How badly damaged is Titanics lower forward bow beneath the mud?

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

Oh, no doubt at all. I just do not think James Cameron did this. In fact, I think this is an off the cuff remark made by him as I have serious doubts about the veracity of what he is saying. Essentially he would have to be saying that the forward part of the bow would not have given at all when it hit the ice, and instead the structure would have failed near where the forecastle attaches to the main body of the ship.

Anyone who has been in a head on collision, or seen one, in an automobile has enough common sense to say, "maybe the structure would have failed at Titanic's bridge, but it certainly isn't the case that the bow itself would not have crumpled when Titanic struck a solid wall of ice at 22mph."

IMHO, you're comparing apples and oranges. Modern cars have crumple zones designed to dissipate the energy of a collision. The knowledge of crumple zones was unknown in 1912, and I don't believe the Titanic was designed to allow the hull to dissipate energy during a collision.

 

[marina_irc]

IMHO, you're comparing apples and oranges. Modern cars have crumple zones designed to dissipate the energy of a collision. The knowledge of crumple zones was unknown in 1912, and I don't believe the Titanic was designed to allow the hull to dissipate energy during a collision.

The operative question is indeed merely whether or not the collision bulkhead holds. If it doesn't in the head-on scenario, she won't necessarily sink, but she would be in a grave fight for her life.

 

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

There are numerous factors involved in the collision. How hard was the ice? Was it rock hard, so there was no "give" in it, or was it somewhat soft, allowing some of the collision's energy to be dissipated through the ice? If damage occurs all the way to the third watertight compartment, then the foremast collapses, and the wireless antenna comes down, making contact with the ship's hull. If the wireless operators aren't aware of this, then the first time they try to send a message, the receiving set will be overloaded, and both radios will short out.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Modern cars have crumple zones designed to dissipate the energy of a collision. The knowledge of crumple zones was unknown in 1912, and I don't believe the Titanic was designed to allow the hull to dissipate energy during a collision.

Ship design creates a crumple zone by its very nature.

 

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

Ship design creates a crumple zone by its very nature.
View attachment 112992

I stand corrected. Thank you, Sam.

 

[PRR5406]

This has little bearing on the idea of a "crumple zone", but four of "Stockholm's" crew were sleeping in their bunks, in the bow of the ship, when it pierced the hull of "Andrea Doria". That bow was crushed back about 40' in the collision. Prior to leaving the scene of the accident, its anchor chains had unwound, tying "Stockholm" the site. The crumpled bow had to be cut away, carrying those remains to the seabed with them. The bow was discovered and identified by divers in the past three years.
Just some facts dealing with the crushing of ship bows.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

In automotive design, a crumple zone is need up front because that is where the engine is usually located, and ingines do not crumple up much in car crashes.

The crumpled bow had to be cut away, carrying those remains to the seabed with them.

Stockholm leaving the scene the next morning.