Discussion:
OT 15 April Titanic.
(too old to reply)
harry
2012-04-14 08:41:25 UTC
Permalink
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Home Guy
2012-04-14 12:28:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-14 13:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-14 13:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
Weren't the tubs of the time heavy metal things that probably would have
just sunk like a rock anyway.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Home Guy
2012-04-14 14:41:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Ullman
Post by Ed Pawlowski
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
Weren't the tubs of the time heavy metal things that probably
would have just sunk like a rock anyway.
=========
http://history1900s.about.com/od/1910s/a/titanicfacts.htm

Although most passengers had to share bathrooms (only the two promenade
suites in first class had private bathrooms), third class had it rough
with only two bathtubs for more than 700 passengers.
=========

For all the oppulance the Titanic was supposed to have, the bathroom
situation (even in first class) seems sub-standard.

But at least the captain had his own bathtub:

============
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010256/Titanic-captain-Edward-Smiths-bathtub-Pictures-surface-1st-time.html

Loading Image...

This amazing picture of Titanic Captain Edward Smith's private bathtub
is among a series of spectacular images that have been shown for the
first time during a court case into the salvage rights.

The porcelain tub, which has intricate plumbing for both freshwater and
seawater, has sat in the captain's cabin at the bottom of the ocean for
almost 100 years.

Captain Smith went down with his ship on April 15,1912. He was one of an
estimated 1500 people who lost their lives in the tragedy.
============

More descriptions and pictures:

===========
http://mredfootballatfault.blogspot.ca/

The bathrooms were finished in the most modern style of the times
complete with showers, bath tubs and double sinks. There was even
flushing toilets on board the ship.

1st Class Bathtub:

Loading Image...
===========


And another thing:

=========
Although the Mackay-Bennett found 306 bodies, 116 of these were too
badly damaged to take all the way back to shore. Attempts were made to
identify each body found. Additional ships were also sent out to look
for bodies. In all, 328 bodies were found, but 119 of these were badly
damaged and thus were buried at sea.
=========

How exactly do bodies become "badly damaged" after being in cold water -
for only 3 days?
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-14 14:58:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
How exactly do bodies become "badly damaged" after being in cold water -
for only 3 days?
My guess would be badly damaged as in torn apart and traumatized. Other
wise they probably would have been talking about decomposition.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Charlie
2012-04-14 17:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Ullman
Post by Home Guy
How exactly do bodies become "badly damaged" after being in cold water -
for only 3 days?
My guess would be badly damaged as in torn apart and traumatized. Other
wise they probably would have been talking about decomposition.
Lots of hungry fish in the sea.

Charlie
Home Guy
2012-04-14 14:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And -> I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.
bob haller
2012-04-14 14:18:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.
And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.
And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).
And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).
And -> I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.
most passengers didnt believe there was real danger, after all it was
advertised as unsinkable, and it went down fast.

recent news said most passengers thought it was safer to stay onboard
Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-14 14:25:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.
And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.
And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).
And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).
And -> I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.
Wow, if only you were aboard, no lives would have been lost.
Considering this took place 100 years ago and you've never seen the
ship, you sure made a lot of suppositions. What wee the tubs made
from? Used to be cast iron, but on the ship, I have no idea.
Steve Barker
2012-04-14 18:17:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.
And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.
And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).
And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).
And -> I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.
another major problem is that the situation was downplayed until the
latter minutes and no one actually thought she would sink.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
Fake ID
2012-04-15 05:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Barker
another major problem is that the situation was downplayed until the
latter minutes and no one actually thought she would sink.
Sounds like the Costa Concordia all over again.

m
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-15 14:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.
I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.
And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.
And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).
And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).
And -> I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.
The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a couple
of minutes
Most if not all of the people who ended up in the water, went down a few
minutes later.
Hypothermia is a very fast killer
http://www.startribune.com/local/146536735.html
Home Guy
2012-04-15 15:00:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Attila.Iskander
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have
been lots of wood crates, etc.
The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a
couple of minutes
What part of "finding enough wood or other junk to use as a raft" don't
you understand?

I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the concept
of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during the 3 to 6 hours
that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait until they were picked up.

The Titanic hit the iceberg at 11:40 pm, and the stern went under at
2:20 am. The first survivors were picked up at 4:10 am, and the last at
8:30 am.

For the others here that claimed that "people stayed on the ship -
believing it wouldn't sink" - ya, well, when the bow is so low and about
to go under, and you've got maybe an hour to make a crude raft, do you
still think that people on the ship are still thinking that the ship
won't sink???
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-15 15:35:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Attila.Iskander
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have
been lots of wood crates, etc.
The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a
couple of minutes
What part of "finding enough wood or other junk to use as a raft" don't
you understand?
I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the concept
of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during the 3 to 6 hours
that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait until they were picked up
I can't believe that you would think that would work given the fact
that it isn't fact that people were killed by drowning, but rather by
the cold. How is one supposed to get to the floating junk but swim to
it? Even if it was right next to the ship, how do you traverse the space
between the top deck (or any other deck you could get out of) and stuff
in the water? You think you could rappel maybe?
Then if you could get past that hurdle, if you are sitting on a
whole bunch of flotsam and jetsam, how do you keep it from sinking from
just the addition of your weight?
Post by Home Guy
For the others here that claimed that "people stayed on the ship -
believing it wouldn't sink" - ya, well, when the bow is so low and about
to go under, and you've got maybe an hour to make a crude raft, do you
still think that people on the ship are still thinking that the ship
won't sink???
The timelines don't indicate anywhere near enough to time to do that
after it became that apparent.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Home Guy
2012-04-15 16:24:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Ullman
Post by Home Guy
I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the
concept of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during
the 3 to 6 hours that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait
until they were picked up
(put a blank-line between the lines you're quoting and your first reply
line to make your reply more readable)
Post by Kurt Ullman
I can't believe that you would think that would work given the
fact that it isn't fact that people were killed by drowning,
but rather by the cold. How is one supposed to get to the floating
junk but swim to it?
The ship was easing itself slowing into the water bow-first. There was
plenty of opportunity to assemble a crude raft on deck and then ease it
into the water with you sitting on it.

