Inside Titanic's Catastrophic Breakup - An Analysis
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
- At about 2:20 in the morning of April 15 1912 the RMS Titanic was in its death throes when something remarkable happened - the ship broke apart. Even then, as dozens of witnesses watched on from the safety of nearby lifeboats the final moments lived on under a shroud of secrecy. The official inquiries came to the conclusion that the ship had sunk intact - but then decades later in the 1980s the ship was found in two pieces. Revisiting the evidence reveals that more people saw the ship break up than those who did not. Why was their testimony rejected? What can the evidence from the wreck tell us about the ship's final minutes? Today we'll consider the facts and learn how - and why - the Titanic broke apart.
The stunning plans shown in this video are by Matthew DeWinkeleer and the Titanic Honor and Glory team and can be found here!
www.titanicdeckplan.com/
The fascinating US Dept. of Commerce report on Titanic's steel quality:
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/G...
Interesting Sources for this video:
Encyclopedia Titanica
www.encyclopedia-titanica.org...
titanicinquiry.org
Oceanliner Designs explores the design, construction, engineering and operation of history’s greatest vessels- from Titanic to Queen Mary and from the Empress of Ireland to the Lusitania. Join maritime researcher and illustrator Michael Brady as he tells the stories behind some of history's most famous ocean liners and machines!
0:00 Introduction
3:00 Part 1: Survivor Testimony
11:00 Part 2: The Wreck's Remains
15:00 Part 3: Inside the Break Zone
22:31 Part 4: The Mechanics and Physics
30:00 Part 5: Other Examples
40:58 Part 6: Unravelling the Breakup
#Titanic #DeepDive #CatastrophicBreakup #UnveilingTitanic #HistoricalAnalysis #Shipwreck #OceanExploration #MaritimeDisaster #UnderwaterResearch #DeepSeaExploration #HistoricalResearch #DisasterAnalysis #ShipwreckInvestigation #MarineArchaeology #UnderwaterExploration #TitanicBreakup #DeepSeaAnalysis #UnderwaterDiscovery #DeepSeaHistory #TitanicResearch #history #facts #ships - Zábava
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
The stunning plans shown in this video are by Matthew DeWinkeleer and the Titanic Honor and Glory team and can be found here!
www.titanicdeckplan.com/
The fascinating US Dept. of Commerce report on Titanic's steel quality:
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-C13-17a17f71ae2f9d4316c52e62d4650c9f/pdf/GOVPUB-C13-17a17f71ae2f9d4316c52e62d4650c9f.pdf
Interesting Sources for this video:
Encyclopedia Titanica
www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/what-did-survivors-see-break-up-titanic.html?expand_article=1
titanicinquiry.org
Why did you repost? I went to upvote after watching only to find it was pulled
Not sure what happened but I saw this upload earlier today. Regardless much love on this and previous projects and I cant wait to see what comes next! All the love from the city that the movie ground hogs day was filmed in!
@@Dereks06probably BS copyright claims
@@Dereks06no doubt that it was typical CZcams bs. Either there was some copyright issues, or more likely, age restriction issues. All you have to do is spell your name on CZcams these days to get age restricted. It's an absolute struggle anymore for creators to keep their videos monetized. CZcams has become an absolute chitshow for creators.
@@DonnieBrass Speaking of chitshow, don't forget to sign up for CZcams TV! /s
To paraphrase a documentary i watched ages ago: Considering the stresses she was under, made with materials we wouldn't use today, the fact she lasted as long as she did and stayed stable allowing all her lifeboats to get away was amazing. She performed amazingly beyond what she was designed for and ultimately she saved 700 lives that night.
This is exactly the comment I was looking for before making it myself. Regardless of all the deficiencies in the steel or design, it was all considered THE best of the time, and under such immense forces it all held together to give the ship long enough of a time to safely allow as many to flee to lifeboats as possible. Rather than a failure or black mark on British Shipbuilding, it highlights the incredible engineering of the time that it overcame many obstacles set before it that weren't even truly known about or understood.
Also, please note. The designer's of the ship, the draftsman, were using paper drawings (blueprints) and did ALL the math by hand, calculating in their heads and on paper, everything.....I don't think anyone could really do that today because we're so dependent on computers
Well… in the apocalypse maybe
She was a good ship.
And let’s not forget her older sister ship the Olympic was made of the same stuff and was similar in most ways was seen as a monster during world war 1, it sunk a u-boat and ran away with torpedo hits a couple of times. That’s the power of the class of that ship and how deadly nature really is
The rudeness of a host who disputes the elderly survivor of such a tragedy to her face is really quite unfathomable. I can easily imagine that was the last occasion that Ms Becker agreed to speak to such a group.
Agreed. I wish we knew how silly he must have felt when it was proven that Becker had been right all along.
@@eccentricgamer4111
Probably didn’t have enough self awareness to feel embarrassed.
Rudeness? Oh get over it. Stop being so nit-picky.
@@baire702 its pretty rude.
It was definitely rude! I think that baire702 mistook the comment for someone calling Mike rude or something. If not then there crazy cause that was a definitely messed up and that dude owes her an apology for sure if anything else!
Your ability to make endless Titanic content is second to none and I'm here for it
Exactly don. Excellent detailed information. Always captivating.
Was this supposed to be mean?
@@astrida111I believe it’s a compliment and is admiring
@@Jimmy94411 suicide not allowed
@@astrida111 suicide not allowed
I'm a Structural Engineer and your terminology use and visual explanations of the Structural mechanisms on this one need applauding very well done mate 👏
Awesome, thanks so much!
One additional insight from my experience would be that the difference between Britannic and Titanic is indeed the roll as the box girder rotates toward vertical it acts less like a beam and more like a diaphragm significantly increasing the overall strength of the ship section at the fulcrum, if the Titanic had more list it likely wouldn't of broke. Also the bow clearly dragged the stern down, by the box girder deck keel holding on, imagine if it snapped clean it might have bought hours to her life as with the SS Daniel J. Morrell
When QM2 was under construction in John Browns shipyard on the Clyde the BBC ran a TV explanation of the kind of seas the ship would be likely to encounter.
This moved on to what length and beam the ship should be and various other design considerations.
When it came to the superstructure, well my friend down the road had a father who worked on that.
Yes a clean break likely would have bought most of the people stranded aboard the Titanic more time, but how much is a matter of conjecture. I suspect it would not have been long before it sank due to the weight of the engines and the reciprocating engine room being open to the sea. With most of the watertight bulkheads only going as high as E-deck, water would have surged over the top of the bulkhead between the reciprocating and turbine engine room, and that would have been enough to finish it off.
