RAISE THE TITANIC


S

Shaun Edwards

Guest
I know its probably impossible because the ship is in two, so dead down in the ocean and being eaten away by organisms which is breaking it down, but is there any possible way of bringing the TITANIC up to the surface and "fixing" it, and keeping it as a monument. Because it just seems a total and tragic shame to leave it to just decay on the ocean floor.
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
4
173
I don't know how many times this subject has been brought up. Suffice it to say, don't get your hopes up. Titanic is but a shell of her former glory, and a rusted one at that. She's a rust bucket. She's broken in two, lying in 12,460 feet of water, where pressure is what, 3.5 tons psi? Of course there's weight considerations, but she's broken in half, so the bow section at weighs at least 25,000 tons. The stern is something that should not be considered, since it is nothing but a collapsed pile of steel and wood remnants.

The only thing you can do is to leave the ship as she is. Even if it were possible to raise the ship whole, it would place her out of context. For one thing, she has spent more time on the sea bed, by far, than on the surface, and another, she is already a monument to those who perished. Raising her would be akin to salvaging the USS Arizona, something no one would consider, because of the tragedy that had befallen her.

I guess all that you can do is leave it as a memorial, mark its position on maps, but do nothing to desecrate the wreck any further than it has already. No, it is an impossibility to return it to sunlight.


Adam
 

Paul Rogers

Member
Nov 30, 2000
1,244
12
223
57
West Sussex, UK
I'd agree with Adam, both on moral and technical grounds.

However, as a theoretical exercise, Arthur C. Clarke's idea in his book "Ghost of the Grand Banks" sounds at least vaguely possible. From memory, it involved wrapping the bow section in some sort of wire which was then used to reduce the temperature to below the freezing point of sea water. (I forget the details - sorry.) What had then been created was a huge iceberg which, because ice floats, was able to raise the bow within its protective ice covering.

I can't find my copy of the book now, so apologies for the "woollyness" of the above explanation.

One quote I heard from somewhere leaps to mind: Nothing which can be engineered is impossible. The question is - how much are you willing to spend?

Regards,
Paul.
 
S

Shaun Edwards

Guest
Thanks guys. Its really sad ain't it though. After all the glory, TITANIC just died! I mean she meant so much to the people who built and the people who were passengers on her, and now she's dying on the ocean floor and we are not doing anything to help her from dying! Very dramatic I know, but its so sad! I wish there was just some way! I would love to walk down the boat deck, to bathe in the Turkish Bath, or eat in the first class dining hall or listen to the lovely music of the TITANIC's musicians. So sad!
 

Adam Leet

Member
May 18, 2001
346
4
173
Shaun, it is indeed sad what happened to her, but consider that it's impossible to walk on her decks again. I don't remember where I heard this, but if the wreck were to be brought to the surface, when you begin drying out the ship, the iron components would collapse into dust.

Yes, it's nice to consider being able to walk her decks, but the woodwork is gone, and even landing submersibles on the wreck further damages the structure. Let me put it this way: Titanic isn't dying; she died when she slipped from the surface at 2:20 a.m., April 15, 1912. What you see on the sea floor is her carcass.

On another note. Paul, I have yet to read that book, and I wish I could find it where I live, I did hear about the scheme to raise the ship depicted. I have thought of it as a possibility (albeit against my feelings regarding the wreck site,) but I wonder if the ice would not crush the ship during the freezing process. Consider what happens to concrete in the winter. Water that has seeped into minute cracks freezes and expands, widening the crack. Of course, Titanic is no different, I would imagine.

Just a thought.


Adam
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Shaun,

Sounds like you're deeply affected by Titanic laying on the bottom of the ocean floor. Yes it is sad. All of us know just how sad it is, but at least here on ET we can talk about it and learn about the glory she once presented to everyone in 1912. There's another thread called, "How much of a Titanic freak are you?" that you might want to post to. That thread happens to be my all time favorite on ET because it gives me a place to express my feelings of Titanic. Let me know if you liked it.

As far as raising the Titanic ~ I'd like to see her bow raised, or at least the mud dug out of it so that we can see the actual damage caused. I know there's been speculation about sound waves and how sound waves gave some clues as to the actual damage of the ship but I'm not versed well enough in sound engineering to make any intelligent assessment of it. So for me, bringing up the Titanic (or at least just a part of her) would be bringing closure to the endless amount of speculation that has gone on about her damage. Yes I would like to walk along her decks but since that is so unlikely I gave up the idea.

Sincerely,

Teri
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Hi Teri, I believe what you're referring to is side scaning sonar. An outfit called Polaris Imaging did such a scan of the bow area below the mudline and found what appears to be the damage that sank the ship. It wasn't much. I few sprung plates here, a few rivets sheered off there...enough in sum to leave that 12 square feet open to the sea as Wilding proposed during the British Enquiry back in 1912.

How useful these images are, I can only guess. I wouldn't accept or reject the conclusions in toto, but I remain skeptical. The damage that was imaged may be some of the ice damage...or it could be distortion caused by collision with the bottom.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Hello Michael,

Side scanning sonar. I believe that is what I was referring to, thanks. No wonder I couldn't remember the name, it is such a long one!

Until I see the damage myself, I really can't ascertain what damage she has, even with such technology as side scanning sonar.

How I wish technology would discover something to enable us to dig the mud out from around her!