Even if you get wet, as long as you stay above the water you can easily
survive 3 to 6 hours.
Post by Kurt Ullman
Then if you could get past that hurdle, if you are sitting on a
whole bunch of flotsam and jetsam, how do you keep it from
sinking from just the addition of your weight?
That depends on what you can get for your raft. I don't know how much
cork, life-rings, life jackets, maybe even buoys they had on the ship.
Post by Kurt Ullman
The timelines don't indicate anywhere near enough to time
to do that after it became that apparent.
It took what - 2.5 hours between hitting the ice and going under.
Plenty of time to scavange the ship if you KNOW that you're not getting
into a life boat.

And the lights stayed on until about the last 2 minutes.
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-17 14:45:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Kurt Ullman
Post by Home Guy
I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the
concept of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during
the 3 to 6 hours that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait
until they were picked up
(put a blank-line between the lines you're quoting and your first reply
line to make your reply more readable)
Post by Kurt Ullman
I can't believe that you would think that would work given the
fact that it isn't fact that people were killed by drowning,
but rather by the cold. How is one supposed to get to the floating
junk but swim to it?
The ship was easing itself slowing into the water bow-first. There was
plenty of opportunity to assemble a crude raft on deck and then ease it
into the water with you sitting on it.
Even if you get wet, as long as you stay above the water you can easily
survive 3 to 6 hours.
Post by Kurt Ullman
Then if you could get past that hurdle, if you are sitting on a
whole bunch of flotsam and jetsam, how do you keep it from
sinking from just the addition of your weight?
That depends on what you can get for your raft. I don't know how much
cork, life-rings, life jackets, maybe even buoys they had on the ship.
Post by Kurt Ullman
The timelines don't indicate anywhere near enough to time
to do that after it became that apparent.
It took what - 2.5 hours between hitting the ice and going under.
Plenty of time to scavange the ship if you KNOW that you're not getting
into a life boat.
And the lights stayed on until about the last 2 minutes.
Always easy to be a Monday-Morning Quarterback.
t***@optonline.net
2012-04-17 15:41:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Kurt Ullman
Post by Home Guy
I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the
concept of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during
the 3 to 6 hours that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait
until they were picked up
(put a blank-line between the lines you're quoting and your first reply
line to make your reply more readable)
Post by Kurt Ullman
I can't believe that you would think that would work given the
fact that it isn't fact that people were killed by drowning,
but rather by the cold.  How is one supposed to get to the floating
junk but swim to it?
The ship was easing itself slowing into the water bow-first.  There was
plenty of opportunity to assemble a crude raft on deck and then ease it
into the water with you sitting on it.
Even if you get wet, as long as you stay above the water you can easily
survive 3 to 6 hours.
Post by Kurt Ullman
Then if you could get past that hurdle, if you are sitting on a
whole bunch of flotsam and jetsam, how do you keep it from
sinking from just the addition of your weight?
That depends on what you can get for your raft.  I don't know how much
cork, life-rings, life jackets, maybe even buoys they had on the ship.
Post by Kurt Ullman
The timelines don't indicate anywhere near enough to time
to do that after it became that apparent.
It took what - 2.5 hours between hitting the ice and going under.
Plenty of time to scavange the ship if you KNOW that you're not getting
into a life boat.
And the lights stayed on until about the last 2 minutes.
Always easy to be a Monday-Morning Quarterback.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Geeez, if HG wants to play the coulda, woulda, shoulda,
game, long before building life rafts, they could have
just made sure all the life boats were filled to capacity or
beyond. Most went off only partially full, nowhere near
capacity. That would have saved hundreds of lives for
sure.

Even if you did have some kind of personal life raft
made out of whatever you could find, just a little
bit of thought would suggest that getting it into the
water with you would have been another story.
Before the boat sinks, it's 50ft or more from the
deck to the water. With the boat going under, you
would think that with all the debris being kicked around,
water turbulence, etc, launching would be problematic.
How do we know that some people didn't try that
but it didn't work?
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-17 14:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Attila.Iskander
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have
been lots of wood crates, etc.
The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a
couple of minutes
What part of "finding enough wood or other junk to use as a raft" don't
you understand?
Unless you stay warm AND DRY, which is very hard to do on ANY kind of raft,
your odds of survival are low.
Post by Home Guy
I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the concept
of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during the 3 to 6 hours
that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait until they were picked up.
The problem is not to be sitting, it's how you get to be sitting without
being immersed or soaked in arctic waters.
Post by Home Guy
The Titanic hit the iceberg at 11:40 pm, and the stern went under at
2:20 am. The first survivors were picked up at 4:10 am, and the last at
8:30 am.
That's nice.
But not really relevant.
Many that made it into the boats, didn't survive those few hours.
How do you think that people sitting soaking wet on a raft would do ?
Post by Home Guy
For the others here that claimed that "people stayed on the ship -
believing it wouldn't sink" - ya, well, when the bow is so low and about
to go under, and you've got maybe an hour to make a crude raft, do you
still think that people on the ship are still thinking that the ship
won't sink???
George
2012-04-14 17:11:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
The comment did come from someone who lives in fantasy land...
Steve Barker
2012-04-14 18:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
there was plenty of stuff to grab onto not to mention they had on life
vests. The main problem was the 29 degree water. A person only last a
few min at that temp even if they are in good shape.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
gonjah
2012-04-14 18:22:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. ;) Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?

