Did only 2 ft doom the Titanic?

[Arun Vajpey]

If the damage was at the 14'draft mark (as other damage has been stated), the hydrostatic pressure would be considerable at over 20psi.

I was thinking the same thing. The Titanic was a huge ship with a correspondingly deep draught. If there was any breach if the hull low down, the pressure of water ingress would have been very high - too high to attempt any repair work.

Also, I thought that the breach into BR5 was an extension of the damage to the adjoining aft part of BR6. If so, wouldn't the bending and buckling of the plates have compromised the integrity of the bulkhead between the two boiler rooms?

 

[Charles C. Deroko]

It likely was. It would appear that damage to the bulkhead (and framing throughout the collision area) was local and that there was enough redundancy in the structure not to be adversely effected.

I worked marine salvage many years ago and even a small hole 2' below the surface can be a pain in the neck to subdue.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

What repair equipment was available

Very little. They did their best with what they had but keep in mind that the elaborate damage control systems, equipment and proceedures we take for granted today simply did not exist in 1912. It took two world wars for those lessons to be learned.

 

[PeterChappell]

It's well-stated that Titanic could have remained afloat if her first four forward compartments were flooded. With hull ruptures across six compartments Titanic was a doomed ship. However, my question is if it wasn't for the two feet of ruptured plating into Boiler Room 5, could Titanic still have remained barely afloat? While this would have meant technically five compartments were ruptured, compartment 1 was not like the others. The damage was localized to the forepeak tank, which was self contained with was watertight horizontally meaning once filled the water wouldn't rise up the upper decks. Indeed compartment 1 only flooded from water spilling over from compartment 2. So instead of five compartments being compromised in this scenario, it's really more like 4 1/3 compartments. If Titanic had been a second faster in turning and avoided scraping the hull into boiler room 5, could she still have remained afloat with only 4 1/3 compartments filling with water? Was there enough wiggle room in the calculations for that?

The breach in the foremost compartment didn't play a major part because the compartments volume was quite small, (about 190 m3). This gif, 'flooding by compartment' provides the total volume of water as each compartment is filled. The internal breach in the sixth compartment from the bow in grey, Boiler room 5, probably didn't play a major part because it was said to be minor, 'equal to that of a hose pipe', which is a fraction of the pumps capacity in that room.

 

[Matthew Ricchezza]

Very little. They did their best with what they had but keep in mind that the elaborate damage control systems, equipment and proceedures we take for granted today simply did not exist in 1912. It took two world wars for those lessons to be learned.

I have a very hard time with this notion. What is constitutes repair equipment today? Some shoring timber, a couple dozen pine wedges, and one or two screw jacks. All of that was on board already. What wasn't there was the ingenuity. Further; to this day, I don't understand why they weren't carrying a fothering mat, nor why everyone here on the forum is so quick to dismiss the practicality of fothering. If the argument is that it takes too long to knot up the mat, then lets try this;

Take a length of line. On one end, secure a lead weight. Take some bed sheets and rip them into long strips. Tie/wrap the ends of a dozen or so strips around the lead weight to make a sort of lead weight & bed sheet ghost/octopus. Lower the lot over the damage and wait for your ghost octopus to get sucked in between the buckled plates and pop out in BR6. Now you have a positioning line threaded into the hull breach. Next take a length of hawser. Tie and knot some more bed sheets onto it to make a fringe. Secure it to the end of the threaded line and lower it over the side. To further aid in positioning, have the cutter in the water with sailors carrying boat hooks. Draw the fringed hawser directly up to the breech and let the suction do the rest.

There are endless permutations of this which could have been tried, all of which utilize rope, weights, and the ships linens, while taking less time and commitment than making a proper fothering. Along the length of the iceberg damage, at no point had the hull plates been parted greater than the width of a man's hand. Hell you could probably dump all the ships table and bed linens over the side and wait for the iceberg damage to clog itself.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

I have a very hard time with this notion.

It doesn't matter what you or I have a hard time with. The absolute reality is that none of the understanding and knowledge gained over the course of two major wars just didn't exist, and niether did a lot of the equipment.

It simply did not. Period.
Now, how much training and experience do you have with seamanship and it's skillsets in line handling? If you did, you would know why trying to hang a huge honking mat over the side and manuevering it into place was a non starter of an idea. It was brought up and dismissed as impractical back in 1912. It would be beastly heavy and it would require a lot of able bodied hands to move into place that they didn't have.

How much training and experience do you have in shipboard damage control? Do you understand stability data and floodable length curves, because if you did, you should already know and understand that five or more compartments breeched to the sea was a death sentence for the ship.

They did their best with what they had.

Keep in mind also that this was at night so there was no chance of them seeing and locating the damage. They know it was there from the sections that were flooded solid, but that was it.

BTW, I'm a retired sailor. I'm trained in line handling and damage control.

 

[PeterChappell]

It doesn't matter what you or I have a hard time with. The absolute reality is that none of the understanding and knowledge gained over the course of two major wars just didn't exist, and niether did a lot of the equipment.

