| Author |
Message |
    
Roy Mengot
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 1:00 am: | 
|
Notes on a few points:
I've been singing Ken's praises as well on the report.
In 1986 Woodshole JJ video, it looked into cabin B-1 or B-3 from the forecastle. I think it accidentally broke the window. The short range lights shown on walls defining a room but no furniture was seen. JJ looking into stateroom U on the boat deck (Seen on the back of Dr. Ballard's book) saw nothing. Apparently the walls of the rooms were disappearing at different rates and all are gone today.
On the crowsnest, I've seen the 1987 RMST (Titanic Ventures) raw video from the dive to uncover the name on the port bow. What happened seems clear to me. The two mainstay cables that originated between the anchor chains and went up to mast above the crow's nest were the two heaviest in the rigging. In Ballard's mosaic, these are seen fallen to port, bending handrails, as they draped over the side before crosing back over the forecastle. One cable was snagged over the crow's nest and pulled it askew, partially tearing it free. When they looked for the name, the cables were cut to get them out of the way (for safety purposes) at the point where the cables first cross off the forecastle, forward of the name. Where the cables cross back onto the forecastle, I could see discoloration from the movement of the cables.
Apparently, when they cut the cable, they didn't realize it was snagged on the crow's nest 100 feet aft. The dropping cable pulled down and yanked the last connections of crow's nest free. Without a map of where all the cables went (Ballard's mosaic wasn't available to them yet), they had no idea they had done it.
Regards
Roy Mengot |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 1:22 am: |
|
Welcome on board Roy!
I look forward to reading your postes regarding the findings of Titanic's shattered interior.
I wonder if the glimpses caught of the cellular double bottom of the stern section would serve to prove, or disprove the keel to boat deck (bottom to top) break up theory...
Regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Roy Mengot
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 1:28 am: |
|
Thorsten asked:
>
Yes. Dr. Roy Cullimore placed film strips on the wreck to see what types of metal appealed to the rusticle bacteria. There are four layers of emulsion in color film, each of which reacts differently to light because of the metal compounds. (Silver nitrate reacts to light and dark).
The results were veritable works of art. The bacteria ate through the emulsions at different rates. In some places layers were eaten between other and in some places all the layers were eaten almost at the same rate. The developed film showed intricate designs, swirls, changing colors, almost art. Dr. Cullimore showed these at the Science and Titanic symposium in Philidelphia a few years ago.
His studies show the bacteria prefer the manganese first, sulphur second, and iron third. The steel on the ship is being dismantled at the molecular level. |
Robert W. Collier
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 4:57 am: |
|
In the Time/Life book on "Airships", there is an account of one going down on an Arctic expedition. The crew tried to make their way home on foot, but eventually died. Many, many years later, their remains were discovered, and with them, undeveloped pictures taken by the survivors on their attempt to get back. Despite the harsh climate the photo record still survived, and was quite fascinating. It would be a tremendously valuable discovery if any intact film is recovered from the wreck, and processed with any good results. Thank you Mr. Marschall for bringing up what Kodak mentioned. Gets the imagination really going. Thank you too for your beautiful images of Titanic all these years and the attention to detail that you have, be it visual, or in words.
Respectfully,
Robert W. Collier |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 6:07 am: |
|
Thanks for the feedback Parks. Sounds Like Cameron is one very busy chap. I certainly intend to see Ghosts Of The Abyss as soon as I can, get the vidio/DVD as soon as it's released, and I hope that the income is enough so that investors will sponsor another expedition...(and hopefully you won't be left on the dock for want of a bunk.)
Regarding the movie, from what I saw, Cameron did the best he could with the information available at the time, and he did a vastly better job of bringing the ship to life then anyone else did, or even could. Inevitably, some of it has become outdated in light of subsequent discoveries, and the dramatic licence taken was just as inevitable. It was a love story after all and made no pretence of being a historical documentary.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Parks Stephenson
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 6:58 am: |
|
Michael,
Your last sentence is key; unfortunately, not everyone sees that as clearly as you. "Ghosts" will be a historical documentary. There won't be any Jack & Rose this time around, but I'll wager that Cameron will bring the ship alive just the same.
