very creative and well done. A channel that strives for the quality of its creations and creating unique videos on the internet. Congratulations... keep it up.
A. 37 seconds to consider all the options and make a decision? B. If Lightoller ordered a head on collision and 100 people died he would have been arrested for mass murder and blamed for the collision. No one would have thought he saved the ship.
If he (Murdoch) had stopped the engines and then reversed them to cut inertia as much as possible, far fewer lives would have been lost! This is why it is hard to fathom the chain of mistakes that voyage, starting with that insane, suicidal speed through an ice field!!
@suspiciousminds1750 Even if he did, that actually made the ship turn SLOWER, which was a terrible idea... Either keep the speed, even increase it, or stop the engines and then reverse them to reduce the inertia so the ship would hit the iceberg at the slowest speed possible... Nerves of steel would do that, just not Murdoch's!
2 minutes and 10 seconds in and already I've noticed so many factual errors. For one, Lightoller was nowhere near the bridge at the time of the accident. 2. The Titanic's service speed was 21 knots, not 24. It is plausible she might have made 23 knots but 24 was out of the question. 3. The order was "hard a starboard" not "hard a port". Yes, the ship turned to port, however the correct command was "hard a starboard"
@@darthbedlammasterofdueling4519 Halifax was still over 370 miles away… there is no way she would have made it, it would have taken her the best part of a day to get there, she only lasted 2 hours and 40 minutes and would have sank quicker if she tried to sail to Halifax because the forward motion would drive the water into the damaged compartments more rapidly.
If you are working as a ship crew, your natural reaction (forget the 40 second decision making) is to avoid collision with an iceberg. The question of a head on collision on instructions from ship's crew does not arise!
Even if the iceberg is too close to go around it?! THAT is folly!! An EXPERIENCED sailor OUGHT to be prepared for EVERY scenario, including "what to do when seeing an iceberg too close to maneuver around it"...!
Stockholm is a bad example. It struck a vastly smaller target whose volume is mostly air. Also, the Andrea Doria, while moving at 22 knots, was traversing across Stockholm's path. Its speed was negligible in the impact. Stockholm's speed, reduced under 20 knots, was probably less than what Titanic would have traveled when hitting the iceberg. In the end, speculation of what would have happened in a head-on collision makes great "what if" fodder. The shape of the iceberg at the point of impact is unknown, and that would have certainly affected any damage. There's just no way to know with any certainty what would have structurally happened to the vessel under those conditions.
I'm unaware of that incident, but I'd be willing to bet that a head-on collision with the iceberg would've been catastrophic to Titanic based on what we've learned about her. She arguably could've sunk faster, and took way more people. The reason for my logic here is based on the issue of the rivets that made up the Titanic's hull. During the ice impact, these rivets popped like a wine cork. On a head on collision, the kinetic energy of the impact would've traveled throughout the ship causing catastrophic damage, especially in the middle/stern of the ship. The reason being is that the heat of the boilers considerably weakened the structure of the vessel in that area, from what I'd read. All in all, factors aside. I think she would've sunk faster under even the best of conditions in a head-on collision.
Lightoller was NOT on the bridge at the moment of collision. He was, in fact, in his quarters, his shift ending at 10:00 P.M., an hour and 40 minutes before the collision. He had noticed something, but remained in his cabin, because, according to him, if he was needed, he needed to be where they would know to find him.
My father, a seasoned sailor, who was sailing for 40 years, told me exactly that back in the 90s. That the Titanic would not sink if she just crashed into the iceberg. The bow is the sturdiest part of the ship, and the ship is designed to withstand collisions. Surely, people would have been killed, but a lot more would have been saved.
Yeah now we know more than 80% of the data. It's sad to think that in less of 1 minut to take a decision, they beleive saving lifes by avoid a crash. Captain made the best choice in this situation, no doubt.
This is an oft discussed topic. The bow housing the anchor and chain followed by cargo (merchant ships) or electronic - Notably sonar (warships). A glancing blow will hit berthing compartments, fuel spaces, and engineering spaces. The Titanic likely would have stayed afloat long enough for the Carpathia to lift off most of the passengers.
The engines were NOT put full astern during the evasive maneuver. You are working with outdated data. (It took quite a while for the engines to be changed from full ahead to full astern. This was a manual maneuver) It is also likely the berg was spotted roughly 1 minute before impact & Murdoch took a bit to decide on his course of action. Trying to avoid the iceberg was an obvious choice and he almost pulled it off.
Corrected something that gets lost over these days because of James Cameron's film but I remember reading a history book in 1977 that explicitly stated the engines were ordered to stop not reverse
This is accurte, a stop order was given, yet is really a moot point...Beyond her maneuvering which slightly reducing her speed, she hit with a full head of steam as there wasn't enough time for the engineers to acknowledge the engine order, close the steam valve by turning the valve wheel 12-14 revolutions, or for the residual steam in the pipelines to be cleared. No matter what engine order was given, she would have hit with a full head of steam
@SpaceForceCooks I could concur on that arcade with her maneuverability there was simply no time for any of the momentum to bleed off from the moment Titanic came face-to-face with the burg they only accident that I could have seen that would have made a difference would have been if the ship had just hit the iceberg had on there's some speculation that it would have had to kill shatter others just crumpled the front end Titanic was a relatively new ship and her hole was in good condition she may have survived a head-on collision but it's a catch-22 will never really know Mathematical computation and statistical analyzation can only yield so many results without definitive proof but under the circumstances the crew on the bridge made the right call within the confines of the time they had to react, and it took some time by the benchley the idea did sink in ships needed to slow down in negligent visibility.
as long as there has been ships, there have been things for ships to crash into, they're designed to survive these collisions, Titanic would remain afloat, however at the bow would be smashed in 80-100ft, and hundreds would be dead
If the hull and bow rivets were literally made of glass, would the rivets shatter absorbing much of the kinetic energy allowing her stay afloat? While glass is an eggaration, it's not too far off...What often gets overlooked are the brittleness of the hand-driven bow and stern high-slag wrought iron rivets in 28f water. There's a phenomenon with all metals called DBTT or Ductile to Brittle Transition Tempature which is where there is a specific temperature that metal will crack instead of deform when under stress. For wrought iron like the rivets, the DBTT is 32f/0C; much research has already been done once they recovered rivets and hull plates. However, when they perform stress tests on Titanic TV documentries, they test in room tempauture environments. We also cannot use the Titanic's sister, the RMS Olympic, hitting the RMS Hawke as a reference as it's again above the DBTT and therefore, the metal remained ductile
Before watching this, the answer is yes. Titanic's bow would've crumpled, instantly killing hundreds of people between compartments 1, 2 maybe 3, but she'd of survived with the watertight doors closed in time. Other ships prior suffered head on collisions including a smaller vessel that hit an iceberg of which was presented as evidence at the board of trade post the Titanic disaster on the Q as to whether she'd of survived a head on collision. If you have a look at Mike Brady's videos on ocean liner designs this is a covered subject.
