^ Undoubtedly, to someone behind the point of the explosion and on the port side of the ship, it would appear to come from forward and to the starboard when such a person gives their estimate of where the explosion originated. I'm disinclined to rely on a witness’ estimate based solely on sounds they heard as particularly exact in the absence of other factors such as the individual’s having had some firsthand experience in having been torpedoed, special training, etc. This may simply be a point of difference in methodology between you and I.
Anyway, that's why I was relying more heavily on the portion of his testimony as to what he actually observed (i.e. how long until he witnessed water entering the boiler room). Now, I understand that in such an event time may appear to move slower to a person who was actually there, but a statement of an interval of a full “2 to 3 minutes” still struck me as a significant elapse of time before flooding began in that compartment. This lead me to believe the torpedo had possibly hit the side of the Cross Bunker ahead of Boiler Room #1, perhaps even damaging the adjacent cargo hold.
Now, as to the "thermite theory," since you raised that point again, the reason I was asking about the merits of it in my earlier post is because I wanted to know more about the scientific merits of the theory and how well they’ve been explored. Thus, my question as to whether its merits have been examined further. Questions had come to mind such as: Does such a reaction actually occur? Do we know more of the circumstances necessary to trigger such a reaction? And what precisely is a thermite reaction like, is it in fact explosive in nature, or is it more a melting and burning event?
With regard to the condition of the starboard hull plating in that region of the ship, as I stated in my second post, I was unaware its condition was known so well as to have ruled out any signs of melting that a thermite reaction would have caused. I had thought with the wreck lying on its starboard side, and with the ship having collapsed some on top of it, that such info was unknown.
I would hope you appreciate, as someone new to this discussion, that I would be taking a holistic approach and considering all suggested causes of Lusitania’s rapid demise and weighing their pros and cons. And with the aluminum powder question, I happened to start my analysis with 1.) was there actually aluminum powder on board (is this documented), and 2.) what conditions are necessary for its ignition. I mistakenly read your earlier post as indicating interest in exploring possible ignition sources for aluminum powder and thus I mentioned Kevin’s thesis that all that is required is high heat + rust for possible collegial discussion and more input on that matter.
Regards,
Adam
