Posted on 01/05/2017 1:48:18 PM PST by Red Badger
Did an intense fire on board R.M.S. Titanic lead to one of the worst disaster's in maritime history?
A new documentary by author and journalist Senan Molony suggests the emergence of pictures hidden in a forgotten album for a century prove that the supposedly unsinkable passenger ship was weakened by a smoldering coal fire even before it left on its catastrophic maiden voyage.
Titanic, which at the time of its sinking in 1912 was the biggest ship afloat, hit an iceberg in the north Atlantic on the night of April 14 and went down with the loss of about 1,500 lives. Some 700 people survived.
Molony said the existence of a fire inside one of the coal bunkers is well documented -- but its significance underplayed.
In the documentary Titanic: The New Evidence, broadcast on the UK's Channel 4 on New Year's Day, Molony reveals pictures taken in early April 1912 shortly before Titanic started its trans-Atlantic voyage. They show a mark on the White Star ocean liner's starboard side near the seat of the fire, and the point of the collision.
"The anomaly is exactly the place where it struck the iceberg," he told CNN.
Molony said his research suggests the intense fire in one of the coal bunkers, which were three storeys high, reached temperatures of around 1,000 degrees, warped the bulkhead steel and made it brittle.
"The bulkhead was not worthy of the name. It completely compromised the ship and led to an accelerated sinking -- Titanic couldn't stay afloat long enough for an effective rescue," he said.
Molony said the pictures were taken at the Harland and Wolff shipyard in Belfast, Northern Ireland, by John Westbreech Kempster on the first two days of April 1912 -- just over a week before it sailed, bound for New York City.
In the documentary he describes the pictures as "the Titanic equivalent of Tutankhamun's tomb."
He told CNN that they were contained in an album which had been put up for sale at an auction in England at the time of the centenary in 2012.
The pictures immediately stirred his interest. The journalist who is political editor of the Irish Daily Mail had been interested in the Titanic story since he was a child.
After the discovery of the ship on the ocean floor in 1985 he researched and wrote a book about the Irish passengers on board.
"I'm really excited about some new evidence," he told CNN. "I've always been fascinated by why it (the Titanic) sped up towards an ice field."
He said his investigations suggest that workers in the boiler room may have been trying to clear the burning coal bunker -- and that the only place to put the coal was in the ship's furnaces, which would have made Titanic steam on at a higher speed.
Not everyone is convinced of the argument.
David Hill, former secretary of the British Titanic Society, told The Times newspaper: "There certainly was a fire. Was it a life-changer? It's my personal opinion that it didn't make a difference."
In a statement sent to CNN, the convention officer for the British Titanic Society Nikki Allen, said the documentary had "ignited discussion around the world."
"The program and its contents is certainly welcome," she said.
"It will enable us to encourage healthy discussion among our membership so that they can decide for themselves on information placed before them so as to inform their own opinion.
"Most satisfying to us, as I'm sure to other like-minded societies is the reaction to Senan Molony's presentation. It clearly shows that although the Titanic sank with great loss of life almost 105 years ago, the story of the vessel and her passengers and crew is still very much alive, for which we are grateful."
No matter what other things may have been wrong with the ship. Hitting the iceberg is the cause of sinking. If it doesn’t hit the ice it doesn’t sink. End of story.
Over half the dead in the Wilhelm Gustloff sinking were children. The ship was on an evacuation mission.
There are leftists in Germany today who argue that the torpedoing of the Gustloff was a legitimate act of war.
I just spent 2 weeks on a cruise ship the Titanic sank because it did not have stabilizers its as simple as that. today when they yell Colombian coffee is now being served on the port side they compensate for the rush of people
That is still hilarious who said that first ? Don Rickles ?
While that may be, one should also consider the fact that the kriegsmarine repainted it from hospital ship colors to regular navy gray. S-13 saw the AA guns and figured her for a warship. What was the sub skipper supposed to think? I realize your average Russian isn’t the sharpest tool, but look at it from his perspective. Had we been in his position, would we have fired? I would have.
The Titanic sank because it had too much water in it...................
“A bunker fire may have reached 1,000°C, but the outside hull steel plates that were in contact with the water never could have reached temperatures high enough to compromise their strength.”
Wouldn’t this apply just to the steel plates making up the outer hull? How about the internal framework, ribbing, bulkheads and whatever the plates are attached to? They would have been subjected to the heat.
Just a thought.
The Titanic did break in two pieces before it sank.............
That's right ... the water that should have stayed outside instead moved inside.
“Figure in the cold temperature acting upon it and it made it even worse.”
I can attest to cold temps affecting the strength of metal.
I have a project where I put about a 7,000 lb pull on a building with a 3/8 chain. In the summer the chain does not break and the building moves.
This winter I’m continuing the moving process over ice. At 20F this same chain keeps breaking. Several times. The pull should be less because it’s on ice (not frozen down either).
My thought also from trying to solder copper pipes with only a little water in them. Forget it.
I can see fire damaging a bulkhead, hull below the waterline? No.
What sank the Titanic? Hitting an iceberg. What many don’t know is the SS Californian was only a few miles away and Titanic’s radio operator ignored the Californian radio warnings of ice. When the warning was sent, the Titanic operator responded “Shut Up, I’m working Cape Race”. The Californian operator complied and the radio was shut off and the Titanic ran into the iceberg within 10 minutes. With no operator on the Californian, they didn’t respond to the distress call. So when people discuss what sank the Titanic, I educate them that it was a rude radio message.
If only they had banned Dihydrogen Monoxide.
In the early 1970’s I worked on coal carrying ore boats on the Great Lakes (boats on the Lakes are called ships on the oceans). On at least two occasions, our cargo would catch fire and we would see smoke and steam coming out the cargo holds. So it was not impossible for bunker coal to catch fire on the Titanic.
Excellent point. In every man made disaster it's usually not one thing. There is a chain of mistakes, any one of which if removed would have prevented the disaster from taking place. The Titanic disaster is a great example of this principle.
Considering what Frau Goebbels did to her children, I don’t think by then the Nazis really cared about their own children anyway.
This would depend upon the molecular structure of the metal in question.... if it was the equivalent of an A-36 today it would have little effect... if it contained a little too much carbon in the recipe, well then 1000 degrees over a coupla days would completely compromise the structure of the metal itself and turn it brittle... combine this with the fact that the purchasing agent for the job bought sub standard steel ( this is a documented fact ) and i do believe this is exactly what happened.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.