No one talks about the fact that Lightoller's family revealed a few years ago confided that when Murdock gave the order "Hard to port", the pilot startled mistakenly turned to starboard, a few seconds later realized his mistake and turned to port. Had he not made the mistake, Titanic may have had enough time to clear to iceberg. Lightoller also told his family that he wasn't completely honest in his testimony during the American and English inquiries, he said as a career White Star officer, he was concerned about loosing his job and likely not hired by another ship company if he said anything unfavorable about White Star.
@@henrynevins nobody talks about it because its bullshit. Lightoller wasn’t even on the bridge at the time of the collision, he was in bed. This video is full of inaccuracies and a simple google search will give you the facts.
Years ago I read a book about Robert Hichens who was at the helm. He later worked on a boat down South Africa and confided with one of his ship mates that Murdoch was actually asleep on a bench at the back of the bridge and took a long time to issue evasive action orders. He told this person he wasn’t in the position to take that action without orders from the officer. Hichens was a bit of a shady character in other aspects of his life, but his story is definitely plausible. That would also account for Murdoch’s apparent breakdown during the sinking.
And what about the shape of the iceberg, what if the “head on” collision wasnt really head on, but because of a shape of the iceberg the ship receives more damage than thought, and idk but with ship so severely damaged i would not risk and sail all the way to halifax, id go straight to st john, full stop somewhere outside of the harbour and have all passengers evacuated with assistance of the towns harbour ships
Or better yet, wait for the other ships coming to rescue in a few hours. Offload all passengers & unnecessary crew before limping your wreck into port with escorts if needed.
I’m no naval architect but if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on wouldn’t it have caused a rippling effect down both sides of the ship popping rivets like a broken zipper as the iron rivets failed because of the cold? Just a thought!
No it wouldn't, head on collisions were common, more common then what happened to the Titanic that caused her to sink, so the ship would be specifically designed to handle such a collision, the damage would be bad as all head ons would be, but she would have survived and while there would have been a loss of life, it would be much less then 1,500..
No. Many many ships survived head on collisions in the past. It was fairly common back then. Titanic was designed to be able to take the force of a head-on collision.
Correct! But not for the reasons you think. The temperature of the water in the ocean, on the northern route, which is the route she took to save time on the crossing, plus the addition of salt in the water, weakened the iron ore (steal mix) from which the hull was constructed. That how the rivers were able compromised. They didn't pop out. The heads were sheared off. Imagine an ice cube lopping off the head of a screw. That's how weak the metal was made, being in that cold water. It was brittle. The ripple effect caused by a head on collision, could have done more than just separate hull plates, it actually could have caused hull plates to rip like paper in certain parts of the ship making the damage so much worse.
46.000 tons ship hitting head on a 150000 tons iceberg at 22 knots would have damage the structural integrity throughout the total lenght of the ship... compromising the water thigt capacity of the bulk heads,and causing a probably much faster sinking
some irregularities, 2:30 the centre prop is seen going in reverse, in fact the centre pro was a one way prop, forward, due to way the engines worked, 2:39 it was 5 watertight compartment breached NOT 4 that cause it to sink 2:53 showing the 5 watertight being flooded not the forepeak, the 5 compartment as shown in the vide is in fact directly under the 1st funnel, which is Boiler Room 6 5:21 Shows that there was 6 watertight compartments breached, in fact was only 5 forepeak holds 1, 2 & 3 and Booiler Room 6 thats 5 compartments...you show the gas opening up Boiler Rooom 5 as well, this in INCORRECT, Boiler Room 5 only flooded when the bulkhead between 5 & 6 collapsed, sealing the fate of the ship 5:28 he says 1,500 people in fact the final account on the day was 1,513 lives
6 were breached. The bulkhead between boiler rooms 5 and 6 didn't collapse. What Frederick Barrett saw was the bunker failing. The bunker in boiler room 5 had a 2 feet extension of the damage in boiler room 6. If the bulkhead actually failed, Barrett wouldn't have survived, and Titanic would've sank slightly faster than original time it took.
The suggestion that hitting the iceberg head on was a decision that could have been made is a preposterous one. No sailor in his right mind would have considered that. The best thing about this video is the graphics.
it would have sank regardless, the shock would have damaged the watertight doors preventing them from closing and leaving the compartments open. This is what happened to britannic from that bomb shock which damaged the watertight doors and didn't close.
If it was a direct hit, it wouldn't have sunk. The compartments woulda sealed correctly. Coulda stayed afloat long enough for rescue ships to arrive and save everyone, and most likely tow the ship the rest of the way.
tried getting AI to generate me a thumbnail similar to this, just the image itself really, and it gave me an image of Titanic slamdunking the iceberg XD
I've always wondered what could've been had they changed course but kept the engines at full speed ahead. The problem with Titanic is that she was slower in reverse (due to 2 rudders compared to 3 forward). Keeping with that logic, one could assume she would've had more thrust to turn and thus clear the ice berg.
The crew would've been roasted for not being able to dodge the iceberg and for all the deaths that occurred. It would've been impossible to prove that a head-on collision would have resulted in fewer lives lost than in any other scenario.
Okay, Titanic’s screws did not all spin in the same direction. While under an “ahead” order the port screw spins counter clockwise and the center and starboard screws spin clockwise. The center screw does not reverse, and cannot be engaged unless the reciprocating engines were running at at least 50rpm
What about the construction of the boilers and engine? Are they attached to the hull sufficiently so that they are not damaged or torn off by the impact?
The boilers and engines (save for the ones in the breakup area) are all still safe in their mountings. If they could survive a breakup, a descent of about 12,500 feet and 2 cataclysmic impacts (the stern hit SO hard, it basically completely mangled it to the point of near destruction), I would say they wouldn't have had any trouble with the impact.
Assuming Murdoch and whoever else would have had that quick thinking and notion that the iceberg was way too close, so they would not have had time to maneuver it around it, the officer on deck would have had to stop the engines and then reverse them to cut the inertia as much as possible, making it hit the iceberg as slowest as possible, therefore reducing the consequences of the impact and the resulting damages both in lives and property! But never underestimate the power of PANICKING! Murdoch's major mistake was to expose the broadside of the vessel to danger! Even if he had not reduced speed and/or stopped the engines, THAT MISTAKE ALONE would inevitably have caused the tragedy!
I wonder. Seeing as icebergs mostly reside below the water, is it not possible the ship may have ridden up on the iceberg/tipped it ? The iceberg also floats and is not a stationary brick wall. That could lessen the severity of the the collision reducing the total injuries/ loss of life.
An iceberg is not a wall. And they could barely see it. You can't just ram it and expect the ship will go straight inside and stop. If there's only a slight angle on the iceberg this is where the ship is gonna go. Imagine the damage then! It would rip all compartments and sink even faster.
The theory appears sound, but shouldn't expert navigators, captains and engineers at the time have known this? It seems like simple physics, but it's possible that it wasn't determined at the time the best way to approach a collision -- head on or let it scape the side of the ship?
You have to take account into the human factor. A natural human reaction is to steer out the way to avoid collision. Not to mention, there was very noticeable VIPs in that voyage, including the ship designer and the richest man in the world at that time as passagers. Would you want that reputation of crashing the ship on the maiden voyage in front of them? Back then, businessmen were even more ruthless than they are today. Also, it takes time to get the information, the brain to process what is going on , analyzing the situation before making a decision. That could take up to 10-20 seconds even for trained personnel. Even with all that, Murdock almost avoided it if only the helmsmen(driver) to mistakenly turn the other way before correcting himself. He initially went starboard(right), when he was comanded to turn port(left).
Better yet, if the Titanic had NOT reversed her engines, but went full speed ahead and turned away from the iceberg, she might have missed it. With the engines in reverse, the rudder was less effective and the ship wouldn't turn as fast. At full speed, the rudder would have been MORE effective, and the ship would have been able to turn faster.
Full steam ahead, not full steam astern. That command reverses the engines it doesn’t make them continue going forward. Great video but some facts are a bit inaccurate
The Titanic had three props. I think the OOD should have told the helmsman and this AI analysis should have been done with port and center engines full astern and starboard full ahead. This maneuver would have allowed the ship to slow and begin to pivot around her center axis while maintaining steerageway as you would have a good flow of water across the starboard rudder. Indeed, under this scenario she might have missed the iceberg entirely and would have been a better way to handle the situation.
Deliberately driving Titanic onto the Berg (without any attempt to avoid it) would probably have be seen l(both by Murdoch and any Inquiry) extremely reckless and probably criminal. Was it really a sensible option for Murdock to release kinetic energy of such terrible destructive force (estimated at some 2,070,000,000 ft lbs), when this would've clearly resulted in catastrophic and unquantifiable damage, whilst simultaneously condemning several hundred people in the bow to immediate and certain death or horrific injury? What can be sensibly said is that a 'rule of the sea' is to present the strongest part of the ship to danger (the prow) whilst simultaneously applying all power to stop; either that or (similarly) turning away from an obstacle with maximum thrust. It seems from the evidence that Murdock acted contrary to the latter part of the second option. As it was, he tried to 'hard-a-port' around the berg and came within inches of doing so, thus demonstrating a good case for attempting it. Had he succeeded, the manoeuvre would probably have been considered a brilliant piece of seamanship.
Another theory , after realizing the damage and knowing the extent could they have restarted the engines and made way for the light they could see about ten miles away , we now know was the ship Californian . And then again they still believed the ship was unsinkable . Oops
With all the ice warnings..they should have stopped for the night….or slowed down….but no..let’s get there…break records….dumb asses…get there itis….kills pilots all the time…and drivers that go through snowstorms….😢
I used Ai to generate a conclusion of titanic frontal impact feeding in factor s as full reverse dissipation of the shockwave through the hull, temperature factors and the manufacturing process. Here is the conclusion. Analyzing the damage sustained by the Titanic in a collision with an iceberg involves various factors, including the metallurgical properties of the materials used in the ship's construction, the conditions of the Atlantic Ocean, and the physics of the collision itself. Here's a breakdown of these considerations: ### 1. Materials Used in the Titanic's Construction: - Steel Hull: The Titanic's hull was constructed primarily of steel, which has different properties based on its composition and treatment. The steel used in the Titanic was of lower quality, particularly in terms of its toughness and ductility, due to the manufacturing practices of the time. - Rivets: The Titanic used wrought iron rivets to hold the plates of the hull together. These rivets were known to be brittle, particularly at low temperatures, which was a significant factor in the ship's failure upon impact. ### 2. Collision Dynamics: - Impact Speed: The Titanic was traveling at approximately 22 knots (25.3 mph) when it struck the iceberg. This speed would result in a significant amount of kinetic energy being transferred upon impact. - Energy Dispersal: When the Titanic struck the iceberg, the kinetic energy would be dispersed throughout the hull. This energy dispersal would lead to deformation of the hull and could cause rivets to fail or shear off, as well as lead to the buckling of steel plates. ### 3. Damage Assessment: - Hull Breach: The collision would likely create a series of punctures or tears in the hull, particularly along the starboard side where the iceberg made contact. The extent of damage would depend on the size and shape of the iceberg. - Water Ingress: If sufficient damage occurred, water would begin to flood the compartments of the ship. The Titanic was designed with watertight compartments, but the damage from the iceberg likely compromised multiple compartments, leading to flooding beyond the ship's safety design. - Rivet Failure: The failure of rivets due to the impact could lead to the separation of hull plates, exacerbating the flooding as these gaps would allow water to flow more freely into the ship. ### 4. Metallurgical Factors: - Brittleness in Cold Conditions: The Atlantic Ocean's cold temperatures could have affected the brittleness of the wrought iron rivets and the steel plates. Brittle materials are more prone to fracture under stress, which would be a critical factor in how the ship responded to the impact. - Fatigue and Stress Concentration: The design of the hull, combined with the impact forces, would create areas of stress concentration, particularly at the joints where rivets are used. This could lead to catastrophic failure at these points. ### 5. Expected Damage: - Extent of Damage: It is estimated that the Titanic suffered a gash of approximately 300 feet in length across multiple watertight compartments. This would allow for significant water ingress, leading to the sinking of the ship. - Rate of Flooding: The rate at which the compartments flooded would depend on the size of the breaches. The ship's design could handle some flooding, but the extent of the damage likely exceeded its safety limits. ### Conclusion: In summary, the collision between the Titanic and the iceberg would have resulted in significant structural damage due to the combination of metallurgical weaknesses in the materials used, the high speed of impact, and the dynamic forces involved. The failure of rivets and hull plates would lead to extensive flooding, ultimately resulting in the ship's tragic sinking. This analysis underscores the importance of material properties, design considerations, and environmental conditions in maritime safety.
En mi opinión, lo mejor hubiera sido la colisión frontal, pero no está en la naturaleza humana tomar una decisión como ésa, y menos aún teniendo tan pocos segundos para decidir. El instinto, en una situación así, siempre ordenará hacer el intento de evitar la colisión, hacer algo que genere una chance de poder evitarla, aunque sea mínima. Entonces, dar una orden de mantener el curso hacia un choque frontal, hubiera sido algo así como "contra natura", porque además, supongo que la directiva principal entre los oficales respecto a los icebergs muy cercanos sería la de tratar de evitarlos siempre, sí o sí. No creo que una colisión inducida por el oficial al mando fuera algo que se considerara, en ese tiempo de bravos marineros, como una "estrategia inteligente". Quizás eso fuera visto, en general, entre la oficialidad, de una manera prejuiciosa, visto como una conducta de ineficiencia, incluso hasta de cobardía, tal vez (aunque en este caso, podría haber representado una tragedia menor a lo que realmente sucedió). Y eso arruinaría su reputación de oficial, quedaría como "el hombre que en lugar de evitar los icebergs, los choca". Y nadie lo contrataría. Imaginemos que Murdock da la orden de chocar el iceberg de frente, manteniendo el rumbo del barco. Después, en el juicio, hubiera salido la teoría de que si hubiera dado la orden de girar la dirección, quizás hubiera evitado el choque, o chocado con daños menores, pero sin embargo, no hizo nada. Y eso lo convertiría en el principal responsable del choque. Bruce Ismay zafaría, porque no tendría que explicar la falta de botes salvavidas, ya que no se usaron, y Murdock hubiera sido el villano de la historia. En cuanto a ir marcha atrás hasta Halifax, habría que aclarar si es posible controlar la dirección del barco yendo marcha atrás, en el rango de precisión necesario como para llegar a ese puerto.
Enjoyable video, thank you. This isn't original thinking on my part - I've read elsewhere that the engines were not put into reverse and that a collision impacting directly on the bow may have sent a rippling impact down both sides of Titanic's hull, popping rivets port and starboard and hastening her demise.
According to eye witnesses and peoples last testimony who worked there. Before there death. It was the Olympics that was sunk for insurance purposes. JP MORGAN Lost his insurance policy on the Olympics due to damage of the ship. He renamed it changed a few things around. There is only 2 photos In existence
I think the ships bow would havr puerced through alot of the iceberg and the inertia would have landed the front end on some ice that could of held the front end afloat. I think if they waited it out in that position the survivors would have all been saved in time from nearby ships. I think reverse would of been a terrible idea. Almodt like pulling a knife out of a wound. U will bleed out. In this case..the ship will sink.
Well done. But why don't you model the maneurobility of Titanic. What if the prooellers were not reversed maybe Titanic could simply pass the iceberg? Another question to analyse is the theory or ship survival proposed by Russian admiral Makarov. The captain could open the doors in the bulkheads and the ship would be sinking horisontaly without trim fo 10 hours. Carpatia would be close by that time. Another even better possibility was to flood rear compartments abd Totanic would not sink even with 6 front compartents fllooded. The captain and the ship designer aboard were not sufficiently educated.
i hate this so much, so many factual errors also just the fact its ai makes it seem so fake and just effortless. Like if you were to actually be a youtuber making good content you'd put in more effort then having an ai engine make it for you.
Of course there would be worked. Hubiera funcionado porque yo una vez me salté una rotonda y me libré. Pude arreglar el coche gracias a que tiré recto, si no hubiera volcado.
However in the enquiry, mr Murdoch will be made accountable - instead of avoiding the berg taking it head on....cause they believed its unsinkable and they would nt imagine side scraping will sink the ship and this many lives will be lost.
I always wondered. Of the bow and forecastle deck woukd sort of cruch inward. Kinda like how the britannic bow smashed into the sea floor. All That weight woikd smash the front of the bow. And buckle and compress the for castle deck where the hatch covers are
Also, while at sea, the engine room has a skeleton crew because at tbis point of the voyage the engines stay running at ahead full for the duration. While maneuvering in port and heading out to sea the engine room has a full crew. With the crew in the engine room during the collision it would have taken well over a minute to stop and reverse the screws. There just wasn’t enough time to reverse the screws.
The real reason why 1,500 people died as a result of the sinking of Titanic is because of insufficient number of lifeboats (even with all lifeboats filled the number of dead and the number of survivors would have been reversed) and inadequate safety training for the crew. Had a frontal impact occurred, the safety measures on ships wouldn’t be what it is today. The sinking of her sister ship HMHS Britannic a few years later is proof of that.
even if they have had more lifeboats, there might have not been enough time to launch them. Near the end they lowered the lifeboat on top of another, and the last two were never launched properly.
@@fieryapple7020 Agreed. they needed the motorized davits that Britannica had, much less work involved in launching those lifeboats. Olympic and Titanic should have never been approved as "safe" without better launching system
Not enough lifeboats was one cog in the machine that sunk the Titanic. They didn't even fill the ones they had as another 400+ could have been saved had they filled them to capacity
Is AI incapable of accurately depicting the Titanic’s interiors? Also, I would think there would be depictions of the possible damage to the ship plus a side view post collision showing how far the damage might have gone back, and to what extent the ship would have listed etc, if it would have stayed afloat longer allowing passengers to be transformed over to the Carpathia, etc…all in all…a useless crap video.
So AI was used to create the crappy images I guess… or you have a specialized model for naval physics? Lol. Sorry guys, but this is a trashy clip fit for engagement farming on twitter
I too often wondered. Would the ship have survived if it hit the iceberg? Head actually seen theories on this undiscovered channel. No, and some people say a word. Have some people say? It won't do so God only really know. But I can tell you this on that night. They tried to avoid which I think most people would have done under them. Those circumstances who would ever think of just okay, we'll hit it. Headmost people try to aboyd, but it was. It's side swiped all the way down the side. She's saying I'm broken too. But if that wouldn't have happened, the ship probably would've seen the same fate as the Olympic scrapping. And then we won't have her here to dive too as of today, but only a few people can see it because it's so far down there, but at least it's still here and we get to see it on video. And documentaries.
very creative and well done. A channel that strives for the quality of its creations and creating unique videos on the internet. Congratulations... keep it up.
A. 37 seconds to consider all the options and make a decision?
B. If Lightoller ordered a head on collision and 100 people died he would have been arrested for mass murder and blamed for the collision. No one would have thought he saved the ship.
If he (Murdoch) had stopped the engines and then reversed them to cut inertia as much as possible, far fewer lives would have been lost! This is why it is hard to fathom the chain of mistakes that voyage, starting with that insane, suicidal speed through an ice field!!
@@rijoenpial My understanding is that he did reverse engines, though I could be wrong.
@suspiciousminds1750 Even if he did, that actually made the ship turn SLOWER, which was a terrible idea... Either keep the speed, even increase it, or stop the engines and then reverse them to reduce the inertia so the ship would hit the iceberg at the slowest speed possible... Nerves of steel would do that, just not Murdoch's!
@@rijoenpial Good points
2 minutes and 10 seconds in and already I've noticed so many factual errors. For one, Lightoller was nowhere near the bridge at the time of the accident. 2. The Titanic's service speed was 21 knots, not 24. It is plausible she might have made 23 knots but 24 was out of the question. 3. The order was "hard a starboard" not "hard a port". Yes, the ship turned to port, however the correct command was "hard a starboard"
9:44 why head to Halifax, ST John’s Newfoundland is even closer to the wreckage then Halifax, so sail the ship backwards there.
@@darthbedlammasterofdueling4519 Halifax was still over 370 miles away… there is no way she would have made it, it would have taken her the best part of a day to get there, she only lasted 2 hours and 40 minutes and would have sank quicker if she tried to sail to Halifax because the forward motion would drive the water into the damaged compartments more rapidly.
What about smoke coming out of all 4 funnels. Only 3 were used, the other was for show.
@@aaronjones7260 but what if you sailed her backwards. What would reverse momentum do.
@@darthbedlammasterofdueling4519 she still would not have made it dude
If you are working as a ship crew, your natural reaction (forget the 40 second decision making) is to avoid collision with an iceberg. The question of a head on collision on instructions from ship's crew does not arise!
...especially when the ship's architect and the managing director of White Star Line are onboard ! 😉
Even if the iceberg is too close to go around it?! THAT is folly!! An EXPERIENCED sailor OUGHT to be prepared for EVERY scenario, including "what to do when seeing an iceberg too close to maneuver around it"...!
a super creative and exciting production. Well made and elaborate. Few channels strive to bring quality and entertainment like this.
since 1986, i have imagined this théory a thoushand times...
The idea at the time was to run the icebergs face first in that situation.
Extrapolating from similar incidents, such as Stockholm, a head-on collision would have been survivable.
Stockholm is a bad example. It struck a vastly smaller target whose volume is mostly air. Also, the Andrea Doria, while moving at 22 knots, was traversing across Stockholm's path. Its speed was negligible in the impact. Stockholm's speed, reduced under 20 knots, was probably less than what Titanic would have traveled when hitting the iceberg.
In the end, speculation of what would have happened in a head-on collision makes great "what if" fodder. The shape of the iceberg at the point of impact is unknown, and that would have certainly affected any damage. There's just no way to know with any certainty what would have structurally happened to the vessel under those conditions.
I'm unaware of that incident, but I'd be willing to bet that a head-on collision with the iceberg would've been catastrophic to Titanic based on what we've learned about her. She arguably could've sunk faster, and took way more people. The reason for my logic here is based on the issue of the rivets that made up the Titanic's hull. During the ice impact, these rivets popped like a wine cork. On a head on collision, the kinetic energy of the impact would've traveled throughout the ship causing catastrophic damage, especially in the middle/stern of the ship. The reason being is that the heat of the boilers considerably weakened the structure of the vessel in that area, from what I'd read.
All in all, factors aside. I think she would've sunk faster under even the best of conditions in a head-on collision.
Lightoller was NOT on the bridge at the moment of collision. He was, in fact, in his quarters, his shift ending at 10:00 P.M., an hour and 40 minutes before the collision. He had noticed something, but remained in his cabin, because, according to him, if he was needed, he needed to be where they would know to find him.
Both 6th Officer Moody and 4th Officer Boxhall were “Mates of the watch” (Murdoch’s watch).
Best channel
1:49. In 1912, the order was Hard to Starboard. Tiller commands. Rudder turns right, ship turns left.
Tiller turns right, rudder goes left (on a vessel with a tiller), but I understand what you meant.
My father, a seasoned sailor, who was sailing for 40 years, told me exactly that back in the 90s. That the Titanic would not sink if she just crashed into the iceberg. The bow is the sturdiest part of the ship, and the ship is designed to withstand collisions. Surely, people would have been killed, but a lot more would have been saved.
Yeah now we know more than 80% of the data. It's sad to think that in less of 1 minut to take a decision, they beleive saving lifes by avoid a crash. Captain made the best choice in this situation, no doubt.
This is an oft discussed topic. The bow housing the anchor and chain followed by cargo (merchant ships) or electronic - Notably sonar (warships). A glancing blow will hit berthing compartments, fuel spaces, and engineering spaces. The Titanic likely would have stayed afloat long enough for the Carpathia to lift off most of the passengers.
The engines were NOT put full astern during the evasive maneuver. You are working with outdated data. (It took quite a while for the engines to be changed from full ahead to full astern. This was a manual maneuver) It is also likely the berg was spotted roughly 1 minute before impact & Murdoch took a bit to decide on his course of action. Trying to avoid the iceberg was an obvious choice and he almost pulled it off.
Corrected something that gets lost over these days because of James Cameron's film but I remember reading a history book in 1977 that explicitly stated the engines were ordered to stop not reverse
🧢
🧢
This is accurte, a stop order was given, yet is really a moot point...Beyond her maneuvering which slightly reducing her speed, she hit with a full head of steam as there wasn't enough time for the engineers to acknowledge the engine order, close the steam valve by turning the valve wheel 12-14 revolutions, or for the residual steam in the pipelines to be cleared. No matter what engine order was given, she would have hit with a full head of steam
@SpaceForceCooks I could concur on that arcade with her maneuverability there was simply no time for any of the momentum to bleed off from the moment Titanic came face-to-face with the burg they only accident that I could have seen that would have made a difference would have been if the ship had just hit the iceberg had on there's some speculation that it would have had to kill shatter others just crumpled the front end Titanic was a relatively new ship and her hole was in good condition she may have survived a head-on collision but it's a catch-22 will never really know
Mathematical computation and statistical analyzation can only yield so many results without definitive proof but under the circumstances the crew on the bridge made the right call within the confines of the time they had to react, and it took some time by the benchley the idea did sink in ships needed to slow down in negligent visibility.
This is what you can expect from AI videos.
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
as long as there has been ships, there have been things for ships to crash into, they're designed to survive these collisions, Titanic would remain afloat, however at the bow would be smashed in 80-100ft, and hundreds would be dead
@@TheSudrianTerrier653 there would be quite a few deaths but not hundreds lol.
If the hull and bow rivets were literally made of glass, would the rivets shatter absorbing much of the kinetic energy allowing her stay afloat? While glass is an eggaration, it's not too far off...What often gets overlooked are the brittleness of the hand-driven bow and stern high-slag wrought iron rivets in 28f water. There's a phenomenon with all metals called DBTT or Ductile to Brittle Transition Tempature which is where there is a specific temperature that metal will crack instead of deform when under stress. For wrought iron like the rivets, the DBTT is 32f/0C; much research has already been done once they recovered rivets and hull plates. However, when they perform stress tests on Titanic TV documentries, they test in room tempauture environments. We also cannot use the Titanic's sister, the RMS Olympic, hitting the RMS Hawke as a reference as it's again above the DBTT and therefore, the metal remained ductile
Before watching this, the answer is yes. Titanic's bow would've crumpled, instantly killing hundreds of people between compartments 1, 2 maybe 3, but she'd of survived with the watertight doors closed in time. Other ships prior suffered head on collisions including a smaller vessel that hit an iceberg of which was presented as evidence at the board of trade post the Titanic disaster on the Q as to whether she'd of survived a head on collision. If you have a look at Mike Brady's videos on ocean liner designs this is a covered subject.
No one talks about the fact that Lightoller's family revealed a few years ago confided that when Murdock gave the order "Hard to port", the pilot startled mistakenly turned to starboard, a few seconds later realized his mistake and turned to port. Had he not made the mistake, Titanic may have had enough time to clear to iceberg. Lightoller also told his family that he wasn't completely honest in his testimony during the American and English inquiries, he said as a career White Star officer, he was concerned about loosing his job and likely not hired by another ship company if he said anything unfavorable about White Star.
@@henrynevins nobody talks about it because its bullshit. Lightoller wasn’t even on the bridge at the time of the collision, he was in bed. This video is full of inaccuracies and a simple google search will give you the facts.
They followed tiller commands. Hard a starboard means turn to port, and vice versa. Lightoller was not present at the bridge during the Collision.
Years ago I read a book about Robert Hichens who was at the helm. He later worked on a boat down South Africa and confided with one of his ship mates that Murdoch was actually asleep on a bench at the back of the bridge and took a long time to issue evasive action orders. He told this person he wasn’t in the position to take that action without orders from the officer. Hichens was a bit of a shady character in other aspects of his life, but his story is definitely plausible. That would also account for Murdoch’s apparent breakdown during the sinking.
And what about the shape of the iceberg, what if the “head on” collision wasnt really head on, but because of a shape of the iceberg the ship receives more damage than thought, and idk but with ship so severely damaged i would not risk and sail all the way to halifax, id go straight to st john, full stop somewhere outside of the harbour and have all passengers evacuated with assistance of the towns harbour ships
Or better yet, wait for the other ships coming to rescue in a few hours. Offload all passengers & unnecessary crew before limping your wreck into port with escorts if needed.
