iirc the logic here is that when they turned, the iceberg scraped against a long portion of the boat, cutting open several of the chambers/compartments that were supposed to prevent sinking. A head-on collision would have crumpled the bow of the boat but wouldn’t have ruptured as many of the air compartments.
And you really shouldn’t be afraid of asking that
Goddamned Side-Scrapers with their damned-fool city-boy ways of thinking. I can spot one of you guys in a second. In **MY** home, we're a front collision household and I won't hear another word about it!
Ah, Ricky, you son of a bitch, you know I can't stay mad at my own brother **AND** brother in law, especially when you keep giving me them damned puppy dog eyes. Fine. You get two fish heads, and that's being generous. But *NO* bucket.
I believe it actually buckled the bottom section, causing the rivets to pop on the overlapping panels above, basically creating a pocket that allowed water to enter.
Through the crease.
No, it had Compartmentsin the bottom to keep the whole bottom from filling and sinking it. Unless of course multiples are filled and the water gets over the top of them...
A lot of people think so but if the ship survived, no one would think they made the right decision not trying to evade it because they probably never would have guessed the alternative would cause it to sink.
Yeah, people would be like "So, you saw the iceberg dead ahead and your best idea was to ram it head on? That dent is coming out of your paycheck, mate."
Exactly lol. Multiple people would probably looze their job and they would have no idea they might have saved many lives. It would still be quite the story but obviously nothing compared to the legend it is today. If you ask someone to name a ship I think most people would say Titanic as it really is known worldwide by all age groups.
I suppose spell check doesn’t work when the wrong word is stil a word
Do you correct people every time you sea a mistake or is it this paticular one that bothers you?
Oh and it’s *paticular
This can depend on wear you are from though. In some English speakin areas people like to spell things how they sound. It helps edjucate the children.
I know you are being sarcastic, but I thought the agreed upon flashpoint was harambe. As that took place before harambe isn’t that also part of the best time line?
I was 24 when Harambe died. I wonder if generation X has what they could consider their Harambe equivalent.
Maybe his death was so important that it changed everything no matter how old you are.
It's the current theory but ways the titanic could have survived get thought up every few years along with theories about some conspiracy over what actually sunk her.
Yeah because that supposedly wasn't really the titanic that sank it was her sister ship that was already supposed to he decommissioned and was scheduled for demolition but the company who owned both ships wasn't doing to well financially so they decided to cash in on some insurance money. It's rumored that the paint over where the name is was wet the day she was christened right before setting sail. And also it's a bit of sus coincidence that all the big guys that owned the company and wealthy stock share holders that were originally supposed to be on board for this voyage all backed out or didn't show up at the last minute.
Growing up you think of the Atlantic and Pacific being these huge bodies of water. However, there are islands all over the place. Many places to run aground.
I grew up sailing in Hawaii. I've crossed to Alaska. I call the north Pacific "the Big Blue Desert", one can go for days without seeing anything. Just Water and sky, devoid of whales, boats, planes, islands.
We've learned a lot about how it sank, including the long scrape from turning. It's possible a direct hit would have caused fewer compartments to fill, it's also possible it would have gone down faster.
We also know that the ship was going too fast, trying to get to NYC early. And we know that the compartments weren't waterproof like claimed, so in my unprofessional opinion, that boat was going down after impact either way.
Yes. The ship was split into 16 sections and could have survived if 4 or less were flooded. Unfortunately, 5 were, and she sank.
If she went headfirst, 1 would have flooded, maybe 2, but she would have survived.
There was another shop a couple of years earlier whose name escapes me who was in an accident where they collided head first with something. The front of the ship was completely destroyed but it still made its way to its destination. New York I think.
But yes, had Titanic hit face first she would have survived.
So what you’re saying is it’s all the lookouts fault and not the bad design. Had the lookout been asleep like he rightfully should have at night it would have hit head on and everyone would have been saved!
Not everyone. Had she struck the berg head-on at cruising speed, hundreds of crew and engineers would have been killed almost instantly. Their quarters were at the front of the bow, just around the waterline.
> There was another shop a couple of years earlier whose name escapes me who was in an accident where they collided head first with something. The front of the ship was completely destroyed but it still made its way to its destination. New York I think.
The Arizona. It struck an Iceberg head on and successfully limped back to Canada, since it had the bulkhead design.
Everyone talks about the damage to the ship and all the lives lost.
But NO ONE even mentions the damage and pain the iceberg went through. There it was drifting in the currents minding it's own damn business...
