Boat deck resurfacing


Rennette Marston

Rennette Marston
Member
May 23, 2020
285
75
63
48
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Your English is alright, but thank you. I see that the boilers did implode probably after the ship forever disappeared from the surface, as you claim. But it probably wasn't enough to completely break the ship into pieces (assuming the ship was already in broken sections by this stage in the sinking).
 

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,156
630
188
20
I was more referring to the stern settling back twice. I think for some to think the ship went down whole, there would have to be as little movement as possible.
 

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,156
630
188
20
Hello after a long time!

The boilers in boiler room 2 have imploded, as can be clearly seen in the more detailed photographs. But they did not implode during but after the sinking of the ship and not in a dramatic way. Damage caused by implosion is visible only on the upper part of the boiler, in area or above the heating pipes. The cause of this damage is the fact that the boilers were about 3/4 full of water. In the upper 1/4 there was steam (or air after steam was released and fires drawn out). Since the water is incompressible, and the external pressure on the boilers increased as the bow traveled toward the bottom, that upper part of the boiler was a “weak point” that had to give way.
The boilers were designed for an operating pressure of 215 psi (15 bar). I guess they could withstand a little more pressure, maybe 275 psi (19 bar), so my thoughts are that the top part of boilers imploded somewhere below 200 meters (650 feet) from surface.
The cylinders of reciprocating engines are damaged in a similar way, but damage to them was much more violent because they were dry inside.

View attachment 49018

Sorry for non perfect english, I hope you understand what i mean.
Cheers from Croatia. Ivan

This was probably a part of the mixture of chaos that some heard after the stern under. There are a couple reports of a loud clatter and booms as it finally disappeared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Rennette Marston

Rennette Marston
Member
May 23, 2020
285
75
63
48
Halifax, Nova Scotia
I was more referring to the stern settling back twice. I think for some to think the ship went down whole, there would have to be as little movement as possible.

Thanks for clarifying! Probably, but as I said, the vast majority of the survivors were in lifeboats far away from the Titanic and they had no clear profile view of the sinking ship since they were facing the prow of the Titanic - so the chaos wouldn't have been so easily noticed by them. Plus some survivors who were near the Titanic and/or had a much better vantage point said that the Titanic was rising and settling in the water more than once. Frank Prentice in his 1966 interview said that the Titanic was "bobbing like a cork," implying that the ship was rocking up and down as the vessel sank. Another survivor, I remember, said that the ship broke twice between 10-20 mins. You also have to consider the atmospheric conditions of that night. Though it was a very starlit night, there was no moon so the Titanic would've been almost completely obscured by pitch blackness with very little electricity at the very end. This would make it almost impossible for those survivors far away and facing the prow or the poop of the ship to tell what was actually going on.
 
Last edited:
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
Not so much as the bow of the ship literally resurfacing after she broke from the stern - something that is impossible unless the ship still had plenty of air in her compartments (which would probably implode on the bow's descent into the ocean floor).

That would only happen if the bow was pointing up at a high angle like the stern and keeping the air locked inside. The bow probably only had to tip up a few degrees to be noticed by the survivors in the lifeboats as the back of the bow quickly sank down when she broke and the air inside would just compress and burst out of the forward ventilators which matches what they had seen and felt e.g. Lightoller felt the air coming out of boiler room 6 and up the forward shaft which pushed him to the surface two or three times as the water kept pouring in from the top which drove the air out of the bow. It has previously been mentioned by members that the forward top decks would have only flooded completely after boiler room 6 had flooded completely. If the watertight door or the bulkhead wall failed then the water would filter out of the boiler room and those decks would become buoyant again just like bailing out a ship at one end and filling it up at the other.






The ship breaks and the air compresses into the bow. It tips back for a moment, the air pushes out of the ventilators, and the bow plunges down again.


British Inquiry
2nd officer Lightoller described the powerful force that pushed him away from the forward ventilator. He said it "Must have been the rush of imprisoned air"

Daily Mail
Mr. Barkworth
"I saw the vessel was sinking, and she went down with a volley of large explosions caused, in my opinion, by the air breaking up the decks, and possibly the rending of the water tight compartments..."

