Main Menu
Recent News
Latest Articles
Random photos


Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index
   Titanic Biographical research
  Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users

 

 Bottom   Previous Topic   Next Topic
2

  •  Rate Thread
      Rate this Thread
      Excellent
      Good
      Average
      Bad
      Terrible
Poster Thread Rated:  2 Votes
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#11

Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Yes it would, Olympic class liners where desinged to withstand a head on impact, it would of been fine. Like I said in another 3 threads about this, so did a few others.
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P
Posted on: 2006/3/24 0:24
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  comando
      comando
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#12

Joined: 2006/3/20
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
NO definatly not. As i said the titanic had 3 props 2 support and one main. It was recored going 21 knots before it hit the ice burg... now a ship that weighs 45,000 tons traveling at a meare 17 knots alone takes about 10 minutes to fully stop using only 2 support props like the titanic had. Thing is that the titanic was going 21 knots well lets say the spotter saw the burg about a thousand feet from the titanic. The order gets through to the engine room to throw engines full revrese. by the time this order goes out the ship is only 500 feet away from the burg and the props finally start turning in reverse. 400 feet come and the ship's speed has slowed to 19 knots. 200 feet and 17 knots 50 feet and 15 knots inpact around 14 knots now thats a hell lotta force inpacting a burg. a simple test to show you in real life what would happen if it hit straight on is take a credit card and push on the 2 egdes farthest away from each other the card bends the same thing would happen to titanic hitting the burg. i state facts not opinions. its late now i gotta go ill explain more later
Posted on: 2006/3/27 4:27
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  jarveytoast
      jarveytoast
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#13

Joined: 2005/12/18
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Interesting, comando........your analysis is intriguing. I appreciate a different view on things.......but I want to ask you: if your analysis is true, which you do build a strong case, why do the "experts" of the Titanic disaster seem to feel the opposite? They feel like the ship would have had a better chance of surviving a head on impact. Now.....could it be that they are not engineers? But how could they state such a drastic opinion on national tv without consulting such experts in the field of engineering? My point is this.........we have people like Ken Marschall saying the ship could have survived, and we have people(like yourself) saying something else. And BOTH of you give good reasons why you believe the way you do. SO..........who's right?
Posted on: 2006/3/28 0:02
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  collegeboy20
      collegeboy20
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#14

Joined: 2006/3/30
From Michigan, USA
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Yes....the Titanic could have been still afloat. If you analyze what would happen you can conclude that it would. If the Titanic struck head on, only one or maybe two compartments would be flooded. The enginners said that if 3-4 compartments were filled with water, the ship would float. It would have been an interesting situation. A huge ship like the Titanic stopping after just hitting the iceburg. A big jult would have been felt throughout the ship causing items to break. But none of the less she would have still floated.
Posted on: 2006/3/30 3:12
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#15

Joined: 2005/8/13
From Crooksville,Ohio and Zanesville,Ohio
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Yes,she would have survived.Also,if her engines weren't reversed before she turned,she would have missed the iceberg
_________________
"Afterwards the people in the lifeboats had nothing to do but wait,wait to live,wait to die,wait for an absolution that would never come." Old Rose
Posted on: 2006/3/30 3:59
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  jarveytoast
      jarveytoast
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#16

Joined: 2005/12/18
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
In the end, I think the ship could have survived a head on impact with the berg. I stress the phrase "could have". I am not saying it wouldn't have suffered any damage. But I do think the odds of it staying afloat would have been greater in this scenario then what happened in reality. I appreciate comando's analysis........but I am not totally convinced that hitting the berg head on would have resulted in catastrophic death and destruction.
Posted on: 2006/4/2 16:32
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  comando
      comando
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#17

Joined: 2006/3/20
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
OK im back you guys, Ok let me tell you what i think would happen. I say that its a 50/50 chance of survival. Ok like i said earlier the engines would only slow the ship a little not stop it so that means it all depends on the slop of the iceburg. For example if the slop of the burg was paralell to the slope of the top of the bow to the bottom the ship would hit, go up a little( just like a ramp) and then come back down. While it hit and went up like lets say 20 ft up. More pressure would be applyed to the bottom of the bow. Now the titanic had a double bottom. Pretty hard to crack from the bottom but not so easy to slide it right off the ship with a forward impact. U see what im sayin? Soif the double bottom shifted just a couple of feet it would have produced major cracks along the edge where the bottom and side of the ship meet threfore filling the ship's ballast tanks and thefor making it sink front first (mabey a little slower than as to missing the burg like in the movie). NOW if the burg had a slope that was almost vertical the ship could have definatly survived. there would be an impact of the tip of the ship hitting theburg then going down to the bottom and compressing the ship about 10-20 feet b4 stopping. only 1 tank woul fill itself and mabey 2 but no more than 2. And titanic could become its own lifeboat and let everyone life. BUT we wouldent have the beautilful tip of the bow that we have today that is still very recognizeable even after 95 years of corrosin and rusting. The ship still stands strong
Posted on: 2006/4/14 5:32
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
  •  FoX
      FoX
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#18

Joined: 2006/4/12
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Interesting analyses. But would the Titanic actually be raised about 20 feet? Would the iceberg really function as a ramp, or would te iceberg's surface give way a little as Titanic collided with it? Also will the Titanic's hull crush at the front upon impact, so both the iceberg and Titanic change structure, I would think.

All this keeps the Titanic from going up the 'ramp'. But of course it would always go up a little. You really need to know the structure of the iceberg to be conclusive about this...
Posted on: 2006/4/14 13:51
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#19

Joined: 2004/7/1
From Delaware, United States
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
Well, lets look at some things here.

1.) Titanic was indeed designed to have her first 4 compartments entirely flooded and she wouldn't sink.

2.) Many ships have taken direct head-on hits from objects and been able to limp back to port. Take the Stockholm for example, she rammed into the Andrea Doria and the Doria sank, but Stockholm floated with a destroyed bow. Of course this was in the 1950's, and the ship was built different using modern technology, but still you get the idea. Also, another ship struck an iceberg head on in the years after Titanic's disaster, this ship didn't sink. It was a small steamer, and the story isn't widely known. I'll try to find its name and when it happened.

In conclusion I believe a direct hit to Titanic's bow would indeed have caused substantial damage to the ship, but I suspect that she would have definetly survived and would have been able to float until assistance arrived.
_________________
Mark Passwaters
Posted on: 2006/4/15 22:39
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Re: Would it be better if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on?
#20

Joined: 2006/4/16
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users
Offline
I'd have to say that Titanic would have probably sank faster:

It is assumed that the bow of Titanic hit the ocean floor between 15 and 20 knots forward speed, fairly head on. The abrupt stop buckled and flayed the ships steel skin for the first two to three hundred feet of the vessel, in fact ripping tremendous holes in each side of the ship and buckling the bow down 10 to 15 degrees from horizontal at the forward well deck.

This indicates the sort of damage that would have happened to Titanic had she collided head on with a berg...
Posted on: 2006/4/16 9:03
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
 Top   Previous Topic   Next Topic
2


 


 You cannot start a new topic.
 You can view topic.
 You cannot reply to posts.
 You cannot edit your posts.
 You cannot delete your posts.
 You cannot add new polls.
 You cannot vote in polls.
 You cannot attach files to posts.
 You cannot post without approval.



Copyright © 2006-2012 Titanic.com
Home Photos Advertise Link to us Flower Box