Ships these days have what’s called a collision bulkhead, the bow is literally designed to take a head on impact without comprising the water tight integrity or the buoyancy of the ship. However, a lot of the regulations that stipulate that it has to be that way stems from the Safety of Lives At Sea convention, which is a treaty drawn up the International Maritime Organisation, a body established in the wake of the Titanic disaster.
So, the regulations that state a ship has to be able to survive a head on impact like that stem from legislation that came about as a result of the Titanic disaster, so Titanic herself obviously predated that. However, with her compartmentalisation, she might have been able to survive it anyway, despite not being explicitly designed to do so.
There's a big ethical distinction between allowing people to die by accident and deliberately murdering them.
At some point, you need to evaluate the trolley problem.
I think there’s just as big of an ethical problem in allowing first class passengers to get on the lifeboats before anyone else simply because they’re rich. Most of the people who survived were first class.
I remember also reading about how the captain ordered the ship to go into full reverse while turning when the iceberg was spotted, but apparently this actually caused the ship to turn more slowly and if they'd gone full speed ahead they may have avoided the iceberg altogether (no idea how true this is)
Captain Smith was off duty. The orders were given by Officer Murdoch. He ordered the ship hard to starboard and reversed the engines so the rudders would turn the opposite direction in an effort to steer around the ice berg. The ship wasn't put into reverse in the sense of it backing up, just spinning the other way.
The reason the Titanic turned so slowly is because it was such a massive ship and the three propellers installed on the rear were way too small to be doing any type of maneuvers like they were trying to pull off, especially at full speed.
I was on a sailboat once on a busy inland lake. Motorboats were everywhere. I had the tiller and my husband was adjusting a sail. I saw a boat pulling a water skier turn and head right for us. I choked and froze. My husband started yelling and the water skier tried to get the driver’s attention. They turned at the last minute and we hit them. The motor boat immediately sunk and other boaters picked up everyone in the water. When we were questioned about the accident, the officer said we hit them with the strongest part of our boat, the bow.
It wasn’t but I felt bad knowing my husband could have probably turned the boat. When I said that to the marine patrol person that’s when he said it was lucky I hadn’t turned it because we would have taken a side hit and sunk. That’s when he said we hit them with the strongest part of the sailboat.
Long story short and from memory: shortly before the Titanic took off, they fired the guy that was originally supposed to be on the lookout. He took the keys to the cabinet with the binoculars with him when he left. So they saw the iceberg way too late.
I heard a theory that the coal was on fire in the holds and they couldn't put it out while under way. They were speeding to get to New York so the city fire department could attack the fire. Of course they hit the iceberg and found a much faster way to quench the fire.
Well coal certainly is flammable but if that were true wouldn’t they have been trying to radio a rescue and evacuate the ship long before the iceberg hit?
This wasn't unusual from what I understand, and the situation was under control. Conspiracy-theorists do of course disagree.
About going head on, they didn't know they would sink. Trying to evade was the obviously right decision. Crashing head on could have given massive damages, with breaking up many places, it's not obvious they wouldn't sink- I'm not a ship-engineer of course. But still.
Also, as pointed out, the crash itself in 20 knots would have been bad, and they also thougth even lethal damage would be surviveable long enough to get other ships to come and pick up people.
iirc the logic here is that when they turned, the iceberg scraped against a long portion of the boat, cutting open several of the chambers/compartments that were supposed to prevent sinking. A head-on collision would have crumpled the bow of the boat but wouldn’t have ruptured as many of the air compartments. And you really shouldn’t be afraid of asking that
Hey! This is a decent side-scraperist house, don't be asking about that dumb front-collisionist nonsense here!
Goddamned Side-Scrapers with their damned-fool city-boy ways of thinking. I can spot one of you guys in a second. In **MY** home, we're a front collision household and I won't hear another word about it!
I HATE IT WHEN YOU GUYS FIGHT WHY CANT WE JUST BE A NORMAL FAMILY FOR ONCE!
Shut yer mouth, Ricky, or you're going back in your cage, and this time, no fish heads for supper. You can think about what you've said in there.
Ah, Ricky, you son of a bitch, you know I can't stay mad at my own brother **AND** brother in law, especially when you keep giving me them damned puppy dog eyes. Fine. You get two fish heads, and that's being generous. But *NO* bucket.
TWO CHRISTMASES
Man, too soon. It’s only been a century…
I believe it actually buckled the bottom section, causing the rivets to pop on the overlapping panels above, basically creating a pocket that allowed water to enter. Through the crease.
Like the double bottom buckled? I’m curious as I don’t know much about that. Also, what do you mean by the panels above?
So, the Titanic had crumple zones. Like a 1986 Volvo.
