The Jack Grimm propeller photo or image?

[Aaron_2016]

Could we finally end this fallacious speculation? If you use a 3D paint image of 3-bladed propeller, and orient it so that it fits the orientation in the picture of Titanic's prop on the sea bottom, you can easily see that the third prop would be buried in the mud.
View attachment 40227

The gap between the third blade is far too big. The mounting for the 3rd blade is clearly not there.

The angle of the blades in your picture (right) is not correct. It would look more like this (left).

You can see the mounting that surrounded the blade should be visible above the sand, but it is not there. There is a huge gap were it is supposed to be. The blade and its mounting are gone. The sand around that immediate area is not disturbed. There is no mound of sand pushed up to indicate a blade is underneath, and there is no scarring in the sand adjacent to the propeller which would have been caused when the stern turned clockwise as it struck the seabed, so I see still see no reason to believe there is a blade underneath.



.

 

[Ioannis Georgiou]

There is no mound of sand pushed up to indicate a blade is underneath, and there is no scarring in the sand adjacent to the propeller which would have been caused when the stern turned clockwise as it struck the seabed, so I see still see no reason to believe there is a blade underneath.

Here is the port one, looks nearly the same as the starboard one. So it's missing on both ones. Must be sure close to the blade Jack Grimm found & both cut off from the iceberg!

 

[Aaron_2016]

Here is the port one, looks nearly the same as the starboard one. So it's missing on both ones. Must be sure close to the blade Jack Grimm found & both cut off from the iceberg!

The sand has been driven up around the port propeller because the 3rd blade is underneath. The stern also slammed into the sea floor on its port side because the port propeller is bent inwards towards the hull. That means the full force and weight of the stern was pushing the port propeller hard into the sand.

The starboard propeller was higher up and if the 3rd blade was still attached it would have dragged a deep line into the mud as the stern skidded around clockwise before coming to a stop. The impressions in the sand caused by the stern skidding clockwise are still there today. There is nothing around the starboard propeller to indicate the blade was attached. No marks, no mound of sand, not even a line carved into the sand as she skidded clockwise. Zero evidence to suggest the blade is underneath.


If the 3rd blade was still intact it would be around here. The mounting would be visible - it's not. The sand would be driven up around the propeller - it's not. There would be a deep impression (line in the sand) as the stern corkscrewed and came to a stop - there's not. I see no reason at all to believe the 3rd blade is underneath.

.

 

[Aaron_2016]

Another view of the starboard propeller.

.

 

[Aaron_2016]

Here we see a comparison. I rotated the starboard propeller on the wreck. As we can see there is no trace of the 3rd blade. Not even the mounted base that surrounded the blade. It's gone.

As usual the survivors got it right and the historians got it wrong.

.

 

[Rob Lawes]

So how did the two heavy blades on the starboard prop that must weigh at least 6 or 7 tons each, manage to stay at the top?

The weight and your "skidding" theory would have meant the blades that were there would have dug in and the so called missing one would be at the top.

 

[Ioannis Georgiou]

As usual the survivors got it right and the historians got it wrong.

Said by the same person who for years was attacking everyone who points out that the "full speed astern order was wrong" and put forward survivors who mentioned it were right. Now the vibration was not the engines going full astern but a lost blade. However I am done with it.

 

[Aaron_2016]

Said by the same person who for years was attacking everyone who points out that the "full speed astern order was wrong" and put forward survivors who mentioned it were right. Now the vibration was not the engines going full astern but a lost blade. However I am done with it.

I don't attack anyone. Everybody is welcome to share their beliefs without fear of ridicule. I stick to my beliefs and defend my research. I uphold my defence, and never take the offensive approach which time and time again has been directed against me which has resulted in the moderators stepping in to defend me. Just accept we all share different beliefs.

So how did the two heavy blades on the starboard prop that must weigh at least 6 or 7 tons each, manage to stay at the top?