Another factor to consider as to why the _Lusitania_ and the _Britannic_ didn't break apart was the rapid rates at which they sank, 18 and 55 minutes respectively, compared to the 160 minutes that the _Titanic_ took to sink. Their hulls weren't under that amount of pressure for as long of a time, especially since their bows impacted the sea floor before they had fully sank.
The damage too. Both were sunk by basically an explosion compared to the direct damage and pressure of the ice
and I'd say the depth of the water. Titanic sank in MUCH deeper water than Lusitania and Britannic, which both hit the bottom before they were done sinking.
Lusitania did split, aft of the third funnel. The aft section of the wreck is completely separated from the bow section.
The impact with the sea floor no doubt relieved some pressure the ships were facing as they sank.
The Lusitania and the Britannic didn't break apart like the Titanic did (Luisitania broke apart presumably after she'd sunken entirely) because of the way they sank compared to the Titanic, which is why they sank in such a brief amount of time comparatively. They flooded unevenly and capsized onto their sides, whereas the Titanic at first listed to the port because a coal fire in the starboard coal storage forced the crew to shift all of her coal to one side, which slowly evened out as water flooded the starboard side after she crashed into the iceberg and she eventually started listing to starboard. Then some in the crew opened the gangway doors on the starboard side and they were never closed, allowing water to simply pour into the ship along the Scotland Yard - a massive corridor, and she evened out and flooded evenly.
Also, both Lusitania and Britannic sank in shallow waters and their respective bows touched the ocean floor while their sterns were rising. They did not break because the ocean floor supported the weight of the stern.
It sucks that Hollywood did their disservice; Britannic turned over and disappeared in the ending (kinda like the 2020 Titanic real time sinking), and Lusitania’s stern sank like Titanic
The stress in the hull due to the stem being cantilevered just depends on the length of the cantilever and angle. It has nothing to do with the bow resting on the bottom, at least not directly. The bow touching the bottom will alter stresses in the section below water and also change how the ship sits in the water. With a reaction (compressive) force on the bow due to the seabed, tensile stresses in the upper structural deck will be reduced for the portion under water but not reduce tensile stress for the cantilevered stern. The reaction force on the bow will also cause the ship to settle by the stern. This means the fulcrum in the video will move rearwards reducing how much the stern is cantilevered reducing stresses. I think the bow resting on the bottom helps but not in the way you think. Also, as stated in the video, those ships had different and better structure.
@@major__kongdamn you kong!! You took my reply word-for-word😁
@@major__kongExactly true, also, lusitania’s longitudinal bulkheads provide additional strength, increasing the moment of inertia considerably. With both reduced cantilevered stern and increased steel cross section under the maximum bending, it is understandable why britannic and lusitania did not snap.
@@major__kong Thank you for the information!
I'm always really impressed by the quality of your videos, but this one blows me away. This is better quality than a lot of documentaries I've seen on TV, and has much better research and narration. You told an engaging and well planned story, and you kept me engaged the entire time. This was honestly incredible, well done!!!
This seems to be a growing trend regarding "amateur" (using the term _very_ loosely) CZcams documentaries vs. so-called broadcast "TV-worthy" docus. Though I'm not quite yet sure why this seems to be the case. I mean have you seen some of the high-budget absolute _trash_ that passes for 'documentaries' on the History or Discovery channel in recent years?? Where's the quality control?
@@DodgyDaveGTX TV is a long suffering, nearly dead entertainment paradigm and there are very few high budget productions anymore. Made for television does not mean high quality and it never did, in fact, all that really says is this here is formatted in such a way as to allow for maximum advertising in every possible way.
Agreed! Excellent work!
Part Time explorer is also excellent, I found him first and his videos led me here. Both excellent channels by really talented ‘amateur’ historians with a clear passion for preserving the stories of the past.
The guys got some great stuff.
Mike!!! I’ve been studying and learning about this ship for 20 years, watching every bit of footage I could get my hands on but your diagram of the wreck superimposed over the original design has given me the clearest way to picture the damage EVER! The way you think about wrecks is so intuitive and so well taught, thank you for sharing!
Isn't it INCREDIBLE! I'm also able to *see* it the way I couldn't before. I've been obsessed with the Titanic since 1998 (thanks to James Cameron), reading & It's amazing how he continually finds new info I haven't seen or even thought about before. I think he might've outdone himself with this video though!
That's so wonderful and intriguing,a boy in his new life knew the ship.You also might be a past life association with the ship.
@@mansitiwari2050 fear Allah
@@Leonicles don't die as a disbeliever
Tattoo not allowed
In my opinion, with a ship the size of the Titanic taking SO LONG to break in half is a testament to how structurally strong the ship was. For a ship the size of the titanic, even half the size of the titanic, to be able to support itself suspended in the air on an axis like it did is an engineering feat that it didnt break apart sooner in the sinking. This is because it was just the keel holding tens of MILLIONS of pounds in the air while being stressed WAY beyond its normal limit AND holding the downward force of the bow under water is wild. The sound of the titanic snapping itself in half must have been so unbelievably loud once that keel broke.
I always imagine what it must have sounded like to the people in the rescue boats. In the middle of the dark cold sea. Giant black mass raising higher and higher and then snapping and smashing back into the dark water. Ugh... the noise must have been true terror.
Lasted longer than either of the Twin Towers, amirite
That boats hull was weaker than tin foil. It's rather obvious since it went to the bottom in 2 hours from it's very first collision
.@@gregorylyon1004. Compared to other ships that lasted like 15 minutes ? 2+ hours to sink after a catastrophic failure is impressive. Titanic could float if 4 of her watertight compartments were flooded, 5 would be pushing it to the limits. 6 was too much and that's why Andrews quickly noted it was going down. The ship was incredibly well built for the times where most ships wouldn't float if even 2 or 3 compartments were flooded. It was also made with incredible materials for the times. The iceberg damage destroyed the rivets and knocked them out of place while the frame itself was barely damaged.
I sure hope any ship I’m on is designed to support stresses like this, as these are not unheard of in high seas.
We now know that witnesses of car crashes, 9/11, and other events have conflicting statements because of perspective, experience, trauma, and many other factors--not necessarily because they are mis-remembering or lying. In fact, it is now generally considered suspicious if all witnesses of an event tell accounts that line up perfectly with one another. The fact that so many Titanic survivors reported that it broke up, but disagree on exactly how and where, would today be a strong indication that a breakup had indeed occurred.