Parks |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 4:53 pm: |
|
I'll wager you're right. My bet is on a series of photos/CGI recreations which would show a given area as completed and what it looks like now.
Any idea what the planned release date is?
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Parks Stephenson
| | Posted on Thursday, January 17, 2002 - 5:01 pm: |
|
Michael,
All I know is that Cameron plans to turn the completed film over to Walden Media in August. Distribution is up to them, but it looks like everyone is expecting a release date of late 2002.
Parks |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Friday, January 18, 2002 - 1:14 am: |
|
It would be wonderful if the dvd release could be followed by a book on this expedition, written with the same spirit of accuracy and foresic science as displayed by the expedition itself. Key photos of finds could be included, and perhaps a few then and now shots. Hopefully Ken could provide a new painted image of the wreck for such a book.
Just a suggestion.....
Many Thanks!
Regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Friday, January 18, 2002 - 1:22 am: |
|
I know the upcoming Cameron release will be a jaw dropper. I trust (and hope) this film will not make the mistake done within the Titanica IMAX film , in which too much film time was eaten up with footage of interior submersible conversations. I think most titanic buffs would rather see footage of the wreck, though no doubt expert commontary by all those involved is needed. The more wreck footage though, the better.
Many thanks
Tarn Stephanos |
Ken Marschall
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 12:20 am: |
|
Dear readers,
Once again, thanks to all who posted such kind words to me here. I appreciate your comments. Following are my responses to a few of your recent queries:
Nigel Bryant wonders if White Star deliberately placed that sideboard in the starboard D-deck entrance vestibule "as a showpiece to greet the boarding passengers, so they could admire the beautiful china." Doubtful. It was most likely fitted where it was simply because it was out of the way of the busy Reception Room. The china was for use at tea time, etc. Regarding the fancy wrought-iron gates that covered the D-deck shell doors in that vestibule, Nigel asks, "Once the...two wrought-iron doors were closed, would you be able to see the equipment used to open the two plate-glass windows in the door inside?" Yes, what could be seen through the grilled gates. I don't believe there was frosted glass on the outboard side of these gates. The hardware for opening the windows was right out there in the open (see the video image on page 158 of Ballard's Discovery of the Titanic and the photo of a recovered D-deck door in my online report). I presume the purpose of the intricate, decorative grilled gates was simply to delight and confuse the eye, camouflaging the utilitarian equipment behind it.
Beverly Crowder asks, "Would you enlighten us as to your engagement aboard QE2? There may be some [of us] who would be able to attend...." A contingent from the Steamship Historical Society of America and I will be boarding QE2 in Southampton on April 18, 2002, for a trans-Atlantic crossing commemorating the 90th anniversary of Titanic. We arrive in New York on the 24th. I've been asked to give a couple of illustrated talks on our favorite subject, specifically my participation in Cameron's movie TITANIC (slides of the building of the sets and miniatures), his recent expedition (slides and/or video of the wreck and its interior will be shown, some for the first time publicly), and perhaps a third one about my artwork. I am happy that the master on that voyage will be Captain Ron Warwick, and I'm looking forward to seeing him again and swapping stories about diving to Titanic (he descended to the wreck last summer shortly before Cameron's expedition began). And, I have just been invited to speak before the British Ocean Liner Society the evening before we depart. If any members are reading this, perhaps I may see you there.
Tentative plans call for ocean liner memorabilia collectors and dealers Richard Faber (of New York) and Peter Boyd-Smith (he runs the shop "Cobwebs" in Southampton) to be aboard, the latter to lecture about Titanic. And noted British maritime artist Robert Lloyd, I understand, may be coming along to premier his new book of paintings of ships of the British Merchant Marine.
