On A Sea Of Glass Real Time Sinking Animation


Nikki Farmer

Member
Apr 14, 2019
81
61
48
Maine, USA
I tried very hard to see if I could make out this detail but not sure if I saw anything. Perhaps a very slight rise of the mast but I might have imagined it. Perhaps my 65 year-old sight is not sharp enough.

Update: I went back and tried again and yes, I spotted the momentary rise of just the top of the crow's nest. To be able to spot that movement, one needs to keep looking at the nest as it submerges.
You can also spot one of the lights from the Officer's Quarters rise a bit too, but the crow's nest is the easiest part of the ship to see when the slight bob up occurs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
You can also spot one of the lights from the Officer's Quarters rise a bit too
Yes, now that you mentioned it, I was able to spot the momentary 'reappearance' of that little square of light about the same time as the top part of the crow's nest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,144
616
188
20
It’s kinda crazy how this slight righting (whatever may have caused it) sparked the whole V Break Theory and those consequential heated debates. Something so subtle and simple turned into THAT mess haha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,024
405
148
16
Maryland, USA
I tried very hard to see if I could make out this detail but not sure if I saw anything. Perhaps a very slight rise of the mast but I might have imagined it. Perhaps my 65 year-old sight is not sharp enough.

Update: I went back and tried again and yes, I spotted the momentary rise of just the top of the crow's nest. To be able to spot that movement, one needs to keep looking at the nest as it submerges.
I also think the ship should not suddenly have a pivot point around the third funnel, like in the "Final Word" animation.
You're right, the 1997 film is just a movie, one that I happened to like a lot about, and you will never hear me say anything bad about that film in general terms. Most of the things that we know are incorrect in the film we've only learned were incorrect since the film came out as a result of good research done due, in part, to the film's popularity. A lot of work was put into getting the film's historical elements up to a standard that was way beyond Hollywood's typical concept of 'good enough for film', and Cameron has done much over the years to further historical research on the disaster.
100% agreed!

When you say the ship came back up after the dip, do you mean how she corrected the Port list?
 

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
When you say the ship came back up after the dip, do you mean how she corrected the Port list?
No, not just that. The animation shows a very slight and barely discernible rise of the flooded bow end towards the end. It occurs at about 02:37:41 on the timeline of the sinking. If you observe where the crow's nest was after it is immersed, the top edge only becomes visible again for a fraction of a second before sinking again.

Likewise, the little square of light that is probably the officers' quarters momentarily reappears after sinking, again for a fraction of a second.

You need to watch the two points separately to make out clearly. Probably easier to you with your young eyes.

I think it is a separate event from the easing of the port list, which probably happened several seconds earlier. I found it interesting because we are viewing the sinking Titanic from the starboard side in that animation when the slight rise of the bow occurs. If it had been a part of the easing of the port list, then that square of light on the starboard side would have gone down further, not appeared to rise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,144
616
188
20
I guess I didn’t realize that these were two separate events. I thought that we were getting a second and more distant view of the port list evening out. I was interpreting the slight rise as the port side coming up as the starboard side suddenly came down (during the reported four “explosions” (maybe a bulkhead giving way and the ship reacting to a massive displacement of water)). I guess I’m having a hard time seeing how the flooded bow could have moved upwards even an inch with so much water in it and why.
 
Last edited:

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
I guess I didn’t realize that these were two separate events. I thought that we were getting a second and more distant view of the port list evening out. I was interpreting the slight rise as the port side coming up as the starboard side suddenly came down
I was only saying my interpretation of the events shown in the animation.
  • At the timeline of 02:36:56 the port list was still present and the crow's nest can be seen nearing the water's surface.
  • The caption for easing of the port list came-up on the screen at 02:37:25 and in the next 6 to 7 seconds that can be made out by the starboard side lights and windows 'dipping' slightly.
  • The very slight rise of the bow as seen by the top of the crow's nest and the light square of the officers' quarters window on the starboard side happened about 9 to 10 seconds after the above at 02:37:41.
Since the above chain of events resulted first in a slight dip of the starboard side (easing of the port list) and about 10 seconds later a very slight rise of the same side (the rise of the flooded bow), I interpreted them as two separate events.
 

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,024
405
148
16
Maryland, USA
I was only saying my interpretation of the events shown in the animation.
  • At the timeline of 02:36:56 the port list was still present and the crow's nest can be seen nearing the water's surface.
R.N Williams was swimming, then was suddenly dry, and tried to get to his father but he was killed by the First Funnel falling. I wonder if he was on portside, or the Deckhouse roof.

