Could Titanic's double bottom have been torn open by the iceberg

T

Tarn Stephanos

Member
No 300 foot gash was found on Titanic's starboard side, and the " loosened plates and popped rivets" were found on both starboard and port sides..

Perhaps the damage from the iceberg is along Titanic's bottom....
Does anyone here ascribe to the belief that the iceberg may have torn open a length of Titanic's double bottom?
Obviously, such damage would not be visible on the wreck, as the damage would be on the wreck's underside.



regards

Tarn Stephanos
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
>>Does anyone here ascribe to the belief that the iceberg may have torn open a length of Titanic's double bottom?<<

Yes. In fact, this is something that some of us have been saying for several years now. Tarn, you may also wish to read The Grounding of the Titanic which was the White Paper that David Brown and Parks Stephenson collaborated on. Beyond that, you may wish to parse some of the discussions in this folder. As research into this is an ongoing affair, all I can say in addition to any of that is "Stay tuned for further developments."
 
T

Tarn Stephanos

Member
I cant believe i missed this article..
I'm going through it now..It is excellent....

regards


Tarn Stephanos
 
T

Tarn Stephanos

Member
Superb article....
It is unfortunate there is no way to view the damage along the underside of Titanic's hull....
The 'door sized' hole, theorized in 1998 just doesnt add up......
Interpreting the sinking mathamatically, given the volume of water that entered the ship, and the rate and time at which she sank, there should be an equation with which one could determine the area opened to the sea....And I refuse to beleive it was 12 square feet......
Im sure Titanic scraped along a spur along her underside, and the dameage probrolly extended most of her length- though i'm sure there were no breaches past boiler room # 4 (though hull paint was no doubt scraped free).

Perhaps if keel sections from amidships could be found in the debris field, there might be tell tale traces of iceberg scraping damage(assuming the rusticle growth hasnt obscured everything)

regards


Tarn Stephanos
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Tarn,

What article are you talking about? I did a quick check and couldn't find anything.

I, of course, am interested in reading someone else's take on potential bottom damage.

Parks
 
T

Tarn Stephanos

Member
Hi Parks
I was refering to your 'White Paper' that you and David Brown put together.
Very well done!
In my post i just went off on a tangent by pondering on other aspects of the idea of the underside of the ship having been breached by the ice...
One should be able to determine the size of the hole(s) through the joy of matmatics..
As math is my weak subject, I'd have better luck interpreting the Toltek language...
12 square feet, as interpreted by Paul Mathias's team, just can't be right...
If there is ever another expedition to the wreck, I do hope the area where the iceberg was supposed to have breached (most notibly near boiler room #5) can be searched for any damage....
(this was done in 1998, but i hope it can be done again)
Im certain the damage is along her keel....
I assumed her double bottom was honeycombed with independent compartments, but such apparently wasnt the case..

regards


Tarn Stephanos
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
>>I assumed her double bottom was honeycombed with independent compartments, but such apparently wasnt the case.. <<

Actually, it was, but when you run across an ice shelf and rip yourself a new one, it doesn't really do you a world of good unless you can confine the damage to that area. Titanic couldn't. For the arrangement of the double bottom, I recommend reading Samuel Halpern's excellant Titanic's Hidden Deck. (Adobe PDF Acrobat needed to open this one.)
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Oh, OK. One of these days, Dave and I need to get back together and refine that White Paper. I've had some more thought on the subject since it was submitted and with his active mind, I'm sure Dave has, too.

One thing that I've recently come to realise is that I don't believe that BR#6 suffered the type of catastrophic flooding that I've always assumed in the past. I would like to pursue this more, but right now I have more pressing matters to which I must first attend.

Parks
 
E

Erik Wood

Member
Claiming that Dave has an "active" mind is the grandest of understatements. I of course say this with upmost respect.
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
Parks, perhaps you and David could collaberate on a seperate paper. Based on some my own discussions with Dave, Erik, and Charlie at last years symposium, I believe I have good reason to agree with your opinion on BR#6.
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Michael,

That's actually what I meant. There's no sense in re-writing the original White Paper that's already been hung out to dry. Dave and I should get together again at some point to write a completely new Paper that will stand on its own merits, especially if it makes the old Paper obsolete.

However, with my schedule, I don't see when I would have time for such an effort until after I get my Marconi project out the door in 2006. There should be no rush, though...the story has been around for nearly a century already.

Parks
 
A

Adam Usher

Member
I dont have any scientific evidence to back up my theory, but i personally dont think that the berg wripped a whole along her side.

I do think however, that the berg smashed the bottom of the ship at the bow area. If the ship had been wripped open along her side, then i think that the ship would have listed to one side like the lusitania and would have reached the ocean floor on her side
 
J

Jesse D O'Neill

Member
Parks

Is Your Marconi Project Suposed to be for Your Site, Book, or some other Form? I Would Be Greatly Interested in Reading it Either way.
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Jesse,

Thank you for your interest. My "project" is a book that I started writing back in 1999/2000. I had to essentially throw out most of my previous research and start anew after Cameron explored the interior of the Marconi rooms in 2001 and discovered details about Titanic's configuration that ran counter to everything that I had culled from the Marconi historical archives. The book was again delayed while I took time to teach myself how to use computer-generated imagery (CGI) software, after seeing its potential while working on "Ghosts of the Abyss." The introduction of CGI into my book meant that a greater emphasis would be given to illustrations, whereas before it had been given to dry, technically-oriented text. I am still working on my CG models of the Marconi rooms, which are far more mature and detailed than what was seen in the GotA companion book. Meanwhile, expeditions to the wreck in 2003 and 2004 returned additional relevant information which I will incorporate into the book. My publisher, who has shown infinite patience in the face of all these delays, recommended that I broaden the scope of my work to include the Marconi operators, so I invited Jemma Hyder to merge her research into their personal lives with my research into the wireless apparatus and industry. This simple book, originally intended to be a technical handbook of sorts on Titanic's Marconi apparatus, is now much more ambitious than originally conceived. Right now, though, my work on the book is on hold while I deal with other, more pressing, priorities. I do intend to hold to my current publication deadline, though, which is now Spring 2006.

Parks
 
Top