When you also consider that they were observing it from a distance, by starlight, on a moonless night, and all they could really see of the ship was a black shadow blotting out stars, discrepancies are even less surprising. It's also worth noting that *Titanic's* lights had just gone out and these witnesses' eyes had likely not yet gotten to full dark adaptation.
Under those conditions, the general shape of that black shadow, and its motions will be much easier to observe reliably, but finer details not so much.
The discrepancy between the breakup point being reported as just afore the first funnel and just aft of the fourth might well have resulted from one observer confusing the bow with the stern. That sounds silly, but in such low-light conditions it's a particularly easy error to make.
@@Tindometari Agreed! In the midst of so much trauma and anguish, it's a miracle they noticed the breakup at all. That may have been part of the reason for why the officers claimed it didn't break up--they may have been busily giving orders or fulfilling their duties in lifeboats, while the rest were simply sitting still, watching.
@@Tindometari And, unlike the 1997 movie, the breakup wasn't very clean; it was messy, the ship ripping itself apart, with multiple major segments coming apart at different times, so of course people weren't going to be consistent with where the ship broke up.
@@kentslocumThe officers may also have thought that White Star was paying attention to their testimony, and insofar as their future prospects were concerned, painting as positive a picture as they could, under the circumstances, was best.
@@humanbeing2420 Agreed. That point was briefly mentioned in the video, along with the suggestion that many of the officers were still in shock that the Titanic sank at all, so it breaking in half was unthinkable. Regular passengers were far less indoctrinated by the aura of the ship's invincibility and may have been more receptive to reality.
45:39-47:53 is the clearest, most descriptively illustrated explanation of the breakup I have ever seen.
Incredible. Absolutely brilliantly done.
Seriously, I would love to see it animated with some internal/X-ray views to showcase things like the buckling of the double bottom
@@crazynachos4230 suicide not allowed
Tattoo not allowed
Tattoo not allowed
The drawings and sketches the creator made are amazing, I honestly feel that him being unable to use the copywritten real images isn't a bad thing as we get to see his own.
Fear Allah
What's a Lisa Jones doing with Al lah? @@LisaJones-xk6xz
Ive always been an aviation enthusiast. Never been botehred with ships. But a few weeks ago i was recommended one of your videos on youtube. And i have to say im now hooked. Im still binge watching. Your videos are so entertaining but you also show such compassion to the victims instead of exploiting them like some videos. Thank you
I'm a history nerd who loves naval warfare history, and I also got hooked on this channel lol I never imagined myself being so entertained by ocean liners, but here I am
Welcome to the community!!!
@@iiiSK8orDI3iii same!! i cant stop watching them
@@imagaybanana2004 thanks it seems a great community
I'm not really into ships like most people here. But I could listen to this guy talk about ships all day. And I played this video twice. Very very awesome
I can’t imagine what the explorers in 1985 that discovered the wreck site thought when they found the ship broken in two, thinking it had been intact for decades. It must have been shocking to say the least.
"My God. Where is the rest of the ship?..."
For what it's worth, James Cameron said he just immediately starting crying when he dived on the wreck in 1995 for his documentary that was itself research for making his film. He said seeing the actual wreck on the ocean floor was one of the most emotional things he ever experienced.
I don't know if Ballard got as emotional, but his team approached it from a much more analytical way. They figured out the key was looking for the debris field, then they found the wreck. Then the realization that it did indeed break up at or just below the water surface.
Ballard had actually assumed she had broken in two and was looking for her large debris field. If Titanic had sank in one piece, Ballard would have run out of time before finding her.
Ballard discusses this quite extensively in his recent memoir
I know that although I was just a kid was Titanic was found, I was heartbroken that she wasn't in still in one majestic piece, as was implied in "A Night To Remember", which was a favourite book of mine. I was already a bit of a shipwreck nerd back then, and Titanic's discovery sealed it for a lifetime.
Your attention to detail, immense knowledge, graphics, drawings and history of the Titanic is mindblowing. I would not want to place a bet on who knows more... you or James Cameron!
Once again, you astound us all with your work and I cannot wait to see what you do next!❤
Haha! You humble me :) Cameron is a hero of mine!
@@OceanlinerDesigns I would dare say if he watched this video he would be impressed. It is rare to find someone so immersed in historical knowledge to the "depths" both of you have sunk! Oh dear, I need to stop, before I am in over my head in puns.
🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊
🤷♀️
@@OceanlinerDesignsdo you guys have each other on speed-dial for quick fact checking?
@@Dobviews fear Allah
@@OceanlinerDesigns fear Allah
Finally, a proper engineering analysis of the Titanic disaster taking into account the characteristics of the steel, the effect of low temperature, the incredible stresses involved and the state of knowledge at the time. Bravo.
Fear Allah
It was made of inferior steel; but the real cause of the disaster was that it was trying for a record for travel time and had an irresponsible captain.
@@gerryboudreaultboudreault2608 No, it wasn't, TITANIC wasn't built for speed like the Cunard lines LUSITANIA and MAURITANIA. It's a myth that TITANIC was going for the Blue Riband, given to the ship that made the fastest crossing of the North Atlantic.
Both Cunard lines vessels went 4 knots faster than The white star lines ships TITANIC, OLYMPIC and BRITANNIC.
A 50 minute video dissecting anything involving Titanic? Just what I needed on a Sunday night! Can’t wait to finish this video, Titanic’s breakup always intrigues me.
Edit: Hey, nice to see some of your illustrations appear in videos again.
Same!
Their is absolutely no mystery on what sank the Titanic. That boat had a weak hull from the git go. And they were running 22 knots in an ice field in the dark. They were trying to make a transatlantic speed record on her maiden voyage. The weak hull is why she sank in 2 hrs on her first and only collision. It's rather obvious
@@gregorylyon1004 quit spouting these lies. Titanic was not designed to be a record-breaking fast ship. White Star knew that building a ship capable of beating the Cunard twins in speed would be a monumentally difficult, and expensive, task. Instead, they decided to beat them in size and luxury instead. White Start had long ago given up the dream of capturing the Blue Ribband. And really, a "weak hull"? Did you even watch the video?
@@sd80mac
Exactly. Every "theory " he listed has/have/were Debunked YEARS ago. Anyone who knows anything about this ship and the sinking knows what he said is simply NOT true
The reason I had always heard for why the "sink in one piece" story won out wasn't based on explicit covering up or trying to save face, but just societal deference to seniors. As highest ranking survivor Lightoller's version of events would have been way more influential than random crewmen or passengers, even though further scholarship has suggested Lightoller's precarious position "aboard" Lifeboat B meant he didn't necessarily have the best view of the final sinking, or perhaps was too busy trying to keep his boat stable to really witness it.