There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.

One idea was to tie all the deck chairs together.
MarkK
2012-04-14 18:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.
It is difficult to second guess...

One possible solution might have been to remain close to the iceberg, and
find a way to climb aboard the iceberg. I imagine that is not easy but
might be the best alternative. It was the only thing for miles around
floating.

It's a real shame that the wireless (radio) safety rules were not in effect,
there were other ships in the area but their radios were off for the night.

Mark
harry
2012-04-15 05:34:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers  were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. ;) Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?
There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.
That was what happened on the Costa Concordia too.
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-15 12:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Ed Pawlowski
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.
If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. ;) Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?
I think the main concern was time to get all that done,
especially since it would have taken time to decide that you weren't
going to get in the lifeboats.
The REAL problem of all those scenarios is, even assuming you can
get it out, lug to the main deck and get it launched, how do you then
get down to it without getting wet?
Post by gonjah
One idea was to tie all the deck chairs together.
See above (g)
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 16:35:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Post by Home Guy
Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
Home Guy
2012-04-14 16:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or objects to
make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.

Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 18:58:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or objects to
make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
Home Guy
2012-04-14 20:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.

You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
gonjah
2012-04-14 20:15:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:25:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
gonjah
2012-04-14 20:38:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:41:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
Why? We already have you two. Isn't that enough to turn anyone's stomach?
gonjah
2012-04-14 20:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
Why? We already have you two. Isn't that enough to turn anyone's stomach?
Apparently, actually reading something before you comment is an option
for you.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:49:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
Why? We already have you two. Isn't that enough to turn anyone's stomach?
Apparently, actually reading something before you comment is an option
for you.
I read what you wrote. I have no interest in climbing through any of your
links to who knows where.
gonjah
2012-04-14 20:56:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
Why? We already have you two. Isn't that enough to turn anyone's stomach?
Apparently, actually reading something before you comment is an option
for you.
I read what you wrote. I have no interest in climbing through any of your
links to who knows where.
Where is that............<plonk>
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:58:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Where's the "like" button. ;)
Two peas; no brains.
http://www.wikihow.com/Take-a-Joke
Why? We already have you two. Isn't that enough to turn anyone's stomach?
Apparently, actually reading something before you comment is an option
for you.
I read what you wrote. I have no interest in climbing through any of your
links to who knows where.
Where is that............<plonk>
Oh, the poor baby announced to the world that he plonked me. I'm *so* sad!
<what a dumbass>
Oren
2012-04-14 21:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Where is that............<plonk>
Oh, the poor baby announced to the world that he plonked me. I'm *so* sad!
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 21:19:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Where is that............<plonk>
Oh, the poor baby announced to the world that he plonked me. I'm *so* sad!
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
Certainly; moron lefty.
gonjah
2012-04-14 21:22:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Where is that............<plonk>
Oh, the poor baby announced to the world that he plonked me. I'm *so* sad!
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
I now-have five people in my kf. He should feel honored.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 22:22:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Where is that............<plonk>
Oh, the poor baby announced to the world that he plonked me. I'm *so* sad!
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
I now-have five people in my kf. He should feel honored.
Oh, I am! Only a two-year-old announces that he's ignoring someone, though.
Oren
2012-04-15 01:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
I now-have five people in my kf. He should feel honored.
Oh, I am! Only a two-year-old announces that he's ignoring someone, though.
People that live in Texas, after moving from Ohio, can be a strange
bunch. I don't even live in Texas! Mormons make public announcements.
I saw it happen right here.
gonjah
2012-04-15 02:02:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
I now-have five people in my kf. He should feel honored.
Oh, I am! Only a two-year-old announces that he's ignoring someone, though.
People that live in Texas, after moving from Ohio, can be a strange
bunch. I don't even live in Texas! Mormons make public announcements.
I saw it happen right here.
Tell your boyfriend that I'm ignoring this sub-thread to so if he wants
to continue this childish obsession with me he'll have to start a new one.

And now for something completely stupid ----->
Oren
2012-04-15 03:01:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
People that live in Texas, after moving from Ohio, can be a strange
bunch. I don't even live in Texas! Mormons make public announcements.
I saw it happen right here.
Tell your boyfriend that I'm ignoring this sub-thread to so if he wants
to continue this childish obsession with me he'll have to start a new one.
See how you are? See how people understand liberals change the subject
when the alligators get deep into the pond?

Liberals always change to present words, it may be forgotten.

Example: Liberals no longer say "spending". Now they, and POUTUS call
it "investment".

Do you have a "bromance" with a male friend?

Tell the man himself. I'm not your proxy; nor, can I speak for you.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-15 04:36:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
A Plonkasuarus got me the other day. Was your's a Mormon or a Liberal?
I now-have five people in my kf. He should feel honored.
Oh, I am! Only a two-year-old announces that he's ignoring someone, though.
People that live in Texas, after moving from Ohio, can be a strange
bunch. I don't even live in Texas! Mormons make public announcements.
I saw it happen right here.
Tell your boyfriend that I'm ignoring this sub-thread to so if he wants
to continue this childish obsession with me he'll have to start a new one.
You're supposed to be ignoring me moron, not talking through others. More
two0year-old tactics. Next time hum while you have your fingers in your ears
(and head up your ass).
Post by gonjah
And now for something completely stupid ----->
You certainly have that down pat.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:25:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.
LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.
Post by Home Guy
Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...
No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.
LOL yourself.
You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.
Yet all 1500 used your idea to survive. You are really that stupid,
HomeMoron.
Jules Richardson
2012-04-15 16:56:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.
Post by harry
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the water;
it would have been extremely difficult to launch anything and end up on
top of it without getting soaked in the process, and then odds are pretty
good that hypothermia will get you before someone rescues you.
Home Guy
2012-04-15 18:24:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in
April?
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
Post by Jules Richardson
Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the water;
If the boat is on an even keel.

