Why Titanic sank

It takes an idiot to design a boat with a hole in it.... tsk ....tsk

 

Boats usually have several holes designed into them.

The trick is not to install any without first planning to.

 

A theory put forward by Joseph Conrad among others, and since discounted by many. There's another theory concerning the quality of the plating rivets (in Titanic) as well........

 

Wasn't there some memories released from the bridge adter the people in question were long since deceased that first the turn to avoid was made to wrong direction by helmsman?

 

This was the real reason.

Petros was close, it was the rivet quality used, not the plating. The high tensile rivets were too hard to place in the bow section (required an operator behind the hole as well as outside, so cheaper/easier ones were used.

The bow plates popped apart like a zipper, according the the last documentary I saw, that actually sent a sub down to check the damage.

Of course, it wouldnt have been a tragedy if the owner hadnt reduced the number of lifeboats carried. The seas were calm, and everyone should have been safe.

The lookout couldnt get to the binocular cabinet ... it goes on and on.

Its like the analogy used in air safety - the contributing factors are all like moving slices of swiss cheese - when all their holes line up - disaster happens.

 

"the real reason"?

Wow, you are certainly connected if you know that.

Because nobody will ever know the real reason.

 

I had not heard about the rivets, though that could make a difference. If the plating crack open instead of just buckling however, it would let a lot of water in fast. the rivets would not likely have caused it to break in half, but brittle plating would. It is well known now that it broke in half.

I very much doubt that it would have survivd a head-on collition with a burg. Consider the amount of energy, all that mass moving at some 20 knots coming to a dead stop? It would have broke in half and sunk even faster.

Besides, not likely anyone on the bridge would have ordered to ram the burg head on, it is the natural response to do exactly what they did, full revers and rudders hard over. From what I have read they had thought they were going to clear it. Even after side swiping it they did not know they were taking on that much water that fast. If the metal hull had not crack open, they may not have been taking on so much water and had time enough to pump out the bidge or get everyone to safety.

A lot of poor decisions added up to it sinking, any one if done differently may have prevented it, or at least saved a lot of lives. but choosing to ram an iceburg head on was not one of them.

 

Titanic 2 is being built in China. No rivets, better notch toughness in low temperature and this time enough life boats.

 

I hope they replace the scotch boilers...

 

It's not being built yet.

Please don't start rumours.

 

Tom, Titanic 2 is to be built in China unless there's a Titanic scale change of plan.

Actual construction is expected to start next week and the contract is supposed to be signed shortly with the state owned yard. Announcements that it is actually proceeding ( .... to be built ) were made yesterday as definite.

 

I think they might forget high pressure steam and use infernal combustion this time.

 

They've remembered to add more lifeboats too

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-to-build-Titanic-2-with-extra-lifeboats.html

 

Are they going to actually call it Titanic II? that seems like a colossal mistake. Or is it going to be a "theme" cruise boat, like having zombie cruise specials, or vampire cruises?

Are they trying to duplicated it as a nostalgia cruise line? I do not understand who would invest in such a venture. That would be like starting an airline called the Hindenburg.

 

You are joking - right ? Its been the most studied naval sinking in the world, with millions spent on research, movies, documentaries, submersible inspection etc etc

There is a guy in todays paper who is launching a program to raise it - just like in the movie.