-
Let's stay in touch! Sign up for our occasional (but interesting) newsletter.
Discover new research on all aspects of the sinking, interesting Titanic facts, and learn more about the Titanic's passengers and crew.
I agree with your theory. I merely went off on a rabbit trail questioning the use of lead, instead of some other fastening system. Heat rises and should there have been a fire, as there clearly was in Bunker 6, All that heat has to go somewhere. There have certainly been questions on whether the heat generated by the "unquenchable" fire in Bunker 6 damaged the plates of the Hull, or the rivets themselves. If the heat generated by such a fire were hot enough to do that, wouldn't the heat generated and funneled up the scuttle be enough to melt lead at 327.5 degrees F? My Gas Grill generates more heat that that. I believe that is a possibility. But that doesn't answer your question to if the Scuttle door or doors contributed to the flooding. I do believe you are onto something, Just how much of a contribution, considering how far up the Hull the scuttles are, is the question. If they were open to the sea, they certainly wouldn't have hampered the flooding at all, and would have acted in tandem with the water spilling over the bulkheads...at least in my opinion.
The problem with any theory is that we will never have all the facts as to how much of a breach the collision made, and exactly how far along the hull. with that information alone one could calculate how much time elapsed vs size of the breach to see if it fit the equation, or if there were other factors which contributed to the sinking such as your theory. One thing that sits in my mind is how long it took for Titanic to come to a stop after the collision happened, and how much that contributed to the flooding, or exacerbating the damage already done to the ship. As I am not an aquatic/maritime engineer, I won't be able to answer your question other than what I have stated above. It WAS however a really nice discussion we have had.
,
The problem with any theory is that we will never have all the facts as to how much of a breach the collision made, and exactly how far along the hull. with that information alone one could calculate how much time elapsed vs size of the breach to see if it fit the equation, or if there were other factors which contributed to the sinking such as your theory. One thing that sits in my mind is how long it took for Titanic to come to a stop after the collision happened, and how much that contributed to the flooding, or exacerbating the damage already done to the ship. As I am not an aquatic/maritime engineer, I won't be able to answer your question other than what I have stated above. It WAS however a really nice discussion we have had.
,
Roger Southern
Member
Bob, the lead referred to is probably RED lead sealing paint which was soaked into the rope gasket around the loading hatch to form a water-tight seal.
Ah... That would make more sense. I'm sorry if I muddied the waters with my questions and comments. Sealing with molten lead would seem to me a time consuming and laborious project each and every time the bunkers were filled. Now it is no more of a task than changing a valve cover gasket on your car's engine. Clearly I am not an expert on the construction or normal maintenance of the day to day activities aboard the Ship, Coaling procedures definitely being one.
But that leads to question further Tim's observation on additional places where water could ingress: Were all of the hull side doors and hatches sealed in the same manner to prevent water from entering the ship? Although after thinking about it, all of these possible breaches could have accelerated the sinking, I don't believe they would contributed to the status of the ship until she had settled deep enough to allow water access, and then really only if they were opened to the sea.
Great conversation.
Bob
Robby House
Member
Oh wow...I thought this issue was pretty much put to bed!?! There is absolutely NO WAY that Watertight Bulkhead E (separating Boiler Rooms 6 & 5) collapsed during the sinking process. Of course we're talking about lead fireman Fred Barrett's testimony of a massive surge of water emanating from the forward starboard end of Boiler Room 5 at approximately 1:15 AM or there about. Without question the massive deluge of water that Barrett described in his testimony was the result of the aforementioned Coal Bunker's hatch doors (which weren't designed to be watertight) giving way to a sudden, explosive surge of water which had accumulated inside the bunker (Coal Bunker W if you want to get precise and in line with H&W's schematics) filling the mostly empty bunker (most of its coal had been removed earlier to unseat a coal fire) with sea water as a result of damage caused by the 11:40 PM collision or allision with the iceberg.
For about an hour and a half Coal Bunker W in Boiler Room 5 had been steadily filling with water until the pressure from all that seawater was too much for its vertical sliding hatch doors to withstand and it or they gave way producing a violent rush of water which was apparently convincing enough to cause Engineer Herbert Harvey and Lead Fireman Fred Barrett to abandon the Boiler Room and the task they had been working involving the compartment's pumps.
During the American inquiry the idea developed based on Barrett's testimony of the 1:15 AM onrush of water that it was very likely caused by the failure of Bulkhead E allowing water into Boiler Room 5 from a very FULL Boiler Room 6 that was the issue. However when one examines the known facts and quantities at play that night it becomes clear that there was no catastrophic failure of the bulkhead in question which would probably would have resulted in Barrett's death. What's more, the coal bunker fire that's often cited as the culprit for this false event in no way significantly compromised the structural integrity of the subject bulkhead. Titanic's bulkheads and the hull's shell plating was made of mild steel. This is a type of steel with a VERY LOW carbon content. It is the presence of carbon in steel alloys that can cause steel to become brittle if exposed to red or white hot temperatures without benefit of undergoing special heat treatment (which actually makes steel much stronger). Mild steel's low carbon content means it can be repeatedly exposed to very high temperatures (caused from say, a coal bunker fire) and not become brittled when it returns to normal temperatures (either by quenching with water or being allowed to cool down on its own.)
I hope this and the illustration I drew up and attached below might help others to better conceptualize what occurred with respect to Coal Bunker W of Boiler Room 5.
Sincerely,
Robert House
BELOW: Coal Bunker W of Boiler Room 5 fills with water through an approximate 2 foot long damaged section Titanic's shell plating. The ship sustained a series of partially open seams in the hull's shell plates which actually came to an end at the location of the subject bunker. Coal Bunker W prevented flooding from entering the main area of Boiler Room 5 although curiously there appears to have been no attempt early on to use the Boiler Room's pumps which had the capacity to handle the rate of ingress inside the bunker with room to spare. With no apparent scuppers built into the floor of these coal bunkers the only way the coal bunker's flooding could have been removed was to let the room to fill to the bunker's hatch door(s) allowing it to crest over the threshold and into the main working space where it would find its way below the stokehold plate flooring and into the centrally located scupper drains where it would be removed. Needless to say this would have done very little to slow the sinking process that night...but it was an option available to the crew which wasn't taken.
Attachments
Last edited:
Steven Christian
Member
That was my first thought when reading about the lead seal. Why not just use gaskets. Especially on something that is opened often.
Tim Gerard
Member
James Cameron tried in 2005. Over the weekend I was watching the documentary of his 2005 expedition. He launched an underwater ROV from his submarine, sending it down what's left of the Grand Staircase, intending to go into Scotland Road and down one of the hatches into a boiler room, I think either 4 or 5, but Scotland Road was too collapsed to fit the ROV through. He did get into the Turkish Bath on the same trip, that was pretty cool to see.