I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-15 20:54:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
Rafts *don't* stay above the water. Wood will only "float" about 10% of its
weight. If you can't displace water you're not going to stay dry. ...but I
wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, even after many have tried to
explain it to you.
Post by Home Guy
Post by Jules Richardson
Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the water;
If the boat is on an even keel.
I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.
Those in the life boats didn't think it was very "easy".

It's truly amazing that you always have all the answers but none who were
actually there did. <what a bozo>
Oren
2012-04-15 22:05:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
Rafts *don't* stay above the water. Wood will only "float" about 10% of its
weight. If you can't displace water you're not going to stay dry. ...but I
wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, even after many have tried to
explain it to you.
Seems he never built a raft as a youngster. Deprived of all the fun?
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-17 15:05:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
Rafts *don't* stay above the water. Wood will only "float" about 10% of its
weight. If you can't displace water you're not going to stay dry. ...but I
wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, even after many have tried to
explain it to you.
Seems he never built a raft as a youngster. Deprived of all the fun?
That is rather obvious.
I think that building and floating a raft should be part of the experience
package of every boy and girl .
It's not only fun, but highly educational.
gonjah
2012-04-17 17:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Attila.Iskander
Post by Oren
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
Rafts *don't* stay above the water. Wood will only "float" about 10% of its
weight. If you can't displace water you're not going to stay dry.
...but I
wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, even after many have tried to
explain it to you.
Seems he never built a raft as a youngster. Deprived of all the fun?
That is rather obvious.
I think that building and floating a raft should be part of the
experience package of every boy and girl .
It's not only fun, but highly educational.
Coming from the desert <NM>, it wasn't part of my curriculum. :)
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-17 15:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?
Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!
And how many times do we need to point out that
1) It would be difficult to assemble a raft on a sinking ship
2) It would be difficult to float the raft from a sinking ship
3) It would be near impossible to get the raft away from the sinking
ship, and thus not getting it sucked down WITH the ship
4) It would be nearly impossible to go from ship to raft without getting
soaked. A soaking that would result in hypothermia in minutes, whether you
are in or out of the water
5) Going unprotected into arctic water can case heart failure the moment
you go in.
It will also cause death within less than 10 minutes if you don't
have special gear to keep you warm (gear that did not even exist at the time
of the titanic)
Post by Home Guy
Post by Jules Richardson
Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the water;
If the boat is on an even keel.
I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.
And the part were the boat is sliding under the water a t increasing speed,
is a place where there is so much suction that just about anything within
reach will go under WITH the boat, people and UNMANEUVERABLE rafts included.

There is a huge gap between your ignorant theories and reality.
Oren
2012-04-14 16:39:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
"...At 2.20 am, it sank, breaking loose from the bow section. The
remaining passengers and crew were plunged into lethally cold water
with a temperature of only 28 °F (-2 °C). Almost all of those in the
water died of hypothermia or cardiac arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Home Guy
2012-04-14 16:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"
A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?

They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-14 17:27:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
They must have used several forests worth of wood.
Last I heard, wood floats...
But you need to not only float but to stay out of the water. How
would you go about doing that? Besides, it sank within 3 hours (~2:45
IIRC). Who would you pull off of manning lifeboats to get all this
stuff? How would you move it from the hold, especially with many of the
decks already flooded? How is all this supposed to happen in the small
time frame?
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Oren
2012-04-14 19:04:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Home Guy
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"
A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?
Only in the movie.
Post by Home Guy
They must have used several forests worth of wood.
Last I heard, wood floats...
Some wood floats better than others.

Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?

Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?

You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.
gonjah
2012-04-14 19:11:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by Home Guy
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"
A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?
Only in the movie.
I saw parts of it at the Titanic exhibit.
Post by Oren
Post by Home Guy
They must have used several forests worth of wood.
Last I heard, wood floats...
Some wood floats better than others.
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
The sea that night was dead calm.
Post by Oren
Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?
You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.
True enough but there was lots of material to make quick floatation
devices (and filling the life boats would have helped immensely) :)
Oren
2012-04-14 20:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
The sea that night was dead calm.
Define "dead calm".

An 8 foot sea swell is calmer than a 25 footer.
gonjah
2012-04-14 21:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
The sea that night was dead calm.
Define "dead calm".
An 8 foot sea swell is calmer than a 25 footer.
<g> I'm not an expert. I'm a landlubber.

Much calmer than when I went on my cruise to Nassau and half the ship
was sick.

I'll admit I'm going on what little I know about the incident but maybe
"very calm" would be more accurate.
HeyBub
2012-04-15 09:22:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
The sea that night was dead calm.
Define "dead calm".
An 8 foot sea swell is calmer than a 25 footer.
"Dead Calm: A condition of no wind or a wind with a speed of less than 1
knot (1.15 miles per hour; 1.9 kilometers per hour), according to the
Beaufort scale."
Steve Barker
2012-04-15 15:17:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by gonjah
Post by Oren
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
The sea that night was dead calm.
Define "dead calm".
An 8 foot sea swell is calmer than a 25 footer.
a "dead calm" is like a glass plate. it was the reason they didn't see
the iceburg in time. Because there were no waves breaking against it.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-14 20:28:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by Home Guy
Post by Home Guy
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"
A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?
Only in the movie.
Post by Home Guy
They must have used several forests worth of wood.
Last I heard, wood floats...
Some wood floats better than others.
None floats very well. To survive in that environment one has to stay *dry*.
Post by Oren
Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?
Floating on a pile of garbage?
Post by Oren
Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?
You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.
...and sail it in the N. Atlantic in April. ...but that's a Canuckistani, for
ya, eh?
Oren
2012-04-14 21:05:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Post by Oren
You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.
...and sail it in the N. Atlantic in April. ...but that's a Canuckistani, for
ya, eh?
Eh!
HeyBub
2012-04-14 15:10:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Eighty-five percent of the women and children survived; seventy-five percent
of the men were lost.

