 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
 | 
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
IvanTheNotSoTerrible Wrote:
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.
The Titanic's crew had not been trained to handle the ship, especially providing the Titanic's size. There were a few known facts, such as the results of her sea trials. [How fast she could stop, turn etc] which to my knowlege were acceptable. However there were no drills or prior practice to prepare for any encounters. It had been thought that if there would be a threat, the Titanic's advanced technology would have made it in reality a push over. When the Iceberg was spotted, late, First Officer William M. Murdoch as tending the Bridge, not the Captain (Who had sailed the Titanic's Nearly Identical sister Olympic and was farmiliar with procedures and such in running the new White Star Liners).
As we know (This is for your theory MA) the Titanic's engines were reveresed immideatly after the berg had been spotted. You're theory states had they been left alone the Titanic may have missed the Iceberg. Heres where my thoery kicks in.
You see, as I previously stated it takes 5-7 Seconds to turn the rudder. When desiring to port around an object, the rudder shifts to starboard ("Hard 'a Starboard") Which implies it is the wing propeller that effects the rudder initially. The center propeller was about 16.5 feet across when the wing's were 23.5 feet across or so. Now the center propeller was in line with the Rudder, so moving more water across it from a straight angle when the wing is attempting to push agaisnt it evens the flow of water to straight ahead, and to port rather than just to port. The ships mommentum is already carrying it towards the berg, as the propellers are trying to steer Titanic to port away from it. So stopping the propellers (Then reversing them) first slows the Titanic heading towards the berg that is Very Very Close, and then has the wing propellers effect the rudder, to turn the ship. I beleive reverse was called to also angle the water towards the ship, instead of away from it - as normal revolutions surge water away from the ship to drive it forward. I like to think Murdoch had reversed the engines primarily to have only the wing propellers steer the ship, away from rather into the Ice. It doesn't have to do with how much water hits the rudder, but how it hits the rudder.
So in conclusion, I seriously doubt that Murdoch was the cause of the collision having reversed the engines. I think that it may have been a possiblity of avoiding the crash yet his actions make sense to me. I expect the Titanic would have hit the berg regardless.
Quote:
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.
Yes, but how quickly can you shift a rudder against a current, when going as fast as the Titanic was at 22 knots? How effective would you expect it to be? The built up pressure does't just die away, it does so gradually. Besides, the engines would have then added to the pressure as the reversing took effect. I feel like there was a reason for Murdoch to do what he did, and although it's difficult to read his mind I know reversing the engines was a sound decision. The faster a ship is going the faster it can either turn, or the harder is can hit into the Iceberg. It's a gamble. Slowing down and going into it head on as lightly as possible would be a best bet.
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 10:52 am
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1969
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
No, Mr. Titanic, it actually was Susan Hughes and Steve Santini's theory (not mine), in their "The Science and Story of TITANIC" companion book to the submersible Titanic model.
Included with their theory, are example sketches of two Titanics. The one on the left, has the water flowing past the straight rudder, as the ship steams straight ahead...and the one on the right; the water is flowing against the turned rudder (showing two arrows showing how the water pressure going against the rudder on both the port and starboard sides would look) causing the ship to turn to port.
Do you happen to have this model, and the above book?
MA
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 11:13 am
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Oh I understand. I meant the theory you provided. As for the book, I do not have it, nor the model. Providing I do not have it, could it be possible I could see what the model's look like, it sounds interesting. I have heared of the Authors names but never seen the book really, I'll be sure to look out for it. Those diagrams could come in handy.
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 11:19 am
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1969
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
Mr Titanic Wrote:
Oh I understand. I meant the theory you provided. As for the book, I do not have it, nor the model. Providing I do not have it, could it be possible I could see what the model's look like, it sounds interesting. I have heared of the Authors names but never seen the book really, I'll be sure to look out for it. Those diagrams could come in handy.