Anyone interested in joining us on this memorable voyage may contact:
Tom Cassidy, Chairman
SSHSA, Long Island Chapter
64 West Street
Northport, NY 11768 USA
or inquire for details at:
Pisa Brothers Travel Service
45 Rockefeller Plaza, Suite 2207
New York, NY 10111
phone: 212-265-8420 (toll-free in the U.S.: 1-800-729-7472)
fax: 212-265-8753
E-mail: mgr@pisabrothers.com
I'm not sure... but if you're not a member of SSHSA, I presume you would have to quickly join in order to enjoy the exclusive membership benefits of this voyage (special rates, reception, cocktail parties, commemoratives, etc.). I believe the lectures themselves may be open to the entire ship as they were aboard Millennium in 2000, so you might not have to be a member to attend those.
Back to your questions: Last time around, Tarn Stephanos asked about the arched windows near the A-deck entrance foyer, and he writes that he meant the windows of the foyer itself, not the corridor leading to the Lounge. In that case, Tarn, the answer is yes -- we did see them. The arched contour of the windows is evident, but no mullions or glass remain. "When the interior of the [A-deck enclosed] promenades were filmed, were those rolled-down panes of glass visible?" I don't recall seeing the glass itself. I believe it looked just like the archival photo of Olympic's enclosed promenade seen in my online report, although covered in rust, of course. "Are there signs of any of the guy wires [that once supported the funnels] dangling down the side of the ship....?" Yes, funnel stays can be found in a few places. I don't recall off hand if any are hanging off the side of the deck, but I wouldn't doubt there are.
Tarn asks what the "perfectly square opening [is] between two arched windows" of the first-class entrance. If you mean on Boat Deck, port side, that's simply where the wall popped out (or in) when the wall buckled severely as the roof was pushed down due to the sudden weight of the onrushing water during the sinking, I think. The ship was really beginning to plunge at that point, and the interior couldn't fill fast enough to stay ahead of it. So, inevitably, the roof collapsed. That's my theory. Downblast is another, but I personally think the former is a bit more likely.
If there are any future expeditions to the wreck, Tarn wonders what my list of remaining targets would be. That's too long to recount here, but certainly the Turkish and Swimming baths would be way up the list. And now that we know what to look more closely at, thanks to Parks Stephenson, the Silent Room, for sure. That space is a virtual time capsule, with all dials and gauges still set in their last positions. Venturing carefully into the Purser's and/or Enquiry offices would be nice and searching more for remnants of the Renault. There are a zillion goals and targets on my wish list, as you can imagine. I'm not so interested in Scotland Road, myself. That wouldn't be a super high priority for me. I understand why it would be for Cameron or others, but I'm not so much into the crew spaces.
Tarn says of the foremast lamp: "On top of this recovered lamp there is still the outline of a rope it had been resting against all these years." What rope? (See page 139 of Discovery.) No, the red and green running lights are no longer attached. I wanted to look for them in the sediment, but we didn't get to it. "Have glimpses been caught through the windows of the second-class staircase area [on the stern, just abaft the mainmast]?" Not on our trip. That deckhouse is pretty squashed and tweaked over to port a bit, too.
Tarn hopes "that mainmast lamp is someday found, though that would be like seeking the proverbial needle in a haystack." What mainmast lamp? See my earlier post. I don't see how there could have been one. How would they have ever kept a hoisted lamp precisely aimed as regulations require, with all the wind up there? And Tarn asks if there is any sign today of the "thick" aerial lead-in wires that he thought were once seen dangling off the officers' roof in 1985/'86. No, there has never been any such wire connecting to anything on the roof in the vicinity of the Marconi or Silent rooms. Any cables strewn about the roof or Boat Deck are easy to identify -- thick ones are funnel stays or other rigging, thin ones would be painters' lines or, really thin ones, possibly wireless-related.
Thanks, Parks, for posting several times and taking some of the load off me here. Tarn, you're relentless! :-)
Teri Lynn Milch asks: "I was told that Cameron's Titanic did $600 billion (wow) in theaters worldwide, and video sales were at least another $200 billion...." This is an easy one. Nope. Whoever told you that is way, way off the mark. The movie has topped all records, but these figures are ridiculous. All sales considered, the last I heard, the film hadn't quite earned $2 billion, or some such. Your numbers are about 400 times too high.
