None of that was in the movie.. didn’t happen.
Jews sank the Titanic. Hello, IceBerg ?
Ever boil water in a paper cup on a campfire as a scout?
What they found was rather intriguing. Titanic's hull plating had a higher than normal sulfur content. In fact, it wouldn't have even made for good rebar. As a result Titanic's hull steel was EXCEPTIONALLY brittle already. Figure in the cold temperature acting upon it and it made it even worse. Instead of bending inward, the hull had pieces of it break off.
The Titanic was a disaster of materials as much as human hubris.
Wilhelm Gustloff was a WAY worse disaster. Several times over.
May have multiplied the effect of the collision
but what sank the Titanic was the fact that the
water tight bulkheads did not completely seal
being open at the top. Once enough water came in
to put that compartment underwater the next would begin
to fill especially starting from forward.
It is possible that had the iceberg struck amidships
the remaining buoyancy would have been enough to
keep the bulkheads above water level.
Bunker fires were not that uncommon in the age of steam.
I thought the Russians did it??
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.
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
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.
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.
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.....
Correlation is not causation. Just because there was a coal fire at the point of impact does not necessarily mean the coal fire caused the breach. Or the collision. The hull also had paint at the point of impact, but I doubt paint was responsible for it either.