Lightoller described a massive “rumbling roar” when the ship reached an angle of “60 degrees.” He described the lights going out at this sound, and he attributed this to the boilers sliding down into the bow. 48:11 shows what his perspective would have been, and through all the panic, darkness, and smoke, you can see why he might have missed it.
Fear Allah
Suicide not allowed
@@tenorcenter drugs alcohol pork not allowed
@@tenorcenter I agree, guys. Lightoller's personal writings didn't mention the stern coming down horizontally and floating, and neither did Jack Thayer, who was on the upside-down collapsible boat with Lightoller. Both of them made the same mistake of running the 2nd and 3rd risings of the stern together in their retelling. Somehow, Colonel Gracie was able to coax more of the story out of Lightoller by interviewing him again later. Gracie relates Lightoller's admission second-hand: "It is true that the after part of the vessel settled horizontal with the water." But Gracie got a few of Lightoller's pieces of information jumbled around in time, too. The three men compared notes on board the CARPATHIA, and had a hard time getting the timeline of the events in the right order. They all had a rough time in the water.
Two things:
1) I'm from Schenectady (the first syllable is pronounced more like 'Sken' than 'Schen') and was unaware of this ships existence. So I was very interested in that part of this video.
2) And breaking apart while in port sounds likes something a Schenectady would do.
Fear Allah
The amount of analysis, hard work, intelligence, drawing, everything you've put into this video. I mean, wow. Just absolutely impressive, what a talented force you are to be reckoned with. And such a variety of skills too. Best of luck to you, you're on your way to even greater successes in your career.
Fear Allah
@@LisaJones-xk6xz Jesus Christ is the Lord and His Father in heaven is God.
The RMS Titanic was the safest ship on the seas and one of the best-built. People want to look for faults and blame to explain away how such a disaster could happen to it, but really the ship was put in an impossible situation no one was prepared for. The reality is that humans can never truly tame the ocean, but Titanic was a damn good attempt.
If you want a disaster to blame people for, look at the space shuttle Challenger. That was entirely avoidable up until the last moment.
That’s an interesting comparison. The Titanic sank because she received damage that was outside of her design tolerances, whereas the Challenger disaster happened because of a failure to define what her design tolerances were (and because of a culture of normalized deviance- the failure to address a known problem with a piece of equipment because nothing bad has happened yet).
I disagree completely. People deserve all the blame for Titanic. All the ship had to do to avoid disaster was to ensure that an iceberg could be spotted early enough for the ship to avoid a collision with one. The captain, with perfectly functional vision and many years of experience, failed to do that. He knew the ship was near icebergs - other ships had reported seeing them nearby - and he knew or should have known that the moonless night would make icebergs more difficult to spot than usual, and instead of building in a margin for error by slowing down, he kept the ship at or near max speed. It was the height of recklessness. The blame for the disaster falls squarely on the shoulders of the captain. There's no need to even look for faults and blame - this is clear as day and staring us right in the face.
@@juliadagnall5816 The thing with Challenger is that the engineers begged administration to scrub the launch precisely because they knew it was too cold the previous night for the rubber gaskets on the boosters to function properly. If engineers are telling you that doing something *will* result in disaster, you don't do that thing! As an engineer myself it infuriates me that the warnings were ignored and the crew uninformed. And what's worse is that the lesson wasn't learned from and administration was also responsible for the Columbia disaster.
@@humanbeing2420 Captain E. J. Smith was an experienced sailor who had many years of commanding large ocean liners behind him. By all accounts he acted according to procedure and his best judgment.
The night was abnormally clear and still and were they not at the edge of the Labrador current the berg would have been seen with plenty time to steer around it. What you must understand is that Ol' Bergy was the very first sign of ice; there were no growlers or sea ice chunks to be seen, which is unusual around a large berg. He knew of the ice warnings and that's why his orders were to decrease to half ahead and wake him at the first sighting of ice. The nature of sea ice is that it comes in patches and it's typical for a ship to encounter a lot of ice while over the horizon there's no ice.
Unfortunately in 1912 the cold water mirage effect was not well understood and the moonless calm gave no hint of mirage at all. They could not have seen the berg in time to avoid it. If they were at 10 knots then they would have more time but it would still be a close call. Remember, the slower a ship is moving the longer it takes to turn; it relied on water flowing over the rudder to turn and shutting down the port propeller would not have been possible in time for additional leverage. Murdoch saw the berg at the same time the lookouts did and did everything possible to avoid the iceberg.
Captain Smith didn't have the Titanic disaster to reference because he was in it, and indeed the sinking changed how ships were operated. It's unfair to blame him for not knowing something no one knew yet. He even steered farther south than recommended to avoid ice, so he was careful. It really was just incredibly bad luck that a deadly berg was alone right when it couldn't be seen and right when the Titanic was passing through.
@@SAOS451316Right, but as far as I’m aware the Rocketdyne engineers had never tested at what temperature the o rings started to fail, so it hadn’t been worked into the go/no go parameters. They knew it was a bad idea, but they didn’t have the data to back it up. Go fever kills, we all know this, which is why it is so important to have what is safe vs unsafe clearly defined. Ambiguity leaves room for judgement calls which leaves room for error.
I love the maps of each deck along the breakup zone. Thank you for putting that together. Another interesting thing I noticed corroborates the baker’s testimony. His room and galleys were directly in the breakup zone. He definitely would’ve heard the noises that he testified to and he got out just in time. That man was lucky all night.
Tattoo not allowed
@@LisaJones-xk6xz You must remember to take your medication.
@@paulanthony5274 fire 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 never ends for disbelievers
@@paulanthony5274 don't die as a disbeliever
@@paulanthony5274 wife back door not allowed ect
I’ve read (and watched) countless Titanic materials over the years, but this is hands down the best explanation and presentation I’ve seen. Fascinating! Well done.
I would argue that the best thing our friend Mike Brady has ever made is a friendly, respectful, and ever-growing community of ocean liner and ship enthusiasts. I love and look forward to all of his videos, but even more I love how genuinely nice people are in the comments.
@cleverusername9369 Nicely said, sir!
Best wishes to all decent people from Prague, Czech republic!✌️😌
@@Gotcha6666 hello from North Carolina, USA!
Hello from the river port in Duisburg Germany.
I prefer the Mike Brady of the Brady Bunch. He was a closeted gay man and still had more integrity than this CZcams "expert".
@@jimmyguitar2933 get lost dude. We're nice here.
The horror of what took place in the final 15 minutes must have been unimaginable, especially for those still on the ship.