What if Titanic returning to an even keel caused the fall to starboard? Or maybe Titanic returned to a Starboard list, and that's why the funnels fell to starboard? That could explain a couple things, like how those on the starboard side preparing Collapsible A were suddenly in waist deep water, or why some felt the deck rise. If R.N Norris and his father were on the portside, that could explain it. If they were on the starboard, the deck wouldn't rise, it'd just be level. I still believe the first funnel fell to starboard however.

enough rambling for now
 

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,144
616
188
20
I was only saying my interpretation of the events shown in the animation.
  • At the timeline of 02:36:56 the port list was still present and the crow's nest can be seen nearing the water's surface.
  • The caption for easing of the port list came-up on the screen at 02:37:25 and in the next 6 to 7 seconds that can be made out by the starboard side lights and windows 'dipping' slightly.
  • The very slight rise of the bow as seen by the top of the crow's nest and the light square of the officers' quarters window on the starboard side happened about 9 to 10 seconds after the above at 02:37:41.
Since the above chain of events resulted first in a slight dip of the starboard side (easing of the port list) and about 10 seconds later a very slight rise of the same side (the rise of the flooded bow), I interpreted them as two separate events.

Yes, I can see in the animation that it looks like two separate occurrences as the bridge is underwater when we get a view from the lifeboat.
 

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
R.N Williams was swimming, then was suddenly dry, and tried to get to his father but he was killed by the First Funnel falling. I wonder if he was on portside, or the Deckhouse roof.

What if Titanic returning to an even keel caused the fall to starboard? Or maybe Titanic returned to a Starboard list, and that's why the funnels fell to starboard? That could explain a couple things, like how those on the starboard side preparing Collapsible A were suddenly in waist deep water, or why some felt the deck rise. If R.N Norris and his father were on the portside, that could explain it. If they were on the starboard, the deck wouldn't rise, it'd just be level. I still believe the first funnel fell to starboard however.
As far as I understand, the port list 'eased' a bit towards the end as depicted but was still there. I don't think that the Titanic returned to even keel, much less back to a starboard list.

I always thought that Richard Norris Williams and his father Charles Duane Williams jumped into the water on the lower port side as it would have been easier. It therefore followed that the first funnel fell towards the port side (makes sense because of the list), crushing Williams Sr and several others. That is how it is shown in other animations, but it is difficult to make out in this particular one due to the angle shown. Using the foremast as a marker, the first funnel does appear to fall on the starboard side in this animation and if so, it might be due to a combination of the easing of the list and the manner in which the stays gave way. I hope that Kent Layton is able to enlighten us on this point.

The second funnel is shown as falling forwards and to the starboard in most animations including this one. The other two funnels fell after the break-up.
 

J Kent Layton

Member
Mar 27, 2004
273
42
193
New York, United States
As far as I understand, the port list 'eased' a bit towards the end as depicted but was still there. I don't think that the Titanic returned to even keel, much less back to a starboard list.

I always thought that Richard Norris Williams and his father Charles Duane Williams jumped into the water on the lower port side as it would have been easier. It therefore followed that the first funnel fell towards the port side (makes sense because of the list), crushing Williams Sr and several others. That is how it is shown in other animations, but it is difficult to make out in this particular one due to the angle shown. Using the foremast as a marker, the first funnel does appear to fall on the starboard side in this animation and if so, it might be due to a combination of the easing of the list and the manner in which the stays gave way. I hope that Kent Layton is able to enlighten us on this point.

The second funnel is shown as falling forwards and to the starboard in most animations including this one. The other two funnels fell after the break-up.
Actually, Thayer said that the ship came up on pretty much an even keel at just about the time that she took her forward plunge.

The forward funnels both went to starboard, not to port. There is no real question about that.
  • Both of Charles and Richard Williams were on the starboard Boat Deck, where they and a number of others noticed the band had finally moved outside and onto the starboard Boat Deck (please see George Behe's new book about Titanic's band for information on that). When they found themselves in the water, Williams reported that his father was crushed by the falling forward funnel, indicating a starboard fall. Interestingly, some of the details in Williams' multiple accounts get confused here and there, and in at least one account he did not mention the manner of his father's demise at all.
  • Second Officer Lightoller had left the starboard side of the roof of the Bridge/Officers' Quarters, swam forward toward the submerging Crow's Nest, and then he broke to starboard. He watched the funnel come down, and reported it went to starboard, missing him and Collapsible B by inches. Clearly, the funnel also fell forward as it came down to starboard.
  • Speaking of Collapsible B, Victor Sunderland, who was with Collapsible B, noted that their boat was being washed around the funnel and had just cleared it when it fell.
  • Fireman John Thompson was with Collapsible A (starboard side) and said that when the forward funnel came down, it caused a huge wash that affected the boat he was in, and his arm was broken in the chaos.
  • Seaman Albert Horswill reported that the forward funnel fell into the water 'on the starboard [emphasis mine] side with a terrific splash'.
Why anyone ever questioned that the forward funnel went to port instead of starboard is beyond me. Quite literally no one reported that it went to port. The davits on the Bridge on the wreck today are meaningless; quite literally anything could have happened to them after they left the surface. Indeed, a segment of what seems to be the forward funnel was also found on the starboard side of the Forecastle on the wreck.