The weight and your "skidding" theory would have meant the blades that were there would have dug in and the so called missing one would be at the top.

It's not my skidding theory. You can see there is a skidding mark smeared against the sea floor where the stern has skidded clockwise. We have no evidence that the remaining starboard blades were facing down as she slid across the seabed. If there had been a 3rd blade underneath then I believe it would have driven a deep impression and dragged a line across the sand with the hull until she stopped.

.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Aaron, if you are going to mark up my picture, as you did in post #31 above, then please do it right!

 

[Mark Baber]

Moderator's hat on:

Focus on the subject, not the participants.

Moderator's hat off.

 

[Georges Guay]

We also know that an engine order was given, most likely to stop. When the engines were brought to a stop the shafts stop turning and the propellers are dragged through the water causing them to cavitate like hell. That would cause an appreciable amount of vibration especially through the stern area of the ship.

I have a few questions…

We close the Throttle Valve (steam intake). The water flow & pressure against the blades is enormous. The turning momentum of the propeller would not be that much less. The Cross Head slide (between the piston and the connecting rod) is kept oiled & greasy to reduce friction to minimum, as all moving parts.

• So how do we stop a main engine from turning freely Ahead?
• Could we set the Reversing Lever to Astern on the fly?
• How could we stop the Central Propeller turning ahead while the vessel is moving too speedily ahead?

Note; from experience, we feel much more vibrations when the propeller is turning than when it is stop. I never felt any vibrations when the prop was stop even at good speed. When we go astern while moving ahead, then there is absolutely no doubt about the vibrations. If we turn the wheel hard over at good speed, some vessels vibrate so much that we believe that we have lost the rudder (and at the limit, some would do like Kort Nozzle).

 

[Ioannis Georgiou]

This was created before the stern ever touched the sea floor (it is explained in that documentary). There is no way the stern slid across the sea bed! The stern end hit the bottom first burring the centre propeller and rudder under the mud (the rudder is visible from up to around G Deck) bent the shafts with the outside props up to F Deck.

 

[Rob Lawes]

I have a few questions…

We close the Throttle Valve (steam intake). The water flow & pressure against the blades is enormous. The turning momentum of the propeller would not be that much less. The Cross Head slide (between the piston and the connecting rod) is kept oiled & greasy to reduce friction to minimum, as all moving parts.

• So how do we stop a main engine from turning freely Ahead?
• Could we set the Reversing Lever to Astern on the fly?
• How could we stop the Central Propeller turning ahead while the vessel is moving too speedily ahead?

Note; from experience, we feel much more vibrations when the propeller is turning than when it is stop. I never felt any vibrations when the prop was stop even at good speed. When we go astern while moving ahead, then there is absolutely no doubt about the vibrations. If we turn the wheel hard over at good speed, some vessels vibrate so much that we believe that we have lost the rudder (and at the limit, some would do like Kort Nozzle).

Unfortunately, I made an assumption that the shafts may have been braked when stopping or that when stopping the engines, the props were not trailed I.e. were free to rotate. I'll gladly concede the point if it is not correct.

 

[Georges Guay]

Listen at the vibrations when the wheel is turned over !



(The captain must have given a kick on the engine at the same time…)

 

[richard de kerbrech]

Yet again, you show a picture with the upper blade in nearly the same position as that in the Titanic picture and show an arrow pointing to the side of the boss when the fixing would start much lower than that.

View attachment 40225

Aaron. If you draw centre lines through the two blades such that they meet in the centre hub of the boss, it will be 120 degrees . By simple geometry bisect this and and extend it through and beyond the centre of the hub. This is where the centre line of the embedded blade will be.To whit, this has already been demonstrated by Messrs Halpern & Lawes. Also please take notice of the comments of Mr Georgious.
These gentlemen have made a lifetime study of the Titanic, believe me they know what they're on about.
Concede with honour but also enjoy your research.