnaces such was the furnaces hunger for fuel, the ideal for keeping the ship in trim was left to the engine room staff who countered any lists with bilge pumps and indeed continued to do so right up until the moment she sank, Britannic incidentally rolled over before sinking as the engineers were ordered up much sooner than the Titanics engineers and they all survived, no engineers from Titanic did so.

It's quite comical when they always assume that as the three ships were of the same class they must have been identical, in reality due to Titanic hitting the sea bed before Britannic hit the water there had been major improvements to the design.

While Olympic received numerous improvements in her post Titanic refit, Britannic being still in the early construction phase also received core design changes, to the point where it would have survived the same iceberg collision.

Britannic indeed would have not sank as quickly as Titanic, but, despite the bulkhead redesigns and the double skin, the hull framing was still not strong enough to sustain the strain of the stern being lifted out of the water by flooded bows, while it is agreed she could have withstood the damage suffered by Titanic in so far as the flooding would have reached a point and got no further, its highly likely that just as happened with Titanic, she broke her back and snapped in two before - admittedly not long before in Titanics case - she lost boyancy.

Once the weight of floodwater overcame her hulls load strength it would still have failed.

I've read that Britannic didn't snap in two mainly because she flooded quicker than Titanic which didn't allow time for the stresses to make the hull fail, also she sank in water shallower than her length and as such was touching the bottom before her stern sank, this would have lessened the hull flexing and reduced the strain on it,which contributed in the hull staying in one piece.

 

[lude1962]

Just seen the c4 doc, separating the wheat from the chaff:
the fire damaged a bulkhead (warped and weakened)
the bulkhead failed meaning the ship sank 90 minutes sooner, the extra 90 minutes could have meant rescue.
The warped and failing bulkhead was observed by one of the Titanic firemen

In the other doc I quoted earlier in this thread the sonar scans indicated the Titanic broke into 3 pieces, bow, stern and a small center section with one of the engines.
Would be interesting to know whether the center section broke at the location of the fire damaged bulkhead.

 

[Scania]

Would be interesting to know whether the center section broke at the location of the fire damaged bulkhead.

The fire damaged bulkhead (according to C4) was between boiler rooms 5 and 6, 6 being nearest to the bow of the ship, the break up occurred in the area between boiler room 1 and the reciprocating engine room toward the stern.



A (very) detailed explanation of the break up can be found here, by Roy Mengot & Bill Wormstedt, two experts in the field of all things Titanic.

http://wormstedt.com/RoyMengot/TitanicWreck/BREAKUP/Breakup.html

If your interested in the Titanic, and have a few hours to kill, you'll struggle to find a better resourse to fill that time than their full site, highly recommended.

http://wormstedt.com/RoyMengot/TitanicWreck/index.html#anchor159070

 

[Gee]

http://www.paullee.com/titanic/index.php is also a good resource.

 

[SkScotchegg]

This thread has been amazing and very fascinating, thanks to everyone who has contributed!

I have one question though, what ever became of the White Star shipping company? Did they get the insurance money for the titanic? Did the company survive? Do they still makes ships today?

EDIT: Question 2, I think it's amazing that "Violet Jesso" survived three ship disasters, they definitely should make a film based on her life story! How old did she live to? is she still alive?

Thanks in advance.