Fear Allah
I work at a welding consumables manufacturer. I always wondered if my basic level understanding of metallurgy was going to come in handy! A boy has it!!! The report you mentioned was quite a fantastic read! Thank you Mike!
Tattoo not allowed
This was the best Titanic documentary I've ever seen. Great job. Not gimmicky at all.
The physics behind the structural failure in Titanic's final moments is a very, VERY interesting and extensive piece of information, we STILL don't know the full details of it, we can only estimate and yet, here we are, we know what it probably looked like, technology has truly taken us far, flaws and all.
If the original plans were available, it would be possible to construct a finite element structural analysis model to figure it out more precisely, but why bother at this point? There would be no new engineering lessons to be learned at this point, and the cost would run into the millions.
The Titanic went down because of 2 major reasons. 1. It had a weak hull. Charles Andrews was under immense pressure to trade off safety measures to make the boat cheaper. 16 lifeboats instead of 48. Wrought iron rivets instead of steel. 2. They were running 22 knots in an ice field because they were trying to make a transatlantic speed record on the maiden voyage. It was a public relations stunt cooked up by White Star.
@@gregorylyon1004. A. It had an extremely sturdy hull, but it wasn't reinforced as Olympic and Britannic would be because of money reasons. Thomas Andrews joined the project late and it was something he wanted changed when Titanic made the voyage. B. That isn't true. He, Alexander Carlisle, and many others wanted more lifeboats. This was denied because White Star and H&W felt they would take up too much space. Lifeboats at that time were thought to be used to ferry passengers from one boat to the next in case of emergencies. White Star said that they could mostly have passengers walk from Titanic to a nearby boat in case of collision. C. They weren't going for a speed record as Titanic wasn't built for speed anyway. They crossed the sea going fast as they felt they could see icebergs in the area and bypass them easily. There was a Mirage effect that night. They should have stayed put, but they saw the sea as clear.
Don't forget the cheaper dodgy rivets that were ordered. they didn't help on the initial imact.
@@dieselfan7406 Don't forget that it was 1912. This was the strongest steel of the time.
The end of a long day...how to unwind and relax...ah! Our friend Mike Brady just dropped another video - well, things are shaping up nicely!
Drugs alcohol pork not allowed
This is truly and OUTSTANDING video! It's so difficult to create meaningful Titanic content these days but Mike absolutely nails it! Nice job!
Fear Allah
Im a mechanical engineering student.
In my Materials Engineering and Machine Elemnt Design courses, the effect temperature has on different types of metals plays a HUGE part in design.
In my materials laboratory, we tested different metals at extreme temperatures (I believe 300°C and -100°C) and impact testing them. Basically we put the metals in a clamp and swing a massive axe between it. Then we measure the difference in the angle of the start position and maximum end position of the swing. If the end position is hogh, then the metal was basically butter. If it is low, then the metal held strong despite the temperature difference. We found that aluminum was the metal that was barely affected by temp differences, hence why it is used in planes. Other metals like steel and tungsten easily snapped under high and low temps.
Mike deserves a lot more subscribers. Absolutely top notch content.
India don't burn dead body not allowed
Most Titanic material these days aren’t worth my time - it’s all rehashed material - but I always listen this channel because I know I’m going to get some good information and fresh viewpoints and examinations. Love it!
and they love to rehash questionable evidence, such as still parading joughin around even though his testimony changed ontop of him drinking which brings into question the validity of his claims.
Right? The original inquiry was some grade A Gilded Age BS.
@@mintybadger6905 fear Allah
@@Milner62 don't die as a disbeliever
Fear Allah
Mike Brady is the Benchmark in Technical analysis of Maritime History. He also makes the analysis very warm by adding a warm narration to his work. Well done Mike !
This video is of stunning high quality and demonstrates a depth and breadth of knowledge of the highest caliber. Not even National Geographic or Cameron himself could have produced something better. Truly an achievement, Mr. Brady. I am so grateful to watch them and to have found your channel. Thank you.
Fear Allah
Mike, another brilliant video on the Titanic. The quality of your channel and the content is fantastic for fans of ships of all descriptions.
Fear Allah
A great breakdown of the structural failure of the vessel. One thing I specifically wanted to call out was your overlays of the original ship with the wreckage. Because it's still so big, and there's a lack of perspective, it's often easy to not realize how much the bow of the ship was compressed by its final encounter with the ocean floor (never mind the stern). This overlay is one of the better depictions of the compressional damage and the extent of the collapsed decks I've seen.
Fear Allah
The BEST explanation of how the Titanic actually succumbed. I've watched the others that talk about failing rivets, etc., but you nailed it with this well-reasoned/researched analysis. Great job!
Fear Allah
I have been a marine engineer for over fifty years. I have retired now, but I was chief engineer on a VLCC.what you have described makes sense. Most people do not understand the stresses and loading that a ships hull goes through. Temperature plays a massive part in this equation as well
Thank you for addressing the quality-of-steel issue: I heard about this aspect of the disaster decades ago, in a magazine article, but it seems to have been forgotten in popular culture, so I've never gotten a full explanation like this.
Drachinifel trained as an engineer and did a video on iron armour shattering when too cold and introduced the Brittle/Ductile transition.
Jesus was not killed nor was crucified
Fear Allah
Tattoo not allowed
@@LisaJones-xk6xz
And you were there.
This was an outstanding well-put-together video, Mike. I give a 20 out of 10 for the material used. It puts some other sinking videos to shame, most notably those who don't know the laws of physics. Given how long it took the ship to be overwhelmed from the flooding, it goes to show you the great craftsmanship and resilience of the vessel back in those days. Again, outstanding video as always, Mike.
As a structural engineer, I have to say that this is an excellent video, especially with regards to behavior of steel structures. Pretty much spot-on. The abrupt failures of the T2 tankers and Liberty ships during and after WW2 along with crashes of the Comet airliners triggered extensive research into fatigue and brittle fracture that continues to this day. In the case of the T2 tanker, the cracks started at a square hatch corner that propagated through the whole ship because the welded construction did not allow for any discontinuities that could stop crack growth. Also during WW2, manufacturing standards for steels were relaxed and many shipyard workers were inexperienced, so the Coast Guard could be forgiven for blaming bad welding in the case of the Schenectady.
You're smart. Does the steel becoming more brittle in colder temperatures imply lower yield strengths? I would have thought the yield strength was the same and wouldn't have any effect on failure if the loads were rather static, as in this case they seem to be (calm, no waves).
