Wade's Theory of the Break Up


Status
Not open for further replies.

Mary Hamric

Member
May 4, 1999
139
4
263
I was reading Wyn Craig Wade's book "Titanic: Death of a Dream" and in it he says that ( I don't have the book with me right now, so I can't quote) the discovery of the Titanic broken in two doesn't give any credence to the eyewitness accounts that it broke up during the sinking. He says that the ship likely sunk intact and that it separated on its way down to the ocean floor. He cites Ballard as supporting this as a possibly theory to boost his point.

Any credence to this idea? This book is old...published soon after the discovery of the wreck. Anyone know if this theory still holds water (sorry for the analogy! LOL!)? Does anyone know if Wade has amended this point? Was this just post-discovery denial of the ship breaking in two?
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,666
881
563
Easley South Carolina
These days? Not much credence at all. We've discussed this extensively here and studies on the matter have been a matter of public record for quite some time now. Some examples of that can be found in recent documentaries done by the Discovery Channel such at "Titanic, Answers Form the Abyss".

More discussions on this can be found in the discussions in this folder as well as Roy Mengot's site at http://www.flash.net/~rfm/index.html

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Jan 17, 2002
58
7
158
Thanks for adding the reference Mike.

Dr. Ballard really didn't give a lot of thought to the break-up. He was hip deep in details and other projects and gave more off the cuff replies. I am currently a member of the Marine Forensics Panel, and have pointed out there are errors in the finite element alanysis that points to the expansion joints (as shown in the Cameron movie). Other forensic evidence points to something else as well. There is no push to deal with the issue currently because of political and economic issues.

How Titanic broke up is still to be resolved. Much of the forensic evidence still needs to be looked at by someone looking for an answer. Most people don't care. I think it does figure into how people on Titanic experienced the disaster.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,666
881
563
Easley South Carolina
Not a problem Roy. Few people even trouble to investigate the matter thoroughly, much less go out on a limb and publish. In general terms, it's not hard to figure out; stress a hull beyond it's ability to survive and it breaks. That's what happened to the Titanic. It's not rocket science.

The devil of course is in the details. It would be nice if somebody could run a mathamatical model which is free of the errors you pointed out to see what they come up with. FWIW, I suspect that the big open space which was the First Class Dining Room was a signifigent factor as it would have been one of the weakest points in the ship's hull, to say nothing of the engineering spaces below.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Jul 14, 2000
741
20
263
Roy,
I just wanted to say that I first saw your wreck model site a couple of years ago, and I spent a few hours looking at every detail. Excellent work. The model was so well put together and the pictures were so clear that only after I finished looking at the web site did I do the math and realize just how 'small' those little details were. Your trigger finger must be steady as a rock. You should be a brain surgeon with finger control like that. Amazing.

I haven't been to visit your site in quite a while, any changes/updates to report that would require another look? Where is your model now anyway?

With great admiration,
Yuri
 
Dec 31, 2000
676
14
263
Roy,

Have you ever read Charlie Pelligrinos' theory on the break up of Titanic, and I was wondering what your thoughts were if you had.

Thank you Roy,

Beverly
 
Sep 20, 2000
1,072
4
313
Mike Standart wrote: "Titanic, Answers Form the Abyss"

Hi, Mike: I'm not one to pick on typos, and I hope you don't take this that way. But I was really tickled by the above, thinking how often some Message Board discussions would be appropriately labeled by that! ;^)

Cheers,
John
 
Apr 27, 2000
95
0
236
Roy,

It seemed to me, reading the material on your web-site, that you had a pretty robust theory of the break-up, one which answers many of the observed facts. What specifically do you feel are the major issues that still need to be resolved?

David Gleicher
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,666
881
563
Easley South Carolina
Well John, that'll teach me to have my beer befor I post. I seem to do better that way.
wink.gif


Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Sep 20, 2000
1,072
4
313
Mike: I've gotta admit, that particular form of "finger dyslexia" is all too familiar to me, too. Back when I used to do COBOL programming ... well, if I only had a nickel for every time I typed "PERFROM"! ;^)

Cheers,
John
 

Mary Hamric

Member
May 4, 1999
139
4
263
Thanks all. I figured that Wade's initial theory did fall by the wayside over the years. But I was just surprised to read it in print.

Yes, Roy. You have a nice site. In fact, I emailed you oh, about 3 years ago, because I was having problems seeing the site in its proper resolution and color (you mentioned that my browser was the likely culprit). It's a great site.

Thanks all...you are the best rivet counters around! :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads