Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[Positive]

Apart what anything else that has been said, how on earth would Lightoller have any idea about whether the wheel was turned the wrong way or not?   When the collision ocurred, he was off watch and fast asleep in his cabin!     They would all have had far too much on their plate when they realised the ship was sinking than to start blaming someone for turning the wheel the wrong way after the deed had been done.    It is generally accepted that if the ship had rammed the berg head on, it would have been very badly damaged, but also unlikely to have sunk.     But I can't see anyone deliberately giving an order to hit it head on (human nauture) with only seconds to make the decision.   More likely to try and avoid it and hope for the best.      Even if it had been turned the wrong way, and someone did tell Lightoller, he would probably either have not have believed it, or if he did, would not have breathed a word to anyone, not even his wife!

I take it all with a pinch of salt as a ploy to publicise the book and would not set much store on an author who still thinks the TITANIC was a "boat!"

In any case, as soon as the officer of the watch ordered the wheel hard over, he would be watching the compass and ships head for signs of her answering, and any miistake would very quickly have been put right.

Bob

[Colin Bishop]

Quite right Bob, the idea of the officers having a meeting in a cabin while the ships was sinking under them and passengers clamouring for places in the lifeboats is rather ridiculous. As you say, the OOW would have been watching for the ship's resposnse like a hawk and presumably it did have a rudder indicator on the bridge showing the actual helm position.

Colin

[Perkasaman2]

The information in Wickipedia gives a short but quite comprehensive summary of the incident which is worth reading. especially subsection 7.2 :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic

[dreadnought72]

Back in the days of the whipstaff, we never had these problems.  Starboard was starboard!

[meyer]

back in those days wasnt starboard steerboard ?
 

[sailorboy61]

we still have the same problem today..... say right - mean left, or say left and mean right........ just look in the house of commons!!!!

 

[tony52]

A large model of the 'Titanic' photographed at Bury, North Manchester in 1998.
The builder had problems with this model, it ran into the bank on its maiden voyage. It was sold shortly afterwards.



Tony.

[tony52]

Titanic's Gloria Stuart (Old Rose) dies aged 100.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Titanic-s-Gloria-Stuart-Dies-At-Age-100-20841.html

RIP
Tony

[farrow]

Hi Colin,
Just 2 things. 1, The rudder indicator would be mechanical and unlit in a unlit wheelhouse on a black night.
                     2, A vessel like the Titannic, when it starts to move at speed, I should think would take a long time to check it's turn then move back. After all she only had a single basic barn door rudder.

But at the end of the day it was a tragic accident with no reliable witnesses, with a huge loss of live. If the Master had survived under todays regs he would have probaly gone to prison and most certainly lost his ticket for recklessly hazarding his ship by not proceeding at a SAFE SPEED in Hazarded conditions.

[Colin Bishop]

Good points there, I have seen a reference to the rudder indicator being electrical but that doesn't necessarily mean it would have been illuminated and they would have been concentrated on trying to see the iceberg clearly. As you say, it's really impossible to get to the entire truth after so much time has elapsed.

Straying slightly off the subject, there was also controversy concerning the Bismarck/Hood episode when Admiral Holland was accused of heading directly towards Bismarck for too long which meant that only his forward guns would bear. When the wreck of Hood was discovered the rudder was found to be turned to port showing that orders had actually been given for the ship to open her 'A Arcs' so as to bring her full broadside into action - unfortunately too late!

Colin

[cdsc123]

A large model of the 'Titanic' photographed at Bury, North Manchester in 1998.
The builder had problems with this model, it ran into the bank on its maiden voyage. It was sold shortly afterwards.



Tony.

Nice model. Makes a change from hearing about all the banks running into problems................

[DARLEK1]

Has anyone taking part in this so called "debate" thought about Captain Smith's Past? What types of ships did he "captain" etc?, Did he have a history of "Banging ships up?" So to speak?

 I think you guys need to read a bit of history!

 HIS "Captain Smith's" orders as being the master of the vessell, would have been the standing orders for any bridge OOW , therefore whould have been following his orders in any event, if the standing orders issued by the master where followed in this case, they would have done that "at the time" from the "masters" experience/ orders!  I think you will find that Captain Smith, was about to retire and that this voyage of the Titianic, was his last "as we all know" claim to fame, infamy! What ever you want to call it, the guy was past his "sell by date" and things had moved on, do not forget, he was doing 21 kts in a 60000 ton plus ship, tripple screw, with only the third centre prop as a reversing engine/ manouvering engine.

 I can run rings around you boys with this to be honest, but, sufficed to say, the bloody ship sank at the end of the day and alot of people died cos of it, OH! And by the way the Hood theorists have been proven wrong too!

 It happened, we so called learned, get a life!

 Paul...

 

[Netleyned]

Seconded


Ned

[gondolier88]

tripple screw, with only the third centre prop as a reversing engine/ manouvering engine.

I can run rings around you boys with this to be honest, but, sufficed to say, the bloody ship sank at the end of the day and alot of people died cos of it, OH! And by the way the Hood theorists have been proven wrong too!

 It happened, we so called learned, get a life!

 Paul...

Your 'rings' are a little wonky mate- the centre screw was a slow revving prop off the low pressure exhaust steam turbine- the two outer prop's were the reversing Triple expansion engine shafts.

Greg

[Colin Bishop]

And Titanic's tonnage was 46,000 gross and 52,000 displacement!

Not sure what you mean by Hood theorists Paul, I was simply referring to the reports (and photos) from the expedition which discovered her wreck. I think the theories were all to do with what set off the explosion that actually sank her. I don't suppose that will ever be resolved.

Colin

[DARLEK1]

Your 'rings' are a little wonky mate- the centre screw was a slow revving prop off the low pressure exhaust steam turbine- the two outer prop's were the reversing Triple expansion engine shafts.

Greg

Not according to my drawings mate!

 Paul...

[Netleyned]

http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/titanic_prime_mover~chapter-0~part-3.html

According to the above the turbine was designed to cut in above 50rpm on the recips
The turbine was bypassed for manoeuvering and going astern

Ned

[Bunkerbarge]

I actually find this a very good read:

http://www.professionalmariner.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=076123ADBC76430FA727A38386136514


As with most Titanic related theories there is no definitive conclusion, which I think is why it is still debated to this day and why it continues to interest historians and mariners alike.  I find it fascinating to try to understand the way in which a ships bridge operated in those days as opposed to how we operate a vessel today.  Just reading that attachment above gives you a bit of an insight into the dysfunctional way in which the bridge team operated and how it would be extreemly difficult for any single member of the bridge team to know what was going on.  It's also interesting to note that the compass was lit with an oil lamp!!

As for running rings around anyone, I'm not sure even the experts would be brave enough to say that because at the end of the day there are still many unknowns.  As for captains reaching retirement I have seen first hand marine accidents involving captains both young and old and I firmly believe that we can train for the incident but we really don't know how we will respond until it happens.  When it does is a young captain, alert and clued up on the latest practises but lacking in experience, any better than an old captain with a wealth of experience but not quite as up to date on the latest technologies?

We could debate that one forever and not reach a conclusion as well!!

[tony52]

http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/titanic_prime_mover~chapter-0~part-3.html

After looking at the GA of this installation could anyone please answer the following question -
The centre shaft was driven by a Parsons (through flow) steam turbine. My understanding of steam turbines is that they should always use superheated steam to prevent the damage that would be caused to the blades by using saturated steam. In this set up the steam turbine uses exhaust steam from the after the LP recip. Would the steam be superheated after having been used in the HP, IP and LP recips thus removing the need for superheating or would the low pressure not cause damage to the turbine blades?

Thanks
Tony.

[Colin Bishop]

The book I have got on the building of the Titanic and her sisters stresses that this was an early type of turbine and not very sophisticated. Presumably the design must have worked as Olympic had one and that ship had a long career.

Colin

[Dueller]

Saw a programme about the collision. Simulations seemed to prove that if the ship had turned to run headlong into the iceberg, although it would have caused major damage it would not have opened enough of the hull to sink her unlike the long gash that did.

[Edward Pinniger]

There is also a book on the market which suggests that it wasn't the Titanic that sunk but the Olympic and that the two ships swapped identities when Olympic was being repaired after the collision with HMS Hawke. The theory was that Olympic was structurally weakened by the impact and was sent to sea as the Titanic to find a suitable iceberg so that her owners couild cash in on the insurance. Of course the change was done in great secrecy.....

Is this the book you're thinking of? http://www.amazon.co.uk/Olympic-Titanic-Truth-Behind-Conspiracy/dp/0741419491 - this book actually debunks the Olympic/Titanic switch conspiracy, with detailed explanations of the many ways that the two ships differed from each other (the different promenade deck windows are just the start. I have this book in my own reference library, as it's the best (only?) reference source for converting a Titanic model to Olympic, and has a lot of interesting detail close-up photos of both ships.

[Colin Bishop]

No it was Robin Gardiner's books:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Riddle-Titanic-Robin-Gardiner/dp/0297815288/ref=pd_sim_b_2

and

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Titanic-Ship-That-Never-Sank/dp/0711034869/ref=pd_sim_b_1

Colin

[gondolier88]

After looking at the GA of this installation could anyone please answer the following question -
The centre shaft was driven by a Parsons (through flow) steam turbine. My understanding of steam turbines is that they should always use superheated steam to prevent the damage that would be caused to the blades by using saturated steam. In this set up the steam turbine uses exhaust steam from the after the LP recip. Would the steam be superheated after having been used in the HP, IP and LP recips thus removing the need for superheating or would the low pressure not cause damage to the turbine blades?

Thanks
Tony.

Hi Tony,

A very good qeustion indeed.

The main reason would be the volume of steam at the low pressure exhaust from the recip's would be huge- to pass this through a superheater and makeit worthwhile the superheater would be massive, and so much condensate would be carried over it would be little more than a steam drier.

While today our understanding of superheated steam and it's properties is absolute so we can design turbines that are small in comparison to thier forebearers in relative comparison to the powewr they supply.

However don't go thinking that all high tech modern turbines are superheated and innefficient- the Oberon class subs using a nuclear reactor could not superheat of course, and using a 7 stage turbine they were very efficient, yet the last stage was almost water!

Greg

[Colin Bishop]

I thought the Oberons had conventional power plants?????