Ioannis Georgiou
Member
I am not sure if we need to see the pictures.
From the text alone it is the same stuff Aaron has posted here time and again. As we see it is the same cherry picking of testimony to made it fit.
-
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.
Reports of Flooding in Aft Section
- Thread starter Aaron_2016
- Start date
-
- Tags
- flooding
I am not sure if we need to see the pictures.
From the text alone it is the same stuff Aaron has posted here time and again. As we see it is the same cherry picking of testimony to made it fit.
Thank you. I don't know why the images didn't show. I can't seem to edit my analysis, so I will try again.
I believe the water travelled aft along the crew passage, further accelerated by water entering through the steward portholes. As I said before. Joughin saw this water in his cabin which was located as far aft as the engineer's stairwell. I don't see why this water couldn't have travelled further into the 2nd class staircase, as well as pouring down into the engine room, which the last distress message indicated was full up. There's no way for the water to enter the boilers from above due to the port list, and the firemen's doors being inches above the passage decking.
What I also included is where the water entered the 3rd class dining saloon - where I believe stress was added to this open space that lead to the early, shallow angle break.
The break up began at 1.40 PM as indicated in Jack Thayer's sketch, as it was sinking bodily. This means the break up wasn't a dramatic catastrophic event 2 minutes before the final plunge, but actually a gradual development over the sinking. See quotes by Emily Ryerson and Ruth Becker from my last post to how this visually would have looked from their testimonies.
When Ruth Becker demonstrated with her fingers how the ship broke apart, she was ridiculed by experts. This is what happens when we willfully ignore the survivors and what they saw that night.
See quotes by Jack Thayer. This what he saw. I determined the visuals from his 1912 sketch and his description of the funnels profusely expelling smoke and sparks. This is corroborated by Harold Bride.
Bride: Smoke and sparks were rushing out of her funnels . {...} but we heard none. We only saw a big stream of sparks .
We also can't forget the ship broke in three, not two pieces.
Survivor Mrs. Chaffee was in lifeboat 4 which was very close to the ship. She said:
"The ship sank steadily until just at the last, when it plunged rapidly. Just before going down it seemed to writhe (twist), breaking into the three parts into which it was divided. First the middle seemed to go down, lifting bow and stern into the air. Then it twisted the other way, throwing the middle up. Finally the bow went under, and it plunged, stern last."
This force would seem to cause the extensive sloping damage we see on the after end of the bow on the wreck, and caused the bow to propel forward as survivors on the boat deck felt.
Thomas Dillon (On the stern)
"The bow seemed to bob up and then break off like a piece of carrot."
He was correct.
(EDIT: The pictures in my original post seem to have been restored as I was writing this. Apologies for he double post. Feel free to use this as reference for extra information.)
Last edited:
Ioannis Georgiou
Member
It was only one one idiot who very rudely took the microphone away stating the ship did not break to be "was ridiculed by experts".
Also Ruth Becker demonstrates where the ship broke apparat and not how.
And what about you who is ignoring every other survivor testimony which does not fit with what you and/or Aaron has posted so far. It's nearly the same.
I am Aaron and I'm continuing my research since starting this topic. I've been studying Titanic for many years. I was posting before as a guest, but took a break from the internet due to the needless backlash I received from sharing alternative facts that differ from Cameron's 2012 Final Word, which is proven to be inaccurate.
I'm hoping further discourse here can be civil, I don't see why new information should be met with hostility. What I came back to share in particular what indication of severe flooding in the engine room, in addition to the 2nd class aft, as well as an updated break-up sequence.
To answer your question, which testimonies? There's numerous reports from survivors that verify the sequence I presented which I'm happy to share once more.
I'm hoping further discourse here can be civil, I don't see why new information should be met with hostility. What I came back to share in particular what indication of severe flooding in the engine room, in addition to the 2nd class aft, as well as an updated break-up sequence.
To answer your question, which testimonies? There's numerous reports from survivors that verify the sequence I presented which I'm happy to share once more.
Ioannis Georgiou
Member
We know.
We already had discussed you theories several times at different threads back here. I can see nothing new in what you have posted so far.