US Inquiry
Major Peuchen
"I imagined that the decks had blown up with the pressure, pulling the boat down, bow on, this heavyweight, and the air between the decks; that is my theory of the explosion. I do not know whether it is correct or not, but I do not think it was the boilers. I think it was the pressure, that heavy weight shoving that down, the water rushing up, and the air coming between the decks; something had to go."

Titanic Encyclopedia
William Mellors
"There seemed to be a tremble run through the whole of the ship and the next thing we heard were loud reports inside which I think were the water-tight doors giving way and before you could say Jack Robinson there seemed to be mountains of water rushing through the doors"

NYPost
Jack Thayer could feel something happening inside the ship when he was standing on the boat deck. "Occasionally there had been a muffled thud or deadened explosion within the ship."

NYTimes
George Brereton
"I saw the water reach the bridge after the vessel broke in two and the forward portion began sinking first."


Couple them together with the survivors who saw millions of sparks and coal and fragments of the ship flying up everywhere and the second funnel lifting off with steam and sparks coming out of it and you have an incredible catastrophic event happening probably deep inside the ship. Until the wreck is thorough explored anything is possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
Most claimed that the ship went down whole, so the break would probably be somewhat on the subtle side of things.

I can only find a few survivor accounts who said the Titanic sank whole. Those who did witness it break probably just did not mention it in their accounts just like the 95% of survivors who did not mention any of the funnels falling. The whole thing was too terrifying for them to go into specific detail. Fred Barrett told the US Inquiry that "When the ship was sinking a volume of smoke came up." The smoke probably consumed a big area around the ship depending on which direction the funnels fell which would consume that part of the ship with smoke on the water. Paul Lee has an account by survivor Charles Dahl's who said "Finally there was a terrific explosion like a cannon report and a big black cloud of smoke arose from the ship. This settled and the ship appeared to be broken at the middle. Finally there was a second report, more muffled than the first and the bodies came over the side of the ship by the hundreds." If the smoke took some time to clear away and the ship was seen to be broken after the smoke settled then it could have concealed much of the ship and probably the thickness of the smoke made some of them believe the ship did not break because the bow had gone down when the smoke was covering their view and they just saw the stern rising up after the smoke cleared and they assumed she was still intact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Rennette Marston

Rennette Marston
Member
May 23, 2020
285
75
63
48
Halifax, Nova Scotia
That would only happen if the bow was pointing up at a high angle like the stern and keeping the air locked inside. The bow probably only had to tip up a few degrees to be noticed by the survivors in the lifeboats as the back of the bow quickly sank down when she broke and the air inside would just compress and burst out of the forward ventilators which matches what they had seen and felt e.g. Lightoller felt the air coming out of boiler room 6 and up the forward shaft which pushed him to the surface two or three times as the water kept pouring in from the top which drove the air out of the bow. It has previously been mentioned by members that the forward top decks would have only flooded completely after boiler room 6 had flooded completely. If the watertight door or the bulkhead wall failed then the water would filter out of the boiler room and those decks would become buoyant again just like bailing out a ship at one end and filling it up at the other.






The ship breaks and the air compresses into the bow. It tips back for a moment, the air pushes out of the ventilators, and the bow plunges down again.


British Inquiry
2nd officer Lightoller described the powerful force that pushed him away from the forward ventilator. He said it "Must have been the rush of imprisoned air"

Daily Mail
Mr. Barkworth
"I saw the vessel was sinking, and she went down with a volley of large explosions caused, in my opinion, by the air breaking up the decks, and possibly the rending of the water tight compartments..."

US Inquiry
Major Peuchen
"I imagined that the decks had blown up with the pressure, pulling the boat down, bow on, this heavyweight, and the air between the decks; that is my theory of the explosion. I do not know whether it is correct or not, but I do not think it was the boilers. I think it was the pressure, that heavy weight shoving that down, the water rushing up, and the air coming between the decks; something had to go."

Titanic Encyclopedia
William Mellors
"There seemed to be a tremble run through the whole of the ship and the next thing we heard were loud reports inside which I think were the water-tight doors giving way and before you could say Jack Robinson there seemed to be mountains of water rushing through the doors"

NYPost
Jack Thayer could feel something happening inside the ship when he was standing on the boat deck. "Occasionally there had been a muffled thud or deadened explosion within the ship."

NYTimes
George Brereton
"I saw the water reach the bridge after the vessel broke in two and the forward portion began sinking first."


