Terrible Deaths

S

Sahand Miraminy

Member
Hey Everyone,
This is kind of a gross topic. Ever since I've seen Ghost ship, I've had a fascination with gore and blood..(in movies) By the way I want to become a film maker..(horror) Anyways if you all have seen Ghost ship the passengers die a pretty bloody death in the start of the movie....It was really cool but anyways I was wondering if something like that could have happened on the Titanic when she was taking her vertical final plunge.....considering the Titanic had many lines on her smokestacks, masts, and cables on her cranes....Is it possible that when people were falling towards the water they could have been brutally decapitated? (not trying to be disrespectful) I think it had to have happened to at least a couple people. If I ever made a Titanic film I would show that in it.
 
When the cable stays to the funnels snapped something exactly like your favourite scene might have happened. I seriously doubt that anybody in the vicinity thought it was really cool though. Sahand, seems like only yesterday when you thought the ultimate horror on Titanic was the chamber pot situation. I'm not sure this is progress.
 
>>Is it possible that when people were falling towards the water they could have been brutally decapitated?<<

Very possible, especially if somebody was in the way of any of those cables that Bob mentioned. These things are under a lot of tension and if they break, woe betide whoever's in the way. The things can cut people in half! There are all kinds of ways to die on a ship. This is but one of them.
 
Sahand,
Although many deaths did take place from people falling hundreds of feet as the ship sank (most likely hitting objects and terribly "mangling" themsleves) I'm sure most killed horribly was the engineers and firemen. Many were probably trapped between closing watertight doors. Many were most likely killed when bulkheads gave way, tons upon tons upon tons of force if you think about it w/ the bulkhead and water forward of it smashing into these guys. They didn't have an ice cube's chance in hell...
Also, the stay cables from the funnels most likely made a passenger or two multiply if you know what I mean! No accounts of these have survived by my knowledge...if anyone could clarify...I know one of the firemen did see his friend disapear due to the fallen bulkhead after he had fallen into a manhole.
 
>>I know one of the firemen did see his friend disapear due to the fallen bulkhead after he had fallen into a manhole.<<

Shane,if you take a look at the extant photos taken of the wreck both inside and outside You won't find any collapsed bulkheads in the sense that you're thinking of. That doesn't mean that there wasn't structural failure. The breakup of the hull girder itself is about as spectacular an example of that as you could ever wish for. However, what you're referring to is that incident in Boiler Room #5 where a fireman fell through an open manhole and broke his leg. No bulkhead collapsed on him or anyone else. The failure that did happen need not be anything more spectacular then the door to the coal bunker giving way and flooding the space or a seperation of a plate or two in the bulkhead itself.

That's all it would take.

In any event there is no testimony or account of a bulkhead actually seen to collapse, nor is there any testimony or even so much as an account of a person being trapped beneath a closing watertight door.

Just thought you should know.
 
Micheal,

When you say bulk head what are you referring to? Do you mean water tight bulkhead or a non-water tight bulkhead?

From what I have read, @ 12:45 am the watertight bulkhead between boiler room 5 and six, weakened by fire and ice, fails. At 2:10, building water pressure bursts boiler room number four, and the final plunge begins.
 
Michael,
I don't think it is known for sure what happened. Frederick Barrett was in boiler room No. 5 with Engineer Jonathan Shepherd, whom broke his leg when he steeped into an open manhole. Herbert Harvey was also present. As Barrett was working the pumps, a "huge wave of green foam came pouring from between the forward boilers, flooding the room. It was as if the entire bulkhead had dissapeared." They sadly had to leave Shepherd, whom was unable to climb a ladder out as the water gushed in. I think it could still be a possiblity that the bulkhead between 5 and 6 buckled a bit, could it not? Creating "cracks" in the still if you may, in which the water cascaded through...
All Ahead Full!
 
By the way, Sahand, if you were to ever make a film about Titanic with people getting heads whacked off, there would probably be a general uproar against the disrespect. It isn't known that it happened so it shouldn't be shown in my opinion, since it is on the borderline of disrespect.
 