Thomas Krom
Member
“See quotes by Jack Thayer. This what he saw. I determined the visuals from his 1912 sketch and his description of the funnels profusely expelling smoke and sparks. “
The drawing was not made by John “Jack” Borland Thayer but by Lewis Palmer Skidmore (Second of September 1877-Tenth of June 1955)), a first class American passenger on-board the Carpathia who traveld with his wife Emily Cordelia Skidmore (Third of February 1884- Twenty fourth of September 1959). Not only is the sketch not made by Thayer but John Borland Thayer also said many times in 1912 that the sketch was nothing as he experienced. In a 1912 newspaper he gave the following account (I kept the spelling mistakes which could be found in the article):
This time I was sucked down, and as I came up I was pushed out again and twisted around by a large wave, comming up in the midst of a great deal of small wreckage. As I pushed my hand from my head it touched the cork fender of an overturned life-boat. I lookedup and saw some men on the top and asked them to give me a hand. One of them, who was a stoker helped me up. In a short time the bottom was covered with about twenty-five or thirty men. When I got on this I was facing the ship. The Stern then seemed to rise in the air and stopped at about an angle of 60 degrees. It seemed to hold there for a time and then with a hissing sound it shot right out of the sight with people jumping of the stern. The stern either pivoted around towards our boat or we were sucked towards it, and as we only had one our we could not keep it away. There did not seem to be very much suction and most f us managed to stay on the bottom of our boat."
The account you often used comes from his 1940s memoirs.
Thomas Dillon according the British inquiry specifically stated he saw the ship sinking in-tact (see TIP | British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry | Day 5 | Testimony of Thomas P. Dillon, cont.)
3858. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) Before the ship actually went down did you see her make any movements?
- Yes, she took one final plunge and righted herself again.
3859. She gave a plunge and righted herself again?
- Yes.
3860. Did you notice anything about the funnel?
- Not then.
3861. Did you afterwards notice something about the funnel?
- Yes.
3862. What?
- When she went down.
3863. Was that after you had left the ship?
- Before I left the ship.
3864. What did you notice?
- Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me.
3865. It seemed to fall aft?
- Yes; it seemed to fall up this way.
3866. Was that the aftermost funnel?
- Yes.
3867. Did you get the idea that the ship was breaking in two?
- No.
3868. Did the funnel seem to fall towards you?
- Yes.
3869. (The Commissioner.) That is the after funnel?
- Yes, my Lord.
3870. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) Then you say the ship plunged and righted herself again; and was it then that you dived into the water?
- I did not dive into the water.
3871. How did you get off the ship into the water?
- I went down with the ship, and shoved myself away from her into the water.
3872. Were you sucked down at all?
- About two fathoms.
3873. And did you then come up again to the surface?
- I seemed to get lifted up to the surface.
3874. You got lifted up to the surface?
- Yes.
3875. Were you picked up by one of the boats?
- Yes.
3876. Do you know which one?
- Afterwards I found out; it was No. 4 boat.
3877. Did you have to swim far? Were you swimming long in the water before you were picked up?
- I suppose about twenty minutes.
3878. Did you see any of the other passengers in the water - any other people in the water of any sort?
- Yes.
3879. Many?
- About a thousand.
3880. Were there any others near the boat when you were picked up?
- I do not know.
3881. (The Commissioner.) Did you say "I saw about one thousand people in the water"?
- From my estimation, my Lord.
3882. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) When you came up again, after you were sucked down - you told us you were sucked down and came up again - was the ship still floating then?
- No.
3883. She had sunk when you came up again?
- Well, I saw what I thought would be the afterpart of her coming up and going down again, final.
3884. Then she had not sunk?
- She came up and went down again.
3885. You saw what you thought was the afterpart coming up again?
- I thought it was the ship coming up again. She came up and went down again - finish.
