1. Welcome to Encyclopedia Titanica
    or subscribe for unlimited access to ET! You can also login with , or !
    Dismiss Notice

2012 NatGeo Sinking Anyalsis scene

Discussion in 'Collision / Sinking Theories' started by Itsstillthinking, Feb 7, 2018.

  1. Took the 2012 POSE simulation scene and stitched together all the scenes showing the simulator in action. The time stamp later on is 1:1 with the doc, but as you can see its totally wrong but if you look closely at the top you can just barely make out the actual forward trim angle. Its interesting to see that the angle the ship was at the time the bridge went under was around 10 degrees. This is shocking as the ship is already high out of the water at 7 degrees!

    POSE sim


    Screenshot (29).png
    7degrees.jpg

    Best i could do with 10 degrees
    Screenshot (30).png
     
  2. People often criticize the updated H&G animation for not being high enough out of the water, the interesting thing is is that according to the analysis it is totally right!

    Image16.jpg
    Image2.jpg

    As you can see right after that the stern rises quite a bit higher
    Image4.jpg
     
    Kyle Naber likes this.
  3. Aaron_2016

    Aaron_2016 Member

    The problem is, the 2012 simulation doesn't correspond with the survivor accounts. If survivors such as Albert Pearcey and others saw the ship sinking bodily right near the end then by all means show that in the simulation. Sadly they throw their accounts out the window because they only want to see what they can understand, or more likely (assuming Cameron was footing the bill) they were only trying to simulate a version that could justify Cameron's efforts, because let's face it, he was likely calling the shots, and we saw his level of interference in his recent documentary where he manipulated the model to get the results he wanted. Manipulation is a wonderful key for bias reporting to achieve a goal that was already predetermined by the orchestrator.


    For instance, the decks in the 2012 simulation are completely bare. This would add an incredible amount of weight to the bow and completely throw off the trim and angle of the sinking.

    They show this.

    bowcargo1.png


    When in reality the water would only cover about 30-40 percent of the space available and the weight pushing the bow down would be considerably less. Like this.

    bowcargo2.png
    Crates, cargo, lifejackets, luggage, mail, food, clothing, coal reserve, fixtures, fittings, and everything not bolted down which could float, would float, and push up against the ceilings of every room with exceedingly more force as the ship sank deeper and the pressures grew more inside, pushing them up even harder.

    They also failed to include the vast number of portholes that were possibly open amidships and aft. Several gangway doors may have been unlatched and partially open further aft. There are so many variables that stating the bow continued to plummet down like a giant empty container with the water filling up every conceivable inch is false and completely unrealistic. Once the water had flooded the lower decks in the bow, the weight would sink the ship down several feet so that the waterline would be level with E-deck and the water would travel aft (witnessed by several survivors) and spill down all available staircases amidships and aft. The ship would settle much more bodily as witnessed by the survivors though strangely ignored. The upper decks in the bow would remain dry (even if they were submerged) because the sea had to flood all available areas at the lower decks forward, middle, and aft, before it could rise up and flood the next deck above.


    There were also an untold number of watertight doors that were open and closed. We can't say for certain how many. e.g. We know the doors on F-deck where the swimming pool was located were closed because the water had rushed up the mail room staircase so fast (owing to the lack of space available to flood) and the water had spilt onto E-deck, up the long corridor (an indication as to how weak the trim was) and the water spilt down the staircases further aft on E-deck.


    Huge space on F-deck forward that was successfully sealed off by the crew when they saw water come down the staircase behind.

    fdeck1a.png


    The water could not flood this section immediately, and the water instead moved further aft, up the corridor above and down into the huge 3rd class dining room near the engine room. This would certainly explain why survivors said the ship sank bodily, practically level as she sank lower and lower both forward and aft until there was an explosive sound and the ship buckled open.


    efdeckflooding.png

    The time is fast approaching 2am. Water is pouring into open portholes, Albert Pearcey is rowing away in collapsible C and notices no downward tilt. Charles Joughin is retreating from his cabin as water continues to pour in and see's several crewmen desperately trying to close the watertight door that leads to the main engine room. Lifeboat 4 is rowing towards the stern and they start to hear the breaking up of the ship and they see her broken stern rise up and settle back. e.g.


    Frederick Scott - Lifeboat 4

    "We pulled away from the ship’s side and we had not been away long before the ship started breaking up, and her stern went up in the air, and you could see her three propellers nearly the same as you can see them on the model.....We had just got at the stern of her when she started breaking up......When she broke off her stern end came up in the air and came down on a level keel and disappeared."

