Depth of bow at 215am


Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tom Pappas

Guest
Lightoller considered swimming to the crow's nest, which was barely touching the surface, just as the water came over the bridge rail.

"The demonstration is left to the student."
 
T

Tom Pappas

Guest
Was that too esoteric?

Okay, get an accurately-scaled elevation of the ship. Draw a line from a point B at the top of the bridge rail to point C, the bottom of the crow's nest, and then extend it out beyond the bow. Line BC represents the surface of the water. Now draw a line perpendicular to BC from the point whose depth you want to determine. Measure this line. You're done.
 
T

Tom Pappas

Guest
Well, evidently the Br. enq. report didn't take into account the trim of the ship. Since point C was normally about 30' above point B, BC would be at an angle of (guesstimating) 30° to the deck, making the pointy end of the ship about a hundred feet down.
 
Gentlemen:
While discussing the depth of the bow at 0215, let us not overlook the height of the stern. How much of the hull was up out of water therefore not supported, and acting as dead weight?
Regards,
Charlie Weeks
 
T

Tom Pappas

Guest
Extend line BC (see above) aft through the ship, and you'll get a pretty good approximation.
 
Tom:
I finally got into my office, where my Titanic model is. Anyway I laid a yardstick alongside the model so that it was level with the bridge rail and just touching the bottom of the Crow's Nest, and low and behold following that line aft and I find the entire hull aft of the forth funnel to be out of water. Quite a bit of unsupported weight I'd venture to say.
Regards,
Charlie Weeks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top