It was a different time.
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-15 13:55:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Good British quality construction
harry
2012-04-15 17:23:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Attila.Iskander
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers  were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Good British quality construction
There were three identical ships. One struck a mine in WW1 and sank.
The other was scrapped 50 yars later.

Amazingly, a survivor of the Titanic was on the Britannic when it
sank. (Survived again.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop


Never heard of the "SS San Franciso" then?
American ship built in New York sunk on maiden voyage in the same part
of the ocean without even hitting anything.

http://www.maritimeheritage.org/ships/ssSanFrancisco.htm

It too was supposed to be unsinkable.
A gripping story of incompetence.
Frank
2012-04-15 17:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Many stories have come to us from the tragic sinking of the great
ship The Titanic...some are not as well known as others.

Most people don't know that back in 1912, Hellman's mayonnaise was
manufactured in England. In fact, the "Titanic" was carrying 12,000
jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico which
was to be the next port of call for the great ship after New York. To
date the largest shipment ever exported to Mexico.

The people of Mexico, who were crazy about the stuff, were eagerly
awaiting delivery and were disconsolate at the loss.

So much so thatthey declared a National Day of mourning which they still
observe today. It is known, of course, as Sinko de Mayo.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-15 17:52:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
Many stories have come to us from the tragic sinking of the great
ship The Titanic...some are not as well known as others.
Most people don't know that back in 1912, Hellman's mayonnaise was
manufactured in England. In fact, the "Titanic" was carrying 12,000
jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico which
was to be the next port of call for the great ship after New York. To
date the largest shipment ever exported to Mexico.
The people of Mexico, who were crazy about the stuff, were eagerly
awaiting delivery and were disconsolate at the loss.
So much so thatthey declared a National Day of mourning which they still
observe today. It is known, of course, as Sinko de Mayo.
It took 20 days for the news to reach Mexico? Incredible!
Man-wai Chang
2012-04-15 17:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
... because there were not enough escape pods!
--
@~@ You have the right to remain silent.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
Caesar Romano
2012-04-15 22:07:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 01:51:41 +0800, Man-wai Chang
Post by Man-wai Chang
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
... because there were not enough escape pods!
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.

After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were
still on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or
"J. Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to
a white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
ship. The writer Ben Hecht, then a young newspaperman in Chicago,
wrote a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and
Ismay. The final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face
of death on the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the
mob, is an owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.
Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-16 02:12:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Caesar Romano
Post by Man-wai Chang
... because there were not enough escape pods!
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.
After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were
still on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or
"J. Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to
a white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
ship. The writer Ben Hecht, then a young newspaperman in Chicago,
wrote a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and
Ismay. The final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face
of death on the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the
mob, is an owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
Not knowing the exact circumstances, he may or may not have done the
right thing by getting off the ship. As a businessman, he may have
save lives by getting the hell out of the way and letting the heroic
crew do their jobs without his hindrance.

What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.

"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed
by the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."

May have been legal, but it certainly was not the right thing to do.
The laws and thought process were certainly different in 1912, not
just for ships, but for industry in all forms.
HeyBub
2012-04-16 11:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed
by the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
May have been legal, but it certainly was not the right thing to do.
The laws and thought process were certainly different in 1912, not
just for ships, but for industry in all forms.
The Board of Trade required standard was "16 lifeboats for vessels of 10,000
tons or greater."

The Titantic was FIVE TIMES larger than the maximum on the list. The Board
of Trade SHOULD have specified EIGHTY lifeboats for a ship Titantic's size.
bob haller
2012-04-16 13:37:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by HeyBub
Post by Ed Pawlowski
What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed
by the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
May have been legal, but it certainly was not the right thing to do.
The laws and thought process were certainly different in 1912, not
just for ships, but for industry in all forms.
The Board of Trade required standard was "16 lifeboats for vessels of 10,000
tons or greater."
The Titantic was FIVE TIMES larger than the maximum on the list. The Board
of Trade SHOULD have specified EIGHTY lifeboats for a ship Titantic's size.
back then safety glasses, car seatbelts and tons of other safety
devices were unheard of.