Couple them together with the survivors who saw millions of sparks and coal and fragments of the ship flying up everywhere and the second funnel lifting off with steam and sparks coming out of it and you have an incredible catastrophic event happening probably deep inside the ship. Until the wreck is thorough explored anything is possible.

Good points about "imprisoned air" venting out of the ship and pushing through the decks (perhaps that's what the "explosions" were - combined with the terrific sharp sounds of steel plates bending and cracking). But I still don't believe the bow could've ever physically resurfaced. Maybe they meant the bow corrected its port list after it twisted and broke free from the stern when the bridge was just beginning to plunge under. As you said at the end, until we thoroughly look at the forensic and circumstantial evidence and piece them together for acute answers, any scenario is possible.

plunge.png


plunge1.PNG


More additional photos to give you an idea of how different the vantage points were from different places:

plunge2.PNG


plunge3.PNG
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Rennette Marston

Rennette Marston
Member
May 23, 2020
285
75
63
48
Halifax, Nova Scotia
The "prow resurfacing" could've actually been the first funnel sinking back first after she detached from her base. Intriguing thought.

funnel.1.png

funnel.2.png

funnel.3.png

funnel.4.png


Here's a comparison of the Skidmore/Thayer sketch I cropped and flipped and my picture. In reality, the first funnel and the entire bow section would have no lights illuminating them, so imagine them as black masses against a starlit sky:

comparisons.png


What do you think?
 
Last edited:

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,156
630
188
20
I can only find a few survivor accounts who said the Titanic sank whole. Those who did witness it break probably just did not mention it in their accounts just like the 95% of survivors who did not mention any of the funnels falling. The whole thing was too terrifying for them to go into specific detail. Fred Barrett told the US Inquiry that "When the ship was sinking a volume of smoke came up." The smoke probably consumed a big area around the ship depending on which direction the funnels fell which would consume that part of the ship with smoke on the water. Paul Lee has an account by survivor Charles Dahl's who said "Finally there was a terrific explosion like a cannon report and a big black cloud of smoke arose from the ship. This settled and the ship appeared to be broken at the middle. Finally there was a second report, more muffled than the first and the bodies came over the side of the ship by the hundreds." If the smoke took some time to clear away and the ship was seen to be broken after the smoke settled then it could have concealed much of the ship and probably the thickness of the smoke made some of them believe the ship did not break because the bow had gone down when the smoke was covering their view and they just saw the stern rising up after the smoke cleared and they assumed she was still intact.

That’s an interesting thought. At the same time, there aren’t too many reports of the smoke (which likely plumed out of the second funnel during its descent).

I think one way we’re able to know that the breakup occurred at one major moment and at a relatively “high” angle is the lights. Although they had been growing dimmer and dimmer throughout the night and within the last ten minutes, there are multiple reports that the stern remained fully lit while at a sharp angle. This shows that electrical and steam connections were still intact and provided illumination before the break. After the break, oil lamps and a few scattered emergency lights would stay on for a minute or two as the stern bobbed and slowly lifted up again.

I can’t remember who stated this, but he was a child when he witnessed the sinking. He said something along the lines of “an explosion shut the lights off and it blew the funnels away with fire.” This is undoubtedly the breakup.
 

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
734
208
England
Hi Jaden.

The animation with the yellow blocked out area supposedly representing a dry area in the bow at the time of the break up simply can't be correct. It shows C, D and E decks all dry forward.

Able Seaman Poingdestre returned to his cabin on E Deck to collect his boots when a wooden bulkhead separating the seaman's mess from the third class accommodation, directly opposite the seaman's mess washroom, failed and he had to wade through waist high water to the ladder up to D deck under the focsle. He estimated this was around 45 minutes after the collision.

Leading Stoker Barrett then, Stewards Johnson and Ray saw the water rising on E Deck forward at various stages in Scotland Road to the point where Steward Ray says he only just made it through the emergency door into the stairwell at the foot of the grand staircase and that E Deck was fully underwater forward of this point on both sides.

Ray's caban was roughly opposite the boiler casing of boiler rooms 3 and 4 on the port side, showing this area was still dry and the water was concentrated forward.

