Marine Forensic Panel Report Gibbs & Cox


Status
Not open for further replies.

Paul Rogers

Member
Jun 1, 2000
1,244
14
313
58
West Sussex, UK
Hello all.

Dean Manning kindly forwarded a link to me which enabled me to download this Report. (Maureen, I believe Dean sent a copy to you, and some others as well.)

I would imagine a large number of people on the Board have already read this Report. If not, the link to access it is: http://www.sname.org/education_pe.htm (Dean, I trust it's okay to post this link.)

I have read the Report once only. It seems to imply that the Titanic was sunk by six gashes along the starboard hill, caused by the "rebounding" of the hull against the iceberg, as a result of the Bernouilli (sp?) effect. (Please note the word "seems." I need to go through the article again, with much more care.)

There are also statements regarding passengers feeling "three distinct contacts" to back up the above theory. There is no mention of the "S" curve attempted by Murdoch, or the damage to the bottom hull, as postulated by David Brown. In fact, most of the Report follows what I seem to regard as "common beliefs" regarding the cause of the disaster. (This doesn't make it wrong, of course!)

A wealth of other information is contained within the article, relating to such topics as the coal fire and its possible effect on the boiler room bulkhead, the ship's breakup, the angle of the stern as it sank, etc. etc.

I have to wait until Christmas to read David Brown's book, (purchased for me by my out-laws!), and I am looking forward to comparing the various theories. In the meantime, I'd be most interested in hearing the views of others who have read the Marine Forensic Report, as to its accuracy and conclusions.

My reason for this is that there "seems" to be major variations between the Report and David Brown's theories and, (at the moment!), I am more inclined to go with David's view of things. This casts doubt in my mind over the validity of the whole Report...if they got the causes of the sinking wrong (with all their computers and technology) what else should be viewed with caution?

Please note that I mean no disrespect to the authors of the Report. They could be right! And I haven't yet read David's book to make a full comparison. I'm simply interested in knowing what you guys 'n gals thought of it!

Regards,
Paul.
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
261
358
As some of you may know, I am a member of Garzke's Marine Forensic Panel (MFP), so I am compelled to post in this thread. :)

I was not a member of the Panel when this report was originally written. I have even been known to disagree with portions of it. I believe some individual conclusions were biased to satisfy the Discovery Channel. However, with each dive to the wreck, new forensic evidence is found that continues to refine the sinking theory. I would imagine that if the effort would be made, the MFP would re-write certain sections of the report, based on the latest evidence and interpretations.

Unfortunately, I don't believe we will see this happen. The MFP, formed to evaluate the sinking of Titanic and Lusitania, is expanding beyond those two ships and with the ouster of Tulloch, is no longer associated with RMS Titanic, Inc. The latest expedition to the wreck included no MFP personnel in its crew lists. Garzke would have to negotiate with the new RMST management to gain access to recovered artifacts and can no longer direct searches for forensics purposes on site. The MFP's involvement with Titanic today is limited to supporting exhibits, like the one which recently opened in Baltimore.

I would not say that the MFP Final Report on Titanic is the last word on the subject (what is, in the Titanic world?). Dave Brown proposed new theories that deserve the utmost consideration, but ultimately may never be proven. The MFP Report is invaluable, though, because it provides information that leads the researcher to a better understanding of the mechanics of a ship foundering. However, just like anything else, the Report should not be taken in blind faith. Read through it and ask your own questions.

The thing that cracks me up is that somebody, at some time, may have nailed the entire truth about Titanic. It might have been me, it might have been you. Trouble is, nobody can prove it.

Parks
 
D

Dean Manning

Guest
hi everyone!

I think there is a mix up as far as what report I've sent(and am sending) to various ET members. The article I sent out is an article from Mechanical Engineering magazine, and(I think) is a spin off of the forensics report mentioned here. When I sent it, I did not have the link to the forensic panel report. So, I encourage those I've sent the Mechanical Engineering article to read the forensic report, it contains a lot of technical information.

right now I'm pressed for time, but I thought I would at least try to clarify the differences in the articles.

later
-Dean
 

Paul Rogers

Member
Jun 1, 2000
1,244
14
313
58
West Sussex, UK
Thank you to everyone above for replying - it's most appreciated.

