Raise the Titanic!

  • Thread starter Nathan Lee Casteel
  • Start date

N

Nathan Lee Casteel

Guest
I think that there is a way to raise the Titanic, but I am going to start working on a plan to bring it up and hopefully that it will work. It will not be an easy task to do.
 
Feb 14, 2011
2,447
32
123
once it comes up, how would you prevent it from crumbling apart from sudden exposure to air?

Im afraid shed shake apart on the way to the surface..

regards

TitanicTarn
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Nathan, in the previous "Raise The Titanic" thread, I asked these questions;

1)How do you bring it up and with what?

2)How do you accomplish the needed work in a place where pressures exceed 6000psi and visibility is zero?

3)How do you deal with the mud that would be kicked up and which would make even the most powerful lights useless in a cold second? (There will be mud kicked up too. LOTs of it as the hulk has to be freed from the ooze that it's trapped in!)

4)How do you keep it from breaking up on the way up?

5)How do you conserve/preserve the hulk and it's peices once it's exposed to air

6)How much money do you have to bring all the neccessary technologies together and develop and test what does not as yet exist?

7)How do you transport the hulk to a place where it can be properly cared for and studied? And finally,

8)What do you do with the thing once you have it up in daylight again? IOW, what's the point?

Deep sea salvage is neither the easiest nor one of the safest things to do as you're operating in an extremely unforgiving environment around a wreck that could cave in on you with little or no warning. The structure is very badly damaged due to the break up, and ninety years in salt water hasn't improved anything. Corrosion and iron eating bacteria have done quite a number on what's left of the ship.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
Hello Nathan:

I hope you will consider this. It took IFREMERS's technical wizards three years to devise a plan just to raise *one 17-ton* section of her hull. Commander Nargeolet compared the attachment of the disel filled bags and transponder mechanisms equivalent to threading a needle at ocean bottom with the NAUTILE manipulator arms.

Your only likely scenerio would be the same method of which was used to raise the Hunley...in TITANIC's case...mere Science Fiction!

I remember previous entrepreneurs suggesting injecting TITANIC's cavernous interiors with ping pong balls. Good Luck raising funds for that endeavor. I am afraid the labordor current would be inundated with the ping pong balls...:)

Let us know when you have arrived at your scheme.

Good Luck,

Michael A. Cundiff
USA
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
Adam:

I don't recall at this time the method of which the Englishman Welsh proposed to inject the ping-pong balls, however the article (Smithsonian '86) offered some brief schematics. Furthurmore there was mention of creating icecubes (Can you believe it...ICE!), and whereby enough of the volumn was filled, the ship would suddenly rise to the surface...ALA..."Raise the Titanic".

:)

Michael A. Cundiff
North. NV U.S.A.
(Our suddenly summer, became suddenly winter just overnight...:-(
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
K

Ken hogan

Guest
Nathan, i recently started a tread about rasing the Titanic's sister ship, The Britannic. Many gentlemen were more than kind enough to point out many flaws with my ideas and they were correct In doing so. Now keep in mind the the Brittanic is in somewhat better shape than the Titanic, is in one piece, (although she is laying on her side) and she is only in 400 feet of water. Now, the problems with rasing the Britannic are huge. First her bow is nearly gone, her structural integraty is horrible (shes laying on her side)and in order to raise her you'd have to right her first, hoping you did'nt tear her apart in the process. Along with about one or two million other things you'd have to do to raise her. Now the Britannic is only in 400 feet of water and look at all the problems. Can you imagine the nightmare it would be to work at two and a half miles down on the ocean floor with only maniupiator arms to work with? Along with that you'd have to sustain a working crew down there nearly 24/7 to even hope of raising her. And how would these people live down there? And more importantly, who's going to pay for it? Even if you started a fund and found parties that were even willing to donate to it there would be a public outcry of such magnitude it would be hard to ever show your face in public ever again. ( and what if you tore her apart in the process? Imagine what would happen then) I think she's far better off where she is. A sad reminder that man is nothing next to nature, and as a warning to warn future generations not tempt the fates. Let's just let her rest in peace alone, in the dark, at the bottom of the sea that took her.
 
N

Nathan Lee Casteel

Guest
Here are your answers......

1. It involves ice, submarines, wax, huge winches, cranes.

2. ok first of all, lift the ship up by using a crane and slide something under it, put the ice in the submarine's arm and use it to put on the ship, that way the ship will stay together when she is lifting, use the wax on the ship to make sure that she stays together once she hits the air, use about 5 huge cranes to lift the ship to the surface, I would say it would cost about $ 20,000 to do this and then take it apart with care and put it into a museum once it is back on land. Then finally I will make a book having it Copyrighted & Published to make a-lot of money for my wrestling company.....
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
1)Slide what under it?
2) What submarines? Currently, there are maybe four or five submersibles even capable of diving down there in the world, and these are extremely expensive craft to operate and even costlier to build
3)How do you even get wax down that far in sufficient quantities and get it where it's needed so that it actually holds the ship together?
4)The huge cranes you suggest that would be suitable for a job like this don't even exist...anywhere!
5)$20,000 ??? You have got to be kidding! The capital investment needed just to design, build and test the fleet of submarines needed for a scheme like this...or any other...and the support vessels required would run into the tens if not hundreds of billions!

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
4
173
Michael, I'm sure he misplaced the decimal point...simple error, after all.
happy.gif



Adam
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
In 1994, George Tulloch, as an observer aboard the NAUTILE during recovery operations remarked, "...when it's costing you five dollars a second", which equates to $100,000 per dive , nearly a decade ago!

