Main Menu
Recent News
Latest Articles
Random photos


Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index
   Titanic historic
   An alternate iceberg damage theory

Browsing this Thread:   78 Anonymous Users

 

  Bottom    Previous Topic    Next Topic
  •  Rate Thread
      Rate this Thread
      Excellent
      Good
      Average
      Bad
      Terrible
Poster Thread Rated:  2 Votes
  •  sundance
      sundance
An alternate iceberg damage theory
#1

Joined: 2004/12/28
From Molly Brown's home town
Posts: -1
Group:
No forum
Offline
Here is the best photo of the suspected iceberg that
is believed to have sunk the Titanic. It is the only
surviving photo of that berg. It was made into a post
card.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Iceberg/titaniciceberg.jpg

A friend of mine on another discussion group and I had been dicussing the possibly of running aground the iceberg by the Titanic and that the damage
would have been to the very bottom of the Titanic. I am more and more
interested in the possibility that there are several
factors that if this scenario is correct that these
factors can be devastating in the behavior of the
steel plates.
First one needs to go back and read the
testimonies of those survivors who testified that the
iceberg extended above the railing and that when the
titanic side swiped the iceberg that the ship was
close enough to the wall of the ice berg that the ice
debris actually fell on board the Titanic.
Now iceberg configuration is very important to
understand. The typical iceberg floats with a average
of only 10% of the ice above water level and the
remaining 90% is submerged. This is a basic formula
but to be more exact explanation of the "tip of the
iceberg" expression can be explained as follows:
Icebergs float because the density of ice (around 900
kg per cubic meter) is lower than that of seawater
(around 1025 kg per cubic meter). The ratio of these
densities tells us that 7/8 of the iceberg's mass must
be below water. Usually icebergs are 20% to 30% longer
under the water than above and not quite as deep as
they are long at the waterline. If you look at a
surface level view of a iceberg you will see that the
submerged portion will extend in all direction past
the surface ice's walls. See the following iceberg:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Iceberg/iceberg.jpg
Now for the Titanic to be close enough to brush the
surface walls and allow ice debries to fall onto the
deck than it is safe to assume that she had to past
over the larger submerged counter weighted larger mass
of ice.
Now if the Titanic did ride up on this submerged
ice than a new factor is introduced! Before we were
figuring the ship's speed of 22 1/2 knots striking at
a slight angle a floating iceberg. If that were the
case that the blunt trama force would be decreased
where as the iceberg would actually be pushed sideways
to a small degree and the Titanic would herself have
experienced a kinetic strike and would have caused the
bow of the ship to slightly bounce way from the wall
just before being forced back toward the stern when
the stern get kicked out away from the iceberg.
Factoring in the weight of the loaded payload area
and all the supplies, crews and passengers plus the
actual ship and now enter the senerio that the Titanic
did ride up on the ice. First thing you now introduce
a new factor that being the weight of the Titanic
bearing down on the irregular submerged ice surface as
it slides over the submerged ice shelf. (Not floats
over but skids across the ice with the weight of the
Titanic exerting a heavy downward force.) This would
definitely have increased the amount of force excerted
to the bottom steel plates. The weight of the Titanic
bearing down on the bottom plates in contact with the
ice would be many times greater that those plates on
the side that side swiped the side of the iceberg.
Here are some more aerial photos of icebergs where you
can see the submerged ice that extends out past the
surface walls.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Iceberg/blockiceberg2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Iceberg/101Iceberg.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Iceberg/051Iceberg.jpg

Now to be close enough for the wall of most common icebergs to extend over the railing yet be close enough to fall onto the deck you can assume that the Titanic would have had to rode up on the submurged portion of the iceberg. If you go back and look at the actual Titanic iceberg and view the suspected damage the Titanic had believed to have caused on the iceburg you can see that the side of the Titanic would have actually been up against the above surface portion of the iceberg.
I would be interested in your opinions!

Sundance
Posted on: 2005/1/15 20:46
Create PDF from Post Print
Top
Subject Poster Date
     Re: A alternate iceberg damage theory Martyn 2005/1/15 21:27
     Re: A alternate iceberg damage theory clinton 2005/1/18 10:42
       Re: A alternate iceberg damage theory sundance 2005/1/18 18:40
 Top   Previous Topic   Next Topic

 


 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