The second funnel also went to starboard. Jack Thayer jumped from the starboard side, just behind the empty davit for Boat No. 7 by the rail there, and he said that it missed him by only about ten yards.

Also: although Lightoller later reported that the funnels fell because the forward expansion joint opened up and caused the guy wires to part, that doesn't hold water (no pun intended). The second funnel fell shortly thereafter even though its guy wires had nothing to do with how open or closed the expansion joint was. The only explanation that makes any sense (particularly since the after funnels held on for the ride much longer) is Wilding's explanation of water washing against the funnels while their interior spaces were not yet flooded, causing them to collapse. When they went down, the guy wires parted under the strain; they did not come down because the guy wires parted. And both forward funnels went toward the starboard side, not the port.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,024
405
148
16
Maryland, USA
Thanks for clearing that up.
Here Arun, I can visualize it


on the starboard side here of the Boat Deck, it's punched badly down to A-Deck, which is not the case on the portside
1991, IMAX
A-Deck Forward Facing promenade, 90_s.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
The one thing that is very noticeable with the animation - and better illustrated than other similar Titanic sinking reconstructions - is the 'time stretch' phenomenon in the last 15 minutes or so. With so many things taking place either at once or in quick succession, a minute seems to take so long. Add to this actual people on the decks as it really would have been and we can only imagine how it must have been for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

J Kent Layton

Member
Mar 27, 2004
273
42
193
New York, United States
The one thing that is very noticeable with the animation - and better illustrated than other similar Titanic sinking reconstructions - is the 'time stretch' phenomenon in the last 15 minutes or so. With so many things taking place either at once or in quick succession, a minute seems to take so long. Add to this actual people on the decks as it really would have been and we can only imagine how it must have been for them.
Very true. You really begin to lose your sense of time as events are playing out at the end.
 

Arun Vajpey

Member
Jul 8, 1999
2,411
867
388
65
I went back and saw this animation several times in the past few days, particularly the final 10 minutes or so. Despite my initial doubts with regard to the timeline of the final plunge, I am now willing to accept that this appears more realistic and closer to what actually might have happened, especially by comparison to the "Cameron 2012" variant and as depicted in the you-tube clip from "Honor & Glory".

In both those other versions the port list does not appear to ease much and both funnels 1 and 2 are shown to be toppling to the port side. Also, there is significant port roll of the stern section after the break in those two versions and it does not rise back up much, almost not at all in the H & G variant.

There are a few rather inexplicable changes in the H&G version. Collapsible A is shown to be tossed down from the roof of the officer's quarters before Collapsible B. Also, despite the port list, that part of the boat deck is shown to be still dry when #B lands, almost rightside up at first. It is only with the flooding of the tilting deck that the lifeboat then capsizes. I do not recall any survivor account describing that chain of events.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,024
405
148
16
Maryland, USA
There are a few rather inexplicable changes in the H&G version. Collapsible A is shown to be tossed down from the roof of the officer's quarters before Collapsible B. Also, despite the port list, that part of the boat deck is shown to be still dry when #B lands, almost rightside up at first. It is only with the flooding of the tilting deck that the lifeboat then capsizes. I do not recall any survivor account describing that chain of events.
Agreed, Lightoller, Hemming, etc, never mentioned it being sort of rightside up.
 

Kyle Naber

Member
Oct 5, 2016
1,144
616
188
20
I think many of us were caught off guard with how quick the plunge is (with lights on) since we were used to seeing movies and other depictions stretching this time to pack the drama in. The worst of it really was the break and what came after. I don’t recall who said it, but they said that the screams on the deck were the worst during an “explosion” that made the lights go out, and many started to jump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Nikki Farmer

Member
Apr 14, 2019
81
61
48
Maine, USA
I think many of us were caught off guard with how quick the plunge is (with lights on) since we were used to seeing movies and other depictions stretching this time to pack the drama in. The worst of it really was the break and what came after. I don’t recall who said it, but they said that the screams on the deck were the worst during an “explosion” that made the lights go out, and many started to jump.
Ruth Becker Blanchard mentioned this yes.

 

Similar threads

Similar threads