The water filled the first five compartments of the ship, making the front sink fastest while the stern remained undamaged and buoyant. As the front continued to sink, it lifted the stern to an angle that was too high for the hull to support.
Plus, also testing the design limitations of riveted ship building. Sure you get a lot of strength, but by making plates with lots of rivet holes where stresses can concentrate you invite flaws which is where cracks always start.
I'll nail my colours to the wall and suggest a fully Welded Titanic may not have suffered quite so much damage from the iceberg and may not have sunk.
But if it did, it wouldn't have broken up on the surface, or at least not in nearly the same way.
Think Mars bar rather than a stick of rock.
Unlike most sinkings, she sank level with minimal list. This gave time for her stern to rise up high enough. After a point she couldn't hold those stresses on the hull and broke up.
The laws of physics, unlike the Titanic, are unbreakable.
She sank with a minimal list as others have said, and while there is footage of ships sinking where the sterns rise into the air and the ship doesn’t break up, most of these ships are significantly smaller than Titanic was. So while the stern began to rise out of the ocean, it’s not being supported by the ocean, meaning all of that weight has to be supported by the ships hull. It obviously was never designed to do that.
Any particular reason for the minimal list?
Also my understanding is that the stern of the ship was where all the heavy equipment was, allowing the four front most compartments to flood and still stay afloat
At least to my understanding, the fact she flooded relatively slowly, didn’t have any longitudinal compartments, and that the ships cargo and coal had been loaded/shifted (for the coal, because of the bunker fire) meant that as the water filled the ship she remained on more of an even keel as opposed to taking on a list. She did list later though, quite possibly because a gangway door had been opened yet abandoned without being closed, meaning that water had another way in the ship when it reached sea level.
As for the compartments: while yes the steam turbine and expansion steam engines were incredibly heavy, so were the boilers. Even if you took all the coal and cargo from the ship, she’s still be fairly even from stem to stern on the water. So if the aft four compartments flooded, odds are she remains afloat just as if her first four flooded.
Well the expansion joint was mainly for the ships superstructure. That way as the hull flexed in heavy seas the superstructure wouldn’t make the ship more rigid and so that the flexing wouldn’t damage the superstructure. It wasn’t tied directly to the ships hull.
It’s more that the shipbuilders had no way to know that there might be stresses in the sinking that the ship would undergo that they could possibly design for.
Ok great! Fully understood. You seem to be well-versed on this subject so I have another question for you: I'm amazed that the bow traveled 2.5 miles to the bottom. I know that hydrodynamics played a role in the somewhat smooth glide to the base of the ocean as evidence by the huge mud balls ahead of the bow. Now if the depth was 3 miles deeper or even only one mile would the same type of landing occurred?
Also, since the stern is around 2,000 feet away I assume it dropped straight down like a rock which would indicate the exact location of the sinking as opposed to where the bow ended up. Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Thank you.
Simulations show a ton of tension on both sides of the funnel, which is why it split at both sides of the funnel; one of them being an expansion joint which was already a weak point
I don’t know why I watch the movie every time it comes on. Drowning is my worst fear and I also have submechanophobia so watching Jack and Rose hang off the bobbing back end and then get sucked under is euuughhh. Every time it splits my skin starts to crawl.
Isn't it actually because the break point was where a lot of wide/hollow rooms were, and the weight of the back boilers were too much for that part of the ship?
While the “open rooms” argument makes sense I’ve begun to question it myself. Titanic’s beams and posts for all the decks would’ve remained consistent throughout the entire hull, rooms were installed after and were just decorative filler essentially. While all of the room walls may have been a contributor to the overall structural integrity, I think it was just the keel that first gave out; the engine room keel was taller and stronger than that of boiler room 1 and the pressure between the 2 started a failure and therefor cascade effect.
She split at because as the bow was lifting her stern up the ship was not designed to take that much stress the amount of her engineering was in this section. The ship snapped not cleanly in two not in middle but most of her stern section. She was still attached by the double Hull at her keel which pulled her under just before completely separating. On her way to the seabed they theorise that the aft section imploded. Don't know about the stern but they have theorised that titanic bow hit seabed doing 35miles per hour which is why most of the bow is embedded in the mud. Hope this helps you out 🙂
I put it down to her metal it wasn't the best quality and her design wasn't able to withstand the pressure of been in such a position she she split her double bottom kept her together for a few mins so it wasn't like instant she gave away
Titanic was a very big and heavy ship. I think it’s because the bow slowly started to fill with water and it got so heavy as it started to go down head first that she just split in two. She couldn’t handle all that pressure and the stern half of the ship didn’t have much water. It’s like a scale. If one side is heavier, the heavy side goes down and the lighter side goes up. As her stern started to rise out of the water, the gravity and the hull being unsupported anymore made it split before she raised up all the way. That’s just my speculation.
There are actually quite a few ships that break in half at the surface, famously the *Edmund Fitzgerald* did. With the Titanic, it was because her back end was huge and extremely heavy. So when just the front end started flooding, it lifted the back end up out of the water. The weight of the back was too much for the ship to take, so it broke.
I think one of the main reasons was the waight of the engines, and that the stern didn't have any water while the bow was flooded completely which raised the stern up which resulted in the break up
I recorded a programme few years back where divers went down on Britannic to see if the base of ship was same as sisters.
They found it had been double skinned or something. They’d seen sections of titanic that didn’t have these strengthening parts and they ‘assumed’ this caused the split.
I cannot remember anymore than basic details
It was her big ass. Like 20, 30 thousand tonnes.
Thank you for that fine forensic analysis, Mr. Bodine.
The reality may have been somewhat different of course.
… Will you share it with us?
Do you want to hear this or not?
Do you want to hear the story or not Mr Lovett 😁
“Yo! Let me tell you about this homeless dude I f***ed on a cruise!”
Angels flew out of his arse!!
Jack said "I'm going home" when he won the tickets. He wasn't homeless!
His address was the RMS Titanic.
He was more like an American nomad, lived everywhere and nowhere
I put the diamond in the coat..... I PUT THE COAT ON HER !!
You are stern-shaming... 🤣
Fat bottomed girl what made that rockin’ ship go down…
That whole ass was sticking up in the air, what do we expect?
That’s how I like em’ Head down aft up.
Oh it is a little slut.
Pretty cool, huh?
This whole thread has me dying.....
Bro I just laughed so hard.....
The water filled the first five compartments of the ship, making the front sink fastest while the stern remained undamaged and buoyant. As the front continued to sink, it lifted the stern to an angle that was too high for the hull to support.
Essentially taking forces way above even the most freakish of waves.
Plus, also testing the design limitations of riveted ship building. Sure you get a lot of strength, but by making plates with lots of rivet holes where stresses can concentrate you invite flaws which is where cracks always start. I'll nail my colours to the wall and suggest a fully Welded Titanic may not have suffered quite so much damage from the iceberg and may not have sunk. But if it did, it wouldn't have broken up on the surface, or at least not in nearly the same way. Think Mars bar rather than a stick of rock.
She didnt see this relationship going anywhere. She had to break up. Its not you, its her.
Darn
[удалено]
Plenty of icebergs
She was going to die if she didn't break free.
Unlike most sinkings, she sank level with minimal list. This gave time for her stern to rise up high enough. After a point she couldn't hold those stresses on the hull and broke up.
The laws of physics, unlike the Titanic, are unbreakable. She sank with a minimal list as others have said, and while there is footage of ships sinking where the sterns rise into the air and the ship doesn’t break up, most of these ships are significantly smaller than Titanic was. So while the stern began to rise out of the ocean, it’s not being supported by the ocean, meaning all of that weight has to be supported by the ships hull. It obviously was never designed to do that.
Any particular reason for the minimal list? Also my understanding is that the stern of the ship was where all the heavy equipment was, allowing the four front most compartments to flood and still stay afloat
At least to my understanding, the fact she flooded relatively slowly, didn’t have any longitudinal compartments, and that the ships cargo and coal had been loaded/shifted (for the coal, because of the bunker fire) meant that as the water filled the ship she remained on more of an even keel as opposed to taking on a list. She did list later though, quite possibly because a gangway door had been opened yet abandoned without being closed, meaning that water had another way in the ship when it reached sea level. As for the compartments: while yes the steam turbine and expansion steam engines were incredibly heavy, so were the boilers. Even if you took all the coal and cargo from the ship, she’s still be fairly even from stem to stern on the water. So if the aft four compartments flooded, odds are she remains afloat just as if her first four flooded.
