What we don't know is the exact underwater geography of that iceberg. If you look at aerial photos of icebergs, you'll often see underwater shelves extending a considerable distance from the portion of the berg above water. What if the Titanic hit the berg head on, but a 300-foot underwater shelf was in front of the berg, invisible to Murdoch? She could have had 5 compartments breached anyway. Also a head-on collision could have resulted in damage that warped the watertight bulkheads, preventing the watertight doors from closing. That's what helped do in the HMHS Britannic, Titanic's sister ship, despite damage from a mine that opened only a small area of the hull. Like you said, there are many variables to consider here.
The biggest issue with the theory of a head on collision is the watertight doors. If Titanic were to strike the iceberg head on, not only would the force be so powerful that the strakes of plates would snap as far back as the well deck, but the Keel of the ship would be warped. The Keel being warped is a big problem. When Britannic struck the mine, her Keel was warped which prevented her watertight doors from closing. The entire argument that "titanic would stay afloat since she was designed to withstand four breached compartments" is completely invalidated without the watertight doors. So undoubtedly, this topic isn't much of a debate. It is an interesting one, but there's only one outcome, which is Titanics watertight doors being jammed, every compartment being flooded in a matter of minutes, and Titanic capsizing in probably under 30 minutes before a single lifeboat is even launched.
I have to agree with your analysis. Striking a solid object is very different than striking an object with many air pockets . The force of the ship hitting the iceberg would transfer the energy the length of the ship. Not only would you have buckling and warping at the bow but the hull plating would have blown outward past the well deck. It's doubtful that the ship would even have time to launch any lifeboats. Even though the ship was handled recklessly at the time before the sinking Murdoch did the only thing possible at the time of the collision.
The thing is, if the crew decided to ram the iceberg, they would’ve closed the doors prior to the collision and thus prevent compartments other than the ones breached by the collision from flooding. The Britannic was a different story, the mine it struck was underwater, so no one saw it coming.
Well said! Your right, one outcome vs the other is always going be better, but in that moment they did what they thought was best for the ship and the passengers. Not to mention the fact the iceberg most likely seemed smaller from the top and they probably thought they could clear it, but under the darkness of the ocean it was way too big and solid to survive the damage. There was just to many variables to consider, not enough time, and many unknowns in the middle of the dark night, on a calm and dark ocean. 🚢❤
Very nice video! I heard after murdoch told guy to turn the wheel hard over murdock stopped the engines and put them in reverse! To go backwards so with a rutter too small the ship could not do that. Plus the iceberg hit the side and underneath as the iceberg was very long underneath. More damage from the double bottom. Also some said all they had to do was to turn the wheel hardover and they would have missed that berg. I am think i am right.
The Titanic's rudder was not too small. The fact the Titanic hit the iceberg had absolutely nothing to do with the rudder size. Actually Murdoch's maneuver was very clever. He attempted to "port around" the iceberg which involves steering hard to starboard (in this case meaning left) to move the ship's bow out of the way of the iceberg and then hard to port to move the ship's stern out of the way. He actually prevented heavier damage. Steering a 50,000 tonne ship is like drifting a car. The ship will pivot at the middle and them swing it's back out. Murdoch's porting around maneuver prevented damage to the stern. All it came down to is that they only had 37 seconds to react. Just not enough time.
recently got bit by the Titanic bug again and this video got me thinking on something else. What if instead of a call to starboard first officer Murdoch ordered a port turn and for the port side prop to be stopped/reversed? Would I be wrong in the assumption that he called the starboard turn knowing there's a lot more coal on that side of the ship and that imbalance would cause the ship to turn faster? (or it could have made the Titanic turn slower, I'm a mechanic not a physicist)
I love this video, excellent job, speaking of the most powerful and wealthiest people aboard Titanic, wasn't John Jacob Astor, the Richest, passenger on The Titanic?
Nice video. I discovered your account recently and really like your content! I quite agree with you but I also think, today, we could know what would have happened if the Titanic had hit the iceberg straight ahead as we have the technology to simulate and calculate accidents and crashes (car or planes). When a plane crash and they find back the data boxes, investigators are able to enter parameters on a simulator and know exactly what happened and if the pilot reaction was right or wrong or which scenarios would have saved the plane etc. We have a lot of parameters about Titanic like size, weight, spread… I’m sure we can find out if the Titanic would have stayed afloat and which scenario could have been the safest.
Don't think its exactly ideal to ram the iceberg head on but yeah, I think it could've stayed afloat for a limited time though. Think about it if they rammed it head on theres probably a massive dent with rips in it that could easily allow water to have a ride around the watertight bulkheads.
I watched a video years ago. It determined through trial and error using models, that had the Titanic struck head on, despite how distant of a chance that would be, it would have capsized about an hour faster than the actual sinking took place. I would love to find the video to show, but I think it was on Discovery about 10ish years ago.
MIT grad PHD nautical engineer here. I’ve designed countless ships and studied the Titanic for over 40 years by now. I can tell you all with certainty is that the Titanic’s best course of action was to actually just go around the iceberg instead of hitting it. If my calculations are correct, if the Titanic never hit an iceberg, she would potentially have far less damage and perhaps not have floundered.
So this is a weird request, but film theory actually has a pretty bad Titanic Movie theory where they go into alternate history and it does not make any sense. I think you might find it interesting.
at the speed Titanic was going, some ships have sunk after hitting an iceberg head on, and others have not. The maneuver could have killed a few hundred people up in the bow. I looked up head on iceberg collisions, and by 21 knots, it’s a toss-up. Her keel might have broken at that speed, or she might have gotten lucky, and it would have held. Of course they wouldn’t have tried it, because it would have meant definitely killing some in the bow, where a left turn that had the time to turn around it would have meant no deaths. And the bulkheads didn’t go very high above the water line. The iceberg probably wouldn’t have done more damage in a head on, but it could have done just as much. Certainly, there would have been some level of buckling, but how much, is uncertain. It’s only with hindsight that we realize it might have been better for the Titanic to hit head on, but we still can’t be certain
Rivets would snap trough entire hull, cracking plates open and flooding every compartment quiet quickly while also in a same time jamming watertight doors
Separate question. I know I'm seeing this months late, but my husband and I debate this idea. Would the water entered slower from pressure if the ship stayed going full steam and not stopped? Would she have sank slower as well as gotten possibly closer to land or other ships.
If the ship kept travelling full steam after colliding with the iceberg, it could only have made things worse. For one thing, Titanic was 2/3 through its journey to New York, so it was still a good 2 days away. With that in mind then, if the ship kept its speed of 21 knots then water would've surged in much faster. The ship would've sunk faster. And the fact it was 2 days away from docking, it wasn't going to be anywhere near land for other ships to come and help. I doubt it would've even got far after the collision. The ship needed to stop or else it would sink faster.
Hindsight is 20/20 but I think it would have survived but whoever suggested it would be considered a lunatic and locked in the brig. That being said, I'd still do it (and possibly knock the ice out of the way) or speed up and try to evade it. There was about 100 ft of clearance with the cargo areas and the watertight compartments. There would have been pretty significant loss of life (but not 1500+ people). Trying to move that much ship at that speed around all of the water resistance made evading it much harder.
I saw an interesting story about the Titanic on Mr Ballen's channel that apparently one of the crew members who was in charge of the ships binoculars forgot them! Apparently one of the surviving crew members later was asked if the binoculars would have made a difference and he said yes.
The reason nobody saw the iceberg sooner was because of the water mirages. It looked like the ocean was going for miles with nothing but it was just because there was no moon, nobody saw anything until it was in our range of seeing which is severely cut off. One man experienced another one when he saw a reflection of the titanic off the port side. Binoculars wouldn’t make a difference at all. It’s like being stuck in a mirror room at a fair, it’s going on forever but it’s actually not.
Seen differing thoughts on this and it all depends on the wording. Some ask should you hit it head-on and could it survive if you did? We all know it was designed to take on damage or flooding in the first 4 compartments, but not everything works according to design. Little variables and unforeseen things can undue all of your intended failsafes. You have no guarantee that your ship will survive that impact. You also have gut instinct and years of sailing that train you to try to avoid any impact and steer out of the way. Especially if you only have a matter of seconds to avoid it all together.
