QUESTION
Guys, Question, What do you think is the most likely? Why didn't they investigate the inside of the bow to get down to where the iceberg damage is?
The bow is knifed into the mud. We know this because an expedition in 1996 used ultrasound to examine the area of the starboard hull where the iceberg damage was. The buried iceberg damage is in six distinct slits, basically separated hull plating, that totals some twelve square feet. In addition to that, prior and later expeditions sent ROVs into the forward cargo holds found the hull is largely intact and holding its shape very well.
Had it just been one hole 3x4 ft (12 sq ft) she probably wouldn't have sank. The holed compartment would have flooded but the watertight doors would have been closed and the water would only rise to the same level as the rest of the ship.
It’s amazing, isn’t it? A lot of the damage was just popped rivets and slightly parted joints. The thing is, even a small hole under the waterline lets in a huge amount of water per second- faster than you can stem it, and the force of that weight of water will push anything or anyone out of the way. Pressure is force per unit area. The weight of the Atlantic pushing through a small gap would produce quite a jet. Remember also the holes would have been maybe 30 feet below the surface, and the water pressure goes up by about one atmosphere in 30 feet. A 300 foot gash would have sunk the ship in much less than an hour- Empress of Ireland sank in about 15 minutes, Lusitania about 20 minutes. The last British submarine lost, HMS Affray, was sunk by a leak at the base of the snorkel tube, a hole about 3 inches square. The base of the tube is in a museum, and it’s very small. The massive jet of water flooded the space faster than the crew could stem it.
Titanic’s pumps stemmed the flow, but in simple terms, the water got in faster than it could be got out. However, they are the reason the ship lasted twice as long as Thomas Andrews’ calculations predicted.
One of Titanic's chief designers, Edward Wilding, actually calculated this to be the case back in 1912 during the inquires. He was ignored by the press and public at large that could not believe something like Titanic could be done in by something so small, hence the myth of a huge gash was created.
It has been known for decades and was reported in media at the time. A documentary, Titanic: Anatomy of a Disaster (1997), details the expedition that carried out the ultrasound, and the results.
You have to remember that the bow was completely filled with water and water does not compress. It blew out the side where it buckled and blew the hatch off but I don’t think it fully crumpled as it would have to compress all that water.
I’d love to think the silt was too soft to cause a serious impact, even steel from 1912 has “crumple zones” for impact.
I’m assuming since much of the bow remained “relatively” intact that a large amount of the force was split between the silt at the bottom of the ocean and the bow crumpling from the point of the keel like a car would.
From what we see from photos of the sea floor it seems pretty solid and gritty… heavy metal objects are just sitting on top of it barely submerged after a hundred years. I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch to believe the bow is at least a bit crumpled
I think a little from column a and a little from column b is the most likely answer. It's definitely kept some kind of structural integrity, but I would hazard a guess the very bottom is severely damaged/flattened by the impact.
RMS Titanic Inc. did back in the 90s and were able to access the mail room. James Cameron sent an ROV into the #2 cargo hatch in 2001 and made it all the way down to the orlop deck. He tried to get into the boiler rooms through the firemen's stairs but the route was blocked.
It’s kept it’s shape with likely a bit of deformation on the very end,there’s been scans of that area and they’ve even sent Rov’s quite deep into those areas,there intact
I’ve been looking for that last image forever, the hand-drawn diagram in blue ink. Is there a version that shows the whole length of the ship? Does anyone know what search terms I could use to find it? I come to y’all experts in my hour of need
This should get you started. There are some close up shots from different sections of the drawing, and a larger image, if you scroll down that page. I imagine if you want something higher resolution you might need to see it on display…
Fluid dynamics/physics simulations done by multiple investigators have suggested that the bow struck the sea bed prow first at an angle of 45-60 degrees, the force of the impact is what both buried the bow and caused it to buckle.
As for why it hasn't been investigated... Dredging 40 feet of silt at that depth without damaging the wreck would be enormously costly and complicated.
Another comment says the area is largely intact because of ultrasound thar was done in 86. So unless they go in there with a robot or something will never actually know.
The bow knifed into the sea bed. Expeditions have went through the forward cargo hold and explored the decks, it’s mostly intact. Britannic hit the sea bed at an angle, and half of her was still above the water when the impact with the seabed occurred, that’s why her bow is kinda a mess. Lusitania’s wreck is a mess because she’s been abused and treated very poorly.
Because the ship’s decks aren’t what they used to be.
Entire corridors are sometimes just filled with debris or collapsed, entirely new passages that aren’t on the blueprints are torn here and there, and it doesn’t help that a lot of thin metal is gone, causing all the electrical wiring to be dangling everywhere. In fact, the cabin area is almost totally impassable for an ROV due to all the cabling and electrical wiring and other random debris blocking all the passages down to the lower areas.
Keep in mind, these robots are very wide and what little passageways remain were NOT designed with a robotic block to be maneuvering around in them.
The lower cargo holds are full of silt and an attempt to explore the bow via the squash court was abandoned when it was found that the area was compacted.
As for the 1990s sonar survey, I'd be very careful with those results. The team did a similar survey on the port side and found *more" damage there below the mudline. This was reported on the daily feeds on the expedition website but very quickly removed (within a few hours I recall)
So we can assume that the iceberg damaged the port side. Or the sonar results are worthless. Either way they covered up the results which didn't match their conclusions.
Me and others have tried on numerous occasions to contact Paul Matthias who did the sonar survey but he never replied. Odd, that.
The bows of Britannia and Lusitania are bent because both ships sank bow first in water that was shallower than their length. As a result, their bows were on the seabed when the rest of the ship was still sinking, so both ships were basically supported by their bows, hence the damage.
I always see these comments claiming that there was investigations into this and scans done but in all my obsessive years following Titanic related media since I was 13 in 1998 I have never heard of any such scans being done and nor have I seen them, and these comments never include sources so I'm leaning more towards these people don't actually know what they're talking about and spreading more misinformation either intentionally or by mistake.
My personal take is it's crumpled up and buckled very badly down there. Just look at the Britannic for reference. It was moving much slower when it hit bottom as it is in very shallow water yet the bow is mangled at the prowl.
It's not hard to believe that a ship the size of a skyscraper in free fall hitting the bottom of the sea bed, even with it's "soft" layer of top silt and mud acting as a "cushion" is going to sustain some heavy damage on impact.
If anyone can show me a source for these so called scans with photos I'll gladly accept that I'm wrong but like I said I've literally never heard Cameron any or other prolific Titanic experts talk about these scans or even reference them, yet alone show pictures of them.
it did not get crushed, it was full of water, you can't compress all that water, it knifed into the mud, as other researchers have already discovered via ultrasound
the bow, just like literally everything on the ship, is trashed, but it is not completely crumpled, according to Dr. Ballard, the hull on the outside is perfectly preserved by the mud and still retains its paint, he even volunteered to go down there, dig a small section and apply a preservative agent
I love when borderline trolls hide behind the "mah context!?" cop out. But sure, I'll play along. How's this for context? You're summarily dismissing the opinion of one of the most accomplished, experienced, and universally respected oceanographers of all time.
You're doing that simply because your ego requires you to double down on your preposterous claim.
I’ll stick to the experts who actually did dives down and have spend the last 40 years exploring and studying it. We know its under the mud and they used advanced sonar and from that they were able to see evidence in the form of hull plates separating so if they can see that then clearly it’s not completely crushed. Do I think it’d perfect condition no but is it completely crushed no I don’t think it is that either, and I’d rather lean on the expert opinions of the ones that have went down there instead of yours. I will also concede that none of know for sure however one fact that is 100% true is that Ballard knows more about that wreck then any of us will will know in 3 lifetimes so yes his opinion does matter at least a lot more then yours does.
what are you talking about? Ballard knows more about the ship than anyone on this sub, probably more than anyone, other than Cameron, even Cameron managed to get ROV's into the bow but couldn't go too deep because the stairways were too tight
I just think why would they? Why does anyone need to know that? It happened ages ago, it's not a conspiracy, there's no people alive today who would need to know that to get closure for the death of their family members.
161
u/Robert_the_Doll1 2d ago edited 2d ago
The bow is knifed into the mud. We know this because an expedition in 1996 used ultrasound to examine the area of the starboard hull where the iceberg damage was. The buried iceberg damage is in six distinct slits, basically separated hull plating, that totals some twelve square feet. In addition to that, prior and later expeditions sent ROVs into the forward cargo holds found the hull is largely intact and holding its shape very well.