The whole quote of Mrs. Emily Ryerson is as follows (see TIP | United States Senate Inquiry | Day 16 | Affidavit of Emily Ryerson (First Class Passenger, SS Titanic))
“The ropes seemed to stick at one end and the boat tipped, some one called for a knife, but it was not needed until we got into the water, as it was but a short distance, and I then realized for the first time how far the ship had sunk. The deck we left was only about 20 feet from the sea. I could see all the portholes open and water washing in, and the decks still lighted. Then they called out, "How many seamen have you," and they answered one. "That is not enough," said the officer, "I will send you another," and he sent a sailor down the rope. In a few minutes after several other men not sailors came down the ropes over the davits and dropped into our boat. The order was given to pull away, then they rowed off - the sailors, the women, anyone - but made little progress; there was a confusion of orders; we rowed toward the stern, some one shouted something about a gangway, and no one seemed to know what to do. Barrels and chairs were being thrown overboard. Then suddenly, when we still seemed very near, we saw the ship was sinking rapidly. I was in the bow of the boat with my daughter and turned to see the great ship take a plunge toward the bow, the two forward funnels seemed to lean and then she seemed to break in half as if cut with a knife, and as the bow went under the lights went out; the stern stood up for several minutes, black against the stars, and then that, too, plunged down, and there was no sound for what seemed like hours, and then began the cries for help of people drowning all around us, which seemed to go on forever. Some one called out, "Pull for your lives, or you'll be sucked under," and everyone that could rowed like mad. I could see my younger daughter and Mrs. Thayer and Mrs. Astor rowing, but there seemed to be no suction. Then we turned to pick up some of those in the water. Some of the women protested, but others persisted, and we dragged in six or seven men; the men we rescued were principally stokers, stewards, sailors, etc., and were so chilled and frozen already they could hardly move. Two of them died in the stern later and many were raving and moaning and delirious most of the time. We had no lights or compass. There were several babies in the boat, but there was no milk or water. (I believe these were all stowed away somewhere, but no one knew where, and as the bottom of the boat was full of water and the boat full of people it was very difficult to find anything.)”
Let me give you some personal advice regarding the Titanic. No matter how much research we do, not matter how hard we believe in everything we must let theories be theories and not factual. There are always some factors we will have wrong with the breakup, things that do not end up with eyewitness reports from the correct angle. Theories should be kept as theories and not as facts or the truth as you often claimed when you removed comments your old comments sections.
This screenshot was taken on the 10th of December 2019 by a good friend of mine. With the Titanic you must never claim theories as factual when there is a lot of evidence against it. I already expect you will say "You are wrong. There is in-fact a lot of evidence in favour of this theory." but I think many people will disagree with that. I will however say I have nothing personal against you and hope we can talk about this civilized.
The drawing was not made by John “Jack” Borland Thayer but by Lewis Palmer Skidmore (Second of September 1877-Tenth of June 1955)), a first class American passenger on-board the Carpathia who traveld with his wife Emily Cordelia Skidmore (Third of February 1884- Twenty fourth of September 1959). Not only is the sketch not made by Thayer but John Borland Thayer also said many times in 1912 that the sketch was nothing as he experienced. In a 1912 newspaper he gave the following account (I kept the spelling mistakes which could be found in the article):
This time I was sucked down, and as I came up I was pushed out again and twisted around by a large wave, comming up in the midst of a great deal of small wreckage. As I pushed my hand from my head it touched the cork fender of an overturned life-boat. I lookedup and saw some men on the top and asked them to give me a hand. One of them, who was a stoker helped me up. In a short time the bottom was covered with about twenty-five or thirty men. When I got on this I was facing the ship. The Stern then seemed to rise in the air and stopped at about an angle of 60 degrees. It seemed to hold there for a time and then with a hissing sound it shot right out of the sight with people jumping of the stern. The stern either pivoted around towards our boat or we were sucked towards it, and as we only had one our we could not keep it away. There did not seem to be very much suction and most f us managed to stay on the bottom of our boat."
The account you often used comes from his 1940s memoirs.
Thomas Dillon according the British inquiry specifically stated he saw the ship sinking in-tact (see TIP | British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry | Day 5 | Testimony of Thomas P. Dillon, cont.)
3858. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) Before the ship actually went down did you see her make any movements?
- Yes, she took one final plunge and righted herself again.
3859. She gave a plunge and righted herself again?
- Yes.
3860. Did you notice anything about the funnel?
- Not then.
3861. Did you afterwards notice something about the funnel?
- Yes.
3862. What?
- When she went down.
3863. Was that after you had left the ship?
- Before I left the ship.
3864. What did you notice?
- Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me.
3865. It seemed to fall aft?
- Yes; it seemed to fall up this way.
