On A Sea Of Glass Real Time Sinking Animation

[Arun Vajpey]

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 agree. Thins happened quite quickly after 02:15 am. In fact, contrary to my earlier belief, the sequence of events depicted do match Sam Halpern's description in his book. The time at the left upper corner of the animation reads 02:15 am when the port list started to ease and the forward and downward lurch occurred.

As shown in the animation:

• Between 02:13 and 02:14 am the bridge was flooding.
• Between 02:14 am and 02:15 am Collapsible A was pushed down from the roof of the officer's deck and landed upright on the starboard side.
• Between 02:15 am and 02:16 am the port list started to ease and the Titanic gave that forward and downward lurch. This generated the 'wave' that washed away Collapsibles A & B.
• Between 02:16 and 02:17 am the wave was moving up towards the stern, washing away several people. The first funnel fell among the swimmers, crushing several. The stern started to rise faster.
• Between 02:17 and 02:18 am the second funnel fell, lights flickered and failed and the break-up started. The considerable mangling of the decks in the forward part of the stern section was very well depicted.
• Between 02:18 and 02:19 am the stern started to flood rapidly through the exposed decks, displacing the air within. The rear end started to rise again steadily.
• Between 02:19 and 02:20 the stern continued to rise and started to sink at the open end. It assumed an almost vertical position at which time the mainmast was still completely visible above the water surface. I estimated that about 250 feet of the stern section was still above the water when it became vertical, which would have looked "enormous" against the starlit sky to onlookers from nearest lifeboats.
• Between 02:20 and 02:21 am the stern section steadily sank from a near vertical position and disappeared from view (17 seconds after the clock indicated 02:20 am).

 

[Nikki Farmer]

A documentary by the team behind the On a Sea of Glass animation is airing tomorrow at 4:30pm EST focusing on Officer Boxhall and lifeboat #2. (it should appear properly once it airs)

 

[Jim Currie]

T
Here's a theory: Try and imagine it. It is based on the evidence of three witnesses who very clearly describe the last minutes. These are:
1. Lightoller with his falling funnel No. 1
2. Joghin with his angle of Loll description at the aft well deck ,
3. Collins with his funnel 4 tilting back description.

Four big funnels tiled over to one side put a huge strain on the guys but these are designed to with stand it during the natural rolling action of the ship in a seaway. However, if the ship hangs in one position and at the same time there is a surge pressure at the base of the funnels, the guys will part.
In the case of Titanic the surge first came at the base of funnel 1 as she went down by the head and that funnel, acting under gravity fell to the side of the list - port
However, due to the speed of submersing, funnels 2 and three were supported by the sea and acted as levers, pushing the hull upright and over to starboard. Due to the stability condition of the forward part of the hull continued to loll to the right - starboard thus causing failure of the port side funnel guys.
As for the stern section?
There is a witness who said he saw it first float even the tilt downward... stern in the air and disappear. That is exactly hoe it would go down, considering that for a moment it was a floating body with a heavy weight (engines) At its forward end.

 

[Kyle Naber]

T
Here's a theory: Try and imagine it. It is based on the evidence of three witnesses who very clearly describe the last minutes. These are:
1. Lightoller with his falling funnel No. 1
2. Joghin with his angle of Loll description at the aft well deck ,
3. Collins with his funnel 4 tilting back description.

Four big funnels tiled over to one side put a huge strain on the guys but these are designed to with stand it during the natural rolling action of the ship in a seaway. However, if the ship hangs in one position and at the same time there is a surge pressure at the base of the funnels, the guys will part.
In the case of Titanic the surge first came at the base of funnel 1 as she went down by the head and that funnel, acting under gravity fell to the side of the list - port
However, due to the speed of submersing, funnels 2 and three were supported by the sea and acted as levers, pushing the hull upright and over to starboard. Due to the stability condition of the forward part of the hull continued to loll to the right - starboard thus causing failure of the port side funnel guys.
As for the stern section?
There is a witness who said he saw it first float even the tilt downward... stern in the air and disappear. That is exactly hoe it would go down, considering that for a moment it was a floating body with a heavy weight (engines) At its forward end.

I have wondered why the fourth funnel would fall with no water at the base and seemingly no damage to the fourth’s guy wires from the break. If they truly are designed to withstand the heavy storms and rough seas, why did it fall back? The first two went with water turbulence and the third’s base pretty much crumbled beneath it during the breakup.

 

[Jim Currie]

I have wondered why the fourth funnel would fall with no water at the base and seemingly no damage to the fourth’s guy wires from the break. If they truly are designed to withstand the heavy storms and rough seas, why did it fall back? The first two went with water turbulence and the third’s base pretty much crumbled beneath it during the breakup.

Hi Kyle
When the shear strakes on C deck parted, the stern was well out of the water. The result was that the stern section "hinged backward " while the forward part hinged down and forward. As the hull separated, water inundated both parts. Because Funnel 4 was still in situ, and on the aft section, as that section settled back onto the sea surface it appeared to anyone on the stern that the funnel was coming back toward them. Shortly after, the stern section would turn stern -up and then sink. Anyone missing seeing the first part of the scenario and seeing the stern go down like that might be forgiven for thinking the hull sank intact. D'ye get ma drift?

