I think you are giving the internal framing at the Titanic too much credit. I looked at the design of the Keel and correct me if I'm wrong but the whole garters were attached to the top of the double bottom. If the ship ran aground then the Keel would ask for like a foundation of a building and would be structurally compromised like the foundation of a building or a house would be compromised if the ground underneath it shifted.We should ask ourselves "How did the rivets found near the wreck become detached from their original locations?"
They were most certainly nothing to do with the original impact which took place at least half to three quarters of a mile north and east of the wreck site.
Ship's rivets do not 'pop out'. Nor do they fall out. In all the years I have sailed, worked in ship-building and repair yards and as a Marine Accident Investigator, I have never come across a case where rivets were either pushed out or popped out.
Rivet holes were not parallel sided but slightly conical in shape. This happened during the 'punching' process. Likewise, rivets were slightly conical under the head to fill the wide end of the punch hole. The only way a rivet could 'pop' or drop out would be if it sheared mid-shank as when the faces of the plated to be joined slid in relation to each other. I could imagine such an event when one of two plates riveted together was suddenly stopped moving by a solid resistance and the other plate was free to continue moving. i.e., falling from a height onto a ledge. However, such a situation could never have happened on the sided of Titanic. The internal framing gave massive rigidity.
There's no evidence that was the case, Travis, despite all sorts of misinformation and sensationalised claims on the subject that many of us will have seen.Also if you look at the Olympic's 1913 refit I am under the impression that Harland and Wolff realized that their ships were not strengthened enough.
Olympic's bow was the same in all relevant respects to her 1911 configuration.It further strengthen the ship so that when she ran and sank a submarine and then later cut through the Nantucket Lightship that she suffered relatively minor damage.
Nor did I state that you had.I never said that the Olympic's bow was ever rebuilt.
You’re mistaken.I know it is easy to dismiss what my opinion is and in your dismissal Mark you kind of waved to hand at it and stuck your nose up without actually offering any form of proof yourself to show where I could be wrong