David: I now know the meaning of mental cruelty! I had to buy your book myself, and then hand it to my wife (to pass on to HER parents) so that they can give it back to me for Christmas. (Don't ask why, anyone, please!) So I had "Last Log" in my possession for about 30 mins - but wasn't allowed to read even the dust covers.
sad.gif


Dean: I should have clarified the differences between what you originally sent, and the MFP link that you kindly gave me, in my original post. The confusion is my fault and I apologise for causing it.

Maureen: Thanks for your reply. You have a wonderful knack of summing up the key issues. Wish I had that skill!

Parks: I'm sooo glad I wasn't rude about the MFP!
happy.gif


Regards, and thanks again, to all.
Paul.
 
Sep 12, 2000
1,513
6
313
"CNN-on location near Southampton and that dock that actually held the famous Titanic is now the seen of another situation. A man named Rogers was seen eariler today with a carefully wrapped package he alledgedly stole from under a Christmas Tree not but 13 days prior to Christmas shouting 'I've got it and no one can take it from me! he he he he' Rogers wife and in-laws mentioned something about the incident saying only that his only having been able to hold the gift for 30 minutes several weeks ago had lead up to the incident!"

Yes, Paul I can see it now! (Giggles)
Maureen.
 

Paul Rogers

Member
Jun 1, 2000
1,244
14
313
58
West Sussex, UK
LOL Maureen! I can't wait to see what the next news bulletin brings...!

In fact, the truth will probably be a bit less exciting. Picture the scene: Early morning on Christmas day. (1)Three children, drowning in wrapping paper, laughing and shouting as they discover their Christmas presents...(2)The children's mother, hands inserted deep into the nether-regions of a large turkey as she prepares Christmas dinner whilst entertaining various family guests...(3)Upstairs; a permanently locked bathroom door; all that can be heard from inside is the occassional turning of a page and the sound of frantic note-taking...
 
Sep 12, 2000
1,513
6
313
Dear Paul,
You have no idea the numbers of things that went through my mind as I read your rendition of Christmas morning in the Rogers household. But we all have a wager going to see how long you last without screaming through the streets with your prize. My date is the 13th. Geoff took the 24th cause he believes in you. Ben took the 25th because he is nice and Standart took the 10th cause he says that he can relate and is willing to show you how to get under the bed to get the package, steam it open and replace it all before the parents (or wife) as the case may be, comes home.

You are great Paul!
Maureen.
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
261
358
BOARD ADMINISTRATOR!!!

I am unable to access any messages that were posted to this thread during the past day. I can see them in the tree view, but when I select one, I am sent to the first message in the thread. For example, I can see that Inger posted, but I cannot call up her message, even when I click on the link. I do not appear to be experiencing this problem in other threads.

Parks
 

Paul Rogers

Member
Jun 1, 2000
1,244
14
313
58
West Sussex, UK
Maureen - bad news! The in-laws have taken the book back to their home! (Allegedly so that they can wrap it personally, although I think they were getting suspicious...)

So I guess Ben will win by default
happy.gif


Thanks for the cake recipe BTW - looks yummy!

Parks: It appears that message headers from some threads are being duplicated in others. (Just the headers, not the posts themselves.) Inger's post, for example, seems to relate to the "Fireman Murdoch" thread - she doesn't appear to have posted to this thread at all.
Phil - have we broken the Message Board?!

Regards,
Paul.
 

Philip Hind

Editor
Staff member
Member
Sep 1, 1996
1,767
76
323
England

Quote:

BOARD ADMINISTRATOR!!!

I am unable to access any messages that were posted to this thread during the past day...



I do have a name!
crazy.gif


There have been a few problems with the board in the switchover to a new version but I think the problem has been identified now I don't know if I can straighten out those unlinked massages but hopefully it won't happen again.
 
Mar 3, 1998
2,745
261
358
Philip,

I originally had your name on the message, but then changed it to your more lengthy title. I wasn't sure if you personally handled the maintenance of the list, or managed a team of flunkies who actually do the dirty work. :) No slight intended.

Parks
 
Sep 12, 2000
1,513
6
313
Okay Mr Hind,
How DO you make that red faced smiley thingy, but more importnatly, how do you make that adorable eyes everywhere tongue handing out smiley face?

Uh, Standart wants to know...yeah...that's it.
Hmmmmm...do you think he heard?

Oh Great Board Adminstrator in the Sky.....(phil?)
happy.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads