It might have stayed afloat or stayed afloat a little longer. That is, if the iceberg did not have an underwater extinsion that did not pierce the ship underneath the hull.

If you will remember, there was testimony that some people saw water seeping up from the floor plates in boiler room (I think 5 or 4), something like six feet from the keel. This means that there was likely ice actually hitting underneath Titanic, not just on the starboard side like we usually associate with the iceberg damage.

Therefore, if the Titanic rammed the berg head on, there is the possiblility that the ship might hit more of this "under the ship portion" of the berg, and that could have ripped open more further back compartments from the bottom.

MGY Friend wrote:
It might have stayed afloat or stayed afloat a little longer. That is, if the iceberg did not have an underwater extinsion that did not pierce the ship underneath the hull.Quote:

We can't keep saying "what if..." because it happened. But we can try to understand "why" because those who do not know the past are doomed to repeat it.

i couldn't agree with you more xkitten14x.

"What if" can be some what un-important, but asking questions and speculating are a part of learning and understanding. It is by asking questions that we can learn from to indeed not repeat the unpleasent moments in history.

Walter Lord, author of "A Night to Remember" stated that his facination with the Titanic stems from the "if onlys" - if only she had enough lifeboats, if only she had water tight compartments that were higher, if only the Carpathia had been nearer, and on, and on, and on.

That is part of the great appeal of the Titanic disaster, the fact that if only maybe one occurance in either her design or navigation, or shipboard routine went different, she may have wound up in the breakers yard after 20 years of service, instead of being at the bottom of the Atlantic.