It simply did not. Period.
Now, how much training and experience do you have with seamanship and it's skillsets in line handling? If you did, you would know why trying to hang a huge honking mat over the side and manuevering it into place was a non starter of an idea. It was brought up and dismissed as impractical back in 1912. It would be beastly heavy and it would require a lot of able bodied hands to move into place that they didn't have.

How much training and experience do you have in shipboard damage control? Do you understand stability data and floodable length curves, because if you did, you should already know and understand that five or more compartments breeched to the sea was a death sentence for the ship.

They did their best with what they had.

Keep in mind also that this was at night so there was no chance of them seeing and locating the damage. They know it was there from the sections that were flooded solid, but that was it.

BTW, I'm a retired sailor. I'm trained in line handling and damage control.

I don't think Matthew is referring to a collision mat, but something far cruder consisting of weighted rope, rolled up linen or blankets. Since it's only slightly denser than water, it would have limited weight, just enough to sink. Getting any initial linen to 'take' in the breach might be difficult due to the overhang, especially during the early stages because the ship was listing to starboard. The boat hooks would have to be quite long due to the depth of water above the breach, and this would mean launching one of the cutters just for this task.

Other people have suggested using carpet or joined mattresses as collision mats which are drawn around the hull. Unless a large part of the hull was to be covered, which is impossible, this would require a knowledge of the depth of breach, which might be estimated from the flooding in BR5 or reports from the people who were in BR6. However, the forward breaches in the holds weren't seen and some are at different heights.

So I agree it would be difficult in practice, and the crew may have been occupied preparing, lowering and manning the lifeboats.

The German crews seemed particularly adept at damage control in what must have been their first major battle at Jutland. The US navy was so impressed they later adopted these techniques. However, the notion that damage control only started in WW1 isn't true. The crews of earlier wooden ships couldn't rely on radioing in for a rescue, so they had to improvise or die. Take the example of the damage inflicted on the Endeavour by the Great Barrier Reef:

Thanks to a combination of sheer hard work and great seamanship after hitting the reef, Cook managed to get the badly damaged Endeavour ashore. The whole ship’s crew toiled on the pumps and threw overboard expendable heavy objects stored in the hold, such as spare anchors and cannons, to make the ship lighter. They also carried out fothering which involved hauling a large piece of sail cloth over the hole to stop the flood of sea water.

Cook described the process:
“The leak now decreaseth but for fear it should break out again we got the Sail ready fill’d for fothering. The manner this is done is thus, we Mix ockam & wool together and chop it up small and than stick it loosly by handfulls all over the sail and throw over it sheeps dung or other filth. Horse dung for this purpose is the best. The sail thus prepared is hauld under the Ships bottom by ropes and if the place of the leak is uncertain it must be hauld from one part of her bottom to another until the place is found where it takes effect; while the sail is under the Ship the ockam & ca. is washed off and part of it carried along with the water into the leak and in part stops up the hole.” (Cook, Journals, 1, 12-13 June 1770)

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Keep in mind also that this was at night so there was no chance of them seeing and locating the damage. They know it was there from the sections that were flooded solid, but that was it.

Thanks MHS. I agree with your above post completely.

I want to add a note about what any consideration of repair to the damage to the Titanic meant in practical terms. The crew - particularly members of the 'Black Gang', Able Bodied Seamen etc were not privy to the ice messages and so from their perspective, the collision of the ship with the iceberg and resultant damage would have been more unexpected than the officers. When it happened, the men would either have been on duty going about their designated tasks or off getting well earned rests. So, by the time they reacted, got some idea of where the damage was in that massive ship, rushed to get weighted ropes, rolled up mattresses, collision mats or whatever, wouldn't the damaged boiler rooms have flooded to the extent to make any attempt at repair work impossible?

 

[PeterChappell]

It is conceivable that something along the lines Matthew suggested might have reduced or stopped the flow in BR6 & 5, however by the time they had achieved this then the water might have moved along E deck and be be filling BR6, BR5 and possibly BR4 from above. All the leaks would be effectively joined, so the ship would still be doomed.

However, any additional measure, or lack of, has to be judged not in terms of whether it might save the ship but in the context of increasing the sinking time or saving more people. Imparting any resistance to the flow at any point must extend the sinking time, but if this meant diverting Labour from the evacuation then it doesn't guarantee any net benefit.

That's one reason why I think using the 9 man guarantee team, the two ships Carpenters and perhaps the 3 Carpenters who were passengers, all who would probably have tools, to block off E deck (and support the nearest wall to the bulkhead below) would have be preferrable than using evacuation crew (and lifeboats) to fish around for the holes.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I think using the 9 man guarantee team, the two ships Carpenters and perhaps the 3 carpenters who were passengers, all who would have tools, to block off E deck (and support the nearest wall to the bulkhead below) would have be preferrable than using evacuation crew (and lifeboats) to fish around for the holes. It is conceivable that something along the lines Matthew suggested might have reduced or stopped the flow in BR6 & 5,

But how would they have been able to do it? Considering how rapidly BR6 and even BR5 flooded, would the carpenters and guarantee team have had the time to gather the necessary equipment and find the damaged areas, let alone attempt to repair them?