besides they thought the ship was unsinkable
gonjah
2012-04-16 13:45:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob haller
Post by HeyBub
Post by Ed Pawlowski
What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed
by the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
May have been legal, but it certainly was not the right thing to do.
The laws and thought process were certainly different in 1912, not
just for ships, but for industry in all forms.
The Board of Trade required standard was "16 lifeboats for vessels of 10,000
tons or greater."
The Titantic was FIVE TIMES larger than the maximum on the list. The Board
of Trade SHOULD have specified EIGHTY lifeboats for a ship Titantic's size.
back then safety glasses, car seatbelts and tons of other safety
devices were unheard of.
My dad was a cop and later a car insurance adjuster. The stories he
could tell. I used to go to the salvage yards with him. Gruesome.
Attila.Iskander
2012-04-17 16:50:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob haller
Post by HeyBub
Post by Ed Pawlowski
What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed
by the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
May have been legal, but it certainly was not the right thing to do.
The laws and thought process were certainly different in 1912, not
just for ships, but for industry in all forms.
The Board of Trade required standard was "16 lifeboats for vessels of 10,000
tons or greater."
The Titantic was FIVE TIMES larger than the maximum on the list. The Board
of Trade SHOULD have specified EIGHTY lifeboats for a ship Titantic's size.
back then safety glasses, car seatbelts and tons of other safety
devices were unheard of.
My dad was a cop and later a car insurance adjuster. The stories he could
tell. I used to go to the salvage yards with him. Gruesome.
A while back, I came across a web site showing photos taken during the
heyday of photo-journalism. It was a site referencing that iconic camera
(don't remember it's name) that was used. The boxy one with the wire frame
viewfinder and flashbulb holder, that was often seen in movies of the 30s to
50s before the single-lens reflex cameras took over.
It was also from the time that newspapers had no problems showing dead
bodies lying on the floor bleeding out, or hanging out of windshields and
door frames of crashed cars.
It had a whole slew of pictures of car wrecks with and without bodies.
Quite unsettling, even for an ex firefighter-EMT who had seen far more than
his share of serious car wrecks.
HeyBub
2012-04-16 21:27:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob haller
Post by HeyBub
The Board of Trade required standard was "16 lifeboats for vessels
of 10,000 tons or greater."
The Titantic was FIVE TIMES larger than the maximum on the list. The
Board of Trade SHOULD have specified EIGHTY lifeboats for a ship
Titantic's size.
back then safety glasses, car seatbelts and tons of other safety
devices were unheard of.
besides they thought the ship was unsinkable
Well, there you are. Safety glasses, seatbelts, and the like wouldn't have
done the Titantic passengers one sliver of good.

In retrospect, the crew COULD have over-loaded the lifeboats. On a calm sea,
surely you wouldn't need the same freeboard as in 12-foot swells.
Particularily since the crew knew, or should have known, that help was only
a few hours away.

The RMS Carpathia acknowledged Titantic's distress call at 12:11 a.m. and
made maximum speed (17 knots) from 58 miles distance. The captain of the
Carpathia rousted a second black gang to stoke his boilers and turned off
all heating and hot water on the ship to conserve steam. The Titanic sank at
2:20 am. The Carpathia arrived on the scene at 4:00 a.m., one hour and forty
minutes too late.
Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-17 02:57:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by HeyBub
In retrospect, the crew COULD have over-loaded the lifeboats. On a calm sea,
surely you wouldn't need the same freeboard as in 12-foot swells.
Particularily since the crew knew, or should have known, that help was only
a few hours away.
In a practiced situation there would have been a lot of things done
differently. There was probably no lifeboat drill like you have today
(even that regulation was changed just a few months ago due to the
Concordia). It was the first time for the crew on the ship and some
confusion and panic on what to do with the boats.
Post by HeyBub
The RMS Carpathia acknowledged Titantic's distress call at 12:11 a.m. and
made maximum speed (17 knots) from 58 miles distance. The captain of the
Carpathia rousted a second black gang to stoke his boilers and turned off
all heating and hot water on the ship to conserve steam. The Titanic sank at
2:20 am. The Carpathia arrived on the scene at 4:00 a.m., one hour and forty
minutes too late.
The California was even closer, but the Marconi operators on the
Titanic told the Marconi operator on that ship to STFU as he was
interfering with their transmission. He shut down for the night after
issuing a warning just before the Titanic hit the berg. Today, that
would not happen that way, there would be radio contact.
Oren
2012-04-17 03:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
In a practiced situation there would have been a lot of things done
differently. There was probably no lifeboat drill like you have today
(even that regulation was changed just a few months ago due to the
Concordia).
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel. You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts. A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin. You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.

...just sayin'
harry
2012-04-17 06:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by Ed Pawlowski
In a practiced situation there would have been a lot of things done
differently.  There was probably no lifeboat drill like you have today
(even that regulation was changed just a few months ago due to the
Concordia).
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel.  You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts.  A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin.  You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
...just sayin'
Same old problem. No-one believed the ship was sinking until it was
too late.
Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-17 09:54:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel. You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts. A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin. You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
...just sayin'
On the Concordia, there was no drill yet. It was scheduled for the
NEXT day. That is no longer allowed and must be done the same day.

Cruises don't interest me so I have no first hand experience.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-04-17 17:31:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Oren
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel. You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts. A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin. You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
...just sayin'
On the Concordia, there was no drill yet. It was scheduled for the
NEXT day. That is no longer allowed and must be done the same day.
Why don't they just wait until they get back?
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Cruises don't interest me so I have no first hand experience.
Fake ID
2012-04-18 06:41:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Oren
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel. You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts. A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin. You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
...just sayin'
On the Concordia, there was no drill yet. It was scheduled for the
NEXT day. That is no longer allowed and must be done the same day.
Their schedule made more sense given that the ship sailed a continuous
loop and passengers would join and leave at different ports from one
another.

OT:
I wonder what on the Titanic would float. Empty wine barrels? Hot air
baloon?

m
t***@optonline.net
2012-04-18 12:59:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fake ID
Post by Oren
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel.  You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts.  A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin.  You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
...just sayin'
On the Concordia, there was no drill yet.  It was scheduled for the
NEXT day.  That is no longer allowed and must be done the same day.
Their schedule made more sense given that the ship sailed a continuous
loop and passengers would join and leave at different ports from one
another.
I wonder what on the Titanic would float.  Empty wine barrels?  Hot air
baloon?
m
First thought would be wood dining tables, doors, wood chairs....
But launching it, not having it swept away by the turbulence from
the sinking boat, are problematic. How about all the debris from
the boat falling and churning in the water that could strike you?
And as someone else
pointed out, if you wound up in that water, you would only have
a few minutes at best where you could still function. And even
then, if you're soaked with that freezing water and clinging to
the top of a makeshift raft, I'm not sure how long the survival
time is either.
Stormin Mormon
2012-04-18 13:14:48 UTC
Permalink
I wonder if it's possible to recover the Titanic, and get it working again?
Some giant air bags to float it off the bottom, and then tug boats to get it
closer to shore. It would be a massive expense, but it would be interesting
just the same.