3866. Was that the aftermost funnel?
- Yes.
3867. Did you get the idea that the ship was breaking in two?
- No.
3868. Did the funnel seem to fall towards you?
- Yes.
3869. (The Commissioner.) That is the after funnel?
- Yes, my Lord.
3870. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) Then you say the ship plunged and righted herself again; and was it then that you dived into the water?
- I did not dive into the water.
3871. How did you get off the ship into the water?
- I went down with the ship, and shoved myself away from her into the water.
3872. Were you sucked down at all?
- About two fathoms.
3873. And did you then come up again to the surface?
- I seemed to get lifted up to the surface.
3874. You got lifted up to the surface?
- Yes.
3875. Were you picked up by one of the boats?
- Yes.
3876. Do you know which one?
- Afterwards I found out; it was No. 4 boat.
3877. Did you have to swim far? Were you swimming long in the water before you were picked up?
- I suppose about twenty minutes.
3878. Did you see any of the other passengers in the water - any other people in the water of any sort?
- Yes.
3879. Many?
- About a thousand.
3880. Were there any others near the boat when you were picked up?
- I do not know.
3881. (The Commissioner.) Did you say "I saw about one thousand people in the water"?
- From my estimation, my Lord.
3882. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) When you came up again, after you were sucked down - you told us you were sucked down and came up again - was the ship still floating then?
- No.
3883. She had sunk when you came up again?
- Well, I saw what I thought would be the afterpart of her coming up and going down again, final.
3884. Then she had not sunk?
- She came up and went down again.
3885. You saw what you thought was the afterpart coming up again?
- I thought it was the ship coming up again. She came up and went down again - finish.
The whole quote of Mrs. Emily Ryerson is as follows (see TIP | United States Senate Inquiry | Day 16 | Affidavit of Emily Ryerson (First Class Passenger, SS Titanic))
“The ropes seemed to stick at one end and the boat tipped, some one called for a knife, but it was not needed until we got into the water, as it was but a short distance, and I then realized for the first time how far the ship had sunk. The deck we left was only about 20 feet from the sea. I could see all the portholes open and water washing in, and the decks still lighted. Then they called out, "How many seamen have you," and they answered one. "That is not enough," said the officer, "I will send you another," and he sent a sailor down the rope. In a few minutes after several other men not sailors came down the ropes over the davits and dropped into our boat. The order was given to pull away, then they rowed off - the sailors, the women, anyone - but made little progress; there was a confusion of orders; we rowed toward the stern, some one shouted something about a gangway, and no one seemed to know what to do. Barrels and chairs were being thrown overboard. Then suddenly, when we still seemed very near, we saw the ship was sinking rapidly. I was in the bow of the boat with my daughter and turned to see the great ship take a plunge toward the bow, the two forward funnels seemed to lean and then she seemed to break in half as if cut with a knife, and as the bow went under the lights went out; the stern stood up for several minutes, black against the stars, and then that, too, plunged down, and there was no sound for what seemed like hours, and then began the cries for help of people drowning all around us, which seemed to go on forever. Some one called out, "Pull for your lives, or you'll be sucked under," and everyone that could rowed like mad. I could see my younger daughter and Mrs. Thayer and Mrs. Astor rowing, but there seemed to be no suction. Then we turned to pick up some of those in the water. Some of the women protested, but others persisted, and we dragged in six or seven men; the men we rescued were principally stokers, stewards, sailors, etc., and were so chilled and frozen already they could hardly move. Two of them died in the stern later and many were raving and moaning and delirious most of the time. We had no lights or compass. There were several babies in the boat, but there was no milk or water. (I believe these were all stowed away somewhere, but no one knew where, and as the bottom of the boat was full of water and the boat full of people it was very difficult to find anything.)”
Let me give you some personal advice regarding the Titanic. No matter how much research we do, not matter how hard we believe in everything we must let theories be theories and not factual. There are always some factors we will have wrong with the breakup, things that do not end up with eyewitness reports from the correct angle. Theories should be kept as theories and not as facts or the truth as you often claimed when you removed comments your old comments sections.
This screenshot was taken on the 10th of December 2019 by a good friend of mine. With the Titanic you must never claim theories as factual when there is a lot of evidence against it. I already expect you will say "You are wrong. There is in-fact a lot of evidence in favour of this theory." but I think many people will disagree with that. I will however say I have nothing personal against you and hope we can talk about this civilized.
It says sketches by Jack Thayer right there in the article. Here's proof.
Jack Thayer drew the outlines and gave it to Skidmore after to shade in the details. This is how it looked before he gave it to Skidmore.
Thomas Dillon observed the ship looking intact as the fourth funnel cantered aft. This is what he was seeing. As we now know the bow lifted upward as observed by numerous testimonies (Ida Hippach, Lady Duff-Gordon, Carrie Chaffee, Clear Cameron, and dozens of others) what he would have been seeing was a pronounced sheer. This is what survivors on the starboard side saw.
This is what it would have looked from Dillons vantage point before he rode the stern into the water.
It is the same effect one would see when looking down a corridor midship.
I blocked that commenter because they were spamming my channel with information from Titanic_Animations. His followers have been wrongfully copy-striking my videos to silence survivors.
I want you to watch this video. I provided the pertinent survivor quotes and my research to Logan Dublin University who has kindly uploaded my work after review from his physics professor to confirm the science. He has shut off commenting to prevent further spam attacks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph2fmIbCiE4
I would be amicable to have a civil, informative discussion with you after you understand how Titanic sank.
Jack Thayer drew the outlines and gave it to Skidmore after to shade in the details. This is how it looked before he gave it to Skidmore.
Thomas Dillon observed the ship looking intact as the fourth funnel cantered aft. This is what he was seeing. As we now know the bow lifted upward as observed by numerous testimonies (Ida Hippach, Lady Duff-Gordon, Carrie Chaffee, Clear Cameron, and dozens of others) what he would have been seeing was a pronounced sheer. This is what survivors on the starboard side saw.
This is what it would have looked from Dillons vantage point before he rode the stern into the water.
It is the same effect one would see when looking down a corridor midship.
I blocked that commenter because they were spamming my channel with information from Titanic_Animations. His followers have been wrongfully copy-striking my videos to silence survivors.
I want you to watch this video. I provided the pertinent survivor quotes and my research to Logan Dublin University who has kindly uploaded my work after review from his physics professor to confirm the science. He has shut off commenting to prevent further spam attacks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph2fmIbCiE4
I would be amicable to have a civil, informative discussion with you after you understand how Titanic sank.
Attachments
Last edited:
Thomas Krom
Member
That comment was writen a month before the video of Titanic animations was released that critized your videos was uploaded however.
And if you consider the account I posted before which was in the newspaper "The Press" on the 26th of April it does not match it at all.
And if you consider the account I posted before which was in the newspaper "The Press" on the 26th of April it does not match it at all.
Last edited:
James Long
Member
Hello Aaron. I see above you has used the quotes supplied by John "Jack" Borland Thayer III. I have had the honor of having several dreams in which I engaged in lengthy conversations with this amazing fellow. These have all occurred in the last 6 months. And yes, I know they are dreams. But in them, I have gathered so much information. For instance, he said "blow or buckle upwards, not "bow or buckle upwards." Also, throughout many of the dreams, he has denied any involvement with the Skidmore drawings, saying he only told Skidmore what he saw. Skidmore misinterpreted him. I can say without a doubt in my mind that contorting the legacy of a man who lost so much, who suffered so much tragedy, is an awful thing. I have always felt a spiritual connection to Jack Thayer. In summary, please do not insult the legacy of this amazing person who the world lost all too soon.
I got many spammers before and after. I've been attacked for my videos and it got worse after TA's smear video. I honestly don't recall which one because I've had to delete so many before my channel got taken down but it was the video that first got wrongly copy-striked before my channel was removed. It goes to show the level people stoop.
3864. What did you notice?
- Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me.
3865. It seemed to fall aft?
- Yes; it seemed to fall up this way.
3866. Was that the aftermost funnel?
- Yes.
3867. Did you get the idea that the ship was breaking in two?
- No.
3868. Did the funnel seem to fall towards you?
- Yes.
3869. (The Commissioner.) That is the after funnel?
- Yes, my Lord.
It fits perfectly.
- Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me.
3865. It seemed to fall aft?
- Yes; it seemed to fall up this way.