 

[Cam Houseman]

Hi Kyle
When the shear strakes on C deck parted, the stern was well out of the water. The result was that the stern section "hinged backward " while the forward part hinged down and forward. As the hull separated, water inundated both parts. Because Funnel 4 was still in situ, and on the aft section, as that section settled back onto the sea surface it appeared to anyone on the stern that the funnel was coming back toward them. Shortly after, the stern section would turn stern -up and then sink. Anyone missing seeing the first part of the scenario and seeing the stern go down like that might be forgiven for thinking the hull sank intact. D'ye get ma drift?

Huh, the Fourth funnel didn't fall backwards slightly?

I always thought it fell back and to port, and that's why the starboard side of the Second Class Boat Deck entrance is obliterated while the portside of the entrance is in great condition
1986, WHOI

 

[Jim Currie]

Huh, the Fourth funnel didn't fall backwards slightly?

I always thought it fell back and to port, and that's why the starboard side of the Second Class Boat Deck entrance is obliterated while the portside of the entrance is in great condition
1986, WHOI

View attachment 76941

Hi Cam.

Have a look at the profile plan.
When the hull split, it did so forward of funnel 4. When the stern section went down, funnel 4 would still be where it was but because of the resistance to the downward passage, if the stern section twisted to starboard as it went down the forward face of the fu,tunnel would resist and the forward guys would break, allowing the funnel to be pushed into the verticql while the boat deck was also vertical. like this;

 

[Cam Houseman]

Hi Cam.

Have a look at the profile plan.
When the hull split, it did so forward of funnel 4. When the stern section went down, funnel 4 would still be where it was but because of the resistance to the downward passage, if the stern section twisted to starboard as it went down the forward face of the fu,tunnel would resist and the forward guys would break, allowing the funnel to be pushed into the verticql while the boat deck was also vertical. like this;
View attachment 76943

Ah I see, thanks Jim!

 

[Kyle Naber]

How eerie is THAT at 19:11? Every time I see new angles of the sinking it’s like seeing it for the first time.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

That's quite an interesting video. There are several points of discussion but would it not be better to do that in the thread specific to Lifeboat #2? Just asking.

 

[Kyle Naber]

That's quite an interesting video. There are several points of discussion but would it not be better to do that in the thread specific to Lifeboat #2? Just asking.

Great idea!

 

[Michael-McDonnell]

Like Roy Mengot and the book On A Sea Of Glass the ship most likely did break into three or four pieces with the forward and aft tower breaking off from the stern as shown in the animation.

 

[Michael-McDonnell]

Notice in the sinking/break up diagram in the On A Sea Of Glass book the middle and rear end of the bow moves up ever so slightly.

 

[Kyle Naber]

Notice in the sinking/break up diagram in the On A Sea Of Glass book the middle and rear end of the bow moves up ever so slightly.
View attachment 77213

I definitely think that this is what “bucking upwards” or “blew the middle up” means. As the stern settled back, the broken end of the stern would have bobbed up from the water. This maybe added to the boiler explosion theory that many witnesses believed in. Coupled with the sparks, loud noises and the broken edges pointing up, it certainly would have appeared that that was the case.

 

[Michael-McDonnell]

I definitely think that this is what “bucking upwards” or “blew the middle up” means. As the stern settled back, the broken end of the stern would have bobbed up from the water. This maybe added to the boiler explosion theory that many witnesses believed in. Coupled with the sparks, loud noises and the broken edges pointing up, it certainly would have appeared that that was the case.

Probably what Carrie Chaffee saw "The ship sank steadily until just at the last, when it plunged rapidly. Just before going down it seemed to writhe, breaking into the three parts into which it was divided. First the middle seemed to go down, lifting bow and stern into the air. Then it twisted the other way, throwing the middle up. Finally the bow went under, and it plunged, stern last.

And Mrs Hippach "Then we started to row. I knew the ship was sinking fast, because I saw the port holes were near the water. We heard some one cry in an appealing voice to us to come back and get more passengers, but we did not dare to. The boat listed so much to one side that I felt sure we would be swamped. When we had rowed about 150 yards away from the Titanic we heard a fearful explosion. I saw the ship split open. At the same time the ship's bow rose up in the air as the steamer sank towards the center. We expected to be sucked into the ocean in the wake of the Titanic and I closed my eyes. I waited and waited. Finally I opened my eyes and the Titanic was gone."

And May Futrelle "She began to settle by the nose. Then came two dull explosions. We saw her break in two. The bow, which had been pointing downwards, dipped, turned up again, writhed and sank with the stern - exactly as though one had stepped on a worm."

They do mention the listing the ship suffered and writhed, which is when the ship returned from a port list to an even keel and the bow recovering momentarily as mention in On A Sea Of Glass.