Agree with you, who would think to crash a huge ship with an iceberg? No one, the instinctive action is to avoid the accident, so all the resources of the moment had to be put on saving the ship from the collision. On the other hand, nobody knew the destiny of the Titanic, neither the impossibility to turn the ship fast enough as it was needed to.
Me? I would hit anything straight on when it comes to driving any vehicle that's going too fast and too big. Because I know I'm going straight and fast and if anything just showed up infront of me that would scared me but also I would just give up or not be stupid enough to turn while going fast and straight cause you just confused the vehicle. But at least if I did notice something within seconds, then all that I could do is slow it down as much as I can before impact.
Titanic was doomed from the beginning,it happened cause it was its faith.Honestly I really love from them to bring it up so you can save it.Even thou it’s a gravesite it would be more memorable to keep it in a museum.
well actually with the speed, the titanic wouldn't be at full ahead when hitting the iceberg. cause one of the officers ordered: full astern, just after the lookouts spotting it, so i think she would hit the iceberg at likely less then even 20 knots, making the damage less so on the superstructure, if when she hit it head on of course.
Even if Titanic could have survived a head on collision, she would have probably been scrapped at the end of her maiden voyage, since WSL already spent enough money fixing Olympic
I think if he had hit the iceburg head on the titanic, he would have granced off of it and still tore a hole in the hull.. He had no time to contemplate his decision. My questions are, why didn't the titanic have a big flood light at the bow of the ship.? Why couldn't there be mattresses thrown over board to clog the tears to possibly prolong the sinking. There was no time to think of these things. It happened, and the world learned from it , but it cost 1507 souls.
I think it could of stayed afloat longer/entirely (esp. If he had the watertight doors closed quickly after), if it hit straight on. I think in this instance it’s more so a matter of how *many* people die as opposed to *if* people would have died and *how much* they would have *suffered.* And as experienced of an officer Murdoch was, if he didn’t intentionally hit the iceberg head on because of how new and elite the ship was, that shows a lack of humility and doesn’t excuse him. (I know it’s all speculation but I’m responding to Rafs interpretation of events). It shouldn’t matter how new, prestigious, fancy or elite the ship was, his job was to get people to where they needed to be, safely and use his better judgement to do so, and letting his better judgment be controlled by looks is…not a good look lol I understand your point a little thought and he may of been inundated with the press and hype that the ship was “unsinkable,” too and started to believe in it himself, and just swerved out of the way for cosmetic reasons, but still… Any good leader or captain or officer should have humility and do what’s best for the *passengers* and *not the ship or public opinion.* It saves lives.
Source? Not to mention they had less than a minute to react, I seriously doubt Murdoch and others would take the time to think about what they should do.
It is believable that if the Titanic had hit the iceberg head on it would have survived because the first bulkheads were called the collision bulkheads meaning that they would have taken the brunt of the collision
I love that you entertained that the titanic could stay afloat with front end damage. I think titanic wouldn’t have sank with just front end damage, Imo Murdock made the wrong decision in a split second decision, by no fault of his of course.
Not sure if it has been mentioned already I the comments, but at the time everyone included Murdock assume the ship was unsinkable. So to side swipe it was probably going to be not big deal.
The fact is that the iceberg wasn't seen until it was less than a ship's length away and there was less than a minute to react. Murdoch knew he couldn't avoid it; he was trying to contain the damage to the forward area of the ship. That's why he was trying to swing the stern clear--to protect the starboard propeller shaft and the propeller itself. Had she been damaged here, there would have been flooding at the stern, too. Regardless of whether the Titanic's officers believed her unsinkable, surely they didn't want major damage to the hull.