I’m no naval architect but if the Titanic hit the iceberg head on wouldn’t it have caused a rippling effect down both sides of the ship popping rivets like a broken zipper as the iron rivets failed because of the cold? Just a thought!
probably. But structure could also absord and dissip a lot of energy
No it wouldn't, head on collisions were common, more common then what happened to the Titanic that caused her to sink, so the ship would be specifically designed to handle such a collision, the damage would be bad as all head ons would be, but she would have survived and while there would have been a loss of life, it would be much less then 1,500..
No. Many many ships survived head on collisions in the past. It was fairly common back then. Titanic was designed to be able to take the force of a head-on collision.
Correct! But not for the reasons you think. The temperature of the water in the ocean, on the northern route, which is the route she took to save time on the crossing, plus the addition of salt in the water, weakened the iron ore (steal mix) from which the hull was constructed. That how the rivers were able compromised. They didn't pop out. The heads were sheared off. Imagine an ice cube lopping off the head of a screw. That's how weak the metal was made, being in that cold water. It was brittle. The ripple effect caused by a head on collision, could have done more than just separate hull plates, it actually could have caused hull plates to rip like paper in certain parts of the ship making the damage so much worse.
46.000 tons ship hitting head on a 150000 tons iceberg at 22 knots would have damage the structural integrity throughout the total lenght of the ship... compromising the water thigt capacity of the bulk heads,and causing a probably much faster sinking
some irregularities, 2:30 the centre prop is seen going in reverse, in fact the centre pro was a one way prop, forward, due to way the engines worked,
2:39 it was 5 watertight compartment breached NOT 4 that cause it to sink
2:53 showing the 5 watertight being flooded not the forepeak, the 5 compartment as shown in the vide is in fact directly under the 1st funnel, which is Boiler Room 6
5:21 Shows that there was 6 watertight compartments breached, in fact was only 5 forepeak holds 1, 2 & 3 and Booiler Room 6 thats 5 compartments...you show the gas opening up Boiler Rooom 5 as well, this in INCORRECT, Boiler Room 5 only flooded when the bulkhead between 5 & 6 collapsed, sealing the fate of the ship
5:28 he says 1,500 people in fact the final account on the day was 1,513 lives
6 were breached. The bulkhead between boiler rooms 5 and 6 didn't collapse. What Frederick Barrett saw was the bunker failing. The bunker in boiler room 5 had a 2 feet extension of the damage in boiler room 6. If the bulkhead actually failed, Barrett wouldn't have survived, and Titanic would've sank slightly faster than original time it took.
The suggestion that hitting the iceberg head on was a decision that could have been made is a preposterous one. No sailor in his right mind would have considered that. The best thing about this video is the graphics.
Thousands of ships have been built, have been admired, and dismantled. But the Titanic will be THE ship. Immortal.
I believe the idea at the time was to run head on.
The alternative number of deaths actually equals the numbers that actually survived.
it would have sank regardless, the shock would have damaged the watertight doors preventing them from closing and leaving the compartments open. This is what happened to britannic from that bomb shock which damaged the watertight doors and didn't close.
If it was a direct hit, it wouldn't have sunk. The compartments woulda sealed correctly. Coulda stayed afloat long enough for rescue ships to arrive and save everyone, and most likely tow the ship the rest of the way.
Might have turned out better if Murdock had ordered full astern on the center and port shafts. It would have helped swing the bow farther to port.
16 bulkheads and y'all missed the 1st one in the bow peak
tried getting AI to generate me a thumbnail similar to this, just the image itself really, and it gave me an image of Titanic slamdunking the iceberg XD
9:40 the ship was in reverse trying to avoid the iceberg. If they didn’t put it on reverse titanic could have survived (100TH COMMENT) :D
I've always wondered what could've been had they changed course but kept the engines at full speed ahead. The problem with Titanic is that she was slower in reverse (due to 2 rudders compared to 3 forward). Keeping with that logic, one could assume she would've had more thrust to turn and thus clear the ice berg.
Can you do a video above the LUSITANIA or Titanic's sister BRITANNIC? Please and Thank you?
I bet it would have snapped like the Britannic when she hit the seafloor.
The crew would've been roasted for not being able to dodge the iceberg and for all the deaths that occurred. It would've been impossible to prove that a head-on collision would have resulted in fewer lives lost than in any other scenario.
What about an order all ahead turn to the opposite of the iceberg turn to port
Okay, Titanic’s screws did not all spin in the same direction. While under an “ahead” order the port screw spins counter clockwise and the center and starboard screws spin clockwise. The center screw does not reverse, and cannot be engaged unless the reciprocating engines were running at at least 50rpm
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
3:22. *Bow. As in take a bow on stage. Not as in bow on a present.
It's most likely an ai voice
It alternates throughout the video too.
Agree. Ex Navy man.
Soon they gone discover that the titanic was sinking by a submarine.
The Titanic was not the "largest ship ever built." It was the largest ship built to that date. Since then MANY much larger ships have been built.
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
What about the construction of the boilers and engine? Are they attached to the hull sufficiently so that they are not damaged or torn off by the impact?
The boilers and engines (save for the ones in the breakup area) are all still safe in their mountings. If they could survive a breakup, a descent of about 12,500 feet and 2 cataclysmic impacts (the stern hit SO hard, it basically completely mangled it to the point of near destruction), I would say they wouldn't have had any trouble with the impact.
@@toddkurzbard Are they safe in their mountings still? Thats incredible.
nice
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
Amazing video, but retry to edit it using "natural intelligence", it will be more and more amazing! Thanks, and have a good work
Assuming Murdoch and whoever else would have had that quick thinking and notion that the iceberg was way too close, so they would not have had time to maneuver it around it, the officer on deck would have had to stop the engines and then reverse them to cut the inertia as much as possible, making it hit the iceberg as slowest as possible, therefore reducing the consequences of the impact and the resulting damages both in lives and property! But never underestimate the power of PANICKING! Murdoch's major mistake was to expose the broadside of the vessel to danger! Even if he had not reduced speed and/or stopped the engines, THAT MISTAKE ALONE would inevitably have caused the tragedy!
The original order given was “hard over” or “hard a starboard”..not “hard a port”.
I wonder. Seeing as icebergs mostly reside below the water, is it not possible the ship may have ridden up on the iceberg/tipped it ? The iceberg also floats and is not a stationary brick wall. That could lessen the severity of the the collision reducing the total injuries/ loss of life.
I miss in video some calculation of damage and how many watertight sectors will be impacted.
An iceberg is not a wall. And they could barely see it. You can't just ram it and expect the ship will go straight inside and stop. If there's only a slight angle on the iceberg this is where the ship is gonna go. Imagine the damage then! It would rip all compartments and sink even faster.
The theory appears sound, but shouldn't expert navigators, captains and engineers at the time have known this? It seems like simple physics, but it's possible that it wasn't determined at the time the best way to approach a collision -- head on or let it scape the side of the ship?
You have to take account into the human factor.
