Titanic "tourist" submarine

[JFK-1]

I thought it was significant that one guy who went down mentioned loud gunshot like cracking sounds every few minutes. Now i'm no engineer nor materials expert, but that noise has to be the body of the hull being contracted, right?

And such a sound sharp as he describes it cannot be anything but internal flaws developing in the material, cracks. I don't know if that guy went back down, I wouldn't have. And I would never have gone down in a craft made of that material again.

Plus given it wasn't even the optimal shape, a sphere is the optimal shape, I think this was a disaster waiting to happen. I think experienced people in the industry knew it, and this Stockton Rush guy had to know that if a disaster isn't exactly certain, it's likely, at best.

I don't know if his mindset was as suicidal and even malevolent as they think it might have been, given the opinion of people who knew a lot more than he did it was beyond negligent.   

[JFK-1]

On 30/07/2023 at 10:59, Maple Leaf said:

I'll wait for all the facts to come out about the Titan before drawing my conclusions about causes of the accident.

 

But I do take exception to the "Titanic was an accident waiting to happen" line.  Titanic had two sister ships, identical in design.  First built was the Olympic, which was launched a year before Titanic, successfully completed it's maiden voyage to New York amid great fanfare, and sailed the oceans without incident until it was scrapped after about 25 years.  Titanic probably would have had a similar career.

 

We all know the circumstances of the Titanic's loss, and human error was the biggest factor. No ship ever built, or ever will be built, is "unsinkable."  It was a foolish thing for anyone to say.

 

The other sister ship, the Britannic, the third of the three, hit a mine and sank in the Aegean Sea in WWI.

 

 

 

Yes they phrased that very poorly. Titanic was a good ship which was run into an iceberg at top speed, any ship would have gone down. They knew there was ice they should have stopped or at least slowed down. The ship was not to blame

 

[tian447]

I was listening to a podcast today which mentioned the Titanic sinking, and they were saying it was entirely down to human error (obviously). But what I didn't know about it, with the ship running at full speed, the lookout crews didn't have binoculars because a crew member had locked them away and not left a key.  The sea conditions being very flat with no moonlight would make it hard to spot Icebergs as they couldn't see the ripples that would usually indicate a large ice presence in the water, made impossible without the tools available to see them. 

 

[JFK-1]

36 minutes ago, tian447 said:

I was listening to a podcast today which mentioned the Titanic sinking, and they were saying it was entirely down to human error (obviously). But what I didn't know about it, with the ship running at full speed, the lookout crews didn't have binoculars because a crew member had locked them away and not left a key.  The sea conditions being very flat with no moonlight would make it hard to spot Icebergs as they couldn't see the ripples that would usually indicate a large ice presence in the water, made impossible without the tools available to see them. 

 

 

 

I think the lookout spotted it still a mile or so away, not enough time to turn away. It's been concluded the ship would probably have survived or at least floated a lot longer if they had hit it head on.

 

It's been said if the captain had been on the bridge he may have decided too close to turn we're going to ram it instead.

[trotter]

On 30/07/2023 at 10:59, Maple Leaf said:

I'll wait for all the facts to come out about the Titan before drawing my conclusions about causes of the accident.

 

But I do take exception to the "Titanic was an accident waiting to happen" line.  Titanic had two sister ships, identical in design.  First built was the Olympic, which was launched a year before Titanic, successfully completed it's maiden voyage to New York amid great fanfare, and sailed the oceans without incident until it was scrapped after about 25 years.  Titanic probably would have had a similar career.

 

We all know the circumstances of the Titanic's loss, and human error was the biggest factor. No ship ever built, or ever will be built, is "unsinkable."  It was a foolish thing for anyone to say.

 

The other sister ship, the Britannic, the third of the three, hit a mine and sank in the Aegean Sea in WWI.

 

 

That's not entirely accurate. She crashed into the HMS Hawke in 1911, although there were no deaths/injuries, she sustained a lot of damage. 

But then in February 1912, she lost a propeller blade on the way back from NYC. To get her back into service as fast as possible, parts and labour were taken from Titanic that was under construction at the time. This delayed Titanic's launch until April 2012, by which time iceberg season was in full effect...

[Bindy Badgy]

6 hours ago, trotter said:

That's not entirely accurate. She crashed into the HMS Hawke in 1911, although there were no deaths/injuries, she sustained a lot of damage. 

But then in February 1912, she lost a propeller blade on the way back from NYC. To get her back into service as fast as possible, parts and labour were taken from Titanic that was under construction at the time. This delayed Titanic's launch until April 2012, by which time iceberg season was in full effect...