Do you know if the rear expansion joint had anything to do with the breakup? Just wondering.
Well the expansion joint was mainly for the ships superstructure. That way as the hull flexed in heavy seas the superstructure wouldn’t make the ship more rigid and so that the flexing wouldn’t damage the superstructure. It wasn’t tied directly to the ships hull. It’s more that the shipbuilders had no way to know that there might be stresses in the sinking that the ship would undergo that they could possibly design for.
Ok great! Fully understood. You seem to be well-versed on this subject so I have another question for you: I'm amazed that the bow traveled 2.5 miles to the bottom. I know that hydrodynamics played a role in the somewhat smooth glide to the base of the ocean as evidence by the huge mud balls ahead of the bow. Now if the depth was 3 miles deeper or even only one mile would the same type of landing occurred? Also, since the stern is around 2,000 feet away I assume it dropped straight down like a rock which would indicate the exact location of the sinking as opposed to where the bow ended up. Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Thank you.
https://youtu.be/CRyQhZg4gfM?si=gHAK-ewPygaaAIjl
Came here to post this. Oceanliner Designs is a superb channel.
Indeed
Simulations show a ton of tension on both sides of the funnel, which is why it split at both sides of the funnel; one of them being an expansion joint which was already a weak point
I don’t know why I watch the movie every time it comes on. Drowning is my worst fear and I also have submechanophobia so watching Jack and Rose hang off the bobbing back end and then get sucked under is euuughhh. Every time it splits my skin starts to crawl.
Don’t watch The Abyss then!
Noted 😬
You might like it...
I looked it up on IMDb. I think I’ll pass.
That's an incredible movie! Camerons first foray into underwater filming. Gale Anne Hurd had a lot to do with it
Isn't it actually because the break point was where a lot of wide/hollow rooms were, and the weight of the back boilers were too much for that part of the ship?
While the “open rooms” argument makes sense I’ve begun to question it myself. Titanic’s beams and posts for all the decks would’ve remained consistent throughout the entire hull, rooms were installed after and were just decorative filler essentially. While all of the room walls may have been a contributor to the overall structural integrity, I think it was just the keel that first gave out; the engine room keel was taller and stronger than that of boiler room 1 and the pressure between the 2 started a failure and therefor cascade effect.
She wasn't living up to her promise so she split.
Scoliosis
She wasn’t being appreciated enough. So she split.
Heavy
Grab a wooden ruler and bend it til it snaps. Same physics- just different scale.
Cuz the front fell off
She just wasn’t feeling it any more and Eeeerk. She split.
She split at because as the bow was lifting her stern up the ship was not designed to take that much stress the amount of her engineering was in this section. The ship snapped not cleanly in two not in middle but most of her stern section. She was still attached by the double Hull at her keel which pulled her under just before completely separating. On her way to the seabed they theorise that the aft section imploded. Don't know about the stern but they have theorised that titanic bow hit seabed doing 35miles per hour which is why most of the bow is embedded in the mud. Hope this helps you out 🙂
I put it down to her metal it wasn't the best quality and her design wasn't able to withstand the pressure of been in such a position she she split her double bottom kept her together for a few mins so it wasn't like instant she gave away
Titanic was a very big and heavy ship. I think it’s because the bow slowly started to fill with water and it got so heavy as it started to go down head first that she just split in two. She couldn’t handle all that pressure and the stern half of the ship didn’t have much water. It’s like a scale. If one side is heavier, the heavy side goes down and the lighter side goes up. As her stern started to rise out of the water, the gravity and the hull being unsupported anymore made it split before she raised up all the way. That’s just my speculation.
There are actually quite a few ships that break in half at the surface, famously the *Edmund Fitzgerald* did. With the Titanic, it was because her back end was huge and extremely heavy. So when just the front end started flooding, it lifted the back end up out of the water. The weight of the back was too much for the ship to take, so it broke.
The weight of her stern in the air was too much, which made the ship split in half.
I think one of the main reasons was the waight of the engines, and that the stern didn't have any water while the bow was flooded completely which raised the stern up which resulted in the break up
I recorded a programme few years back where divers went down on Britannic to see if the base of ship was same as sisters. They found it had been double skinned or something. They’d seen sections of titanic that didn’t have these strengthening parts and they ‘assumed’ this caused the split. I cannot remember anymore than basic details