    Mr. Brown was on the ship and saw the stern break and then rise up the same as Fred Scott.

    "With the first report of that explosion I saw the afterpart of the ship giving a tremble like this (showing), and I thought by the afterpart going up like this (showing), and giving a bit of a tremble that the bow had fallen off....." (Where were you when this occurred?) "In the water; right before the forward funnel."


    .
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
  4. Ken, Parks and others have stated again and again that Jim outside of paying for the simulation, he had no input on it. Jim also in the recent doc manipulated the model to what is know to be fact i.e the place where the breakup was and various time stamps of the sinking. Jim has admitted multiple times that the POSE and sinking tests are not 100% correct by any means as no one will ever know but can get to a general idea on "what might have happened". Even if one does not like Jim and his Team one at the least acknowledges that they are the only ones who have done as serious and creditable simulations/research on the Titanic that does not include crap "theory. There are unlimited variables when it comes to a sinking ship but there has not really have been any other creditable work done on the matter outside of these
     
  5. BTW Was not trying to disprove your point or anything i was just making sure everyone knew that they have admitted to the faults of this sim
     
  6. LukeW17

    LukeW17 Member

    They out of everyone have the best knowledge about what happened to the Titanic, I wish we could have them explain on here some of the forensics involved both in the physical tests and the simulations.

    Yeah it is true that we will never know exactly what happened - but it is always interesting trying to work it out through new tests and theories and I have lately started to become more interested in the physical properties of the sinking as well as the historical side of the story.

    It is good to have debate about what happened on here as everyone’s views are interesting and offer different view points, new things can always be learnt
     
  7. Kyle Naber

    Kyle Naber Member

    Jim has been to the wreck more than anyone else on this planet and has had the opportunity to witness the wreck for himself on many occasions. I like to think that he has at least a smidge of credibility ;)
     
    LukeW17 and Itsstillthinking like this.
  8. Pac0master

    Pac0master Member

    Well the ship took nearly 3 hours to sink.
    the forward lean would be so slow that it would be hard to perceive at first,
    We need to account for the Sheer as well

    I'm guessing the force of the water pulling on the bow might have reduced the sheer a little bit, making corridors like the scotland road look straight

    la___long_beach__queen_mary_corridor_by_elodiejones-d4w4uwr.jpg
     
  9. Aaron_2016

    Aaron_2016 Member

    Looks like the Queen Mary is down by the head, but this is simply an illusion.

    Survivors described the ship rocking and twisting as she broke herself apart. Perhaps the ship was flexing like an unstable suspension bridge.


    The entire forward section would be twisting over to starboard.

    corridor_STAR.png


    and the entire aft section would be twisting over to port.

    corridorport.png


    Water was seen on E-deck rolling up the long corridor on the starboard side forward, and rolling up the corridor on the port side aft. Wonder if she was flexed with both ends fighting each other.


    corridorport2.png


    The weight in the middle and the strain of the engines would hog her down and bend her even more owing to her enormous length. This could explain why doors were jammed. Perhaps the stresses were pulling her from every angle which caused her to buckle open.




    rotate1.png



    .
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2018
  10. The ship towards the end was flexing enough so much like what the Britannic went through with her water tight doors getting stuck. Even the Leviathan in a bad storm hit a big enough wave to cause 40 or so cabins to get the doors jammed
     
    Aaron_2016 likes this.
  11. Pac0master

    Pac0master Member

    The image of the Queen Mary I've shown was just an example of sheer, the middle section of the ship is lower than the bow or stern.
    With all the water, the ship was much heavier in the bow section, so the sheer would gradually disappear, making corridors like the Scotland road appear straight.
    Given the fact the ship took hours to sink, any forward tilt would be really hard to feel or notice as they get used to the slow movement
    Though it's only an hypothesis. If true, it might account for the claims that the ship was straight,
    perhaps it looked Odd as they were used to see it slightly curved inward. which could be why they mentioned it.
    But that's mostly random guessing from my part. so it's to be taken with a grain of salt.

    I'm also curious about the open portholes.
    This was quite a cold night, who would want to open them especially after the collision when they were fighting the flow of water.

    On the Britannic, IIRC it was a pretty warm day and they were trying to vent off the smoke.
    looking for them on the wreck is kinda hard if not impossible now due to its condition

    I'm still confused about the water seen on the E deck
    same goes for the witness claiming the ship wasn't leaning forward.

    Since every simulation and animation done to date shows a quite obvious forward tilt, I'm sure they had their reasons, perhaps there were more testimony in favour of the tilt or something.
    I'm not an historian and I haven't done research on the survivor's testimony.
     