 

I think you're out be a hundred years  

[CavySlaveJambo]

15 hours ago, tian447 said:

I was listening to a podcast today which mentioned the Titanic sinking, and they were saying it was entirely down to human error (obviously). But what I didn't know about it, with the ship running at full speed, the lookout crews didn't have binoculars because a crew member had locked them away and not left a key.  The sea conditions being very flat with no moonlight would make it hard to spot Icebergs as they couldn't see the ripples that would usually indicate a large ice presence in the water, made impossible without the tools available to see them. 

 

 

The crew member had accidentally taken the key with them when the crew had been shuffled with the delayed departure. 
Also on the human error front IF the “MSG” prefix had been sent on the final message warning of ice from the SS Californian that night would it have made a difference, that said surely without the “MSG” the radio operator should have informed the bridge. Especially given how close the SS Californian was. 

[trotter]

8 hours ago, Bindy Badgy said:

 

I think you're out be a hundred years  

[Maple Leaf]

17 hours ago, tian447 said:

I was listening to a podcast today which mentioned the Titanic sinking, and they were saying it was entirely down to human error (obviously). But what I didn't know about it, with the ship running at full speed, the lookout crews didn't have binoculars because a crew member had locked them away and not left a key.  The sea conditions being very flat with no moonlight would make it hard to spot Icebergs as they couldn't see the ripples that would usually indicate a large ice presence in the water, made impossible without the tools available to see them. 

 

 

The iceberg would have been very hard to see on a dark, moonless, calm night.  Binoculars probably wouldn't have helped.

 

A searchlight mounted in the bow would definitely have helped, but that's all second-guessing.  No ocean liner had one of those.

[Maple Leaf]

16 hours ago, trotter said:

That's not entirely accurate. She crashed into the HMS Hawke in 1911, although there were no deaths/injuries, she sustained a lot of damage. 

But then in February 1912, she lost a propeller blade on the way back from NYC. To get her back into service as fast as possible, parts and labour were taken from Titanic that was under construction at the time. This delayed Titanic's launch until April 2012, by which time iceberg season was in full effect...

I'm assuming that you're referring to Olympic in that sentence. 

 

Your points are all true enough.  My objection is to the throwaway line that "Titanic was an accident waiting to happen", implying that it was doomed to sink, it just being a matter of time.  That simply isn't true, as the history of the identical Olympic proves.

[tian447]

45 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

The iceberg would have been very hard to see on a dark, moonless, calm night.  Binoculars probably wouldn't have helped.

 

A searchlight mounted in the bow would definitely have helped, but that's all second-guessing.  No ocean liner had one of those.

 

Just a shame Climate Change hadn't started a bit earlier.  Sort those pesky icebergs right out  

 

You'd have thought that a reduced speed in certain parts of the ocean, especially ones that have potentially multiple-million tonne jaggy things for you to smash into, would have been a good idea.  They had been warned multiple times of sea ice, and yet still decided that 22 knots was an appropriate speed to cruise along at.  (However, there is a theory that they were going full speed ahead because they had to, due to a coal storage fire that they had to burn off in the engines to keep under control.  Believe if you want, it's another rabbit hole to disappear down)

 

All in all, the sinking of the Titanic is a tale of cost-cutting, human errors, arrogance, and just plain bad luck.

Edited August 1, 2023 by tian447

[Maple Leaf]

10 minutes ago, tian447 said:

 

Just a shame Climate Change hadn't started a bit earlier.  Sort those pesky icebergs right out  

 

You'd have thought that a reduced speed in certain parts of the ocean, especially ones that have potentially multiple-million tonne jaggy things for you to smash into, would have been a good idea.  They had been warned multiple times of sea ice, and yet still decided that 22 knots was an appropriate speed to cruise along at.  (However, there is a theory that they were going full speed ahead because they had to, due to a coal storage fire that they had to burn off in the engines to keep under control.  Believe if you want, it's another rabbit hole to disappear down)

 

All in all, the sinking of the Titanic is a tale of cost-cutting, human errors, arrogance, and just plain bad luck.

Indeed.  And 1,500 people died awful deaths because of it.

[JFK-1]

9 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

Indeed.  And 1,500 people died awful deaths because of it.

 

Add another 5 who died an easy death. Literally gone before they even knew it, faster than the speed of thought.

[JFK-1]

Seems more debris has been recovered, mention of human remains. Be interesting to know what could survive that, I'm guessing maybe teeth or bone fragments.

 

Remaining debris from destroyed Titan sub found on Atlantic seabed

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67073535

[Der Kaiser]

Might be Jack. 

 

Would be some closure for Rose.....door hugging cow.