I believe Thomas Andrews' prediction of how long the Titanic had left was based on the flooding pattern in relation to time elapsed rather than actual physical inspection of the damage itself.

 

[PeterChappell]

But how would they have been able to do it? Considering how rapidly BR6 and even BR5 flooded, would the carpenters and guarantee team have had the time to gather the necessary equipment and find the damaged areas, let alone attempt to repair them?

I believe Thomas Andrews' prediction of how long the Titanic had left was based on the flooding pattern in relation to time elapsed rather than actual physical inspection of the damage itself.

11:40 collision
11:45 Andrews finds out about the collision, then starts to check each of forward compartments. Perhaps collaborates with Carpenter to cover more compartments instead of covering same task.
12:00 Suspect first lower 5 compartments were breached. 6th non-critically. All BR6 men know that compartment is breached even if it's in darkness.
12:05 gather team. Ask a few to mark out the line to be closed off. The rest to wait at the carpentry store assuming it to be locked
12:10 Ships Carpenter to advise best place to gather the pieces; eg, carpentry store, planks, solid doors or tables, beds, furniture.
12:15 convince Captain the work must go ahead. He orders Labourers (BR6 men?) to help carry wood & tools to location, porters to unlock appropriate cabins for access. Might need 1 officer and senior staff in first half hour to supervise this to avoid obstruction, if scavenging in the cabins.
12:20 start to nail in 2x2 frame and supports on floor for diagonal struts. This is all the essential work on the floor of the corridors which is swamped around this time. All nailing is above floor height from that point.
12:25 Once that is done, the planks or doors, can be sawed to length and placed in front of the frame across the corridors. This is built up, mainly over the following hour as the level rises.
So we have 11 workers, excluding Labourers, across 75ft (about 25ft is the casing from memory) so that's about one worker per 7ft, to either build the wall or support the nearest cabin wall above the WTB which extends down through F deck to between BR5 & BR6.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

I believe Thomas Andrews' prediction of how long the Titanic had left was based on the flooding pattern in relation to time elapsed rather than actual physical inspection of the damage itself.

That is right. By around 12:10 Andrews told Smith that holds 1, 2 and 3 were gone, and soon he would learn that BR 6 could not be saved. Based on the how much flooding entered the vessel over a given time period, Andrews had guessed that ship had about hour to an hour and a half left. This guess came around the time that that Smith gave to order to load the boats, somewhere around 45 minutes after impact. So then the question becomes, what do you do with the very limited resources available to you? The damage occurred well below the waterline. You couldn't get to it, simple as that.
As far as the damage to the empty bunker in BR 5, some time ago I calculated that took in a little over 41 tons in 12 minutes. As we used to say in the Bronx, you can 'forget about it.'

 

[Arun Vajpey]

The damage occurred well below the waterline. You couldn't get to it, simple as that.
As far as the damage to the empty bunker in BR 5, some time ago I calculated that took in a little over 41 tons in 12 minutes. As we used to say in the Bronx, you can 'forget about it.'

Thanks Sam. I think that just about sums up the situation.

Peter, if you have not already done so, I suggest reading Chapter 6 of Sam Halpern's RITLOTSST: A Centennial Reappraisal. Sam has calculated that BR5 was taking in over 4 long tons of water per minute and by 12:25am, had 180 long tons in it. I believe Wilding (and so probably Sam) used imperial ton measures and so BR5 was flooding at the rate of over 1000 gallons per minute. I think repair work under those circumstances would have been difficult, to say the least.

 

[Steven Christian]

It doesn't matter what you or I have a hard time with. The absolute reality is that none of the understanding and knowledge gained over the course of two major wars just didn't exist, and niether did a lot of the equipment.

It simply did not. Period.
Now, how much training and experience do you have with seamanship and it's skillsets in line handling? If you did, you would know why trying to hang a huge honking mat over the side and manuevering it into place was a non starter of an idea. It was brought up and dismissed as impractical back in 1912. It would be beastly heavy and it would require a lot of able bodied hands to move into place that they didn't have.

How much training and experience do you have in shipboard damage control? Do you understand stability data and floodable length curves, because if you did, you should already know and understand that five or more compartments breeched to the sea was a death sentence for the ship.

They did their best with what they had.

Keep in mind also that this was at night so there was no chance of them seeing and locating the damage. They know it was there from the sections that were flooded solid, but that was it.

BTW, I'm a retired sailor. I'm trained in line handling and damage control.

Yes. Thomas Andrews knew within minutes it was game over. With the damage and the bulkheads only going so high there was no stopping it. I can't speak for other ships but my ship (Midway class) were designed with maximum compartmentalization because of lessons learned the hard way from the past. I don't know if Titanic figured into that but maybe she did as ships designs/modifications were changed after her.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

but my ship (Midway class) were designed with maximum compartmentalization

Can really compare warship design to passenger liners. Very different needs.