  12. According to the POSE sim, by the time the forcastle was going under water the ship had only around a 5 degree list

    Ken Marshall on the Titanic channel had this to say while walking around on JC'S sinking set
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Back in those days people had the window open for fresh air even when it was cold outside.


    I am not sure what you mean with that, water was seen on E Deck and it was no surprise that it got there.


    There are many survivors who mentioned the forward tilt or that the bow was low in the water. A few might have not mention it but that is the case with every survivor story.
     
    Pac0master likes this.
  14. Pac0master

    Pac0master Member

    Yeah I thought about it. but it's kinda odd, especially when a ship is sinking, wasn't there a law or some sort of code to follow indicating all porthole must be closed or something?
    They weren't much in a hurry for the first hour they could have checked them out.

    but yeah that's a fair point.



    I said it because IIRC Aaron_2016 cited a survivor who noticed water flow far in the aft of the ship and then flew back toward the bow
    or something similar.
    It was in another thread too.
    so I just find this testimony quite confusing which implies either the water went uphill or the ship wasn't leaning forward which is contradictory to many other survivor accounts.


    Yeah pretty much what I though.
     
  15. I do not know of anyone claiming that. The only one who stated about water aft was chief baker Joughin. He only stated that he found water in his cabin which was at the port side higher and that it might/must have come into his room though the Scotland Road (this was due the starting list to port).
    This is what he said:

    6217. What water did you see, and where was it? - There was not very much water. It would just cover my feet, that is all. The list of the ship sent it down against my settee in the room.
    6218. Sent it down from where? - I could not say where it came from.
    6219. Was this place of yours on the port side of the ship? - Port side, amidships.
    6220. (Mr. Clement Edwards.) Would you see the direction from which this water was coming? - I should say it came from forward.
    6221. Was there much of it? - No, not much; it just went over my ankles I should say.
    6222. Two or three inches? - That is all.
    6223. Was it flowing at all rapidly? - No.
    6226. Are there any bulkhead doors in the alleyway outside your room? - One immediately outside.
    6227. Is that forward or aft? - Forward of my room.
    6228. And the water was coming from forward? - The water was coming from forward.
    6229. So that if that bulkhead door had been closed it might possibly have kept the water out? - The door was not closed, but just about that time I saw two men coming and they said they were going to close it, but I did not see it closed.
    6290. Then there is another matter I want to ask you about. As to water, you say, as I understand, you only saw water on the alleyway? - I did not see it in the alleyway; I saw it in my room. My room is in what we call the skin of the ship, and the water was on the lower port side, just enough to cover my feet, that was all.
    6291. (The Commissioner.) Your room is against the skin of the ship? - Yes.
    6292. On the port side? - Yes.
    6293. And the water that you are talking about was on the port side of your room? - Yes, the extreme port side.
    6294. Did the water extend over the whole of the floor of your room? - Oh, yes, but the bulk of it was on the port side.
    6320. (The Solicitor-General.) It was only to see where we were, my Lord. (To the Witness.) Now, with regard to this water, did you think that the water was sea water, or did you suppose that owing to the ship having a list, water had poured from somewhere inside the ship? - My idea was she had shipped some water forward, or a quantity of ice that had melted and had run down; but I did not give it a second thought, because it was not serious.
    6321. Was there anywhere else on E deck that you saw any indication of water at all? - No.
    6322. (The Commissioner.) I should like to ask a question about it. Did the water come under the door of your cabin? - The door was open.
    6323. Then it was flowing from the passage; it must have come in from the passage outside? - It must have come in, yes. There is a scupper just at the outside.
    6324. That passage outside is what you call an alleyway, is it not? - Yes.
    6325. Is that what you call Scotland Road alleyway? - Yes.
    6326. That was a fairly wide passage? - Eight or nine feet, I think, I am not sure.
    6327. Was there water on the floor of that passage? - Very little.
    6328. As the ship listed over to port the water flowed down into your cabin and left the alleyway from which it came fairly dry? - Yes.
    6329. Did you see or believe that more water was coming in while you were standing there? - I could not see any coming; I did not know where it came from at all.
    6358. (Mr. Clement Edwards.) There is a question which I did not examine into, but which has arisen, if, your Lordship will permit me. (To the Witness.) When you saw this water in your compartment did it lead you to any conclusion as to the special danger in which you thought the ship was? - No, not anything special. If it had been higher I should have thought something about it, but under the circumstances I thought it might have been a pipe burst, because there was a pipe burst on the "Olympic" from the engineers' quarters and we got the same water. It might have been the same thing.
     