Michael Condon: "I would like to know what you have seen in the debris fields. Have they all been cleared of artifacts? Are there still areas that have not been explored to any extent or at all?" Michael, please see my online report (the "Debris Field" section) in which I address this.
Tarn returns with, "Is there any indication that any windows were accidentally shattered during past Titanic expeditions?" I know of not a single case. "In the Ballard mosaic...there seemed to be shell fragments of the second funnel on the roof of the gym. Are they still there?" The roof has almost completely fallen into the gym, carrying any fragments of the funnel with it. Remember the rather high fragment just to starboard of the first funnel opening, on the roof there? There is nothing left of it today, just a few scattered crumbs. As this steel was very thin, it seems to have just reached the breaking point, and if a sub accidentally bumps it, it just crumbles. This may explain the now-missing tall fragment at the aft port side of the first funnel opening.
I note Roy Mengot's theory of what wrecked the crow's nest. I had heard of it a while back. It is intriguing. The rigging that was cut to enable cleaning of the name on the port bow is indeed the same line that snakes its way eventually up and over the nest. My only reservation comes with the physics involved: Cutting those two steel cables would cause them to drop down vertically, adding little additional "weight" to them. Some weight, yes, but enough to pull all that heavy rigging across the deck a distance? Even a few inches? The slack (drooping) in the one cable that hangs between the forecastle and the crow's nest (when discovered) would tend to argue against any significant tug on it, it seems to me. Here's the question: Has the bright yellow discoloration, indicating disturbance of the surface, been seen where the cables cross over the breakwater? The port steam winch? If so, Bingo.
I'll keep an eye out for this telltale discoloration when reviewing the video. Perhaps, even after 14 years, it may still be yellowish.
Ken signing out for now. |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 2:05 am: |
|
Hi Ken!
Thanks again for taking the time to answer my many questions. I do apologise if the volume of my questions has made me the proverbial pain in the butt, but I am so fascianted with Titanic, and this past expedition, I am eager to learn about all the discoveries that mere made.. Ill try to scale back on the volume of my inquires so as to give others a chance, as well as take a load off your plate.
Im very interested to find out the marconi room wires were very thin. For some reason, i was under the impression they were thick cables.
There is a small rope stain or outline Ive observed on that navigation beacon- It might have been on its bottom- I cant remember exactly where- it just struck me as a curious detail I observed about the piece at the Titanic exhibits.
Parks accounts of the Marconi and adjoining rooms are simply superb, and that is one bit of footage I eagerly await...
A future examiniation of the keel of both bow section and stern section may help detrmine for certainty if the manner of Titanic's breakup was keel to boat deck, or boat deck to keel...
Id like to see Mr Cartner's Renault located-.Charles Hass and Jack Eaton insist it was crated in a disassembled condition.If thats true, perhaps there may be scattered pieces of the car in the hold.
Any sign of the tall boom and firemen's mess flue once attached to the foremast? I imagine they must be in the sediment near the bow section.
I fact, mabey the revolver Lightoller dropped from his pocket fell into the hold, as I believe he let the gun go as he was swimming near the crowsnest.
If there is no sign of the crowsnest on the well deck, I suspect it fell into one of the holds.
I recall in the Ballard book there was a photo of what appeared to be the base of the fourth funnel. Was this the largest funnel fragment located? A pity Titanic's funnels did not retain their general mass and shape, as did Briatnnic's funnels.
Thanks again Ken for answering my many questions.
Many regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 2:12 am: |
|
Ken, if you can ever get back to the wreck and have the opportunity to look for the Renault, I wish you and the expedition luck in finding it. I doubt you'll find much left of it at all beyond the engine block. I doubt that 90 years of immersion in salt water would leave anything left of the metal plating or much of anything else at all.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Adam Leet
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 2:34 am: |
|
Mr. Marschall, thanks for replying about the funnel color mystery. The models I have constructed have a cocktail I mixed up (haphazardly, unfortunately,) and they seem to match up with that of the funnels of the Cameron movie with fairly good approximation.
