 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
IvanTheNotSoTerrible
Deck Officer
Posts: 55
Rivets: 6 (+6/-0)
|
 | 
|
|
Whose fault?
I gather you guys really know your stuff about Titanic. I was curious who or what you think was to blame for Titanic colliding into an iceberg causing its sinking.
|
|
Aug/5/2005, 12:19 pm
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
To be honest, it is rather difficult to pin fault on just one person. The blame is actually a whole network of negative events that contributed to the disaster, and or collison.
The first person that would come to mind is Joseph Bruce Ismay. You see, a Coal Bunker Fire had been sprung in one of the Titanic's coal bunkers, before her voyage, and the administration (Ismay, J.P Morgan etc) and White star was aware of this fire. It was caused because there was no ventelation in the Titanic's bunkers, and loose coal dust sparks fires. It really was a common thing. So they permitted the Titanic to sail, on fire! It was deep in her forward hull, and not much attention was paid to it. Ironically people much like J.P Morgan, dropped from the voyage, feeling "sick".. knowing about the fire. Bunker Number six to be precise. Now throughout the voyage, according to the Titanic Inquiry, a team of about the to twelve men was set to put this fire out. The fire, as reported had warped the hull, and the crews attempts to put it out using cold water had taken drastic toll on the hull. Oill was rubbed on it to give the bulkhead a normal appearence. So when the Iceberg hit this area (which it did) the rushing water had punctured the bulkhead and flooded two compartments, rather than one, providing the steel had been weakend.
The crew had also attempted to lower the amount of matter that could burn (coal). And how do you get rid of coal, through it's use! They shoved as much coal as possible into the boilers to empty out the burning bunker, and get to the fire that burn below the surface. By April 14th (night of the collison) the Titanic was rushing at full speed (providing the extra fuel) into an icefeild that was known lay ahead.
During the voyage as I previously stated, the fire flared up, so the Titanic called in the NY fire department to help put out the fire (little did they know that by April 13th the fire would have been put out). Yet the big bad Managing Director Ismay didn't want the press and all New York seeing Firefighters board the Titanic putting out a fire he allowed aboard the Titanic! Bad pablicity to know you sailed on a ship that was allowed to sail with fire on it, no? SO he rushes the Titanic, so it could arrive on Tuesday night, under cover of darkness. Not only so, but the already gained miles, could contribute to new headlines. The Titanic was built for luxgury not speed, and arriving early in New York meant the ship was not only the most elegant, but she was fast to. (Not the fastest, but fast with regard to her size too). She was built for comfort. And a first class passenger heard Ismay convince Captain Smith to pick up speed (light the last few boilers) in the First Class Reception room. So she was rushed - Almost full speed into an iceberg.
Then there is Captain Smith who ignores seven Ice warnings. He also was not at the bridge at the time of the collison (having had dinner in the A La Carte Resturaunt). Had he been there, he would have known what to do - allow a head on collision, and the ship woud live.
First Officer Murdoch, bless his dead heart, really was put on the spot. He see's a giant berg, late I might add, and tries to turn the ship, full speed astern. Now it is common sense to turn away from something in your path. Yet his action had caused the Titanic's weakest area, the flank to bump along the berg popping rivets and flooding her lower decks. This action flooded five consecutive compartments at once (one over the maximum) a head on collision would have flooded about only two.
The night was a moonless night.
The crew had bot been trained to run such a large ship.
The lookouts lacked bonaculars. No lookouts at the prow of the bow.
The water was calm, with no breaking water at the base of potential bergs.
Spring of 1912 was a warmer one, contributing to more bergs breaking off glaciers.
Water poured over the watertight bulkheads (which don't climb any higher than E deck) when the ship was sinking.
Many other factors as well, but those are some I can think of off the top of my head. Hope I was of some assistence. Good Question as well.
Regards,
James
|
|
Aug/5/2005, 11:10 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1968
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Well said and explained there, Mr. T.!  