Structurally speaking, Titanic would have survived a head on collision BUT she would pitch forward as the water comes gushing forward the bulkheads damaged or destroyed. And the idea of having a brand new ship ram a massive iceberg might make WSL pay more from the lives lost in an instant and Murdock's reputation to the company would be ruined.
there were 2 ships from white star line what did hit icebergs head on and they did not sink so even though a couple of hundred people would have died the ship wouldn't sink because steel flexes comple zone elascticy effect
It's called fear! And they were more stupid. At least if you had 30 sec depending how fast your going is to command to reverse the ship right away so every sec counts comes to speed. The faster that you go then more death/damage to be likely to sink the ship! But the slowest that you can go will be less damage/death unlikely that a ship will sink
I am very surprised hardly anyone knows about the Sultana and from what I’ve read it has killed more people than the titanic did and it was also a boat of White Star line not to mention if titanic HAD ranmed head on one would have to account for waves, sealife possibly getting into the ranmed crashed open part possibly bringing it down anyways so I put my vote at depends on the circumstances
The engineers did re-open some of the watertight doors so they could rig the pumps, but they kept the crucial doors between Boiler Rooms 4 & 5 and 5 & 6 closed to delay the flooding for as long as possible. A lot of people don't realize that there were dozens of watertight doors on the Titanic, but only the 12 doors at the very bottom of the ship could be closed electrically from the bridge. The others had to be operated manually, and it's probable that some of these doors were never closed during the sinking.
Imagine; it hit the front and there was one in the back it could only sink from the middle. it would not sink from the front or the back only the middle. so it would sink faster. so it would never snap in Half.
It would have Survived with only 2 compartments flooded but it would have a lot of loss of life and Injury for the passengers / crew who would be there and the bow being destroyed by the vessel moving 21 knots to the Iceberg And no Senior officer would ram A new steamer get a bow Destroyed like that.
Historic travels made a video on this topic and he determined that the Titanic was going too fast and she whould still sink (EDIT) historic travels also mentoned the olympic and hawk and andriea doria and stockholm
I think if it was hit head on at the speed it was going, the remaining compartments that weren't damaged would have buckled over time or quickly depending on the amount of initial damage and it could have sank even faster than what it did. I agree with you that with the the officers training he wouldn't have ever done that. Heck, I wouldn't have chosen to do that.
Lol, they did chock it in reverse in an attempt to slow down. Ships don’t have breaks. It would’ve taken half a mile or better to stop. Slowing down also makes turning harder. If anything they should’ve gone full speed ahead and turned starboard. They may have missed it by a couple feet
What we don't know is the exact underwater geography of that iceberg. If you look at aerial photos of icebergs, you'll often see underwater shelves extending a considerable distance from the portion of the berg above water. What if the Titanic hit the berg head on, but a 300-foot underwater shelf was in front of the berg, invisible to Murdoch? She could have had 5 compartments breached anyway. Also a head-on collision could have resulted in damage that warped the watertight bulkheads, preventing the watertight doors from closing. That's what helped do in the HMHS Britannic, Titanic's sister ship, despite damage from a mine that opened only a small area of the hull. Like you said, there are many variables to consider here.
Honestly I think nobody could blame Murdoch, as he didn't even have a minute to decide.
Agreed!
Murdoch turned a 870 foot long ship in about 35 seconds. Pretty good going
@@nicholasaslanides9703, indubitably he was a really good officer
The biggest issue with the theory of a head on collision is the watertight doors.
If Titanic were to strike the iceberg head on, not only would the force be so powerful that the strakes of plates would snap as far back as the well deck, but the Keel of the ship would be warped.
The Keel being warped is a big problem. When Britannic struck the mine, her Keel was warped which prevented her watertight doors from closing. The entire argument that "titanic would stay afloat since she was designed to withstand four breached compartments" is completely invalidated without the watertight doors.
So undoubtedly, this topic isn't much of a debate. It is an interesting one, but there's only one outcome, which is Titanics watertight doors being jammed, every compartment being flooded in a matter of minutes, and Titanic capsizing in probably under 30 minutes before a single lifeboat is even launched.
My thoughts as well. I think most of the bulkheads would have been bowed and it could have sunk in minutes.