If I may move a bit from Titanic, I had heard a few months back Bismarck was another goal of Cameron's. Can you confirm or deny this? I had also heard you could not make it to the wreck because of time constraints, though as I asked above, that may not be true.
Back to Titanic, if another expedition is possible in the future, are there any plans to further investigate the aft engineering compartments? I believe Mr. Standart asked about venturing into the turbine engine room, though I have doubts that is possible, given the devastation. I would be interested in seeing what can be found in the aft portion of the reciprocating engine room.
Thank you, and welcome back to the forum.
Adam Leet |
Steve Santini
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 2:45 am: |
|
Hi Ken,
With great interest I have been reading your posts about your recent expedition with Cameron to the Titanic. It was also a pleasure to hear briefly of your discoveries when we spoke by phone a short time back. Thank you for taking the time to share these updated and accurate reports of the current state of the Titanic wreck site. All my best wishes, Steve Santini. |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 3:04 am: |
|
Hi Ken-
I understand during the 2000 expedition an attempt was made to find Titanic's builders plaque. Was it found on that expedition, if not, was it seen on the recent Cameron expedition? Where would such a plaque have been located? Does Olympic's still exist? I have heard rumors a wood backing to Titanic's plaque was recovered in 2000, But Im not sure if thats truth or rumor.
Thanks
Tarn Stephanos
8 ) |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 7:18 am: |
|
Mr. Ken Marschall,
Because you are famous and have a huge popularity, the servers of this thread got overloaded and did not send me emails. See what happens when a celebrity comes aboard?
You are a very kind man for answering my question with regards to the income of Cameron's Titanic blockbuster. Thank you very much. I am deeply impressed. A friend of mine told me she met you at a Titanic Convention and said you were a very nice gentleman. She is right.
I don't have too many technical questions for you at this time except for one:
For any possible future expeditions Cameron might undertake, is it possible to put "shovels" on the ROV's hands in order to dig up the silt and sludge at the starboard bow of the ship to see the damage she sustained?
Very Sincerely,
Teri Milch
P.S. The next time you and Mr. Don Lynch consent to an interview aboard Keldish, can I be your interviewer? I can take a fairly decent picture, (see my ET profile) and be very professional!  |
Roy Mengot
| | Posted on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 5:48 pm: |
|
I think I can give Ken a hand with a few of the questions. He'll correct me if I'm wrong.
On the builder's plaque, yes an attempt was made to locate it. It hung on the outer wall of B-deck under the bridge overlooking the forward well deck. I've seen one for another ship and they are a heavy bronze plaque denoting builder information.
It fell off and is somewhere in the silt. It was not found as disturbing the silt is like setting off a smoke bomb in front of you. So a shovel attachment to the sub or ROV doesn't help. There is no good way to stabilize the sub in position there without potentially damaging something else.
Ken's report included descriptions of attempts to access the turbine room and generator room. They failed due to fallen debris. I'm interested in the patterns of the debris for forensic purposes. I've seen a photo of the closed watertight door between the reciprocating room and the turbine room. A sub can move between the engines but it was a real risky affair.
On stacks, part of one is just off the east side of the stern. It's depicted in Ken's paintings. I've heard that on the '91 dives that more were seen south of the stern section. |
Nigel Bryant
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 12:08 am: |
|
To Ken
Thank you for anwsering my questions. I am really inspired in your paintings , they really capture the Titanic beautifully. Thank you for all the hard work you have done over the years not just on the Titanic but the Olympic, Lusitania, Britannic and all the other paintings. You make these ships come back alive even though they graced the oceans at the beginning of the 2Oth Century.
All the best for the future,
Nigel |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 12:33 am: |
|
Dear Mr. Roy Mengot,
<<disturbing the silt is like setting off a smoke bomb in front of you. So a shovel attachment to the sub or ROV doesn't help.>>
Supposing the current of the ocean is in favor of the ROV, meaning the current flows towards the ROV setting any silt that is dug up behind the ROV. I'd like to think this scenario would be in favor of the expedition.
<<There is no good way to stabilize the sub in position there without potentially damaging something else.>>
Somehow I am of the firm belief that the ROV is capable of handling a heavy shovel attachment but the ideal scene would be to have a LARGE shovel to get the job done much quicker. Now that of course, may not be possible. Also, the ROV would be digging exterior of the ship, in an area where there's only the hull to bump into, so I don't understand why something else could get damaged.
Yours Sincerely,
Teri L. Milch |
Beverly J. Crowder
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 2:48 am: |
|
Hey Teri,
You remember the vacume idea? I think that would work best.
Teri interviewing Don and Ken, now this could be fun. How about it gents?
Well, I'm off to a few projects I am working on.
Beverly  |
Beverly J. Crowder
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 2:51 am: |
|
BTW: So good to see you Roy, thanx for your time and feedback. I really enjoy your website and all your hard work and research also.
Cheerio,
Beverly |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 6:13 am: |
|
A vacuum at 12,500 ft where the pressure exceeds 6000psi? Somehow, I doubt it. The support gear needed to make it work has to be carried by the support vessel, and I don't think there's enough room on existing ships to carry all the hose to get down that far, even if it could be made to work. Regarding shovels, ROV's are pretty small and they have to be in order to get into small places. This would tend to preclude the use of large tools beyond small manipulating arms.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 2:50 pm: |
|
Hi Bev,
Yes I remember that vacuum idea. Was that yours? I don't remember who's idea it was. Just think of how big the bag would have to be!
Hi Michael,
<<ROV's are pretty small and they have to be in order to get into small places.>>
I was kind of thinking of digging only exterior of the ship, not interior, where the hands have to be small. Some day our technology should afford us the opportunity to dig beneath the bow of the ship to be able to view her damage. I just hope that day comes before I leave earth...
Sincerely,
Teri |
Beverly J. Crowder
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 6:59 pm: |
|
Hey Teri,
Now this can't be any ordinary Hoover, we will have to go with the heavy duty, mega suction, Mega Maid. Taa Daahh!
Hey, could you imagine the stewards and stewardesses? I bet they would have loved a vacume.
Bev |
David Hudson
| | Posted on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 7:06 pm: |
|
Teri,
"Some day our technology should afford us the opportunity to dig beneath the bow of the ship to be able to view her damage. I just hope that day comes before I leave earth..."
Yes, technology will one day be advanced enough. The only problem is that it most probably won't be in time. Titanic can only last so long. Even if the lower hull remains intact decades after the superstructure collapses, digging underneath would change the hulls support. By that time, the hull would be too weak. Any "cave" large enough to see anything of interest would probably lead to further hull collapse. A more advanced form of echo sounding might work better. Who knows what gadgets will be produced that may answer the question.
I just hope that day comes before Titanic leaves earth...
David |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Monday, January 21, 2002 - 4:32 am: |
|
Hi David and Beverly,
I hope that day comes too, before the Titanic leaves earth.
I am straying off topic too much, so I'll just leave it with a question for another thread. What sort of erosion, if any, takes place to the hull surrounded and protected (?) by silt and sludge.
Okay let's get back to Mr. Ken Marschall's great Titanic 2001 Expedition Report, shall we???
Sincerely,
Teri |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Monday, January 21, 2002 - 3:22 pm: |
|
In response to Dan Cherry's post dated Wednesday January 16, 2002 at 01:45 p.m., an inside source informed me that the dangling brass sign WAS plucked by the 2000 Expedition, and that the appropriate sources have been notified.
The judge specifically stated no plucking from the bow of the ship.
Teri |
Roy Mengot
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 22, 2002 - 1:35 am: |
|
A vaccuum cleaner is nothing but an empelller that blows water or air through it like a ventilator. At any depth, a simple electric motor creates low pressure at the suck end by creating high pressure at the blow end. Deep sea archeologists and explorers use these all the time. It's just more difficult to deploy and control one at Titanic's depth with a submersible. It's just a case of building one that can protect the motor at that depth.