Teri
 

Mike Bull

Member
Dec 23, 2000
515
14
171
I suppose the way to find out if the sonar images were of iceberg and not impact damage would be to scan the OTHER side of the ship through the mud and see if there is anything similar over there-if not, then it probably WAS the berg damage they saw. It would be interesting to see under the mud-presumably the red paint would be still intact under there, but I don't know what else digging her out would gain/prove.
 
Dec 4, 2000
3,242
533
278
The other side of the ship has been scanned, and the data does not seem to support the contention that split seams on the starboard bow were the fatal wounds. Look on page 108 of my book, "Last Log Of The Titanic."

"...During visits to the wreckage site in the French submersible Nautile, Paul Matthias reportedly found more, not less, damage to the port bow than to the starboard bow. Matthias's observation was available from Discovery Channel Online in a report that claims there seems to be more damage on the port side than on the starboard side. Matthias is quoted as saying that he believes he was seeing not ice damage but crumpling due to the impact with the ocean floor...."

Beware assumptions.

Nobody knows the exact nature of the fatal damage to Titanic. All we know for certain is that some seams have opened. Those openings may have been caused by the iceberg, or they may not. There are many other ways in which rivetted seams could have been sprung open during the accident, during the sinking, or during the impact with the bottom.

I urge everyone to read the White Paper prepared by Parks Stephenson and me for the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. This paper details evidence that the primary damage was to the bottom and not to the side because the accident was primarily a grounding on an underwater ice shelf and not a sideswipe. This paper is published elsewhere on this E-T Forum.

-- David G. Brown
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Teri, we may yet see such technology developed within our lifetimes. I'd love to see it myself, especially if it meant we could get a hard look at the bottom of the ship. I'm not sure it wouldn't ultimately raise more questions then it would answer, but as the old axiom goes, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Michael,

Very succinctly said, my friend! I was actually in the middle of making a posting quite similar to yours, but you beat me to it!

David,

I'll be sure to read your excerpt quoted above.

Yours,

Teri
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Not a problem, Teri. I don't know if you caught it or not, but on one of the Discovery Channels today, they ran "Titanic, The Investigation Begins" in which they detailed the effort to bring up the Big Peice. It was quite a misadventure where they lost the thing during the first attempt and had to go chasing one of the lift bags that got loose.

The thing that got my hair standing on end was watching those heavy nylon ropes smoking under the strain befor they broke. Fortunately, nobody was in the way. Breaking ropes have been known...quite literally...to cut men in half.

Major salvage operations are not for whimps. One little mistake, and you're shark bait!

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Michael,

I was at the Titanic Luncheon aboard the Queen Mary all day so I did not see that program but I have seen something like that somewhere else. It's a shame that they couldn't get that piece up to the surface.

Dangerous attempts such as that one are definitely not for me!

Thanks for the informative.

Teri
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
692
483
Easley South Carolina
Oh but eventually they did get the Big Peice to the surface. They had to go back for it again the next year, and damn near lost it again once it was hanging over the fantail of the ship used to bring it up.

It was a bear of a job, swinging around as it was because of the heavy seas. Some poor sod could easily have been killed then and there while they tried to secure it on board. 20 tons of metal swinging around is something to be treated with the greatest respect...unless you enjoy being dead. Personally, I don't reccommend it. It can ruin your day.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Michael,

You know what? I just remembered where I saw the big piece. It was at the Las Vegas exhibit at the Rio Suite and Hotel. It was huge and heavy looking. The piece looked kind of sad just lying there all by itself. It almost felt as if it was crying out to please put me back how I was, on the moving Titanic Maiden Voyage. Wow.

Teri
 

Sam Brannigan

Member
Feb 24, 2007
903
14
123
Sorry if I digress a little here, but I noticed Michaels comments on the dangers of snapping ropes. I seem to recall reading that when the hawsers from the "New York" snapped in Southampton Docks there were people injured. That must have been an ugly sight. The contemporary press seemed almost blase about things like that. No mention in the 1911 press of the poor guy who was killed at the Titanics launch.

Concerning the "Big Piece", when they dropped it first time round it landed on the seabed in an upright position, deeply embedded in the silt and it was a hell of a job getting it back up again.

Regards

Sam
 
Apr 7, 2001
1,052
6
0
Hello Sam,

You are right about the big piece being buried in silt, as I remember reading about that. I thought, those poor guys!

And Sam my friend, where did you hear about the poor chap who lost his life during Titanic's launch? You really got my curiosity on that one.

Teri
 

Dave Hudson

Member
Apr 15, 2011
503
4
71
About finding evidence of berg damage,

Why not just look at it from the inside? I know that they tried that in the holds and that for some reason it didn't work, but what about Boiler Room 6? There is easy access -namely a gargantuan funnel shaft with little debris on the way down. This would not only accomplish fiding berg damage, but also, we would finally have photos of an Olympic Class boiler room.

And who knows, maby we'll find the Rubiyat in a coal shute!
happy.gif


David
 
P

Philippe Delaunoy

Guest
Dear Teri,

This is the path to "Deaths of shipyard Workers" from the ET Main Menu : Titanic A-Z/Harland&Wolff/Deaths of Shipyard workers.

There you could find that James Dobbin died on 1st June 1911. The Death Certificate says : "Accidentally crushed under a
piece of timber" during Titanic launch on 31 May 1911.

You can also find the worker's names and the circumstances of other accidents.

Phil.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads