Titanic's Hull

[Micheal Napier]

Hi all.

Can anyone tell me how thick the Titanic's hull was, and is such a thickness comparible to the thickness of hull on modern ships?

Thank you for your time.

 

[Brandon Whited]

To Michael,

I believe, but am not certain, that the hull of Titanic was around two feet thick. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong; I would hate to be the bearer of misinformation.

-B.W.

 

[Micheal Napier]

Thank you Brandon,

Just wondering does that mean 60cm thick in the metric system?

 

[Mark Chirnside]

Do you mean how thick the hull plating was?

 

[Micheal Napier]

Sorry if i did not make myself clear.

Yes Mark i am reffering to the hull plating, sorry if I confused anyone.

 

[Dan Cherry]

Micheal,
the hull plating on Titanic was one inch (2.5+/- cm) thick.
I do not know how that compares to today's ships.

 

[Brandon Whited]

Sorry, I did not know you were specifically referring to the plates.

 

[Mark Chirnside]

The question's been answered.

 

[Daniel Klistorner]

1 inch = 2.54cm

 

[Micheal Napier]

Thank you all.

Sorry for not replying sooner but I have been kept busy. Thanks for your responses, they are very helpfull and much appreciated.

Mike

 

[jean leysman]

Hi all,

Maybe I can add some interesting information here:
I heard the hull plates of modern ships are much thinner. Because the steel used now is stronger and less brittle than in Titanic's days.

Maybe the experts on the subject (I'm sure they're out there!) can correct or confirm this.

Leysman

 

[Michael H. Standart]

Hi Jean, the thickness of the steel used depends on several factors such as the quality of the steel used, it's application, spaceing of framework and the size of the ship. I've seen hull cuts on several frigates and destroyers where the plating wasn't all that thick at all. On an aircraft carrier, I've noted hull plating an inch thick. It has to be in order to carry the load of the flight deck which is (Supposedly)armoured in some places and the weight of up to fifty fully loaded warplanes.

Plating used for the hull itself will tend to be thicker as this is the part of the structure that carries the heaviest load. For superstructures, it will tend to be thinner as it's not carrying the whole load of the ships weight. It's also wise to keep it thinner to avoid topweight problems.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart

 

[Stephen Stanger]

Just a dash of irony. I click on the tech section and there are 401 entires. Had to say something under this heading.

 

[Dave Hudson]

Ah, that's true Stephen, but your post makes 402! Oh well, I recal one section having 1912 once. I checked back later and there were 1985.

Spookilly,

David

 

[Cal Haines]

Micheal asked:
Can anyone tell me how thick the Titanic's hull was, and is such a thickness comparible to the thickness of hull on modern ships?

Hi Micheal,

Titanic's hull plating was 1.0" thick in the mid-body of the ship, except near the keel where it was heavier. The bow and stern were plated with 0.6" thick plates, but the spacing of the frames was also reduced fore n' aft.

As for modern ships, the US Navy's Ticonderoga-class cruisers have 0.5" thick hull plating, of course, they only displace about 20% of what Titanic did.

Cal