@@jonathanhill2703 Me smart? Ha, so you think! Well here goes. Yield and fracture toughness are not the same.Yield is a measure of static strength.Toughness is resistance to impact loading. Yield stress is not changed by lower temperature, but fracture toughness can be dramatically reduced at low temps. Below a certain temperature known as the transition temperature, steel changes from an elastic to a brittle material. For modern steels, the transition temp is well below 0 degrees F, but for steels produced over 100 years ago or to reduced quality during wartime, that temp could be higher, say 30 F, leading to an increased vulnerability to brittle fracture. So therefore the rivets on the Titanic no doubt popped like pieces of glass upon impact with the iceberg even if they had theoretically been strong enough when evaluated by yield strength alone.
@drecksaukerl I reckon you are right about the T2 tankers. A few months ago I inspected some Bailey bridges. I assume they were made during WW2 because the welds were astoundingly bad. It was probably the result of very poor steel and a near complete lack of skill on the part of the welder. But they are still in service. Badly in need of paint, but still in service.
@@jonathanhill2703Actually, yield stress increases as the temperature falls. The problem is that the steel become less ductile at lower temperatures, so it's less resistant to propagation of cracks and less able to redistribute forces as some parts of the structure reach yield. That's my understanding, anyway.
Also part of the reason airliners have rounded windows instead of square, as in the failure of the square hatches on ships.
I usually don't have the gumption to sit down and watch a professional documentary on Netflix or the like, but by God, I will watch Mike Brady talk about Titanic for 45 minutes.
Another absolute masterpiece of documentary film making. Your analysis of the break up is far far more detailed than anything else I've seen. 50 mins of being totally hooked and fascinated, awesome stuff Mike!!!
Awesome video, the research, the visuals, the narration are making this video an incredible piece of media. You are the reason why I'm sticking with CZcams. Passion and talent of creators like you are making it worthwhile. Thank you for your incredible content and your passion for Oceanliners, Your videos just keeps on getting better. Keep up your astonishing work!
Last I checked, you can make another Google account if you want to give this video another like.
If you click ‘like’ twice it’ll just take away the first like.
Best thing to do is, keep hitting like button, but make sure you only click on it an odd number of times.
@@RichieW90210 how many notifications for liked comments did u get on this one?
There were a couple of steel steamers that sailed the Great Lakes made with a grade of steel that ended up not being suitable for shipbuilding. The Western Reserve broke in two and sank in a late August gale on Lake Superior in 1892, with one survivor. The survivor testified that the ship seemed to be handling the weather fine when she simply broke in two.
Her sister ship, the W.H. Gilcher, disappeared on Lake Michigan that same year in a gale on or about October 28.
Testing of the metal showed that it became brittle when exposed to cold.
Brittle when exposed to cold 😢 not a great quality for sailing the great lakes
The lakes never give up her dead…
To be fair, the concept of fracture toughness was a largely unknown issue until well into the 20th century. American standards for steel are set by ASTM, and standards for toughness for structural steel did not show up in ASTM until the mid 20th century.
There's also the Daniel J. Morrell, Carl D. Bradley, and of course the Edmund Fitzgerald that all also broke in 2 during storms.
@@drecksaukerl of course - my example was to show that even pre-Titanic, the learning curve for new shipbuilding materials was inked in blood. "You don't know what you don't know" as they say. In the early days of iron and then steel hulls, it used to be hard to get veteran crews - they didn't trust anything but wood. Some of the early iron ships had wood planking on the hull because insurance companies didn't trust the new materials completely, either - they'd give a lower rate for a wooden hull over the iron frame.
They definitely got it figured out by mid-20th century, as you say - there are quite a number of ships from the 40's and 50's that still sail the Lakes: Lee A. Tregurtha (1942); Alpena (1942); Arthur M. Anderson (1952), Philip R. Clakre (1952) - among others - are still in service. Fresh water + figuring out the metallurgy has created a fleet of ships that see services lives of 90-100 years.
It's amazing how we are still watching and talking about Titanic still to this day.
15 April 1976, we stopped at the coordinates left by the official record on the day of the sinking. The US Navy FFG I was on had a memorial service. It was a beautiful clear day also.
Suicide not allowed
Fellow schenectady resident here. I giggled at your pronunciation. If you are not from here, no one can pronounce it!
Love all of your videos. Thanks for the content.
Channels like this are why CZcams is amazing. Top tier. Thanks for all the hard work. New hair is on point!
Fear Allah
I thought you would bring up the Great Lakes freighters as the probability that even the toughest ship has split into here and there. Your content is spectacular as always
Great Lakes freighters aren’t a very good example. They’re not subject to anything like the sort of weather that oceangoing ships need to be able to handle, so they’re held to much lighter structural requirements than seagoing ships are. As a result, lake freighters have much lower hull girder strength than equivalently sized seagoing ships, are are much more susceptible to breaking in half when sinking.
@@michaelimbesi2314 of course. I'm not comparing a saltwater ocean liner to a freshwater Great lakes freighter in 1911 but rather the relative circumstances and design flaws and results. The idea that any of these vessels would split in half was inconceivable. But there's a bunch of them.
Yes, but no. Just see the Edmund Fitzgerald. The great lakes in bad weather are just as violent as the north Atlantic.
The Titanic and the Edmund Fitzgerald both had weak hulls. Built with scrap metal. Anything to save a buck. And both ships went to the bottom. The Titanic was the biggest piece of crap ever built by a ship builder. The first collision put her on the bottom in 2 hours. Even if it had made it to New York it would have sunk as soon as it hit the dock. That's how weak that hull was
@@michaelimbesi2314 This is factually incorrect. Ships on the Great Lakes are, in fact, subjected to forces far greater than most ocean-going vessels will ever encounter. This is largely due to the much shorter fetch between the waves. Oceans produce large swells, the lakes produce steep, choppy moguls.
When I saw the plans for the ship, I saw all that empty space too and it immediately made me think of one thing that tends to make buildings at least partially collapse during earthquakes and that is having a "soft story." That is basically when you stack a big building on a story that is very open. The building tends to buckle there and I had the same thought about the ship buckling in a similar fashion, but rotated 90 degrees.
This channel has progressively become the best in terms of historical accuracy and production value in the maritime history niche. I am genuinely excited anytime there is a new video posted by this channel. Great work Mike! Keep it up!
Thank you for the Titanic content Mike, we appreciate it!
"It would've casted a shadow on proud traditions of British shipbuilding."
This makes the line "I'm sorry I didn't build you a stronger ship, young Rose."
Hit so much harder. Andrews probably blamed it all on himself for something that isn't his fault at all. In terms of the ship breaking, I feel like it should be obvious. With the bow taking on water, it only makes sense that the ship could stand so much pressure before breaking. It surprises me that there's still debate on this.