I have to agree with your analysis. Striking a solid object is very different than striking an object with many air pockets . The force of the ship hitting the iceberg would transfer the energy the length of the ship. Not only would you have buckling and warping at the bow but the hull plating would have blown outward past the well deck. It's doubtful that the ship would even have time to launch any lifeboats. Even though the ship was handled recklessly at the time before the sinking Murdoch did the only thing possible at the time of the collision.
Wernt the WTD closed before the collision with the iceberg. If the same was done with a head on collision who really knows ?
@@stevenwade7466 The water tight doors were closed after the collision.
The thing is, if the crew decided to ram the iceberg, they would’ve closed the doors prior to the collision and thus prevent compartments other than the ones breached by the collision from flooding.
The Britannic was a different story, the mine it struck was underwater, so no one saw it coming.
Thanks for the shout out. And also I love the video keep up the good work.
Well said! Your right, one outcome vs the other is always going be better, but in that moment they did what they thought was best for the ship and the passengers. Not to mention the fact the iceberg most likely seemed smaller from the top and they probably thought they could clear it, but under the darkness of the ocean it was way too big and solid to survive the damage. There was just to many variables to consider, not enough time, and many unknowns in the middle of the dark night, on a calm and dark ocean. 🚢❤
Very nice video! I heard after murdoch told guy to turn the wheel hard over murdock stopped the engines and put them in reverse! To go backwards so with a rutter too small the ship could not do that. Plus the iceberg hit the side and underneath as the iceberg was very long underneath. More damage from the double bottom. Also some said all they had to do was to turn the wheel hardover and they would have missed that berg. I am think i am right.
The Titanic's rudder was not too small. The fact the Titanic hit the iceberg had absolutely nothing to do with the rudder size. Actually Murdoch's maneuver was very clever. He attempted to "port around" the iceberg which involves steering hard to starboard (in this case meaning left) to move the ship's bow out of the way of the iceberg and then hard to port to move the ship's stern out of the way. He actually prevented heavier damage. Steering a 50,000 tonne ship is like drifting a car. The ship will pivot at the middle and them swing it's back out. Murdoch's porting around maneuver prevented damage to the stern. All it came down to is that they only had 37 seconds to react. Just not enough time.
quite a coincidence. I'm watching your video and the radio rings my heart will go on 😊
Another interesting topic you covered.
Btw thanks for featuring my Instagram answer.
recently got bit by the Titanic bug again and this video got me thinking on something else. What if instead of a call to starboard first officer Murdoch ordered a port turn and for the port side prop to be stopped/reversed? Would I be wrong in the assumption that he called the starboard turn knowing there's a lot more coal on that side of the ship and that imbalance would cause the ship to turn faster? (or it could have made the Titanic turn slower, I'm a mechanic not a physicist)
I love this video, excellent job, speaking of the most powerful and wealthiest people aboard Titanic, wasn't John Jacob Astor, the Richest, passenger on The Titanic?
Nice video. I discovered your account recently and really like your content!
I quite agree with you but I also think, today, we could know what would have happened if the Titanic had hit the iceberg straight ahead as we have the technology to simulate and calculate accidents and crashes (car or planes). When a plane crash and they find back the data boxes, investigators are able to enter parameters on a simulator and know exactly what happened and if the pilot reaction was right or wrong or which scenarios would have saved the plane etc. We have a lot of parameters about Titanic like size, weight, spread… I’m sure we can find out if the Titanic would have stayed afloat and which scenario could have been the safest.
Thank you so much! 🙏🏼🚢
The normal human reaction is to avoid being hit. Nobody has a crystal ball. No captain or crew error in my opinion.
Don't think its exactly ideal to ram the iceberg head on but yeah, I think it could've stayed afloat for a limited time though. Think about it if they rammed it head on theres probably a massive dent with rips in it that could easily allow water to have a ride around the watertight bulkheads.
I watched a video years ago. It determined through trial and error using models, that had the Titanic struck head on, despite how distant of a chance that would be, it would have capsized about an hour faster than the actual sinking took place. I would love to find the video to show, but I think it was on Discovery about 10ish years ago.
MIT grad PHD nautical engineer here. I’ve designed countless ships and studied the Titanic for over 40 years by now.