A natural human reaction is to steer out the way to avoid collision. Not to mention, there was very noticeable VIPs in that voyage, including the ship designer and the richest man in the world at that time as passagers.
Would you want that reputation of crashing the ship on the maiden voyage in front of them? Back then, businessmen were even more ruthless than they are today.
Also, it takes time to get the information, the brain to process what is going on , analyzing the situation before making a decision. That could take up to 10-20 seconds even for trained personnel.
Even with all that, Murdock almost avoided it if only the helmsmen(driver) to mistakenly turn the other way before correcting himself. He initially went starboard(right), when he was comanded to turn port(left).
Better yet, if the Titanic had NOT reversed her engines, but went full speed ahead and turned away from the iceberg, she might have missed it. With the engines in reverse, the rudder was less effective and the ship wouldn't turn as fast. At full speed, the rudder would have been MORE effective, and the ship would have been able to turn faster.
Full steam ahead, not full steam astern. That command reverses the engines it doesn’t make them continue going forward. Great video but some facts are a bit inaccurate
The Titanic had three props. I think the OOD should have told the helmsman and this AI analysis should have been done with port and center engines full astern and starboard full ahead. This maneuver would have allowed the ship to slow and begin to pivot around her center axis while maintaining steerageway as you would have a good flow of water across the starboard rudder. Indeed, under this scenario she might have missed the iceberg entirely and would have been a better way to handle the situation.
Maybe it would have hit another iceberg sailing in reverse?
Deliberately driving Titanic onto the Berg (without any attempt to avoid it) would probably have be seen l(both by Murdoch and any Inquiry) extremely reckless and probably criminal. Was it really a sensible option for Murdock to release kinetic energy of such terrible destructive force (estimated at some 2,070,000,000 ft lbs), when this would've clearly resulted in catastrophic and unquantifiable damage, whilst simultaneously condemning several hundred people in the bow to immediate and certain death or horrific injury? What can be sensibly said is that a 'rule of the sea' is to present the strongest part of the ship to danger (the prow) whilst simultaneously applying all power to stop; either that or (similarly) turning away from an obstacle with maximum thrust. It seems from the evidence that Murdock acted contrary to the latter part of the second option. As it was, he tried to 'hard-a-port' around the berg and came within inches of doing so, thus demonstrating a good case for attempting it. Had he succeeded, the manoeuvre would probably have been considered a brilliant piece of seamanship.
The central propellor was not reversible but I’m glade someone finally got the number of blades on the central propeller correct
Another theory , after realizing the damage and knowing the extent
could they have restarted the engines and made way for the light they could see about ten miles away ,
we now know was the ship Californian . And then again they still believed the ship was unsinkable . Oops
Yes it has already been tested and proven. It would have only flooded the first 3 areas.
With frontal wouldn't have sink never consider that was an iceberg floating not a mountain and will have been moved backwards reducing the damage.
Fear of ahead on impact or risk trying to avoid but will scrape the side hoping it wouldn't be worse then head on
With all the ice warnings..they should have stopped for the night….or slowed down….but no..let’s get there…break records….dumb asses…get there itis….kills pilots all the time…and drivers that go through snowstorms….😢
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
how many people are gonna get this wrong 5 was breached the very front was never struck please get it right
The most important is missing
The calculation if it sinks and what would happen. That all misses
I used Ai to generate a conclusion of titanic frontal impact feeding in factor s as full reverse dissipation of the shockwave through the hull, temperature factors and the manufacturing process. Here is the conclusion.
Analyzing the damage sustained by the Titanic in a collision with an iceberg involves various factors, including the metallurgical properties of the materials used in the ship's construction, the conditions of the Atlantic Ocean, and the physics of the collision itself. Here's a breakdown of these considerations:
### 1. Materials Used in the Titanic's Construction:
- Steel Hull: The Titanic's hull was constructed primarily of steel, which has different properties based on its composition and treatment. The steel used in the Titanic was of lower quality, particularly in terms of its toughness and ductility, due to the manufacturing practices of the time.
- Rivets: The Titanic used wrought iron rivets to hold the plates of the hull together. These rivets were known to be brittle, particularly at low temperatures, which was a significant factor in the ship's failure upon impact.
### 2. Collision Dynamics:
- Impact Speed: The Titanic was traveling at approximately 22 knots (25.3 mph) when it struck the iceberg. This speed would result in a significant amount of kinetic energy being transferred upon impact.
- Energy Dispersal: When the Titanic struck the iceberg, the kinetic energy would be dispersed throughout the hull. This energy dispersal would lead to deformation of the hull and could cause rivets to fail or shear off, as well as lead to the buckling of steel plates.
### 3. Damage Assessment:
- Hull Breach: The collision would likely create a series of punctures or tears in the hull, particularly along the starboard side where the iceberg made contact. The extent of damage would depend on the size and shape of the iceberg.
- Water Ingress: If sufficient damage occurred, water would begin to flood the compartments of the ship. The Titanic was designed with watertight compartments, but the damage from the iceberg likely compromised multiple compartments, leading to flooding beyond the ship's safety design.
- Rivet Failure: The failure of rivets due to the impact could lead to the separation of hull plates, exacerbating the flooding as these gaps would allow water to flow more freely into the ship.
### 4. Metallurgical Factors:
- Brittleness in Cold Conditions: The Atlantic Ocean's cold temperatures could have affected the brittleness of the wrought iron rivets and the steel plates. Brittle materials are more prone to fracture under stress, which would be a critical factor in how the ship responded to the impact.
- Fatigue and Stress Concentration: The design of the hull, combined with the impact forces, would create areas of stress concentration, particularly at the joints where rivets are used. This could lead to catastrophic failure at these points.
### 5. Expected Damage:
- Extent of Damage: It is estimated that the Titanic suffered a gash of approximately 300 feet in length across multiple watertight compartments. This would allow for significant water ingress, leading to the sinking of the ship.
- Rate of Flooding: The rate at which the compartments flooded would depend on the size of the breaches. The ship's design could handle some flooding, but the extent of the damage likely exceeded its safety limits.
### Conclusion:
In summary, the collision between the Titanic and the iceberg would have resulted in significant structural damage due to the combination of metallurgical weaknesses in the materials used, the high speed of impact, and the dynamic forces involved. The failure of rivets and hull plates would lead to extensive flooding, ultimately resulting in the ship's tragic sinking. This analysis underscores the importance of material properties, design considerations, and environmental conditions in maritime safety.
