Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index Titanic historic unsinkable? |
Browsing this Thread:
6 Anonymous Users
Bottom Previous Topic Next Topic | 2 |
|
|
|
---|
Poster | Thread |
---|
|
#12 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Isle of Wight, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
it was called 'unsinkable' because it had 2 hulls, so they thought that not even a teeny-tiny bit of water could get in, but nowadays cruise liners will hav up to 4! i guess it was one of those untested theories.
|
||
Posted on: 2003/8/24 19:02
|
|
#13 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Near London, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
[quote:de4281f309="Adam Went"]I agree. WHat was the point of just having watertight bulkheads that didn't even reach the top [/quote:de4281f309]
Yeah, that's too true because when a ship gets too hevy with water, it's going to tip forward (like it did) and the water would quickly find it's way into the next compartment. |
||
Posted on: 2003/8/24 22:06
|
|
#14 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Isle of Wight, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
If Titanic would have stayed afloat for a few hours longer untill the Carpathia came, it wouldn't have gone there anyway; When the first lifeboats were loaded they were too scared to go back and get more passengers because they were afraid that they would get sucked down with the ship. So, a few hours later, the Carpatia wouldn't have gone to resque more passengers because they would be too afraid and would actually had a reason to be because it would be a lot longer after they had struck the iceburg because she would still be sinking but at a smaller rate.
Hmm...I think I like to say "because"! |
||
Posted on: 2003/8/25 13:03
|
|
#15 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Near London, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
[quote:d1759518fe="Digiteen"]
Hmm...I think I like to say "because"! [/quote:d1759518fe] I noticed that you said 'because' slightly too often :D |
||
Posted on: 2003/8/26 22:47
|
|
#16 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Isle of Wight, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
[quote:6860251eb9="Squall"][quote:6860251eb9="Digiteen"]
Hmm...I think I like to say "because"! [/quote:6860251eb9] I noticed that you said 'because' slightly too often :D[/quote:6860251eb9] Yeah lol! I just started and accidently started to explaining everything that happened about everything! :mrgreen: I guess I was on a roll! |
||
Posted on: 2003/8/27 10:03
|
|
#17 |
||
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/8/24
From Near London, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
[quote:9e29ba9810="Digiteen"][quote:9e29ba9810="Squall"][quote:9e29ba9810="Digiteen"]
Hmm...I think I like to say "because"! [/quote:9e29ba9810] I noticed that you said 'because' slightly too often :D[/quote:9e29ba9810] Yeah lol! I just started and accidently started to explaining everything that happened about everything! :mrgreen: I guess I was on a roll![/quote:9e29ba9810] Were on a roll BECAUSE... :D |
||
Posted on: 2003/8/27 22:39
|
|
#18 |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Hi,
I'm sure this will dispel some myths: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Carpathia/page2.htm Kindest regards, Mark. |
|||
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2003/9/15 9:48
|
|
Unsinkable? | #19 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/9/20
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
To date, there are only a few boats that can claim to be unsinkable. Those few can and do float while completely full of water. This does not make the passengers dryer, but does prevent their having to swim back from a boat ride. There are no steel hulled ships, that I know of, currently listed as being unsinkable. Our finest warships have negative bouyancy when their integrity is breached, and thus sink like the hunk of metal that they are. The best way to keep a ship from sinking is to keep the water on the outside, barring that condition, you have little hope to keep her afloat. Titanic steel was of the best made in her time, not the best made today, and her design was fairly well thought out considering that she was constructed during the 'horse and buggy' days. Other ships were made from the same design and one of them sank while the other was retired after a long history, but they didn't have a huge rip in the side below the waterline to deal with. Can anyone name the woman that sailed on each of these three sister ships and survived the sinking of two and did not die because of shipwreck? Clue ... It's not 'Molly' Brown.
|
||
Posted on: 2003/9/23 16:12
|
|
Unsinkable | #20 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/9/1
From Near Southend-on-Sea, England
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
In reply to the last post by Will regarding the woman who served onboard all three sister ships. The answer is Violet Jessop.
Violet served on the Olympic as a stewardess and was on board when it collided with HMS Hawke. She served in the same capacity on board the Titanic and survived the sinking. During the 1st world war Violet was a nurse on the Brittanic she was on board when it either struck a mine or was torpedoed in the Aegean while being used as a hospital ship; again Violet survived but received a serious head injury. After the war she served on a number of White Star ships including (again) the Olympic. Do I recieve a prize? |
||
Posted on: 2003/9/25 1:47
|
Top Previous Topic Next Topic | 2 |
|