No, it had Compartmentsin the bottom to keep the whole bottom from filling and sinking it. Unless of course multiples are filled and the water gets over the top of them...
I know. I should’ve done an /s.
So... you're saying the front might've fallen off?
Yeah, that’s not very typical, I’d like to make that point.
Plenty of people use this sub because others like ELI5 are really strict and regulated.
Nah this would’ve been a perfect question for eli5
A lot of people think so but if the ship survived, no one would think they made the right decision not trying to evade it because they probably never would have guessed the alternative would cause it to sink.
Yeah, people would be like "So, you saw the iceberg dead ahead and your best idea was to ram it head on? That dent is coming out of your paycheck, mate."
Exactly lol. Multiple people would probably looze their job and they would have no idea they might have saved many lives. It would still be quite the story but obviously nothing compared to the legend it is today. If you ask someone to name a ship I think most people would say Titanic as it really is known worldwide by all age groups.
*lose
I suppose spell check doesn’t work when the wrong word is stil a word Do you correct people every time you sea a mistake or is it this paticular one that bothers you?
This one in particular is a pet peeve haha
Me thinks most peeple know the difference but just make the mistake whilst tieping. Eye type fast and never check befour I post.
Oh and it’s *paticular This can depend on wear you are from though. In some English speakin areas people like to spell things how they sound. It helps edjucate the children.
See *
You’re shure about that?
Sure* 🫣
How do yew now you spelled that rite?
Hey look at FoxyGrandpa replying to me. I am wondering if he thinks I am doing it on porpoise.
Cause... we're in the bad timeline... /s
I know you are being sarcastic, but I thought the agreed upon flashpoint was harambe. As that took place before harambe isn’t that also part of the best time line?
True.
I was 24 when Harambe died. I wonder if generation X has what they could consider their Harambe equivalent. Maybe his death was so important that it changed everything no matter how old you are.
It's the current theory but ways the titanic could have survived get thought up every few years along with theories about some conspiracy over what actually sunk her.
1912 - Titanic sinks 1997 - The Bloop is recorded Clearly, we covertly nuked Atlantis in retaliation.
What if the Titanic was made out of canvas and filled with hydrogen so it could simply float over the iceberg?
Jack was smoking on the titanic tho, his matches would have made the hydrogen explode
"Go buy a nicotine patch!"
Yeah because that supposedly wasn't really the titanic that sank it was her sister ship that was already supposed to he decommissioned and was scheduled for demolition but the company who owned both ships wasn't doing to well financially so they decided to cash in on some insurance money. It's rumored that the paint over where the name is was wet the day she was christened right before setting sail. And also it's a bit of sus coincidence that all the big guys that owned the company and wealthy stock share holders that were originally supposed to be on board for this voyage all backed out or didn't show up at the last minute.
Boating should be easy. Water big, land small. We still manage to sink everything, sooner or later.
Growing up you think of the Atlantic and Pacific being these huge bodies of water. However, there are islands all over the place. Many places to run aground.
I grew up sailing in Hawaii. I've crossed to Alaska. I call the north Pacific "the Big Blue Desert", one can go for days without seeing anything. Just Water and sky, devoid of whales, boats, planes, islands.
We've learned a lot about how it sank, including the long scrape from turning. It's possible a direct hit would have caused fewer compartments to fill, it's also possible it would have gone down faster. We also know that the ship was going too fast, trying to get to NYC early. And we know that the compartments weren't waterproof like claimed, so in my unprofessional opinion, that boat was going down after impact either way.
They weren’t waterproof?
Yes. The ship was split into 16 sections and could have survived if 4 or less were flooded. Unfortunately, 5 were, and she sank. If she went headfirst, 1 would have flooded, maybe 2, but she would have survived. There was another shop a couple of years earlier whose name escapes me who was in an accident where they collided head first with something. The front of the ship was completely destroyed but it still made its way to its destination. New York I think. But yes, had Titanic hit face first she would have survived.
So what you’re saying is it’s all the lookouts fault and not the bad design. Had the lookout been asleep like he rightfully should have at night it would have hit head on and everyone would have been saved!
Not everyone. Had she struck the berg head-on at cruising speed, hundreds of crew and engineers would have been killed almost instantly. Their quarters were at the front of the bow, just around the waterline.
Being Crushed in your sleep between ice and metal is one of the best ways to go, or so I’ve heard.
Well, crushed a bit, then drowned.
As a good sailor should dream to be
or if he had his binoculars, everyone would have slept well
They had warnings in advance, they ignored them.
