Did only 2 ft doom the Titanic?

[Arun Vajpey]

As the flooding in the forward holds and Boiler Room 6 approached the E-Deck, the rate of ingress slowed dramatically as the differential head across the openings was reduced.

Was that responsible for reduction in the rate at which the bow dipped in the second hour?

 

[yotsuya]

The first question we should be asking about the flooding sequence is the inflow of water. The rest of the flooding will progress from there.

The initial flooding will be at a greater rate because of the distance of the damage from the waterline.

The second question is when it would equalize and the force of the water coming in reduce. (I think this is included in the above graph)

And third, how many ports were left open that then added to the influx of water. This changes the dynamics of the sinking and also provides an increase of water ingress. As the water rises above the edge of the hull, that introduced even more ways for water to flow.

The fourth thing is how water progresses inside the ship. Water partitions are wood and what are metal. What might break and give and what will stand firm even if it might leak. This impacts how Boiler Rooms 3, 4, and 5 fill with water. Boiler Room 5 has a short split from the ice berg and Boiler Room 4 has a small mystery leak that only got noticed because of the angle of the deck. No one saw water from inside the ship flowing into either BR 4 or 5.

Calculating the flooding of the ship is a complex set of formulas, but not impossible. I understand the theory, but it requires calculus which has always eluded me. One of the key things would be a survey of open ports on the wreck. I don't think that has ever been done and a full understanding of the sinking cannot be gained until we have that information. Though an educated guess can be made by figuring out all the rest and calculating it as a missing variable. Once the row of ports sank on E deck (assuming some were open), the ship was doomed. Not only was that over the top of the water tight bulkheads (C-J) but it introduced new ways for water to get in. That occurred before 1:17 am when Lookout Symons noted the E deck ports were under water and only C and D were left above in the bow. And at that moment the ship was on a nearly even keel.

 

[PeterChappell]

And third, how many ports were left open that then added to the influx of water. This changes the dynamics of the sinking and also provides an increase of water ingress. As the water rises above the edge of the hull, that introduced even more ways for water to flow.

The fourth thing is how water progresses inside the ship. Water partitions are wood and what are metal. What might break and give and what will stand firm even if it might leak. This impacts how Boiler Rooms 3, 4, and 5 fill with water. Boiler Room 5 has a short split from the ice berg and Boiler Room 4 has a small mystery leak that only got noticed because of the angle of the deck. No one saw water from inside the ship flowing into either BR 4 or 5.

As the ship trimmed down, the water would collect against the forward F deck bulkheads, so assuming F deck was porous throughout, most water would probably enter the boiler rooms 4 and 5 via the forward coal bunkers or along the boiler room roof and down the bunker walls. Neither route would be obvious to all the workers in the boiler room.

Bear in mind that Andrews estimated the ship would take between an hour to an hour and half to sink at 12:22, so this was a bit pessimistic. If any port holes were open (and didn't shut automatically) this should have been an optimistic estimate.

With regard to the internal leaks it's worth bearing in mind the enquiry findings.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

The red line graph in that Fig. 10, as are a few others there, shows water flooding into the ship based on many assumptions. Of course anything beyond 160 minutes is meaningless since the real ship vanished after 2h 40 min time, which is 160 minutes.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Ray went down sometime after 12:55 (LB 7 in the water and rowing away) and before 1:30 (LB 9 lowered). That is a sizable window.

Ray said he went below after seeing what he thought was the first boat to leave the ship. It may or may not have been been the first boat, but we know they were swinging #9 out at the time he got there. As far as Ray getting to #9 when he came back up, he claimed he came up on A deck and went to #9, saw it loaded and lowered, then did the same at #11, and then went to #13, which was the boat he got into. Problem is that #9 was loaded and lowered from the boat deck, not A deck. It seems to me that it was #11 that he came to, not #9 as he recalled (which was his assigned boat), helped to fill #11 up, and the went to #13, also on A deck, and helped load and lower it. .

 

[Arun Vajpey]

With regard to portholes, isn't it likely that most would have been closed with it having been such a cold night?

 

[Samuel Halpern]

With regard to portholes, isn't it likely that most would have been closed with it having been such a cold night?

That's correct. Most were. And all portholes that could be opened were above the so called bulkhead deck (E).

 

[James Murdoch]

Had Boiler Room 5 not been flooded, could the pipes in Boiler Room 6 had kept the flooding at bay enough to allow the carpenter to repair the damage and end up with effectly only 4 comparments flooded and therefore, the Titanic surviving?

No, unfortunately. By 11.50, BR6 was under 8ft of water ((Hackett & Beford) Barrett). The initial ingress of water was simply too great for any feasible attempts at damage control other than what was already actioned. (Bringing the hose forward to utilise pumps, closing wtds). It is worth remembering at that time damage control had not really developed as a field, unfortunately regardless of anything suggested (counterflooding etc.) given the damage profile the ship would founder regardless.