MA
|
|
Aug/6/2005, 10:31 am
|
|
susanababy
New Passenger
Posts: 15
Rivets: 2 (+3/-1)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
That was well said mr titanic
|
|
Aug/7/2005, 5:24 am
|
|
IvanTheNotSoTerrible
Deck Officer
Posts: 55
Rivets: 6 (+6/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Despite its reputation after being built, it sounds like it had a lot going against it due to inexperience.
Interesting that the ship would have fared better if it would have collided straight into the iceberg. Can you shed more light on that? What would have happened if it would have gone straight? What kind of damage do they estimated would have occured instead?
|
|
Aug/9/2005, 10:19 am
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Some fine questions. I appreciate your curiosity. And as a quick note, the Titanic's reputation began as she was being built, not after she was completed. Infact the hype over the White Star's "Super Liners" began with the Olympic, an event with the H.M.S. Hawke is one I recall well. The R.M.S. Olympic was rammed by it's concrete bow, meant to actually sink other ships, and with a click of the Switch the Olympic's watertight doors shut, she survived, and was repaired. At this point Titanic was being built, and the word "practically" was forgotten in the phrase of "Practically Unsinkable". The shipbuilders, the captain (E J Smith who cammanded the Titanic and Olympic) beleived it was unsinkable as well.
I know, it does seem rather odd that a head on collision would have actually given the Titanic more of a possiblity of survival. However, it makes quite some more sense when we take a look at the Titanic's watertight bulkhead design.
In regards to this picture, look at the forwardmost compartments. Now when the Flank was exposed to the berg, it popped open five compartments through the ripping of rivets. The action taken was turning the wheel hard to port (the Ice hit Starboard) reversing the engines and going full speed, which meant trying to turn sharp, and fast. This allowed the berg enough space to gash open five compartments and seal the fate of the vessel.
Now where you see lines seperating the hull, the bulkhead is locked tight with a watertight door. This is how the Titanic was dedigned, to withstand the very worst of scenerios. If the ship were hit at one of these "lines" or "bulkheads", flooding two compartments at a time, the doors would, clearly prevent the flooding of any more compartments. (The ship could also survive with four forward consecutive compartments flooded). Now during the strike of the Iceberg, the Titanic was traveling anywhere from 21-22 knots. Had the engines been signaled to stop by Murdoch from the bridge, the mommentum already gained would have carried the Titanic into the berg (as opposed to running into it at full speed, which is not wise, and I doubt anyone would do, it's like hitting the breaks and skidding as opposed to driving into something). Providing the ship was built to withstand head on collisons, as other ships before the Titanic had rammed bergs head on and survived, the worst the berg could do to Titanic was peel back the steel and such to expose two compartments, (Refer to the picture above, rather difficult for ice to open any more than that). It is estimated that only about two would have been opened, and the doors would have shut, sealing the ocean from the rest of the ship. Up to four could have been ripped open and the ship still would survive, not that the berg could ever have come close to that much damage.
In other words, two compartments would flood, and the ship could still sail to New York and have been repaired in Nova Scotia, if not towed back into Belfast's Harland and Wolff.
|
|
Aug/9/2005, 10:08 pm
|
|
IvanTheNotSoTerrible
Deck Officer
Posts: 55
Rivets: 6 (+6/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Wow! Thanks for all that info. I had no idea.
|
|
Aug/10/2005, 8:26 am
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1968
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Mr. T., in Susan Hughes & Steve Santini's "The Science and Story of TITANIC" book, on page 34, says that ...First Officer Murdoch immediately ordered the engines stopped, then reversed. Here's what else they said in STEERING THE TITANIC chapter:
Quote:
By the time the lookouts spotted the iceberg, it was about 500 yards (460 m) away, less than two lengths of the Titanic. At that point, it was impossible for the ship, moving at the speed it was, to stop before striking the iceberg. But why couldn't the ship turn out of the way in time? The answer lies in the workings of a ship.
The Titanic was steered with its main wheel, located in the wheelhouse behind the bridge. The main wheel was connected to the ship's massive rudder -- as tall as a 10-story building and weighing 100 tons (90 t). The position of the rudder determined the direction in which the ship traveled.