I can tell you all with certainty is that the Titanic’s best course of action was to actually just go around the iceberg instead of hitting it. If my calculations are correct, if the Titanic never hit an iceberg, she would potentially have far less damage and perhaps not have floundered.
Underrated comment 😂👌🏽
@@lyrichill9150 haha it took a year for someone to pick up on it . Thanks!
So this is a weird request, but film theory actually has a pretty bad Titanic Movie theory where they go into alternate history and it does not make any sense. I think you might find it interesting.
Hi raf my name is Rizwan and my question is was they any other way to save the titanic when it hit the iceberg?
The problem was that they returned/stopped the engines. That slowed down the process.
Love your account ima big titanic fan
Thank you!!
at the speed Titanic was going, some ships have sunk after hitting an iceberg head on, and others have not. The maneuver could have killed a few hundred people up in the bow. I looked up head on iceberg collisions, and by 21 knots, it’s a toss-up. Her keel might have broken at that speed, or she might have gotten lucky, and it would have held. Of course they wouldn’t have tried it, because it would have meant definitely killing some in the bow, where a left turn that had the time to turn around it would have meant no deaths. And the bulkheads didn’t go very high above the water line. The iceberg probably wouldn’t have done more damage in a head on, but it could have done just as much. Certainly, there would have been some level of buckling, but how much, is uncertain. It’s only with hindsight that we realize it might have been better for the Titanic to hit head on, but we still can’t be certain
Avoiding the iceberg altogether would've been the best option obviously, but it was simply too late :(
Rivets would snap trough entire hull, cracking plates open and flooding every compartment quiet quickly while also in a same time jamming watertight doors
I would have loved to have seen Murdoch have to explain to the inquiries why he hit the berg head on.
Separate question. I know I'm seeing this months late, but my husband and I debate this idea. Would the water entered slower from pressure if the ship stayed going full steam and not stopped? Would she have sank slower as well as gotten possibly closer to land or other ships.
If the ship kept travelling full steam after colliding with the iceberg, it could only have made things worse. For one thing, Titanic was 2/3 through its journey to New York, so it was still a good 2 days away. With that in mind then, if the ship kept its speed of 21 knots then water would've surged in much faster. The ship would've sunk faster. And the fact it was 2 days away from docking, it wasn't going to be anywhere near land for other ships to come and help. I doubt it would've even got far after the collision. The ship needed to stop or else it would sink faster.
Hindsight is 20/20 but I think it would have survived but whoever suggested it would be considered a lunatic and locked in the brig. That being said, I'd still do it (and possibly knock the ice out of the way) or speed up and try to evade it. There was about 100 ft of clearance with the cargo areas and the watertight compartments. There would have been pretty significant loss of life (but not 1500+ people). Trying to move that much ship at that speed around all of the water resistance made evading it much harder.
I saw an interesting story about the Titanic on Mr Ballen's channel that apparently one of the crew members who was in charge of the ships binoculars forgot them!
Apparently one of the surviving crew members later was asked if the binoculars would have made a difference and he said yes.
The reason nobody saw the iceberg sooner was because of the water mirages. It looked like the ocean was going for miles with nothing but it was just because there was no moon, nobody saw anything until it was in our range of seeing which is severely cut off. One man experienced another one when he saw a reflection of the titanic off the port side. Binoculars wouldn’t make a difference at all. It’s like being stuck in a mirror room at a fair, it’s going on forever but it’s actually not.
I think by simply not reversing engines would have made the ship more maneuverable and possibly completely miss the iceberg
Seen differing thoughts on this and it all depends on the wording. Some ask should you hit it head-on and could it survive if you did? We all know it was designed to take on damage or flooding in the first 4 compartments, but not everything works according to design. Little variables and unforeseen things can undue all of your intended failsafes. You have no guarantee that your ship will survive that impact. You also have gut instinct and years of sailing that train you to try to avoid any impact and steer out of the way. Especially if you only have a matter of seconds to avoid it all together.
