Discussion in 'Collision / Sinking Theories' started by Gloria Lyons, Jun 26, 2000.
The boilers in room 1 were not lit.
boilers in boiler room 1 were not lit but what if they were pouring hot water and shoveling burning coal? perhaps they ttempted to start them?
did titanic was equipped with donkey boilerthat could theoretically supply steam to dynamos with emergency lines?
Boiler room 1 was lit sometime after the collision, does anyone know the time frame when that happened? Just curious
These new dimensions introduced in the break-up in certain ways revalidate the witness experiences described since the sinking. In certain ways we are picturing again the classical image of the ship with the stern high in the sky and the lights still glowing, but no longer considering it a pre-break-up scenario but a post-one!
wait,so you suggest theship going vertical with most or all lights still running? engine room at this time was filled and turbine room must been start to flood,if all watertight doors and hatches were closed then those rooms would be not accessible and water could not sneak in but again,how long dynamo would spin down and generate eoungh power to keep lights going?
when steam supply is gone main dynamo shut downs but the secondary dynamo need steam aswell,how one would start after another died by steam pressure loss?
we could get some answers very easily,if we know what circuit breakers position was during sinking,did all breakers were tripped or they keept putting them on untill very last moments? we know the electrical panel atleast piece of it was salvaged but was it photographed upside down? why asking for this?
if all breakers were in off position then lights would be instant cut-off. if dynamo had failed lights would be dimming not going out instantly.
do we know any inquiries about electrical stuff related? inquiries about ship flexing? .
another Q is steam pressure loss,we know at time of sinking there was two separate steam supply used both main and emergency..emergency steam lines were above bulkheads? if so they break first while main was ongoing or they fail both together?
when ship broke in two it did not separate at one time,the steam supply had to be still ongoing,stern then rolled? and steam pipes twisted into spirals then eventually break when keel gives up? what if actually steam pipes were holding ship together along keel for some time during breakup?
do we know other ships reacting like that with having lights running afte break up? afaik only ship with lights still going was japanese batleship fuso which broke in half after ammunition magazines blowing up,from few inquiries we can see that stern drifted away from bow for some time on tis own power suggesting that engines boilers were not flooded and hermetic eoungh to not flood instantly.
According to JC's 2011 Sim at the time of the break up boiler room 3 was partially flooded at the time of the break up, while higher decks where more flooded aft but boiler rooms 1 & 2 where dry at the time of the break-up
Cameron's simulation was beautiful to watch, and may have been substantially accurate -- but it was just a simulation and studying it does not constitute research into Titanic's sinking.
Not to antagonize anyone, but reading over posts above I see a lot of assumptions with little corroborating evidence. For instance, assuming the ship could virtually stand on its nose without regard to the buoyancy needed for such a stunning event. Or, assuming that the "keel" broke last when the iron on the bottom says otherwise. And, where did the idea come that the boilers in #1 were lighted off that night. The process of bringing a boiler on line takes at least 20 hours beyond the few Titanic floated after the iceberg.
There's a lot of material out there, both on line and in (better) books. It's fun to play mind games, but without research they're about as useless as farting "Annie Laurie" through a keyhole.
To the real point, it could take years of work to learn which lamps were on what circuits. Some were fed by the main dynamos, others by the emergency set. Which went out first. Which turned red indicating low voltage and hinting and a dynamo "spooling down?" Sam Halpern has nicely detailed the steam piping in the ship. What can be learned from his drawings which are based on solid research, not guesses?
I'm of the opinion that learning more about the electrical system and how it shut down will yield much information about the overall breakup of the hull. Dunce caps off. Thinking caps on. Knowledge is at stake.
-- David G. Brown
Stern or any piece still connected at this point. Could be done by one of the larger middle pieces. The stern cuts off after forward end of reciprocating engines
The time the bridge went under
Thats fascinating about the boiler situation (BTW thanks for calling me on being wrong) so does this mean that all of the power in that last while was solely supplied from boiler room 2?
at time of breakup only boiler room 3 and 2 were supplying steam,boiler room 1 was not capable,even if boilers were started they did not work even with hot-start process.
Testimony yields that both the order to keep steam up and to draw fires were heard. Unfortantly though no direct info about which boilers were kept up survives. We do know that the men were told to abandon their posts. So it is likely that some boilers remained lit and possibly died down.
"It may here be mentioned that in all passages, public rooms, compartments and decks throughout the vessel are placed emergency electric lamps. These are on special circuits and derive current from the emergency dynamos previously referred to, so that in the untimely event of an entire extinction of the ordinary lighting, there would still be available illumination at all points where passengers and crew would congregate; in fact, anyone could find their way from one end of the vessel to the other lighted at night by this means."
This is from the 1911 edition of The Electrician.
"The Electrician" 28 Jul 1911
We sort of do in a way since we can tell that all the boilers (or for me the left three as i have not seen good footage of the right 2) in 2 are slightly indented from implosions, a fairly good sign that they where hot at the time of the break up
Water at the break-Up
If they were hot then surely you would expect to see explosion damage rather than implosion? Or am I mis-understanding?
Everyone iv come across says its more of a implosion due to the nature of the boiler
By whom? Why did nobody mentioned it? Dillon (who by the way belonged to the crew for BR#1) went a few times thought BR 1, the last time after when he left BR 4 and went into the main engine room and was send up at about 1.20 a.m.
And if lit for which purpose? There was no time to do anything with them, only wasting time an manpower.
I believe a large stream of sparks, red hot coals, and plumes of black billowing smoke rushed out of her funnel(s) when the ship appeared to explode and break apart. There has been no conclusive cause for the following survivors accounts e.g.
"Smoke and sparks were rushing out of her funnel."
"It came with a deafening roar that stunned me. Something in the very bowels of the Titanic exploded and millions of sparks shot up to the sky, like rockets in a park on the night of a summer holiday. This red spurt was fan shaped as it went up, but the sparks descended in every direction in the shape of a fountain of fire. Two other explosions followed, dull and heavy, as if below the surface. The Titanic broke in two before my eyes."
"One of the funnels seemed to be lifted off and fell towards me about 15 yards away, with a mass of sparks and steam coming out of it. I saw the ship in a sort of a red glare, and it seemed to me that she broke in two just in front of the third funnel."
"When the ship was sinking a volume of smoke came up."
"After the noise I saw a huge column of black smoke slightly lighter than the sky rising high into the sky and then flattening out at the top like a mushroom."
"After she got to a certain angle she exploded, broke in halves"
He was asked.
Q - What do you think those explosions were?
A - The boilers bursting.
Q - What makes you think that?
A - The cold water coming under the red-hot boilers caused the explosions.
Q - You reasoned that out?
A - Yes; but you could see the explosions by the smoke coming right up the funnels.
Q - Did you see any steam and smoke coming?
A - Yes.
Q - Did you see any sparks?
A - It was all black; looked like as if it was lumps of coal, and all that.
Q - Coming up through the funnels?
A - Through the funnels.
Q - That is, there was a great amount of black smoke coming up through the funnels just after this explosion?
A - Just after the explosion.
Q - And there were lumps of coal, etc, coming up?
A - Yes; pretty big lumps. I do not know what it was.
Q - Did any water come up?
A - I never seen no water; only the steam and very black smoke.
Reminds me of this illustration of the Lusitania sinking. With red sparks, steam and smoke shooting out of her third funnel as the hull (edited) fractures and breaks apart.
That would be my guess, too.
It would seem that the radiation pattern would be somewhat slanted, not horizontal, and closer to the water.
I think that would have affected both reception on Titanic and transmision becoming weaker.
Separate names with a comma.