Hull damage other than what was caused by the iceberg

[Jason White]

Greetings and a happy Turkey Day to all. Here's something that has bothered me for quite sometime.
In the moments before Titanic broke in half during the final plunge, several witnesses testify that they heard a loud noise coming from the ship...a roaring sound accompanied by the sounds of various items breaking. Years afterwards it was determined that this would have been due to everything crashing towards the bow as the ship assumed a nearly vertical posture in the water. (Note that this was before the stern settled back due to the break at the expansion joint.) This would have included the boilers and possibly parts of the reciprocating engines which as every one knows were immensely heavy. If this is the case, why were more holes not seen in the hull. Surely the boilers and other heavy equipment would have crashed through the ship and quite possibly through the hull. In every account of the various expeditions that I have read, no mention was made of this possibility. Is it possible this damage, if it occurred, would lie beneath the mud-line along with the damage caused by the iceberg itself?

 

[Michael H. Standart]

There are no holes from these things crashing forward because it didn't happen that way. Check out photos of the wreck and you'll find that most of the boilers and engines are still where Harland & Wolff placed them nearly a century ago. The notion that the engines and boilers crashed forward dates back to 1912 and was based on the assumption that the hull went vertical just befor it plunged and also that it didn't break up.

The first assumption is questionable because if it had done that, it's almost a certainty that the equipment mentioned would have torn loose from it's mounting as described. The second notion...that of the ship sinking intact...has been positively refuted by the condition of the wreck itself.

There is at least one boiler in the debris field however and I would be interested in knowing where it came from, though this may prove to be impossible to determine. A large portion of what's in the debris field came from the midsection that collapsed in on itself and disintigrated.

Regarding the noise itself, remember that ships breaking up are not silent. This is an extremely violent and noisy event.

 

[Adam Leet]

"There is at least one boiler in the debris field however and I would be interested in knowing where it came from, though this may prove to be impossible to determine."

As I recall, all five boilers from BR #1 were located, with one found on its side. They were positively identified as coming from #1 since they were single-ended, and not double-ended as found in the other boiler rooms.

Check Ballard's book "Discovering the Titanic" and note the ANGUS photos towards the end.

All five boilers in BR #2 are still housed in the bow section, on their mountings, as you said. Still, no indication anything from forward of that compartment went crashing through the bow.

Hope this helps.


Adam

 

[Michael H. Standart]

Hi Adam...thanks for reminding me of that. I'd literally forgotten where the boilers in the debris field had come from.

 

[Erik Wood]

Is there an example of a sunken vessel where it's contents went crashing through the bow as she sank???

If so please send me some references.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

None that I'm aware of. Every casualty I'm aware of either;
•Sinks intact (Andrea Doria, Britannic)
•Sinks intact but spills loose equipment and fittings all over the place (Bismark)
•Burns and sinks (Achille Lauro)
•Breaks up on the surface and spills it's guts all over the place (Derbyshire, Edmund Fitzgerald) or,
•Breaks up on the way down and spills it's guts all over the place. (Durned near ever ship that still has air trapped inside when it goes deep enough to be crushed)
•Explodes as a consequence of accidental fire (Mount Blanc} or combat damage (HMS Hood)

Nice little list there, and not one of them with anything crashing through the bow.

 

[Jason White]

Hmmm...yes I see. Thanks much Michael, as always your insight is greatly appreciated. Happy Thanksgiving to all!

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Wasnt part of bismarcks bow and stern missing when ballard discovered her?

 

[Michael H. Standart]

The bow was and is intact, but the stern is missing, and this speaks to a structural weakness which was a problem for a lot of Germany's captal warships circa World War Two.