For a ship to be able to turn, it needs to be moving. If the ship's rudder is positioned straight back, or "amidships," water flows past the rudder, and the ship sails straight ahead. When the rudder is turned to either side, the water presses against it. This turns the ship.
When the lookouts reported the iceberg, First Officer Murdoch immediately ordered the engines stopped, then reversed. But, of the Titanic's three propellers, only the two side propellers, powered by the reciprocating engines, could be put into reverse. The turbine engine and the center propeller -- which was directly in line with the rudder -- remained stopped. This meant that there was no longer nearly as much water flowing over the ship's rudder.
The faster a ship is moving, the greater the pressure of the water against the rudder, and the faster the ship can turn. When a ship is slowing down -- as the Titanic was when Murdoch ordered the engines reversed -- the flow of water across the rudder is reduced, and the ship cannot turn as quickly. Some experts believe that if the ship's engines had been left running full ahead during the turn the Titanic could have turned more quickly -- and perhaps avoided the iceberg.
MA
Last edited by MurdochsAid, Aug/20/2005, 11:00 am
|
|
Aug/10/2005, 12:20 pm
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
I mentioned that MA, he stopped the engines and reversed them full speed astern, tried to port around it but the berg was too close. Thanks for the source. And it is correct, however, turning the ship regardless is a large gamble. Murdoch stopped the engines, then asked Hichens to "hard-a-statboard", regardless of wether the engines were reversed or not, they were shut off completley. Mommentum at that point carried the Titanic towards the berg, when it was spotted the Titanic had been too close to it traveling almost full speed. So by the time the engines initally reversed thrusting water at the rudder, the ship began to turn slightly, enough to avoid a full collision, yet just enough to brush the ice. Now, it is beleived the berg had hit the Titanic as it began to turn around it. Because after the order was given by Murdoch to turn the ship, he ordered the Watertight doors shut. However, as they were shutting water was pouring into the ships lower decks. Let us keep in mind the theory that the Titanic actually rode up onto the Iceberg, so even if the ship had turned in time as far as this idea is concerened, she still would have hit the Iceberg. Murdoch I suppose stopped the engines to slow the ship and reversed them to steer out of the way. It only takes 5-7 seconds to turn the rudder into the angle desired, yet the ship didn't turn until she was quite close to the berg. Mommentum would have rushed water onto the rudder (providing the ship was going full speed) until the engines reversed and provided the rudder with more of a flow of water. So although the rudder would have been less effective on a turn with reversed engines, it still only turned the ship slightly, too close to the Ice, yet when the command to pull over to starboard, the rudder acted well and swung the stern from the Iceberg. So the ship must have indeed turned while brushing against (around)the iceberg.
I beleive because in order to stop the ship, and switch its engines back on, it leaves a breif momment of gradual growth in revolutions. Therefore the stern turned slowly when first turned and then acted well after the engines reversed providing more water. Yet, the ship regardless was traveling at full speed and the berg was spotted too late, I support the theory but it could be sliced different ways. The Titanic had no chance of compleley missing the berg.
Your Welcome John. As for your question, I should note that 5 compartments measured about 300 feet (276 exact). Two Compartments was anywhere from 100 - 110 feet. So you get the idea of how much steel was present in only two compartments to withstand a head on collison. And the ship could stay afloat with four consecutive compartments flooded... The hull in that area was about one inch thick steel. The starboard encounter with the Titanic and the berg that was caused instead of a head on collison also exposed the Coal Bunker Fire effected area to the Ice. However a head on collison would have occured far from it, being near the fifth compartment. The steel under the water, as we know was effected and weakened by the tempeture of the ocean as well, however, a head on collision would have crashed steel above the water into the berg.
Last edited by Mr Titanic, Aug/10/2005, 10:43 pm
|
|
Aug/10/2005, 3:28 pm
|
|
IvanTheNotSoTerrible
Deck Officer
Posts: 55
Rivets: 6 (+6/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
I take it the info you posted wasn't known by the Titanic crew. If so, it's a shame it took so many lives to learn how to deal with a situation like theirs.
|
|
Aug/17/2005, 9:25 am
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
 TSOLD's time is: Nov/26/2009, 5:51 pm
|
|
|
Topic 