Finally, by the time Steward Wheat saw water on E Deck starboard running down the stairs into the area at the foot of the grand staircase, the water level below would have seen boiler room 6 full and the water rise inside the boiler uptake, lip over the join inside and start to flood back down into boiler room 5. The top of the bulkheads within the smoke trunking only reached as high as the deck of E deck where they combined to form a single trunk up to the funnel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
Hi Jaden.

The animation with the yellow blocked out area supposedly representing a dry area in the bow at the time of the break up simply can't be correct. It shows C, D and E decks all dry forward.

Able Seaman Poingdestre returned to his cabin on E Deck to collect his boots when a wooden bulkhead separating the seaman's mess from the third class accommodation, directly opposite the seaman's mess washroom, failed and he had to wade through waist high water to the ladder up to D deck under the focsle. He estimated this was around 45 minutes after the collision.

Leading Stoker Barrett then, Stewards Johnson and Ray saw the water rising on E Deck forward at various stages in Scotland Road to the point where Steward Ray says he only just made it through the emergency door into the stairwell at the foot of the grand staircase and that E Deck was fully underwater forward of this point on both sides.

Ray's caban was roughly opposite the boiler casing of boiler rooms 3 and 4 on the port side, showing this area was still dry and the water was concentrated forward.

Finally, by the time Steward Wheat saw water on E Deck starboard running down the stairs into the area at the foot of the grand staircase, the water level below would have seen boiler room 6 full and the water rise inside the boiler uptake, lip over the join inside and start to flood back down into boiler room 5. The top of the bulkheads within the smoke trunking only reached as high as the deck of E deck where they combined to form a single trunk up to the funnel.

You missed the point I was making. If the bulkhead wall or door failed then there was nothing to keep the water held in the bow. It would just drain out into boiler room 6 and flood the rest of the ship and tipped the bow up again when the ship broke and the walls inside the ship failed. e.g.



shipwater.png





Can anyone explain how Lightoller managed to feel so much water entering the shaft down to boiler room 6 and why there was so much trapped air that came out and bent the grating of the shaft, or why the survivors could see and feel the ship rolling from side to side and they had to keep away from the railing on either side presumably because she was top heavy with so much water filling the cabins above at the same time the boiler rooms and engine room were unflooded below, and the women steerage passengers who saw water inside the stern and the lifeboat survivors who saw the full length of the ship on the port side sinking lower and lower. Too much convinces me to believe the Titanic sank nothing like the movies and documentaries show.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
The "prow resurfacing" could've actually been the first funnel sinking back first after she detached from her base. Intriguing thought.

View attachment 49032
View attachment 49033
View attachment 49034
View attachment 49035

Here's a comparison of the Skidmore/Thayer sketch I cropped and flipped and my picture. In reality, the first funnel and the entire bow section would have no lights illuminating them, so imagine them as black masses against a starlit sky:

View attachment 49036

What do you think?


There were people on the boat deck on the starboard side who felt the deck rising up at the same time the people in the lifeboats on the port side saw the bow rising up. Two sides of the bow rising up. One of the survivors that seems to be largely ignored is Cecil Fitzpatrick. I found his account on this message board. He paints an image in my mind of the bow breaking and lurching down and then righting itself and tipping back up again and as he held onto the lifeboat davit he looked down at the mass of struggling people in the water who were washed forward. I presume the 2nd funnel fell when the ship broke and the wave swept those people forwards and over the bridge as it dipped down for a second and scooped those people onto the forecastle as the bow tipped back up.



Cecil Fitzpatrick's account
cecilfitzptrick.png
 

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
734
208
England
Hi again Jaden.

I'm slightly confused by the series of pictures you show above.

Are you suggesting that the ship broke and then the bulkhead between 6 and 5 collapsed or is the first picture you show just representing the forward end of the ship? If so, then the rest of the hull at that angle would be almost entirely underwater, including the after well deck. The bow down angle, while not as steep as shown in some early depictions, was great enough to lift the stern out of the water to an extent.

If your picture depicts the bow area after the split, it would still be pointing down and water would be pouring in from the break area and running down towards the bow.

Furthermore, when the focsle went under before any break at around the time collapsibles c and d were launched, water would have been pouring in through the vents and smoke chimneys above the fan space and crew galley respectively.

As for Lightoller, there are two points here. If the trunk was empty to a depth of say 10 metres, which is roughly 30 feet or 3 decks down, and the trunk was a metre square then that equates to 10 cubic metres of water. 10 cubic metres of sea water weighs approximately 10 metric tons. That's a lot of water.