    Pac0master and IvanZagric1990 like this.
  16. Pac0master

    Pac0master Member

    Yeah pretty sure that's the one I meant.
    I thought it was pretty odd to hear about water flowing there without any obvious point of entry.
    I mean, the scotland road is quite long so it would have been pretty easy to spot the water around the forward section
     
  17. Aaron_2016

    Aaron_2016 Member


    Mr. Wheat was on E-deck and saw the water quickly flood the mail room and rise up to E-deck. He saw the water spill up the starboard side corridor and down into the middle. He said the large Scotland road corridor on the port side was dry. This implies there was a starboard list at this time and the bow was so full of cargo that there wasn't much space for the water to go, and so it quickly rose up to E-deck already, and up the corridor and down into the middle.


    fdeckwheat.png


    Charles Joughin was in his cabin all the way aft on the port side of that same deck. Survivors said the ship listed to port when the last lifeboats were being lowered. Charles Joughin felt the ship listing over to port and he saw the water settle against the port side of his cabin all the way aft. He thought the water had come up the long corridor but he also did not believe the ship was down by the head much, if at all. He felt the ship list more to port and got out of there. He looked down the corridor and saw the water had disappeared. The huge corridor was dry. He then saw two men trying to close the watertight door just outside his room where the engines were. Soon afterwards the ship broke in two.


    edeck_Joughin.png

    These two staircases would have been completely open to the water on E-deck. I believe the water spilt down these staircases and filled incredible weight in the middle.


    edeck_Joughin2.png

    The deck below - Blue - flooding from the staircases above. Red - watertight doors were sealed here.

    efdeckflooding.png


    Now we come to the survivors who saw the Titanic settle down bodily by her broadside.


    4th officer Boxhall - In lifeboat 2 - very close to the ship near the end.

    "The boat seemed to be drawn closer to the ship. I think, myself, that there was more suction while the ship was settling bodily. That was shortly after we were lowered into the boat......The ship was settling down broadside."

    Q - Were you convinced, when you took to the boat in which you left, that the Titanic would go down?
    A - I was quite undecided about it.

    (The ship was approaching her final end and yet he still saw no reason to believe she would go down as she sank deeper "bodily" and "broadside".)


    Miss Caroline Bonnell said - "The Titanic kept settling lower and lower, however. Then word came that the engine room was flooded......After we were lowered away the men in our boat started to row. I looked back to the Titanic and could see the big ship settling. She seemed already to be only half her former height."


    Mr. Edwards - Representing the Docker's Union
    "....It is pretty clear that the Titanic, when she went down, went down very gradually, and that the evidence which has been given about her going down head first and practically perpendicularly is not true......It is pretty clear on the evidence that, as the sinking was gradual, there must have been water coming in a good way aft."


    Edwina Troutt
    "As we were rowing away we could see the Titanic gradually sinking......This row of lights would disappear and the next row of lights disappeared."


    Violet Jessop
    "I started unconsciously to count the decks by the rows of lights. One, two, three, four, five, six. Then again, one, two, three, four, five....There were only five decks now. Then I started all over again. Only four now. She was getting lower in the water, I could not any longer deny it......Only three decks now, and still not a list (tilt) to one side or the other. I watched Titanic give a lurch forward, one of the huge funnels toppled off like a cardboard model, falling into the sea with a fearful roar."


    Albert Pearcey - In Collapsible C. - The water was up to the promenade deck.

    Q - Did you notice when you rowed away whether the ship had any list?
    A - Yes, the ship had a list on her port side.
    Q - Did you notice whether she was down by the head?
    A - No, I did not notice.
    Q - Did you notice whether she appeared to be going deeper into the water forward? Did you notice that?
    A - No.
    Q - Did you see the vessel go down?
    A - Yes.
    Q - Were you facing her when she went down?
    A - Yes.
    Q - Were her lights burning?
    A - Yes, the lights were burning.


    There are other accounts of survivors seeing the ship sink steadily from bow to stern, but you get the realisation that the ship was settling bodily. Now comes the question. Did open portholes further aft 'assist' in the flooding of the ship bodily? A number of survivors opened their windows, or said they were open, primarily for fresh air owing to the horrible smell of fresh paint and varnish which possibly made it unbearable to sleep, especially in the smaller cabins. There were also kitchens and places that required ventilation e.g.

    Charles Joughin

    Q - On E deck are the portholes in practice opened from time to time?
    A - Very, very often we keep them open the whole of the passage.


    Emily Ryerson - Lifeboat 4 - close to the ship when she sank.

