The REAL reason The Titanic Sank
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 02. 2024
- The Titanic sunk after hitting an iceberg in 1912, but it wasn't that simple considering the ship was deemed unsinkable.
I cover interesting stories within history and science using a video style inspired by Reece Batts & Bill Wurtz! Subscribe if you like this video. - Zábava
One correction that I overlooked during my research, the Titanic was not sailing to beat a record that is a common myth but not actually true.
The ice tray is the best example I've seen explaining the compartments 🚢. Very insightful, Great video 👍👍
Thanks! 😃
the video production is genuenly amazing. i bet you are gonna be famous with 100k or maybe even 1 mil subs one day if you keep up the good work. I don't know if the video is true or the comments are but i bet you are gonne get the exact information in the future. Best of luck in your future videos!
The video is not 100% true at the end, if you were to believe most of the parts at the end you would paint a whole different picture on Titanic’s sinking but at the start it’s informative.
The Captain of the Titanic Was Not Out for a record, in fact the Titanic was not the fastest ship in the world The white star line the company that owned the trio of ships, Olympic, britannic And Titanic we’re more focused on safety and luxury even the captain himself changed the Titanic‘s course to avoid the ice field.
Great video. Very informing for beginners. Captain Smith actually changed Titanic’s direction slightly, and when the ship hit the iceberg he was asleep and the 1st Officer was in command. Binoculars, while they would’ve helped spot things in the daytime wouldn’t have helped at all and would have made it worse for the lookout crew since there was a cold water mirage and it was a moonless night. Titanic was built to the highest safety standards at the time but it doesn’t compare to today, just how Icon of the Seas in 100 years will be obsolete. Titanic was never called unsinkable, in fact many ships at the time such as the Lusitania and Mauretania were titled as unsinkable upon their introduction. The crew did have time to prepare for a proper evacuation, most of Titanic’s crew members were royal navy reserves and White Star Line veterans.
My suspicion is that the main reason was that it was heavier than water
The 5 funneled titanic in thumbnail 😅
There was very little knowledge of damage control evident in their actions. When Cook run aground on the Great Barrier Reef (1770), he used sails, with ropes tied to the ends. They were worked from the bow and stern along to where the hole was and water pressure pushed it into the hole. This doesn’t stop the water but it slowed it enough to allow the pumps to make it possible to make it to land.
They should have down similar, using mattresses instead of sails to try to slow down the water intake. There were many holes and it needed to be done quickly. The aim would be not to stop the ship sinking completely, but if they slowed down the water intake they would have slowed down the sinking, giving other ships time to respond. Many lives would have been saved if they could have floated her for 2-3 hours more.
Lack of training in basic damage control. As an ex-RAN sailor, it annoys me.
Is no one gonna talk about the fact the thumbnail titanic has 5 funnels?
I’m pretty sure the titanic wasn’t actually deemed “unsinkable”
Thank you for sharing this. I greatly appreciated it. Titanic was a crime. 0n the night of her sinking . The Californian was 19 miles away. She had her radio shut off the night. There two other ships in the area that night.
The Sampson was doing illegal activities in the area the night she sank. Also. Mount Temple was also in the area as well.
The Captain of the Mount Temple was told to stay away from the ice. The Captain of the Sampson told the inquiry about what he was a few days after the sinking
Nonsense. Sampson was nowhere near Titanic.The Titanic historian Leslie Reade obtained microfilmed Lloyd's List records reporting that the Samson docked in Isafjordur twice that April: on the 6th and the 20th, then on 15 May. The April dates would not have allowed anywhere near enough time for the Samson to be in the vicinity of the Titanic on 14 April.
Attempts have been made to discredit Captain Moore of Mount Temple and lay blame on him for "abandoning" Titanic and those aboard her to their fate,. However, the historical record clearly proves otherwise. At a distance of 49.5 nautical miles (91.7 km; 57.0 mi) from the famous distress coordinates of Titanic, and roughly 60 miles (97 km) from the actual location of the disaster, Mount Temple was simply too far away to be seen from those aboard Titanic, and for those aboard Mount Temple to see Titanic or her distress rockets.
Captain Moore and his crew made a desperate attempt to reach the stricken Titanic, but only reached the western side of the ice field that stood between her and the wreck site some 2 hours and 40 minutes after Titanic sank. There was no way that she could have reached Titanic in time to carry out a rescue; she did not 'abandon' Titanic.