The picture you showed at the begining.....HOS Titanic managed to get to the Dock, for someone to takve photo
Agree with you, who would think to crash a huge ship with an iceberg? No one, the instinctive action is to avoid the accident, so all the resources of the moment had to be put on saving the ship from the collision. On the other hand, nobody knew the destiny of the Titanic, neither the impossibility to turn the ship fast enough as it was needed to.
Me? I would hit anything straight on when it comes to driving any vehicle that's going too fast and too big. Because I know I'm going straight and fast and if anything just showed up infront of me that would scared me but also I would just give up or not be stupid enough to turn while going fast and straight cause you just confused the vehicle.
But at least if I did notice something within seconds, then all that I could do is slow it down as much as I can before impact.
Titanic was doomed from the beginning,it happened cause it was its faith.Honestly I really love from them to bring it up so you can save it.Even thou it’s a gravesite it would be more memorable to keep it in a museum.
Ram the iceberg and put the propellor screws on full reverse to try and decelorate as much as possible.
The bow has been demolished by that big chunk of ice!
well actually with the speed, the titanic wouldn't be at full ahead when hitting the iceberg. cause one of the officers ordered: full astern, just after the lookouts spotting it, so i think she would hit the iceberg at likely less then even 20 knots, making the damage less so on the superstructure, if when she hit it head on of course.
Agree, titanic may have stayed a float but there’s nooo way anyone on the bridge would say yeah let hit head on
Even if Titanic could have survived a head on collision, she would have probably been scrapped at the end of her maiden voyage, since WSL already spent enough money fixing Olympic
I think if he had hit the iceburg head on the titanic, he would have granced off of it and still tore a hole in the hull..
He had no time to contemplate his decision. My questions are, why didn't the titanic have a big flood light at the bow of the ship.? Why couldn't there be mattresses thrown over board to clog the tears to possibly prolong the sinking. There was no time to think of these things. It happened, and the world learned from it , but it cost 1507 souls.
YES
Yes
What would of happened if it went to right of the iceberg
I think it could of stayed afloat longer/entirely (esp. If he had the watertight doors closed quickly after), if it hit straight on. I think in this instance it’s more so a matter of how *many* people die as opposed to *if* people would have died and *how much* they would have *suffered.*
And as experienced of an officer Murdoch was, if he didn’t intentionally hit the iceberg head on because of how new and elite the ship was, that shows a lack of humility and doesn’t excuse him. (I know it’s all speculation but I’m responding to Rafs interpretation of events).
It shouldn’t matter how new, prestigious, fancy or elite the ship was, his job was to get people to where they needed to be, safely and use his better judgement to do so, and letting his better judgment be controlled by looks is…not a good look lol
I understand your point a little thought and he may of been inundated with the press and hype that the ship was “unsinkable,” too and started to believe in it himself, and just swerved out of the way for cosmetic reasons, but still…
Any good leader or captain or officer should have humility and do what’s best for the *passengers* and *not the ship or public opinion.* It saves lives.
I've heard that sailors were taught to ram Icebergs back then and Murdoch knew that was problaby the best, i wonder why he chose to steer away.
Source? Not to mention they had less than a minute to react, I seriously doubt Murdoch and others would take the time to think about what they should do.
actually the titanic would sunk because the front of the ship is made to collide with other ships and the iceberg is not a ship
It is believable that if the Titanic had hit the iceberg head on it would have survived because the first bulkheads were called the collision bulkheads meaning that they would have taken the brunt of the collision
I love that you entertained that the titanic could stay afloat with front end damage. I think titanic wouldn’t have sank with just front end damage, Imo Murdock made the wrong decision in a split second decision, by no fault of his of course.
Agreed, and yes there would have been loss of life, but less than the over 1500 people that lost their lives in the sinking.
Not sure if it has been mentioned already I the comments, but at the time everyone included Murdock assume the ship was unsinkable. So to side swipe it was probably going to be not big deal.
The fact is that the iceberg wasn't seen until it was less than a ship's length away and there was less than a minute to react. Murdoch knew he couldn't avoid it; he was trying to contain the damage to the forward area of the ship. That's why he was trying to swing the stern clear--to protect the starboard propeller shaft and the propeller itself. Had she been damaged here, there would have been flooding at the stern, too. Regardless of whether the Titanic's officers believed her unsinkable, surely they didn't want major damage to the hull.