    Q - When you went down into the water, from the boat, did you notice anything about the portholes in the side of the ship?
    A - Yes, a great many were open.

    Q - Did you notice anything in particular about the portholes on the water?
    A - Yes, the water was washing in the portholes, and later I think some of the square windows seemed to be open, and you could see in the cabin and see the water washing in and the gold furniture and decorations, and I remember noticing you could look far in, it was brilliantly lighted, which deck I couldn’t tell.

    Q - Did you notice any of the lines of portholes disappear after you got in the boat?
    A - Yes, she was sinking very rapidly then, we saw two lines and then we saw only one. It was very brilliantly lighted and you could see very distinctly.

    Q - And the portholes you say were open, do you recollect what deck they were on?
    A - I should say they were on the B and C decks and the C ones were gradually covered. There were a great many open, I don’t know how many.

    Q - Do you recall seeing any below the C deck?
    A - No, our boat was down on that level when we were lowered, practically even with the C deck; the ship had sunk so much on that side. (port side - broadside)

    Q - At the time your boat was lowered the water was washing in the portholes of the C deck?
    A - Yes.

    Q - On that side?
    A - On the side she sank, that is the port side.


    Now we come to the survivors who rowed towards another ship off the Titanic's port bow. I understand many lifeboats rowed in this same direction towards the other ship. This means a large number of survivors who claimed to have seen the Titanic sink entirely by the bow were looking at her from this angle.


    bowangle.png

    They would see her bow, and they would see it was getting lower - hence the false conclusion that she was sinking by the bow the entire time. At night time it would be even harder to judge how she was sinking from this angle, and yet this is the angle a great number of survivors saw the Titanic go down. This is why I believe the survivors who were looking at her broadside, or were much closer to the ship when she sank are the key survivors who knew exactly how the ship was sinking i.e. bodily broadside. There was an explosive sound deep inside and she broke. The bow suddenly then took a violent unsteady lurch and the lights went out in the bow, while the broken stern rose sharply into the air with lights blazing - as survivors described - like a fully lit skyscraper. Only now did a number of survivors turn and look (attracted by the sudden explosive sounds) and they mistakenly believed she was intact with her bow deep below the surface. They thought the engines slid down into the bow as they heard another roaring explosion and saw the broken stern settle back. The stern rose up again, corkscrewed and went down. You can appreciate that during the Inquiry they had to state right there what happened. Without pause for thought they just gave a brief answer and described the ship sinking in the most general basic terms. This is why there are so many discrepancies as each person was transfixed on a different aspect of the sinking and break up, coupled with those who did not see it properly owing to their location in the lifeboat.



    .
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2018
  18. There was a staircase leading for E down to F Deck into the linen room, the uptakes for the boiler rooms were not watertight, the fan shaft was not watertight, so how could be that part marked in red be completely dry????


    How soon afterwards? Didn't he said that after it he went to threw deck chairs over board?
    He was on the A Deck pantry when he heard the sound of breaking metal.


    I guess the water in the first 6 compartment did not "filled incredible weight" right?
     
    IvanZagric1990 likes this.
  19. Aaron_2016

    Aaron_2016 Member


    The section marked 'dry' is in reference to the direction the water inside the ship travelled. The watertight doors were closed. The area was sealed to the water that flooded up the corridor. The water that poured in from above or from the boiler room below would occur much later. The section marked 'red' would have flooded before that happened and sagged the ship down in the middle. Lightoller was sucked against a vent in front of the first funnel as the water rushed into the sections that were not flooded forward. The amount of water that rushed into the vents from the top is an indication as to how much air was inside the bow when the bridge went under.

    The port list became noticeable when the last boats were leaving. The ship was settling very low in the water at that stage, and Joughin was in his cabin and observed the water settle on the port side of his room all the way aft.

    The forward compartments were filled with cargo, mail, coal reserve, and materials that floated. The water rose up to E-deck rapidly because there wasn't much room left in the bow. Also the steerage rooms forward had small passage ways outside their rooms. If their doors were closed and the passage ways flooded rapidly the rooms would become air pockets as the water rose up to the next deck above.


    .
     
  20. Swimming bath was not sealed to the water that flooded up the Scotlaand Road. Like Ioannis said, near steward's lavatory is a staircase that leads from Scotland Road down to F deck. I do not believe that doors leading to that staircase, or any other room on the left or right side of alleyway, were watertight in any significant manner. So water could not just flow aft down the alleyway, it had to flood these spaces first, not to mention it had to go down to boiler rooms through uptakes and fan rooms.
     
Loading...