I suspect you have been taken in by a recent video made by Senan Molony?
wow I didnt know that
I hope you get famous in the future and please upload more titanic facts (im begging youu!!11)
Planning to cover a lot more than just the titanic in our upcoming videos!
Amazing! this was actually pretty informative for children who want to learn about ships, although there were a few VERY minor inaccurate statements the overall message was correct. Videos like these can surely support people trying to find information on the Titanic and other ships and the jokes were even hilarious!
W video
Even if some of the facts are not known to be true the style of your videos are great keep going and you will be up there at the top of CZcams!
Ah, the old myth that she was steaming too fast to break a record. A record she couldn't have broken as she wasn't even the fastest ship. She wasn't even at full steam when she hit the iceberg. She was on the longer southern crossing to avoid the ice, and her course altered further south to avoid ice warnings.
Every movie made the ship hits the iceberg but after the ship hits the iceberg disappears
You do know icebergs float don't you? By the time Titanic came to a halt, the berg had floated away.
This is accurate! I don't see that many people talk about the ships faulty design.
Maybe because it didn't have a 'faulty design.'
Titanic wasn’t faulty
@@Borninthe80s. The way they designed the rivets into the ship were not that durable. The best example of the rivets being faulty would be the Britannic hitting a mine. Due do the rivets being faulty, it caused the hull to get twisted which doomed the ship since they jammed the watertight doors open.
Thx
Not trying to be too picky but the part where you said the lookouts didn't have bincolars, that was the point. You see the lookouts had to keep an eye on the stars, that was the only way they could see a dark object, it was a moonless night, the sea was dead calm so no waves breaking against objects and both the sky and ocean was completely pitch black. Now the stars can reflect off stuff and also if you have an object infront of you it will cover the stars. Now having binoculars would make this job even more difficult as you get a limited view and also the lookouts needed to adjust and get used to the dark up there, they even turned all the exterior lights on the front of the ship off so it would be easier. So having binoculars would make it even more difficult to see. Also you later said that some lifeboats weren't properly inflated, there were no such types of boats. There were boats called Preserve Boats which had the popular nickname of Collapsibles and they were like very flat lifeboats, kind of like rafts but they had canvas sides that could be pulled up or collapsed downwards. Also at the start of the video you said that the ship sunk by design, kind of but kind of not. It was mostly nature itself as the large ice pack had broken off Greenland and drifted South right into the busy shipping lanes so what sunk Titanic was pure nature and physics. Also after that you said Thomas Andrews was the naval architect for the Titanic, this is a problem I've seen a lot of times and people seem to forget that there was a huge team of a lot of people who designed the ship. The ship's main architects were William Pirrie who was in charge of the shipyard but the main man, the chief designer, the head architect of the Titanic was Alexander Carlisle. Alexander Carlisle had retired before the completion of Titanic and as such Andrew (nephew of Pirrie) had been brought in as a replacement to oversee the finalization of the construction and also boarding the ship on her Maiden Voyage as William Pirrie had become sick. NOW ONE OF THE WORST THINGS YOU GOT WRONG, you said if the watertight comparments got flooded from above it would easily overflow into the next, then what's the point of watertight doors and watertight bulkheads. It doesn't matter if the ship takes on water from the bottom, the sides or from above, the ship would stay afloat. The ship could stay afloat with any of her 3 compartments flooded, she could even float with all 4 gone but she can't float with 5 which was the damage that Titanic dealt. Well the Titanic breached 5 comparments and the 6th's coalbunker which wasn't meant to be watertight and later collapsed in the sinking. Now next you also said that recent studies have shown the rivets and steel on the Titanic would become brittel. Well, the steel and rivets used on Titanic were the best at the time, Harland and Wolff, the most advanced and best shipbuilders at the time could very easily get their hands on the best of the best. NEXT THING, you ruining the reputation of a dead man. You said that the captain of the Titanic was sailing at a dangerously fast speed, that can't be physically possible as they never even reached full speed on her Maiden Voyage. Her top speed was 23-24 knots, during that last night they were sailing 20 knots. They didn't even have all the boilers list. Also you said they were pursuiting of a record, that's literally physically impossible, there is no one that could happen, physics doesn't support that. The RMS Mauretania had held the 2 records since 1907 and 1909 and she held them for 20 years. The Mauretania could make the trip in 5 days, Titanic in 7-8 days. Even if they pushed the engines of the Titanic to the limits it wouldn't be possible. They weren't even planning to take the record in the first place. White Star Line, one of the best shipping line in history wouldn't do that, to this day they remain as one of the best shipping lines as they focused on size and comfort. Hope I wasn't too picky but I'm just trying to correct some things as having people believe in myths and absolutely stupid rumors isn't the best thing as it can ruin the reputations of once great people and ruin the lives of their living family members.