I think a movie was made, about that. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081400/

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
harry
2012-04-18 14:19:23 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 18, 2:14 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
I wonder if it's possible to recover the Titanic, and get it working again?
Some giant air bags to float it off the bottom, and then tug boats to get it
closer to shore. It would be a massive expense, but it would be interesting
just the same.
I think a movie was made, about that.  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081400/
Hollywoodcrap. The hull is broken in two and is pretty well lrusted
up.
Jules Richardson
2012-04-18 15:25:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stormin Mormon
I think a movie was made, about that.  http://www.imdb.com/title/
tt0081400/
Hollywoodcrap. The hull is broken in two and is pretty well lrusted up.
Not to mention that the stern section hit the sea bed props-first at a
high speed, with most of the deck and hull plating peeling off.

As it happens, I've got a copy of the book of Raise the Titanic in the
van which I got from a junk store a couple of months ago, having spotted
it and remembered seeing the movie when I was a kid - I hadn't even
realized then that the 100yr anniversary was coming up. The wreck wasn't
discovered[1] until five years after the movie (and eight years after the
book), so I suppose the movie makers can be forgiven a bit of Hollywood
fantasy :-)

[1] unless you buy into the potential discovery by the Royal Navy in
1977, but I think the exact details of that aren't due to be declassified
for a few decades...

cheers

Jules
Stormin Mormon
2012-04-18 16:26:37 UTC
Permalink
IIRC, the ship sank after iceberg tore open four sections of compartment.
So, there was that damage plus any subsequent damage. Might not be possible
to raise the wreck in one piece. IIRC, the stern sank first, due to weight
of the engines.

It's a fun idea, to consider raising the wreck, and see what can be found.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Jules Richardson" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:jmmme5$8jq$***@dont-email.me...

Not to mention that the stern section hit the sea bed props-first at a
high speed, with most of the deck and hull plating peeling off.

As it happens, I've got a copy of the book of Raise the Titanic in the
van which I got from a junk store a couple of months ago, having spotted
it and remembered seeing the movie when I was a kid - I hadn't even
realized then that the 100yr anniversary was coming up. The wreck wasn't
discovered[1] until five years after the movie (and eight years after the
book), so I suppose the movie makers can be forgiven a bit of Hollywood
fantasy :-)

[1] unless you buy into the potential discovery by the Royal Navy in
1977, but I think the exact details of that aren't due to be declassified
for a few decades...

cheers

Jules
Ron
2012-04-18 17:04:43 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 18, 12:26 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
IIRC, the ship sank after iceberg tore open four sections of compartment.
So, there was that damage plus any subsequent damage. Might not be possible
to raise the wreck in one piece. IIRC, the stern sank first, due to weight
of the engines.

Ed Pawlowski
2012-04-18 21:57:23 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:26:37 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
IIRC, the ship sank after iceberg tore open four sections of compartment.
So, there was that damage plus any subsequent damage. Might not be possible
to raise the wreck in one piece. IIRC, the stern sank first, due to weight
of the engines.
It's a fun idea, to consider raising the wreck, and see what can be found.
It is in hundreds of pieces, but mainly, it is split in half. If you
get National Geographic channel, there is a good 2 hour show with
James Cameron. No way that is coming up from 12,000 feet down.
Oren
2012-04-18 22:17:20 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:25:57 +0000 (UTC), Jules Richardson
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by Stormin Mormon
Hollywoodcrap. The hull is broken in two and is pretty well lrusted up.
Not to mention that the stern section hit the sea bed props-first at a
high speed, with most of the deck and hull plating peeling off.
There was a History or Discovery show about Metallurgy?

Steel made in those days were not the quality as we now know. We can
X-ray now for weak spots. The ship's metal hull, with faults and
warts, are said to be a partial reason the ship broke in parts as it
did.

I forget what show I watch, but it was interesting.
Jules Richardson
2012-04-18 22:47:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:25:57 +0000 (UTC), Jules Richardson
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by Stormin Mormon
Hollywoodcrap. The hull is broken in two and is pretty well lrusted up.
Not to mention that the stern section hit the sea bed props-first at a
high speed, with most of the deck and hull plating peeling off.
There was a History or Discovery show about Metallurgy?
Steel made in those days were not the quality as we now know. We can
X-ray now for weak spots. The ship's metal hull, with faults and warts,
are said to be a partial reason the ship broke in parts as it did.
Interesting. I think the last I'd heard - and this is going back a few
years - the steel hull plates were deemed good enough for the job, but
there was a question hanging over the quality of the rivets used to hold
them together (my hazy memory says that it was typical practice to use a
better quality for certain sections, but someone at Harland and Wolff had
decided to use the lower quality rivets that were used on less-critical
parts of the ship as a way of saving money).

The theory at the time was that the rivets had popped when the berg was
struck, creating a far bigger hole than might otherwise have occurred.
I'm not sure what analysis has been done on the actual wreck since to
prove or disprove this, though...

As for the breaking in two, when the bow went under the rear third or so
of the ship lifted out of the water, creating far more strain on the
structure than it was ever designed for - it's not surprising that it
tore apart.

cheers

Jules
HeyBub
2012-04-18 23:05:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jules Richardson
As it happens, I've got a copy of the book of Raise the Titanic in the
van which I got from a junk store a couple of months ago, having
spotted it and remembered seeing the movie when I was a kid - I
hadn't even realized then that the 100yr anniversary was coming up.
The wreck wasn't discovered[1] until five years after the movie (and
eight years after the book), so I suppose the movie makers can be
forgiven a bit of Hollywood fantasy :-)
Heh!