Everything has a limit… it’s astonishing it held as long as it did for a little over 2 hours
@jackthorton10, you're right. Honestly, it's rather impressive in a dark way.
@@jackthorton10 2 hours 40 minutes. Yes I agree, partly due to the excellent work of the engineers.
I recently watched the titanic movie maybe 3 weeks ago and omg have I been watch every documentary I can find. I find it so terrifying how dark it would of been mixed with the noises of the boat creaking as its torn apart and dragged to the bottom of the Atlantic.
I've read almost everything I can on Titanic, ever since the mid-80s as a little kid. And it never ceases to amaze me how much I still don't know about this ship. Superb video!
Thank you for explaining how other ships like Lusitania and Britannic DIDN'T split apart too despite sinking in similar fashions as Titanic. That has always confused me until now. Thanks, and merry Christmas!
The late Roy Mengot's website on the Titanic detailing the entire breakup section, deck by deck, was very informative for me. It shows a lot about how and where Titanic broke apart, similar to your video.
I have no particular special interest in Titanic other than the normal dude interest of big ships and disasters, but every few years youtube seems to send me down a rabbit hole of titanic engineering and drama videos. Last time it was a channel called Titanic Animations debunking the v-break theory, and now Ive been binge watching your videos for the past couple days. Amazing work man, the amount of work to draw and model all of those details must be insane.
I really enjoyed watching this video. Your descriptions & explanations are, without doubt, second to none! Like millions of other people, I've always been intrigued by the sinking of the Titanic. THIS video gave me a fresh insight into what occurred that tragic night - THANK YOU!
Rest in Peace, RMS Titanic, her captain, her crew and her passengers. You're all deeply missed.
Its so sad that all those ppl died RIP titanic 😢
Actually, Titanic’s double bottom pieces separated fairly early on. A presentation at SNAME Maritime Convention 2021 discussed her sinking further, and showed that the evidence indicates that one of the double bottom segments actually slid up over the other one into the ship. But I can’t fault you for not knowing that, it wasn’t really publicized. The only reason I even knew about it was that I was there. Otherwise, excellent video.
Any materials available publicly? It must be an interesting read.
You do realise what you're claiming happened - with such certainty I might add - is simply another theory?
Which accounts for why the two sections of the keel and double bottom are lying far away from the rest of the ship, they and the contents of the reciprocating engine room and boiler room 1 likely were the first parts of the ship to fall to the bottom.
@@taraswertelecki3786 fear Allah
@@scottread tattoo not allowed
This is a subject that always fascinated me as a young teenager but I never found much information on it back then. It's nice to finally put all my childhood wonderings to rest! As always 10/10 top quality content!
This has to be my favorite Titanic video. There are so many Titanic-themed videos out there that pretty much regurgitate the same information, just dressed up differently. This video, Mike Brady, is such an amazing, detailed explanation of how/why the ship broke up and how that relates to footage of her final resting place (including debris field!) But here's the coolest part....you did it in a way that the enthusiast (vs. engineers and really smart people ;) can understand. I've learned so much from this video in addition to your other videos. Thank you so much for being the "secret sauce" that someone like me appreciates!
Thank you Mike Brady for a fascinating article. Oh and by the way, "Schenectady", is pronounced as if the h isn't there, it's silent, Skenectady. My dad grew up there. Thank you again, love your work.
I also grew up in Schenectady, and posted a good-natured pronunciation correction; a minor flaw in an otherwise top-notch (as always) production by Mike Brady.
Hey, at least Mike posted the correction on the video, so many don't bother. That would be my only complaint on an otherwise fantastic video/breakdown. Professor level stuff here.
I grew up there too, and I prefer Mike’s pronunciation!
This break up sequence absolutely needs to be animated. I genuinely think it is probably the most accurate breakdown of the destruction sequence. Perhaps you could do a crowd starter or talk to the creators of the 3d explorable titanic animation you often us. I believe its the engine and modeling for a game you released?
It's close, but not quite. It doesn't show the first breaking at low angle; so in that regard, it's like most of the other single-break theories.
Hey Mike I believe ths analysis of the breakup of the Titannic was EXCELLENT! This is one of your all time best presentations. Very clear and easy to understand despite the complexities of the issue. BRAVO!!!!!
I can only echo the endless stream of compliments this video and analysis has spawned. Well done, Mr. Brady; not only your personal best, but the best of the best I have seen on this topic. Thank you!
Hi Mr. Brady. It's been quite some time since I last wrote a comment to let you know how much I enjoy your videos. I appreciate and RESPECT all of your hard work and dedication. Please accept my best wishes for a safe, happy, and healthy Christmas season and a prosperous New Year.
I just remembered back in the early 80's our aquarium had a "TITANIC" ornament and I specifically remember it being represented as one unbroken hull with a tear along the side and a mist of bubbles would rise from all 4 funnels .
I love the video Mike , great work !
This is the best put together explanation I’ve seen. Very well done. I no longer have unanswered questions. I was particularly impressed with the way the debris field was explained.
As a mechanical nerd with a strong interest in history, I thank you for this well thought out and superbly narrated video. Very well done.
This is a well written, well researched account, Mr. Brady. The footage is spectacular.
Your knowledge of Titanic is encyclopedic!
I must say I am amazed at the fact there are no "conspiracy" arguments in the comments section that I could find. It is nice to be part of an audience that respects both author and one another!
Such a brilliant documentary! I think you absolutely put this topic to rest. There’s just nothing on the internet that is so throughly researched and well presented about the breaking of Titanic. Well done👏 and have a Happy New Year!
When I was in grad school we went on a tour of the Cape Hatteras lighthouse (Ocracoke, North Carolina outer banks), and they told us that Hatteras had a new and powerful wireless system that was the farthest away from the Titanic, which also had a new and very powerful wireless, but still received the wireless distress signals from Titanic. It was utterly shocking. All of us on the tour just got very quiet. That beautiful lonely lighthouse and then just this devastating news that reached so many ships etc that couldn’t help the great Titanic…
Another fascinating piece of in-depth analysis. Thank you for the time, passion and sincerity you demonstrate in each of your videos Mike. I've loved tales of the Titanic for most of my life and I've learnt so much since finding your channel a few months ago. Keep on doing what you are doing please.
Thanks for all the hard work you do, Mike! Excellent video!
One day, I'd like to see your channel address how Mr. Charles Joughin survived for so long in the icy water when so many others did not. Cheers!