With a long hose to channel the silt down-current from the work site, you can dig things out. In the interior, the silt needs to be channeled outside the ship. It's not trivial (cheap) to do, but it can be done. |
Teri Lynn Milch
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 22, 2002 - 3:59 am: |
|
Roy,
Now that's what I like to hear! That getting deeper into the silt IS possible. Someone just needs to fund it. At least I'm not crazy in believing it can be done.
Thanks for the info!
Teri |
J. Tagliere
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 23, 2002 - 3:36 pm: |
|
I wrote to Dr.Lori Johnston (at least I think I had the right email) to ask if the ammonite discovery was confirmed. I am hoping she'll respond. Does anyone know if Roy Cullimore was also onboard the Keldysh for the Earthship mission? Maybe I can write him to find out as well. |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Friday, January 25, 2002 - 1:57 am: |
|
Ken, is there a particular patch of hull, above or below the waterline, thats has a reasonable stretch of intact paint? When a glimpse was caught under the bildge keel of the stern section, was much red paint available?
Thanks
Regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Friday, January 25, 2002 - 2:00 am: |
|
Here is a theory as to why marconi room equipment was found in stateroom Z- Is it plausable when the weight of water caved in the overhead above the grand staircase, force from the water ripped through both boatdeck doorways flanking the grandstaircase, literally bulldozing the first few partitions? That may account for the disaray....
Peace
Tarn Stephanos |
Tarn Stephanos
| | Posted on Friday, January 25, 2002 - 2:04 am: |
|
Hi Ken!
Of all the things you have seen on Titanic wreck, what was the most striking? Which image shines the brighest in your memory? Your first glimpse of the wreck? The lights shining through the reception room window?
Many thanks
Regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Michael Cundiff
| | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2002 - 6:56 pm: |
|
Mr. Mengot:
With all due respect...again, I would have to disagree with you. It is my feeling, and with a supporting detailed account (TIME periodial '86), I believe the *intitial* contact with the nest was a result of Martin Bowen's visit along the foremast, and up to the point of the crow's nest, whereupon, J.J. (Alvin's R.O.V.) became entangled.
Owing to Bowen's skilled efforts the "swimming eyeball" was freed.
A subsequent visit by the Russian Keldeysh/MIR teams (The breathtaking IMAX feature) revealed video of a *partial* nest.
Anyhow I really find this *pointing of fingers* irrevelant...afterall...who is to blame for the *overall collapse* of the TITANIC?
Who are we to point our finger at when the wreck of the TITANIC, as we know it today, becomes an unrecogognizable heap of rusted rubble...
...who indeed?
Michael Cundiff
U.S.A. |
Michael Cundiff
| | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2002 - 7:07 pm: |
|
Mr Marschall:
It is my hope that you are still active as a participant of the ET forum.
I wanted to extend to you, what I feel to be the highest of compliment in regards to your work.
I have on display a framed print of yours..."Farewell to Southampton" (BTW, my favorite) Anyhow a friend of mine noticed the print and asked..."Is that the Titanic?", of which I replied..."Yes", my friend continued with..."I did'nt think they had color film back then".
And, if you would repsond Ken please...what is the most *moving* feature of the Titanic wreck (current state). As far as touching on your emotions.
With my hat off to you...I thank you again.
Respectively yours,
Michael Cundiff
U.S.A. |
Michael Cundiff
| | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2002 - 7:25 pm: |
|
Hello:
In regards to general excavating of the wreck site. What I feel to be the most educational (For the Titanic community) would be to exhume the
mound of sediment afront the fore starboard bow plates, in close proximity of the 30' diameter breech. The result of Titanic's intital impact with the seabed in April 1912.
I feel it important to our needs that we know, beyond the shawdow of a doubt, what the terminal damage inflicted to Titanic, as a result of collison with ice.
I for one, hold an open reservation of opinion as for the finds of Dr. Mathias. For, any common sense thinker would deduce that, these 3/4" x various length horizontal wounds revealed by the EOSCAN technology may have been as a result of impact with the sea bottom as well. Considering that the sediment rate (According to Dr. Ballard) is a 1 centimeter gatheriing per 1000 years!..