Thank you for your comment, I appreciate any criticism as I'm new to video creation and wanting only to create the best videos with accurate information. I want to address some of your points:
It is well documented there were binoculars on board but locked away. I included this not to exclusively say that the access to these binoculars would have caused them to be used and guarantee they'd spot the iceberg; rather I included this as an example of the oversight of some of the safety considerations.
I recognize I used the wrong term for the life boats, but again I was just trying to highlight that it wasn't prepared for an evacuation. This was no fault of the crew as they had enough aboard to pass the safety standards for this time, it just wasn't enough for a mass evacuation.
I realize there were multiple architects involved in such a project, but Thomas Andrews being the director from Harland and Wolff made him in charge of overseeing the project. I didn't want this video style to dive too deep into the details and instead provide some illumination on the greater nature of the tragedy for the average CZcams viewer - this ties directly into the next point of why the ship sank.
The watertight compartments did flood into one another. I recognize the breach may have exposed more than just one compartment which expedited the sinking process, but it is documented that these compartments were not entirely sealed at the top allowing for them to overflow into one another such as the ice tray analogy portrayed. Along this idea of design flaws, I didn't want to suggest the iceberg wasn't a big factor, as I mentioned it was the catalyst for this tragedy. To reiterate on my previous statement I just wanted to show that the sinking wasn't as simple as: ship hits iceberg, ship sinks.
As far as the materials go, I stated in the video it's easy to point out these flaws today. At the time they may have been the best materials and this disclaimer was meant to remove blame from the workers using the best materials for the time. There is a modern belief among many historians and metallurgists that the materials would have become brittle under cold water. This would have been a factor in the ship sinking, but considering the materials used at the time a blameless factor.
With all of these arguments, I will concede that the speed record may have been a myth after doing research from reading your comment. I came across this claim multiple times in my research and recognize I should have looked into it further before stating it as fact.
Holistically, I think the information in the video is valid with the exception of the record. I do realize in the future I need to do more due diligence in the way I present the information. I'm attempting to encapsulate complex historical and scientific scenarios into 'digestible' pieces of content for non-experts on the subject matter. Pointing all of this out to me will inspire me to do further review in future scripts to make sure what I'm presenting, and the way in which I'm wording the material is done so in a way that is fair and accurate. I am not aiming to ruin any reputations of individuals involved as there was way too many individuals involved for the blame to fall exclusively on any one action or person. It was ultimately a tragedy and I am sorry if it was a presented in a way that made it seem as though I didn't respect that.
@@DigestibleTruths But the compartments had no need to be sealed off from the top. The damage she took that night wasnt actually all that catastrophic. It's how those openings were laid out along her side that doomed her. Even as far back as 1912 Edward Wilding calculated the total size of the openings to be no greater than like 12 square feet. The designers did not anticipate she'd ever suffer a glancing blow that'd puncture several, non continuous slits along 300ft of her hull.
Afterall with the watertight doors closed she could've had -any- two of them breached... Any three of the first five, or even the first four in a row could all be open to sea and she'd survive. She'd go down by the head untill the water level inside the ship was the same as outside, and so long as the level outside the ship did not exceed the maximum height of the bulkhead, they'd never overflow.
But on that faithful night five compartments (six if you wanna count the little 2ft opening of the coal bunker) were breached. And so as she went down by the head the water level lower than her designers had accounted for the water could spill over the tops. Infact in the subsequent refits the Olympic and the Britannic made it so that both of them could've survived the damage of that night. But hindsight is always 20/20
Finally did you know you can actually see the proverbial "killing blow" on the wreck today? If you look at the mosaic of the starboard side of the bow section right about where the bow begins to disappear into the mud you can see the hull plating has been separated. It's right around where boiler room six would be.