3866. Was that the aftermost funnel?
- Yes.
3867. Did you get the idea that the ship was breaking in two?
- No.
3868. Did the funnel seem to fall towards you?
- Yes.
3869. (The Commissioner.) That is the after funnel?
- Yes, my Lord.
It fits perfectly.
Thomas Krom
Member
This was not a spammer however, this was a person who came with arguments again the theory, some of which I supplied to him, which he posted to your comment section in a respectable manner. I want to give you some personal advice in a respectable manner, do not claim any theory as factual. The breakup is one of the things we will never have 100% correct since there will be always factors we will have wrong. We must also not make conclusions about certain things and taken it into the wrong context. Two of the most talented Titanic historians, Don Lynch and Ken Marshall, knew Ruth Becker for many years and if she truly saw the bow resurfacing she would certainly had told them that.
You are right. None of us were there. But we can't just ignore an overwhelming number of testimonies that saw the bow resurface, many of these from Boat 4 which adhered closely to the ship.
We ignored testimonies about the break up, and proven wrong.
We ignored survivors who saw the ship break in the middle, and not between third and fourth funnels, and we wrong.
I see a dangerous pattern here. I've been showing the survivors testimonies over and over, exactly what they said, and slowly experts are discovering the truth without credit to my work. It's a matter of time with the forensics of the break up too.
We ignored testimonies about the break up, and proven wrong.
We ignored survivors who saw the ship break in the middle, and not between third and fourth funnels, and we wrong.
I see a dangerous pattern here. I've been showing the survivors testimonies over and over, exactly what they said, and slowly experts are discovering the truth without credit to my work. It's a matter of time with the forensics of the break up too.
Thomas Krom
Member
Regarding the breakup we have to look at every account that mentions the breakup to have a good insight, a good recommendation is to read The Facts - What Did the Survivors which looks deep into every eyewitness accounts of survivors regarding the breakup.
Theories should be kept theories however and not the truth/facts in my opinion and when it is a theory it should be mentioned it is just a theory. When there is evidence against any theory you should look into them deep, look if your sources are valid, invalid or possibly even misinterpreted. Never give information unless you are perfectly sure, better to say you are not sure, but will look the matter up as I always say.
No historian acknowledges ,as far I am aware, the bow resurfacing, including Dr. Paul Lee although indeed some of the accounts you mostly used are word for word can be found on his sinking page his end conclusion does not conclude that statement. Some of these talented historians are here on this message board. From the talented Samuel Halpern who along with many other talented historians wrote the book “Report into the loss of the SS Titanic” which looked much deeper into the inquiry including the breakup to the writers of the book “On a sea of glass”, which included a whole appendix with countless accounts regarding to the breakup.
Theories should be kept theories however and not the truth/facts in my opinion and when it is a theory it should be mentioned it is just a theory. When there is evidence against any theory you should look into them deep, look if your sources are valid, invalid or possibly even misinterpreted. Never give information unless you are perfectly sure, better to say you are not sure, but will look the matter up as I always say.
No historian acknowledges ,as far I am aware, the bow resurfacing, including Dr. Paul Lee although indeed some of the accounts you mostly used are word for word can be found on his sinking page his end conclusion does not conclude that statement. Some of these talented historians are here on this message board. From the talented Samuel Halpern who along with many other talented historians wrote the book “Report into the loss of the SS Titanic” which looked much deeper into the inquiry including the breakup to the writers of the book “On a sea of glass”, which included a whole appendix with countless accounts regarding to the breakup.
Hey, Aaron! The "bow resurfacing" was most likely the bow correcting her port list and listing slightly to starboard after she twisted, buckled, and broke from the stern, or at least that's what I believe. There is no way the bow would've dramatically resurfaced at such a high angle later in the sinking. Even if the bow still had plenty of air inside, she would not have dramatically resurfaced from the water that way. It would've been much subtler. I think the second picture above more accurately demonstrates the break-up process than the later photos. Here's my version for reference:
Numerous eyewitness accounts and the wreck demonstrate the fact that the two forward funnels fell on the starboard side and crushed the gymnasium and the starboard bridge wing.
At any rate, the bow would retain a downward tilt as the ship was progressively sinking but list on her sides while doing so.
Last edited:
){kind=link}