When you read the book, you'll discover that getting the ship to the surface
was the LEAST of the problems the protagonists faced. There were Russian
spies and saboteurs, the minining of extremely rare ores just a little bit
before the launch of the Titanic (these ores were part of the cargo), and so
on.

Sjouke Burry
2012-04-18 18:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
On Apr 18, 2:14 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
I wonder if it's possible to recover the Titanic, and get it working
agai
n?
Post by Stormin Mormon
Some giant air bags to float it off the bottom, and then tug boats to
get
it
Post by Stormin Mormon
closer to shore. It would be a massive expense, but it would be
interesti
ng
Post by Stormin Mormon
just the same.
I think a movie was made, about that.
 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081
400/
Hollywoodcrap. The hull is broken in two and is pretty well lrusted
up.
Not to mention, the airbag at that depth contains probably only
liquid air, and wont lift anything at all.
Kurt Ullman
2012-04-17 11:50:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oren
Post by Ed Pawlowski
In a practiced situation there would have been a lot of things done
differently. There was probably no lifeboat drill like you have today
(even that regulation was changed just a few months ago due to the
Concordia).
The drill may be new for that company, but cruises (5) I've been on in
the past 12 years have a lifeboat drill shortly after sailing outside
the port channel. You have some snacks while the luggage is delivered
and then the drill starts. A mandatory drill. Passengers are not
released until every passenger is present. and accounted for. You
bring your life floatation device with you from the cabin. You have
an assigned deck assembly area, specific to the lifeboat.
I haven't been on a cruise yet (both in the US and in Europe) where
the drill wasn't completed before departure. Usually about 30 minutes
or so before so we could have it, go back to the cabin, dump off our
life preserver, and still have time for a couple of beers before the
band started up on the pool deck.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Jules Richardson
2012-04-17 12:54:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob haller
besides they thought the ship was unsinkable
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Legends_and_myths_regarding_RMS_Titanic#Unsinkable
Jules Richardson
2012-04-16 20:46:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Caesar Romano
Post by Man-wai Chang
... because there were not enough escape pods!
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.
After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were still
on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or "J.
Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to a
white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and Ismay. The
final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face of death on
the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the mob, is an
owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
Not knowing the exact circumstances, he may or may not have done the
right thing by getting off the ship. As a businessman, he may have save
lives by getting the hell out of the way and letting the heroic crew do
their jobs without his hindrance.
What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed by
the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
Hmm, didn't the Olympic (Titanic's sister[1] ship) have a similar
(possibly identical) number of lifeboats? As far as I know, nobody kicked
up a stink then; people weren't particularly worried about it until after
Titanic went down.

[1] IIRC, some of the "Titanic" footage from newsreels and the like
immediately after the Titanic disaster is actually of Olympic; the ships
appeared more or less identical.

cheers

Jules
harry
2012-04-17 06:18:22 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 16, 9:46 pm, Jules Richardson
Post by Jules Richardson
Post by Ed Pawlowski
Post by Man-wai Chang
... because there were not enough escape pods!
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay.  He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.
After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were still
on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or "J.
Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to a
white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and Ismay. The
final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face of death on
the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the mob, is an
owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
Not knowing the exact circumstances, he may or may not have done the
right thing by getting off the ship.  As a businessman, he may have save
lives by getting the hell out of the way and letting the heroic crew do
their jobs without his hindrance.
 What he was guilty of was reducing the number of lifeboats.
"To accommodate the luxurious features Ismay ordered the number of
lifeboats reduced from 48 to 16, the latter being the minimum allowed by
the Board of Trade, based on the Titanic's projected tonnage."
Hmm, didn't the Olympic (Titanic's sister[1] ship) have a similar
(possibly identical) number of lifeboats? As far as I know, nobody kicked
up a stink then; people weren't particularly worried about it until after
Titanic went down.
[1] IIRC, some of the "Titanic" footage from newsreels and the like
immediately after the Titanic disaster is actually of Olympic; the ships
appeared more or less identical.
cheers
Jules- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
When theTitanic sank,all sailings were suspended on the sister ship.
No-one would have got on anyway.
Extra lifeboats were added and the bulkhead heights increased and
other rmodifications.

However when the Britannic (even more modified) struck a mine off the
shore of Turkey, it sank even faster than the Titanic. It was a
hospital ship so there were casualties again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMHS_Britannic
RobertPatrick
2012-04-16 02:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Caesar Romano
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 01:51:41 +0800, Man-wai Chang
Post by Man-wai Chang
Post by harry
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic#100th_anniversary_commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.
... because there were not enough escape pods!
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.
After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were
still on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or
"J. Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to
a white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
ship. The writer Ben Hecht, then a young newspaperman in Chicago,
wrote a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and
Ismay. The final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face
of death on the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the
mob, is an owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
hmmm, there is a different version here.
http://jack-h-schick.wrytestuff.com/swa828612-The-Coward-Of-The-Titanic-J-
Bruce-Ismay-I-Saw-It-In-The-Movie.htm

or

http://preview.tinyurl.com/7ulugg2

Seems that Hearst hated him. Hearst published that Ismay was at fault.
Man-wai Chang
2012-04-16 09:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Caesar Romano
But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.
After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were
still on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or
Same reason why people invested in Lehman Brothers? :)
--
@~@ You have the right to remain silent.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
/( _ )\ (Fedora 15 i686) Linux 3.3.2
^ ^ 17:17:01 up 12:15 0 users load average: 0.17 0.17 0.11
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...