Then when you consider the trival methods (discarded anchor chains & NAUTILE's shopping cart sized retrieval basket) of deploying your *utensils* for working the great Abyss...shucks... as someone noted previously...you may as well be devising a scheme to lower the North Atlantic Ocean!!

Michael A. Cundiff
USA
 

kevin johnson

Member
Apr 2, 2005
93
1
86
are there actually any real plans to raise
her Im just a neophyte in this area but as someone
who has a vested interest in her since according
to family history my grandfather had gold bullion on
her when she sank I say try it if feasible but
if not let her r.i.p
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Kevin, there are no plans whatever to raise the ship. For the reasons we've discussed in this and some other threads, it simply isn't possible. The technology needed to make it happen doesn't exist yet. By the time it does, there won't be anything left of the Titanic to bring up.

I would also be extremely skeptical of any stories about gold bullion, jewels, diamonds, etc. Stories like this always seem to be assocciated with shipwrecks, especially the more notorious episodes, but there's rarely anything to them.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 

Bill Willard

Member
Mar 24, 2001
283
12
183
Nathan, allow me to add to everyone's skepticism. I was on the '98 expedition when the Big Piece came up.

Practice your theory on soggy, wet cardboard. The metal is no longer structurally solid. The support columns in the area of the grand staircase are warped like parentheses. Exterior walls are collapsing. The forward cargo cranes are tilting, and should break off of the supports very soon if the decay continues at the same rate.

As a Physicist, no technology exists to raise something in that condition OF THAT MASS and volume, and properly take care of your package.

Sure, if someone creates a large shovel, it could scoop down and pick up the entire bow area in one swoop, and bring it slowly to the surface. If someone creates it. The interior volume of the ship contains open passageways of small geometric areas, so filling the ship with any floatable substance wouldn't work. The substance could not be contained. Infusing the substance into the interior in a bladder-type system would cause too much damage, and rupture the bladder as the ship made distance toward the surface and the water pressure decreased (causing the interior bladder pressure to increase and quadruple in volume, in some substances).

As a scientist, congratulations on wanting to find a solution to the no-win scenario. But, in practical thoughts with today's technology, it won't be done. By the time the technology arrives, the ship will be gone as we know her. Also consider the social protests your idea will have. People will not want it raised, just as many want it left alone today.

Just some thoughts,

Bill W.
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
Hello Bill:

The closest apparatus in function today, one that is a far reach from your *large shovel* would be IFREMER's Grabber. I believe it's design was intented as a means to encapulate a large section of shallow water wrecks. It is a cable operated mechanism, therefore I am sure it could be implemented for deep water wrecks...but in TITANIC's case it would only nullify the Grabber's concept.

I am going to get back with you on a reference photograph of this very large piece of IFREMER's
equipment. It's in a Geographic book regarding treasure ships.

BTW, the Grabber was also the conception of Pierre Valldy. The Frenchman who devised the lift bag system for recovering the "Big Piece" of your aforemention.

As always, I appreciate your insight Bill...:)

Sincerely,
Michael A. Cundiff
USA
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
ADDENDUM:

A nice color image of IFREMER's "Grabber" can be seen in Nigel Pickford's (In corraboration with Na'tl Geo.) "Lost Treasue Ships of the Twentieth Century". However there is no text reference to the photograph. It is a large cumbersome *claw* like device, hence the name "Grabber".

Michael A. Cundiff
USA
 

Bill Willard

Member
Mar 24, 2001
283
12
183
When I was in Toulon for the planning session for the '98 trip, Monseiur Valdy told us about 'the Grab' (that was the prototype's name). He sketched it on the drawing board, and I loved his animation on how it would work.

Pierre's concept on raising the big piece was simple and perfect. It was approved by the IFREMER personnel after a discussion on the tensile strength of the cable system. IFREMER is very focused on safety issues. Discovery wanted to document quite a bit from in the water, and IFREMER was hesitant about a 20-ton piece dangling with divers swimming about it with cameras.

Pierre Valdy has several other items he invented at the Toulon IFREMER branch. He showed a few to us and took us on the grand tour. It was on this day I got to sit in Nautile!! It happened to be in port that day.

Bill
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
G'Morning Bill,

If given the opportunity, would you have been able to withstand the confines of NAUTILE's 7' diameter sphere to visit TITANIC up-close and personal?

I understand Mr. Findley had the opportunity but neglected for one reason or another. Perhaps Mike would be so kind to expand on this?

Personally I am of the *claustrophobic* category, so if I was given the opportunity to dive in the NAUTILE, I would then have pleaded for a sedative until we arrived at the wrecksite...:)

Another *recently* deployed marvel out of the IFREMER, Toulon branch..a model 6000 "VICTOR" R.O.V. with manipulator/scientific capabilities that far exceed the MAGELLEN R.O.V. As you are aware MAGELLEN's photography excelled during your '98 visit to TITANIC. MAGELLEN was also instrumental in the discovery and recovery of Gus Grissom's *infamous* LIBERTY BELL 7 space capsule.

Have a nice day Bill!

Michael A. Cundiff
USA
(GOD BLESS Mr. Grissom's ultimate sacrafice for the benefit of the U.S. space program)
 

Bill Willard

Member
Mar 24, 2001
283
12
183
I would go without a doubt.

The Magellan was lost during the Liberty Bell mission. Curt Newsome (who was with us for a few weeks on Titanic '98) had to go back with the Discovery ROV and work on the Liberty Bell. They were able to locate, recover, and fix Magellan's problems.

As a matter of fact, Magellan was back out at the wreck site with RMSTI in 2000, but Oceaneering was dismissed and now RMSTI/Oceaneering are settling it in court.

Bill
 

Similar threads

Similar threads