Michael Cundiff
Carson City, NV |
Andrew Williams
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 2:50 pm: |
|
Hi Ken!
If you don't mind folks, I would like to add my five eggs in now.
There is no doubt, during these last couple of weeks or so, and I'm sure I nearly speak for everybody on this forum who has been closely monitoring your updates Ken, we feel deeply privileged and honoured at knowing that a legend in the Titanic Community, has join us.
However, I would just like to ask one question please.
>>Is there any plans that you Ken, and Rick Archbold are going to collaborate by putting the knowledge your sharing with us into a book format?
Regards
Andrew W. |
Nathan Good
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 8:36 pm: |
|
What was the farthest that the 2001 expedition penetrated into the wreck? Does anyone know if the ROV's explored any very well known passenger's cabins and if so, what did they find?
Mr. Marschall, I greatly appreciated your detailed and descriptive analysis of what you saw at the wreck. Do you have any plans to become involved in any kind of book relatated to what was seen? I agree with others that say some before and after shots would be interesting. I can imagine that after all of your research involving the Titanic that the opportunity to go down to the wreck and view images from deep inside must have been a tremendous experience. It is nice that someone so dedicated and knowledgable to the Titanic such as yourself had the opportunity to go to the wreck and participate in this expedition.
On another note, I find it this entire expedition to explore the interior of the wreck incredible. The inside of the wreck and the condition of the rooms has always intrigued me. I always wished that there were more photographs of the interior of the Titanic existing from before she sank. More images from inside the wreck will help me understand more about the areas undocumented by cameras in 1912. I sincerely hope that underwater pictures from this expedition are published in a book.
Thanks
N. Good |
Tad Fitch
| | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2002 - 12:31 am: |
|
Dear Ken,
Hello, how are you? I just wanted to thank you for your detailed report on the recent expedition to the Titanic. I have always admired your artistic talent and the work and research you have done regarding the physical details of the Titanic, and the expedition report was very, very interesting. It answered many questions that I had regarding the physical condition of the wreck. I share your hope that the swimming pool and turkish bath of the ship can be explored on a future expedition. It is very good to see you on the message board, and thank you for taking the time to reply to our questions and posts.
All my best,
Tad Fitch |
Jennifer Mueller
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 3:12 am: |
|
mr marschall i would like to say how much i enjoyed reading your report about the recent titanic expidition and i was wondering is the grand staircase in the same condition as you saw it the first time in 1986 or has it changed a lot and i would like to know how did you did the famous paintings of the wreckage of time magazine before you even saw it for the first time and i have a book called titanic an illistrated history by don lynch and it features drawings and paintings by you and i want you to know that i enjoyed reading the book and i would recommend that book to anyone who love the titanic thanks for your time jennifer mueller |
Cassandra Crowther
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Dear Mr. Marschall,
Over the years, I have received a great deal of happiness (and learned a lot as well), by studying your paintings. I want to thank you for adding so much to my study of TITANIC.
I also would like to thank you for such a detailed, fascinating report on the latest expedition down to her resting place. I learned a great deal by reading it and it has only increased my interest in learning more about her and her people. Again, thank you. |
Tarn Stephanos
Member
Username: titanictarn
Post Number: 515
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 19, 2002 - 1:25 am: |
|
Is there a web address i can refer to friends to get immediate access to Ken's writeup?
Ive been refering them to the ET mainpage, but there must be a web address that takes us directly to the writeup.
Anyone know the address?
Thanks
Tarn Stephanos |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 4277
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Monday, August 19, 2002 - 4:07 am: |
|
Tarn, the only thing I can do is give yiu the link to the homepage of Parks website at http://home.flash.net/~sparks12/titanic.html
Just scroll down to and click on James Cameron’s Titanic Expedition 2001:What We Saw On and Inside the Wreck when you get there.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
|
Tarn Stephanos
Member
Username: titanictarn
Post Number: 518
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 19, 2002 - 5:12 am: |
|
Thanks Michael!
tarn |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page