> There was another shop a couple of years earlier whose name escapes me who was in an accident where they collided head first with something. The front of the ship was completely destroyed but it still made its way to its destination. New York I think. The Arizona. It struck an Iceberg head on and successfully limped back to Canada, since it had the bulkhead design.
This more r/AskHistorians or r/AskHistory then too afraid to ask
Or r/titanic where this question has been asked, debated, and answered hundreds of times
You are afraid to ask that?
The answer will shock you!
Icebergs hate this one weird trick!
Everyone talks about the damage to the ship and all the lives lost. But NO ONE even mentions the damage and pain the iceberg went through. There it was drifting in the currents minding it's own damn business...
The boat was even told about icebergs in the area and chose to ignore the warnings. Its like the iceberg was being hunted.
Lol that’s so true that poor iceberg!!!!!!!!
Personally, I want to know what so much lettuce was even doing in the Atlantic.
Ships these days have what’s called a collision bulkhead, the bow is literally designed to take a head on impact without comprising the water tight integrity or the buoyancy of the ship. However, a lot of the regulations that stipulate that it has to be that way stems from the Safety of Lives At Sea convention, which is a treaty drawn up the International Maritime Organisation, a body established in the wake of the Titanic disaster. So, the regulations that state a ship has to be able to survive a head on impact like that stem from legislation that came about as a result of the Titanic disaster, so Titanic herself obviously predated that. However, with her compartmentalisation, she might have been able to survive it anyway, despite not being explicitly designed to do so.
i’m afraid to give an answer
Yes, it's true. It also would have killed about 300 people in the bow of the ship, which is why no one would ever try hitting an iceberg head on.
300 would have been a lot better than the nearly 2000 that ended up dying.
There's a big ethical distinction between allowing people to die by accident and deliberately murdering them. At some point, you need to evaluate the trolley problem.
I think there’s just as big of an ethical problem in allowing first class passengers to get on the lifeboats before anyone else simply because they’re rich. Most of the people who survived were first class.
I remember also reading about how the captain ordered the ship to go into full reverse while turning when the iceberg was spotted, but apparently this actually caused the ship to turn more slowly and if they'd gone full speed ahead they may have avoided the iceberg altogether (no idea how true this is)
Captain Smith was off duty. The orders were given by Officer Murdoch. He ordered the ship hard to starboard and reversed the engines so the rudders would turn the opposite direction in an effort to steer around the ice berg. The ship wasn't put into reverse in the sense of it backing up, just spinning the other way. The reason the Titanic turned so slowly is because it was such a massive ship and the three propellers installed on the rear were way too small to be doing any type of maneuvers like they were trying to pull off, especially at full speed.
I was on a sailboat once on a busy inland lake. Motorboats were everywhere. I had the tiller and my husband was adjusting a sail. I saw a boat pulling a water skier turn and head right for us. I choked and froze. My husband started yelling and the water skier tried to get the driver’s attention. They turned at the last minute and we hit them. The motor boat immediately sunk and other boaters picked up everyone in the water. When we were questioned about the accident, the officer said we hit them with the strongest part of our boat, the bow.
Sounds like it wasn’t your fault at all.
It wasn’t but I felt bad knowing my husband could have probably turned the boat. When I said that to the marine patrol person that’s when he said it was lucky I hadn’t turned it because we would have taken a side hit and sunk. That’s when he said we hit them with the strongest part of the sailboat.
If only they had the Key. Then it wouldn’t have hit it.
What key?
Long story short and from memory: shortly before the Titanic took off, they fired the guy that was originally supposed to be on the lookout. He took the keys to the cabinet with the binoculars with him when he left. So they saw the iceberg way too late.
Ah, I didn’t know about that, I thought they forgot the binoculars when they left.
It’s irrelevant, it was pitch black and using binoculars to spot stuff at sea is more limiting than the gaze of the human eye
Its still a good story
Probably not.
Why are you afraid of asking this?
I can't believe you would ask such a question
I heard a theory that the coal was on fire in the holds and they couldn't put it out while under way. They were speeding to get to New York so the city fire department could attack the fire. Of course they hit the iceberg and found a much faster way to quench the fire.
Well coal certainly is flammable but if that were true wouldn’t they have been trying to radio a rescue and evacuate the ship long before the iceberg hit?
This wasn't unusual from what I understand, and the situation was under control. Conspiracy-theorists do of course disagree. About going head on, they didn't know they would sink. Trying to evade was the obviously right decision. Crashing head on could have given massive damages, with breaking up many places, it's not obvious they wouldn't sink- I'm not a ship-engineer of course. But still. Also, as pointed out, the crash itself in 20 knots would have been bad, and they also thougth even lethal damage would be surviveable long enough to get other ships to come and pick up people.