Because the space only has one exit for the air and water is pouring in at the same point it would tend to glug much like the action of tipping a bottle upside down and letting the contents run out. Water will pour in rapidly and displace the air which has to force its way back past the incoming water.

Also, for every atmosphere of pressure increased, the volume of air will halve. Therefore a small air bubble at depth has to expand as it rises. That will cause a rapid increase of pressure which has to go somewhere. Its called Boyles law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
The pictures show the bow after it twisted and broke free from the stern and drifted away, bobbing up and down and sinking.

Lightoller described being sucked against the vent 2 or 3 times and being blown out 2 or 3 times and the grating is bent outwards by the force of it. I can't imagine that a single shaft being filled with water quickly would cause that. I think the boiler room below it was breached open by the door or the wall and that moved the water out of it and disrupted the flow of water inside the ship. From what I have read the Titanic sank on her port side all the way to the stern and that made some of the survivors think the iceberg had ripped along the whole bottom of the ship, which it didn't but that is what they thought when they saw the whole ship on the port side sink lower and lower. That would trap the air against the starboard side and hold the ship up on that side, and I think when the boiler rooms filled quickly the bow would right itself and roll back to a level keel again and that would dislodge all the air that was compressed against the starboard side. If the bow was twisting over and breaking open at the back that would cause the air at the back of the bow to race forwards either against the starboard side or port side depending on which way the bow was listing because the survivors observed the bow rolling from side to side and pitching up and down with steam and sparks and air bursting out of it.

People like to simplify the sinking as much as possible. I think it was complex.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
734
208
England
Yes, it almost certainly was a relatively complex event however, by the time the water had reached at least D Deck in the bow, the ship was on a relatively even keel meaning that there would have been unlikely to have been major air pockets in boiler room 6 at least which would have been fully flooded at this time.

Steward Ray tells us, mid way through the sinking that the water was level with the foot of the grand staircase on E Deck, that it was even on both sides and the forward end of E deck was underwater. By showing that the sides were relatively evenly flooded it shows that the ship was on an even keel.

We therefore know that at some point after this the port list begins to become more pronounced since we know that there was a strong port list by the time boats 13 and 15 were being launched. By this time, the stern was further out of the water than the bow area.

It's estimated that at the time the boiler room crew were released at approximately 01:20 in the morning, the bow down angle would have been around 4 degrees down and this downward trim would have been slowly increasing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
734
208
England
Another thing, with your diagrams above Jaden, regarding your theory of a bulkhead collapse.

The alignment of your boiler rooms to funnels is slightly out, as the bulkhead between boiler room 6 and 5 was mid way under the first funnel. The bulkhead between 4 and 3 midway under the second and so on.

I notice that you show the watertight doors in the boiler rooms open. We know that the door between boiler room 5 and 4 was closed as we have a number of surviving firemen who tell us so. Therefore, even if the bulkhead or door between 6 and 5 failed, the water would be stopped by the bulkhead between 5 and 4. I of course, assume you are also aware of the safety floats under the deck plates that would have enabled the watertight doors to close as soon as the water level reached them in the remaining boiler rooms.

Furthermore, for the water to roll back as you suggest, it would need to rapidly flood into boiler room 6. There were only 2 ways this was possible seeing as the main access to 6, the firemans tunnel was sealed off. Water could enter 6 via the fan room on F Deck outside the squash racket court or the emergency escape on to E Deck. I don't see how eather of these access points would enable the rapid transfer of water.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
J

Jaden Maxwell

Guest
It's just a quick diagram showing a general idea of the broken ship. The safety floats are questionable. Do they still function if the ship is listing heavily to port or starboard? Do they work if the hull is twisting, hogging, sagging? Can the crew members down in the boiler rooms even be trusted? If they were hand selected and not randomly chosen to answer questions at the Inquiry can we be certain they were not instructed to say what they said. e.g. A member here I think called David Brown has been very vocal about the crew contradictions concerning boiler room 6. I would take the word of a crew men with a pinch of salt. The passengers have less reason to hide the truth. I think that is why the officers were not permitted to say the ship had broken while the survivors (some in their lifeboats) said she did break before she sank. There was so much steam and sparks flying about the place that I question if the boilers really were cold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Similar threads

Similar threads