Structurally speaking, Titanic would have survived a head on collision BUT she would pitch forward as the water comes gushing forward the bulkheads damaged or destroyed. And the idea of having a brand new ship ram a massive iceberg might make WSL pay more from the lives lost in an instant and Murdock's reputation to the company would be ruined.
yes
How would you survive the sinking of titanic if you didn’t have hindsight
I think for sure head on would of just been worse because that part of the ship can't be used anymore and I think what happened is what happened
He should disobey captain orders and slow down because he knows about the ice warnings
🚢🌊
🌊🚢
Didn’t they reverse the propellers? What if they’d have full ahead
there were 2 ships from white star line what did hit icebergs head on and they did not sink so even though a couple of hundred people would have died the ship wouldn't sink because steel flexes comple zone elascticy effect
I don't think that the titanic would have stayed up too long but maybe more lives would have been saved
It's called fear! And they were more stupid. At least if you had 30 sec depending how fast your going is to command to reverse the ship right away so every sec counts comes to speed. The faster that you go then more death/damage to be likely to sink the ship! But the slowest that you can go will be less damage/death unlikely that a ship will sink
Isyes
What if they just didn't see it until later, then just did full astern because there would have been no time to attempt a turn . . .
ok, what about if they avoided the iceberg in the first place?!!
There a risk the keel could have buckled along the whole ship, causing it to sink faster.
I think going to head on collision Titanic would have survived but that's my opinion
Even if it didn’t crumble it would not be able to go back to shore
I am very surprised hardly anyone knows about the Sultana and from what I’ve read it has killed more people than the titanic did and it was also a boat of White Star line not to mention if titanic HAD ranmed head on one would have to account for waves, sealife possibly getting into the ranmed crashed open part possibly bringing it down anyways so I put my vote at depends on the circumstances
did they open backup the wire tight doors
The engineers did re-open some of the watertight doors so they could rig the pumps, but they kept the crucial doors between Boiler Rooms 4 & 5 and 5 & 6 closed to delay the flooding for as long as possible. A lot of people don't realize that there were dozens of watertight doors on the Titanic, but only the 12 doors at the very bottom of the ship could be closed electrically from the bridge. The others had to be operated manually, and it's probable that some of these doors were never closed during the sinking.
Instead of slowing down they should have speed up and have a better chance not hitting it
Imagine; it hit the front and there was one in the back it could only sink from the middle. it would not sink from the front or the back only the middle. so it would sink faster. so it would never snap in Half.
I’m a expert and I think the Titanic would sink because the iceberg would hit 5 boilers and water tight doors would break and flood and sink
But the iceberg only hit Titanic on the starboard side never head on because that’s not what happened got breached
It would have Survived with only 2 compartments flooded but it would have a lot of loss of life and Injury for the passengers / crew who would be there and the bow being destroyed by the vessel moving 21 knots to the Iceberg And no Senior officer would ram A new steamer get a bow Destroyed like that.
Titanic split half when grand flood
I think
Historic travels made a video on this topic and he determined that the Titanic was going too fast and she whould still sink (EDIT) historic travels also mentoned the olympic and hawk and andriea doria and stockholm
Greetings Lights.
Who was the cheif purser of titanic
I think if it was hit head on at the speed it was going, the remaining compartments that weren't damaged would have buckled over time or quickly depending on the amount of initial damage and it could have sank even faster than what it did. I agree with you that with the the officers training he wouldn't have ever done that. Heck, I wouldn't have chosen to do that.
I would but I am a bit to young to join instagram
Was anyone charged with the sinking of the titanic?
He should have just reversed the ship
Lol, they did chock it in reverse in an attempt to slow down. Ships don’t have breaks. It would’ve taken half a mile or better to stop. Slowing down also makes turning harder. If anything they should’ve gone full speed ahead and turned starboard. They may have missed it by a couple feet
Titanic cancer why doesburgyesis
yes