Good morning, Kent: Although I was aware that the potential for fiasco resulting from the longitudinal bulkhead was discussed before the disaster, it still strikes me as not really being a factor in what happened.
Which is why I wish that they'd get around to exploring what remains of the impact area, and not waste time forward in the cargo area looking for 'secret' contraband, the existence of which has been known since 1915.
The initial list did not last even five minutes. She was rolling out of it in the time it took passengers to walk from the dining room to the staircase. Likewise, in the time it took Ogden and Mary Hammond to walk directly from the lounge to the location of 20/22, the list had gone.
The Lusitania had taken on water fast enough that in the time it took D.C. Harris to run to his cabin and then the forward end of the superstructure, the water had come up as far as the well deck, from which he stepped overboard. Harris was an excellent witness. ALL details of the 10 page account he wrote two days later match up with other accounts, and he did not exaggerate. He witnessed the launch of boat #1, with three people in it, from in the water. It is known from other accounts that the launching of #1 came relatively early in the sequence of the disaster. My hunch...since no one survived to confirm or rebut this, and no one seems interested in exploring this area of the wreck... is that something caused damage massive enough to compromise the longitudinal bulkhead, and caused the ship to fill at a rate fast enough to have the bow awash in under 7 minutes.
The open, or broken, portholes in the vicinity of the explosion would have increased the list, by causing more water to enter the ship on the 'downhill' side, as happened in many disasters involving warm weather sinkings and an initial list. But quite the opposite seems to have happened: as more water entered thru portholes, the list decreased and the ship seemed to become steadier. As far as I know, the only accounts mentioning open portholes allowing an influx of water (and there are a small handful)were written by people who ventured to D and E decks AFTER the list abated.
The open porthole issue was discussed, rather tenaciously, at the Limitation of Liability hearings. But, I dont think any witnesses testified that they saw water entering thru them; only that many portholes on both sides of the ship, in first class, were open.
Justicia was not at all similar to the Lusitania, IF you believe in the second explosion. I do NOT believe in the second, heavier, explosion, but just to play devil's advocate on behalf of those who DO believe in a heavy detonation followed by a second, massive, detonation, the Justicia did not have two catastrophic explosions in virtually the same spot and within seconds of one another. If one truly believes in the second, massive, explosion theory, it is not hard to imagine an unusual amount of internal damage occurring in its general area.
You'd be better off using the Mt Vernon as an example. Almost the same size as the Lusitania, one torpedo, and drew water fast enough that her lower passenger deck was soon awash. In that case, only the facts that the torpedo did not compromise her watertight bulkheads and she had a well trained crew saved her, and there was no massive list. I posted the entire official account of that event on ET...it's in the archive, somewhere.
>Did the partially submerged bow come back up when the Lusitania's list righted itself to some extent?
Possibly. Something happened around minute 15, that caused a number of witnesses watching from on and around the docking bridge, aft, to claim on May 8-14, that the bow had suddenly broken off. Obviously, it hadn't, but SOMETHING took place far forward that caused people far aft to believe that the bow had detached.
Also, several dozen witnesses, both in the lifeboats and in the water, described an event amidships on the starboard side, that they invariably described as the sudden collapse of a portion of the ship's side. What did they see? Hard to say, but dozens of people, all in the same general area and writing independently of one another, used strikingly similar language in describing it. This tends to reenforce the theory that there was unusually heavy damage in the blast area...but no one ever explores there, so who knows?