>>When you say bulk head what are you referring to? Do you mean water tight bulkhead or a non-water tight bulkhead?<<

"C"...all of the above.

>>From what I have read, @ 12:45 am the watertight bulkhead between boiler room 5 and six, weakened by fire and ice,<<

The problem with this is two fold. One being that there is no substantial evidence that any bulkhead was actually weakened by the fire which smouldered in the coal bunker, and the other being that nobody who survived actually directly saw the bulkhead collapse. It was inferred in light of the flooding that was observed. It may or may not have happened that way. It could have been a bulkhead...perhaps just a plate or two or some seams, or it could have been the door to the coal bunker giving way under the pressure as it filled up. As shane said, it could also have been buckling and cracking.

Lots of room for speculation here. It would be nice if somebody could get an ROV in those spaces to check things out.

>>By the way, Sahand, if you were to ever make a film about Titanic with people getting heads whacked off, there would probably be a general uproar against the disrespect.<<

Possibly. They audiance might also cry out for more. (The Breads and Circus's mentality at work here!)

>>It isn't known that it happened so it shouldn't be shown in my opinion, since it is on the borderline of disrespect.<<

Why?

Granted, it's not knowable, but it's not outside the realm of possibility either....and if it happened, it happened. Any perceptions of respect or a lack thereof doesn't take away from that.
 
Hey Everyone,

Yea It can be a little on the borderline but it could have happened. There are even more terrible things that probably or could have happened for ex: huge pieces of glass from the gsc dome going into people when it imploded...(if it imploded) but there had to be other parts of the ship where sharp glass could have done bad damage like that. I dont want to sound morbid though. The thing about doing these kind of scenes would set aside a new titanic movie from others that everyone knows what would happen everytime.

P.S. happy birthday to me! lol.
 
"I dont want to sound morbid though."

keep on practicing
happy.gif
 
Sahand, you have to remember; Ghost Ship was a fictional story (and a total failure.) Titanic is something that really happened and there are people still living that went through it! You have to remember that those "cool" scenes where people were decapitated were some ones daughter or son, or even a mother or father. They suffered painful, untimely deaths that shook the world and shattered their families. It is really disrespectful of you to even suggest it, i have to say. Plus, there is no proof any of it happened; no severed bodies were recovered and there were no surviving witnesses to tell it. It's one of those things left not told; that is if there is anything to tell. I like to think it didn't, and as morbid as it may sound they all died the same way and anyway Sahand, no one should turn the Titanic legacy into a bloody, painful mass killing - rather it should be left as an event of tearful goodbyes and love. That's how it has been seen for the past 92years in "A Night to Remember" and more recently "Titanic" and in public society, and both those films i'd say made well over double that of "Ghost Ship"...
 
>>no one should turn the Titanic legacy into a bloody, painful mass killing <<

Not to sound unsympathetic, but with 1497 deaths, a bloody mass killing is exactly what this event was, and facing the hard realities is not...in my opinion...disrespectful. It's merely facing the event for the ghastly tragedy that it was.
 
Michael that of course is your opinion; however i'm sure the majority of the public that when thinking about the Titanic - don't concentrate on women and children being sliced in half by cables or glass from the Grand Staircase pinning into their backs! The more renowned legacy is of the band playing to the end, the sad goodbyes ect. We must remember these people are not our relatives or friends, but someone elses and i know if i had people discussing the deaths of my family i'd be pretty mad! Everyone should remember them as the people they were - not focus on their bloody and painful ends. And i still stand in saying that making a movie on these painful deaths is a disrespectful and obnoxious way to remember those 1497 people killed that night.
 

Similar threads

R
Cause of Death for RMS Titanic victims
4 5
Replies
67
Views
20K
PRR5406
PRR5406
J
More people on the Titanic died of hypothermia than of drowning
Replies
2
Views
3K
Tom Pappas
T
Back
Top