Titanic: ahhhh freak my nose
En mi opinión, lo mejor hubiera sido la colisión frontal, pero no está en la naturaleza humana tomar una decisión como ésa, y menos aún teniendo tan pocos segundos para decidir. El instinto, en una situación así, siempre ordenará hacer el intento de evitar la colisión, hacer algo que genere una chance de poder evitarla, aunque sea mínima. Entonces, dar una orden de mantener el curso hacia un choque frontal, hubiera sido algo así como "contra natura", porque además, supongo que la directiva principal entre los oficales respecto a los icebergs muy cercanos sería la de tratar de evitarlos siempre, sí o sí. No creo que una colisión inducida por el oficial al mando fuera algo que se considerara, en ese tiempo de bravos marineros, como una "estrategia inteligente". Quizás eso fuera visto, en general, entre la oficialidad, de una manera prejuiciosa, visto como una conducta de ineficiencia, incluso hasta de cobardía, tal vez (aunque en este caso, podría haber representado una tragedia menor a lo que realmente sucedió). Y eso arruinaría su reputación de oficial, quedaría como "el hombre que en lugar de evitar los icebergs, los choca". Y nadie lo contrataría. Imaginemos que Murdock da la orden de chocar el iceberg de frente, manteniendo el rumbo del barco. Después, en el juicio, hubiera salido la teoría de que si hubiera dado la orden de girar la dirección, quizás hubiera evitado el choque, o chocado con daños menores, pero sin embargo, no hizo nada. Y eso lo convertiría en el principal responsable del choque. Bruce Ismay zafaría, porque no tendría que explicar la falta de botes salvavidas, ya que no se usaron, y Murdock hubiera sido el villano de la historia.
En cuanto a ir marcha atrás hasta Halifax, habría que aclarar si es posible controlar la dirección del barco yendo marcha atrás, en el rango de precisión necesario como para llegar a ese puerto.
If the Titanic had survived this I'm pretty she would never have made it through either WW1 or WW2, would of been torpedo'ed
Like RMS Olympic?
Enjoyable video, thank you. This isn't original thinking on my part - I've read elsewhere that the engines were not put into reverse and that a collision impacting directly on the bow may have sent a rippling impact down both sides of Titanic's hull, popping rivets port and starboard and hastening her demise.
According to eye witnesses and peoples last testimony who worked there. Before there death. It was the Olympics that was sunk for insurance purposes. JP MORGAN Lost his insurance policy on the Olympics due to damage of the ship. He renamed it changed a few things around. There is only 2 photos In existence
Can u drive ahead with ships nose in iceberg?
I think the ships bow would havr puerced through alot of the iceberg and the inertia would have landed the front end on some ice that could of held the front end afloat. I think if they waited it out in that position the survivors would have all been saved in time from nearby ships. I think reverse would of been a terrible idea. Almodt like pulling a knife out of a wound. U will bleed out. In this case..the ship will sink.
Well done. But why don't you model the maneurobility of Titanic. What if the prooellers were not reversed maybe Titanic could simply pass the iceberg? Another question to analyse is the theory or ship survival proposed by Russian admiral Makarov. The captain could open the doors in the bulkheads and the ship would be sinking horisontaly without trim fo 10 hours. Carpatia would be close by that time. Another even better possibility was to flood rear compartments abd Totanic would not sink even with 6 front compartents fllooded. The captain and the ship designer aboard were not sufficiently educated.
it would've telescoped and stayed afloat. The end!
i hate this so much, so many factual errors also just the fact its ai makes it seem so fake and just effortless. Like if you were to actually be a youtuber making good content you'd put in more effort then having an ai engine make it for you.
Of course there would be worked. Hubiera funcionado porque yo una vez me salté una rotonda y me libré. Pude arreglar el coche gracias a que tiré recto, si no hubiera volcado.
IT IS NOT The biggest and luxury ship ever build. Only for ITS time.
However in the enquiry, mr Murdoch will be made accountable - instead of avoiding the berg taking it head on....cause they believed its unsinkable and they would nt imagine side scraping will sink the ship and this many lives will be lost.
Exactly!
Full ahead and hard starboard or port.
Instead of the reverse anything instead of the head on it turns but in full ahead not reverse
Sad😢😢😢
You should spell the word “bow” as “bau” for the AI narrated voice. It’s being pronounced bow like bow and arrow as is.
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
I am a very good titanic expert. Well done 10/10
practice makes perfect
I always wondered. Of the bow and forecastle deck woukd sort of cruch inward. Kinda like how the britannic bow smashed into the sea floor. All
That weight woikd smash the front of the bow. And buckle and compress the for castle deck where the hatch covers are
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
YOU WROTE TITANICC ON THE THUMBNAIL WITH 2 CC????
Nice try diddy
Also, while at sea, the engine room has a skeleton crew because at tbis point of the voyage the engines stay running at ahead full for the duration. While maneuvering in port and heading out to sea the engine room has a full crew. With the crew in the engine room during the collision it would have taken well over a minute to stop and reverse the screws. There just wasn’t enough time to reverse the screws.
The real reason why 1,500 people died as a result of the sinking of Titanic is because of insufficient number of lifeboats (even with all lifeboats filled the number of dead and the number of survivors would have been reversed) and inadequate safety training for the crew.
Had a frontal impact occurred, the safety measures on ships wouldn’t be what it is today.
The sinking of her sister ship HMHS Britannic a few years later is proof of that.
They didn't have time to launch all 20 as is so more lifeboats weren't going to help. See Lusitania for that one.
They needed more lifeboats, more crew to launch them, and a quicker system to launch them like on Britannic.
even if they have had more lifeboats, there might have not been enough time to launch them. Near the end they lowered the lifeboat on top of another, and the last two were never launched properly.
@@fieryapple7020 Agreed. they needed the motorized davits that Britannica had, much less work involved in launching those lifeboats. Olympic and Titanic should have never been approved as "safe" without better launching system
Not enough lifeboats was one cog in the machine that sunk the Titanic. They didn't even fill the ones they had as another 400+ could have been saved had they filled them to capacity
AI is so obvious.
Murdoch should disobey his captain orders and slow down the ship
Bro the ai finally drawed the titanic how it really is 5:46
Why the ai images tho
What did you expect from Bugger Filmes. Clickbait as usual.
So much misinformation and people are buying it 😭😭😭😭😭
🤔
If they are all so bad, then please do not make any video again.
Clickbait
I hate all this AI nonsense.
Not me
AI voice that doesn't know how to pronounce bow.
Terrible AI imagery.
Terrible video
Thank you for participating. We are looking to improve for future productions. Don't forget to subscribe and share. Thanks.
Is AI incapable of accurately depicting the Titanic’s interiors? Also, I would think there would be depictions of the possible damage to the ship plus a side view post collision showing how far the damage might have gone back, and to what extent the ship would have listed etc, if it would have stayed afloat longer allowing passengers to be transformed over to the Carpathia, etc…all in all…a useless crap video.
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
So AI was used to create the crappy images I guess… or you have a specialized model for naval physics? Lol. Sorry guys, but this is a trashy clip fit for engagement farming on twitter
That’s your opinion
@@anthonylowder6687 yes it is. It just weird to see something like this after all the other amazing videos on this channel
I too often wondered. Would the ship have survived if it hit the iceberg? Head actually seen theories on this undiscovered channel. No, and some people say a word. Have some people say? It won't do so God only really know. But I can tell you this on that night. They tried to avoid which I think most people would have done under them. Those circumstances who would ever think of just okay, we'll hit it. Headmost people try to aboyd, but it was. It's side swiped all the way down the side. She's saying I'm broken too. But if that wouldn't have happened, the ship probably would've seen the same fate as the Olympic scrapping. And then we won't have her here to dive too as of today, but only a few people can see it because it's so far down there, but at least it's still here and we get to see it on video. And documentaries.