Even Will, himself (his spirit, that is), does not mind taking helpful constructive criticism from those people nor anyone else. After he saw the diagrams, and seeing as how it all made more sense to him as to what he should have done, he said that had he the chance to handle the situation over again. He would not have ordered the engines to be shut down nor put in reverse, but to have QM Robert Hichens 'hard a port' around the berg.
I happen to find the model and book in my local Hastings Book & Video Store. Perhaps, you should look for the small packaged set in your own local book store...or, return to that TITANIC Exhibit, and look for it there. Betcha you'll find it.:heyy:
MA
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 11:49 am
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
It is a logical explination, though still a gamble. His way was certainly not the best way to handle it yet it was reasonable sa to why it was done as it was. I beleive a head on collision would have produced a one hundred percent sucess rating, providing the ship would have survived regardless of chance. I'd have to see teh diagrams but I doubt the iceberg would have been missed, especially in regards to the thoery that the Titanic's double bottom was damaged from riding up on the iceberg. There are many possiblities. I find it a unique thoery. Yet what judges a turn is not only speed but distance as well.
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 12:04 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1969
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
Mr Titanic Wrote:
It is a logical explination, though still a gamble. His way was certainly not the best way to handle it yet it was reasonable sa to why it was done as it was. I beleive a head on collision would have produced a one hundred percent sucess rating, providing the ship would have survived regardless of chance. I'd have to see teh diagrams but I doubt the iceberg would have been missed, especially in regards to the thoery that the Titanic's double bottom was damaged from riding up on the iceberg. There are many possiblities. I find it a unique thoery. Yet what judges a turn is not only speed but distance as well.
Believe me, when I tell you that he knows that now. See what a great sport he is, when it comes to how he is taking in our helpful constructive critisms of how he originally handled that situation over some 93+ years ago? :angel: 
MA
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 12:37 pm
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Well what are your thoughts on the matter? The head on collison in particular? And do you also think that reversing was just as logical as not doing do?
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 12:39 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1969
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
Mr Titanic Wrote:
Well what are your thoughts on the matter? The head on collison in particular? And do you also think that reversing was just as logical as not doing do?
I think that had he made that decision allowing the ship make that head-on collision, the ship might have stayed afloat longer...limbing along as far as the Halifax, Nova Scotia port to lay up until repairs could be made to her. Although, some of those passengers (both crew & 3rd Class/steerage) in her bow section might have been killed, there still would be more lives saved today.
Then, the remaining passengers could safely disembark in Halifax...to continue on to their designated destinations by train.
Although I dearly love Will, I still feel that stopping the ship, to put her in reverse (as you would an automobile)...was a rather unwise move to make. Because all he was doing was slowing down the starboard flow of water on her rudder, making her turn more slowly...all the while, she was cruising closer and closer towards the berg.
MA
Last edited by MurdochsAid, Aug/21/2005, 5:46 pm
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 1:07 pm
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
True, I beleive the only flaw with reversing the engines was the wait for them to start up. That cost the ship most of her time, time she didn't have. I mean I did provide reason as to why he did it, but given all the possiblities I doubt it was the best move. Then again, he had not been trained to handle such a large ship, normally a ship may have been able to make the turn.
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 1:15 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1969
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
Mr Titanic Wrote:
True, I beleive the only flaw with reversing the engines was the wait for them to start up. That cost the ship most of her time, time she didn't have. I mean I did provide reason as to why he did it, but given all the possiblities I doubt it was the best move. Then again, he had not been trained to handle such a large ship, normally a ship may have been able to make the turn.
Absolutely! Will realizes that now, and coincidentally--he agrees with our summations, regarding his actions.
BTW, the Hughes & Santini box that both their submersible model and book comes in, says...
THE [large]TITANIC[/large] BOOK AND SUBMERSIBLE MODEL
Complete with an actual size photo of the model itself. The background color of the box is blue...kinda like the title bar of our computers.
MA
|
|
Aug/20/2005, 1:41 pm
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
 TSOLD's time is: Nov/27/2009, 9:56 am
|
|
|
Topic 