I am pretty sure he was either mistaken about the duration he was in the water (alcohol messes with perception) or he had the same Mutation as the islandic fisherman whose fat more resembled seal-blubber than human fat 😁
@@i.b.640 , lying is more likely as he gave two different stories, one story he gave was that he jumped into the sea when the break up started and another story that he watched people thrown up against the port side railing and walked on the starboard hull plating and rode the stern down.
Not only did his story change but neither story has supporting evidence, in fact his second version of the story actually is disputed by Patrick Dillon who`s testimony counters his story of people being thrown up against the port side railing due to a port list.
I dont believe it is a product of alcohol as much as it is a product of wanting fame and changing his story for the more elaborate.
Finally a detailed video that does not try "re-writing" history or the details of the sinking. Also a nice point on the material imperfections... it don't matter what the steel was made of... the cause of sinking was the Iceberg and the highest quality of steel would of peeled open. Also something that people over look when mentioning rivets as a partial cause... Rivets popping actually prevent steel splitting... it's also easier to quick or long repair popped rivets than crack steel... there is actually some structural benefits to rivets. Of course as pointed out... in 1911... all the construction was either normal or even slightly above average for the time.
"Hopefully this does not add to your list of fears that stop you going on a cruise ship"... I would rather be on a boat than a plane. If a boats fails mid travel... humans float... there is a high chance of survival. If a plane fails mid travel... humans cant fly... there is little to no chance of survival. Besides... i am a Islander... from the very islands she was built on.
It’s crazy how they denied the fact that Titanic broke in half, yet somehow its sister ships were conveniently reinforced to prevent them from breaking up and this all went unnoticed…
Extremely articulate, convincingly scientific, and impressively understandable for those of us without an engineering background. As a former educator, I salute your masterful presentation. The fact that I stayed glued to the screen, at 3 a.m., without a thought of the time, speaks to the perceived worth of your efforts. Thank you.
It's always a good day when Ocean Liner Designs uploads! 😃
Fear Allah
@@LisaJones-xk6xz ?
@@gantheman7321 fire 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 never ends for disbelievers
@@gantheman7321 don't die as a disbeliever
@@gantheman7321 wife back door not allowed ect
I've studied the break-up a lot. This is a terrific video and very well put together. Amazing work as usual
Unbelievable video mate. The way you tell the story, the science lessons, the drawings you made, the photographs etc. So, so good!
Thanks for dropping this today and letting Christmas come early! Forever in awe and appreciation of the work you put into these videos.
The sheer detail and work that goes into doing these is always SO fascinating.
Another well researched and documented video. Mike, thank you.
The forensic level of detailed analysis and the layout/structure of your presentation made it very interesting and enjoyable.
Fascinating video, Mike. It is a wonder that Titanic didn't come apart much faster.
Your analysis of what happened makes sense. It wasn't hard to follow and you did it so well. Thank you.
A superbly done video Mike, you never disappoint young sir!
The only thing I can add, and it's not much, is Titanic's length was quite long in proportion to it's beam which I'm sure played a part in the break in two. There was nothing wrong with the length-to-beam proportion in Titanic's case especially since the stern of the ship was never supposed to be lifted out of the water like that.
As far a hull stresses are concerned it was a given in those days and up until recently that during a conventional launch (sliding down the ways into the water) a ship's hull would undergo stresses worse than any it would ever encounter at sea. If the hull survived the launch, it was good to go.
Oh, I've got a book that was published within weeks of the disaster, I found it in a New Jersey bookstore in 1984, and there are survivors accounts stating the ship broke in two. I didn't think much of it until Bob Ballard found the ship in 1985 and then:
"Wow! Those survivors were right!"
Phenomenal video, Mike. Super well researched and organized. I learned dozens of new things and really appreciate the focus on the engineering and strength of the materials, stress concentrations and design of the hull. You really know the design of the ship inside and out and it shows. My guess is that you're a mechanical engineer at your day job?
I appreciate that you address the issue of the metallurgy of the steel used in Titanic.
I read an article many years ago about how the steel used in the Titanic was the best available at that time and scientists were able to prove it because of the advances in analysis that had recently become available.
If anyone discussing Titanic mentions it, they never go into the detail you have.
Well done!
Fear Allah
This was absolutely fascinating, I loved the in depth structural explanations and all the diagrams. Really amazing detail and quality, superb work!
Great technical explanations!! I just finished a statics course and I could just imagine all those moments, reaction forces, shear,and normal forces, etc. I imagine what it would have been like for me if I was on that ship that night knowing I was going to die soon suffering hypothermia and other distress. It makes me feel so bad for those who lost their lives on a ship whose story will never fade.
Be sure to keep learning--specifically, about potential and kinetic energy, buoyancy and specific gravity, force couples, and Euler buckling. All of those are important for understanding the TITANIC's break-up.
That the prevailing opinion for most of the 20th Century agreed upon Titanic foundering in one piece is astounding!
73 years, 4 months, and 17 days from Titanic's foundering to Robert Ballards discovery on the North Atlantic Ocean floor, on September 1st, 1985, forever settling the much maligned opinion that she broke in half; something almost all refused to accept -ab agreeably bizzare fate for her to experience on her maiden crossing!
I adore how thorough you are in all of your videos. I've been binge watching your material all weekend long. Keep up the great work and thank you💕🛳
One practical explanation: Night vision. I heard an optometrist speculate...those looking away, or with eyes shut (praying) had perfectly-adjusted night vision.
However, those watching the ship were adjusted to its light.
Once the lights went out - thise watching the ship, go blind. They exclaim.
Those with eyes shut, now look up, to clearly see the dark ship.
Those people - could see a dark ship break apart, while the light-blind can't.
This explains how each individual person can think they are correct. With no witnesses lying.
wow that makes a lot of sense, i can't believe i've never thought of that
Absolutely your best work yet! I can hardly imagine the time and effort you must put into these polished, detailed videos. Thank you.
Kudos to Mike on this - very, very good presentation and research. This is a solid consideration of the terrible events in question. I will also second Mike's suggestion viewers check out and purchase those deck plans through the link he provided. I have a set, and they are absolutely glorious.
Anyone genuinely criticising the designers of Titanic for breaking in two under that much stress probably miss the point. Tongue in cheek, the barber's shop wasn't designed to serve as a fulcrum for the bow and the stern and they permitted themselves the luxury of assuming it wouldn't have to.
Where they did err was in their assumption that five compartments wouldn't flood, put measures in place to prevent relatively minor damage from causing it (additional skins), or implement backup watertight doors to completely seal any and all compartments. Subsequent ship designs show the key learnings were understood and implemented; look at how much damage the Bismarck took before finally sinking.
Love these videos. I found your channel two days ago and your videos have been riveting (sorry).