3.3 Titanic operation and boiler room 6

We are not quite through with boiler room six.  The author feels there remains substantial misunderstanding about the Titanic’s operation apart from the sinking itself and this impacts on the understanding of the sinking dynamics.  Why this misunderstanding persists is in and of itself a mystery.  The operation of boiler room six is central to the misunderstanding.

Titanic had six boiler rooms which were separated by transverse coal bunkers and water tight bulkheads.  As indicated previously, they were numbered 1 through 6 with number 1 boiler room closest to the stern and number 6 the most forward.  Boiler room 1 was the smallest with five single ended boilers.  The other five boiler rooms had double ended boilers which were about twice as long but of the same diameter.  Boilers in room 1 were principally used to provide steam for generating electric power and secondarily for the steam driven bilge pumps and ash ejectors.

Once the Titanic passed its abbreviated sea trials it is doubtful that these boilers in room 1 were ever completely shut down since the ship was immediately pressed into service to replace the sister ship Olympic which was in dry-dock for repairs.

 

Coal consumption was a big factor in steam ship operation and boilers were fired up on an as needed basis.  Thermodynamic and pressure drop considerations meant that only those boilers closest to the engines driving the ship were used for steam demanded by engines at the speed desired.  An approximate formula states that the steam required is proportional to the third exponential power of speed or velocity.   For example; a doubling of speed requires eight times more steam quantity, everything else remaining the same.

Until the collision with the ice berg Titanic was operating at reduced or “break-in” speed; at a little over 20 knots.  The running gear (reciprocating steam engines, steam turbine, gearing, bearings etc.) were performing very well so that Captain Smith and the virtual owner, Bruce Ismay, were anticipating getting favorable press by breaking Olympic’s maiden voyage crossing time record (Captain Smith himself had the Olympic under his command at that time).

To best Olympic’s record, the Titanic had to be run at its maximum design speed and to do this all boilers had to be operational which meant four (and the last) additional double boilers had to fired up according to the cube law noted above.  There happened to be four such boilers furthest from the engines that had never been used even in the test trials because the running gear had not yet been broken in.  These boilers were, of course, in boiler room six furthest from the stern.  Therefore I conclude: BOILER ROOM 6 WAS NOT IN OPERATION AT THE TIME OF THE COLLISION.

There is additional substantiating evidence for this conclusion which, by its nature, is quite extensive.  Much of it is therefore delegated to the APPENDIX. In Appendix 1 is a revised listing of the Titanic Crew, those who survived the sinking.  The original listing found in Reference 2 has a complete listing of all the crew prior to the sinking. This distinction is provided to help in keeping track of those involved in providing witness testimony.  Witnesses are shown in red lettering.  As far as boiler room six is concerned, the most important witness is leading fireman, Frederick Barrett. 

The crew listing in Reference 2 provides important information where it delineates the three 4 hour time “shifts” (watches) of operating personnel—firemen, trimmers and greasers.  It is very important to point out that the headings contained in Reference 2 for these time delineations for the operating personnel are misleading.  Better headings are provided in Appendix 1 where “watches” is to be preferred over “shifts” since the former is used in technical forums e. g. the hearings.  One reference states “there is nothing more confusing in the Titanic story than that involving time”  This seems to be the case even with simple things like “watches”.  The tables in Appendix 1 present 3 shifts of crew on 4 hour watches.  Each crew man on the Titanic served two watches a day each having 4 hours on and then 8 hours off.  From the evidence found so far it is not clear when the second watches occurred for the crew in these tables.  The bracketed times in blue format are my best guesses for when the second watches took place based on available information.  That information makes it clear that for these crew, the firemen,(stokers), trimmers, and greasers, the day schedule was as follows:

                             TITANIC WATCH SCHEDULE

8:00pm to 12:00am     2000-0000 (first watch)

12:00am to 4:00am    0000-0400 (middle watch)

4:00am to 8:00am      0400-0800 (morning watch)

8:00am to 12:00pm    0800-1200 (forenoon watch)

12:00pm to 4:00pm    1200-1600 (afternoon watch)

4:00pm to 6:00pm      1600-1800 (first dog watch)

6:00pm to 8:00pm      1800-2000 (second dog watch)

                      

Note that on the Titanic the 4-8 “shift” was broken into two watches called first and second dog watches.  Through a rotation system (not specified), the dog watches enabled all the crew of these tables to have evening meals on occasion.  Not all shipping companies or ships for that matter treated this kind of crew so well.

 

Now with the detailed information we can make better sense of what went on in boiler room 6 on the night of the collision.  We start the scenario at 4:00 pm the night of the sinking.  The third table down in Appendix 1 gives the surviving crew from this 4pm to 8pm watch.  The total crew in this watch shift before the sinking, besides the surviving lead fireman, Mr. Charles (George) Henderickson, included two other lead firemen, 54 firemen/stokers, 22 coal trimmers, and 18 greasers.  The firemen and trimmers were spread out over the five operational boiler rooms (1-5) since I maintain boiler room 6 was not in operation..  While the greasers shared the same watch schedule as the firemen and trimmers and hence are in these lists, most of their duties took them far from boiler room activities since their job was to keep rotating surfaces, e.g. bearings, well lubricated.  Other crew such as lookouts, had different watch schedules ranging from 2 hour watches to 8 hours and beyond.  Captain Smith’s main function, when things were going well, was to entertain the rich, young and famous for as much time as possible.  While the 4pm-8pm watch was keeping the ship running at top speed, the other two shifts were getting their evening meal either from 4 to 6 or 6 to 8.

Their feeding took place well away from the public in the crew dining room (mess) hall on C-deck forward of the bridge just under where Cameron’s movie stars Jack and Rose traipsed across to get to the bow for their romantic encounter.

The 4pm to 8pm watch is then replaced at 8:00 by the next watch; the 8pm to 12 (midnight) watch for which Mr. Frederick Barret is the surviving lead fireman.  The full crew for this watch includes 4 other lead firemen, 49 regular firemen, 22 trimmers, and 7 greasers.  [The disproportionate number of greasers in the 4pm-8pm watch raises my eyebrows, but the matter cannot be pursued here.  Many hours were spent by the table compiler for Reference 2, Lester J. Mitcham, and by others to provide these lists that are found in Reference 2 and for which I am most grateful; I must thereby leave it to others for explanation.]

According to Fred Barret’s testimony at the hearings there were three personnel in boiler room 6 at the time of the collision.  Here is his testimony as summarized by  Walter Lord in “Night to Remember”and depicted in Figure 3.3-1 below:

                                                                     

          F 3.3-1 Boiler Room 6 at Time of Collision

         [Appendix 1 is to be found at the end of "The Mysr]terious Titanic Affair" blog]

According to Fred Barret’s testimony at the hearings there were three personnel in boiler room 6 at the time of the collision.  His testimony is depicted in Figure 3.3-1 below:

F 3.3-1 Personnel in Boiler Room 6 at Time of Collision

Besides Fred, the leading fireman in this watch (he is listed first in Ref. 2), there is the engineer, Hesketh, and the fireman/stoker, Beauchamp.  No other personnel are mentioned by Barrett or Beauchamp (Hesketh did not survive).  If the boilers were in full operation there would have been fully a dozen operational people in boiler room 6 at the time of the collision.  Notice would have been made by Barrett and Beauchamp of the chaotic exit with that many people, the closing of the water tight doors and only one escape ladder.  And besides the water tight doors going into the firemans tunnel closing (two sets of doors), the tunnel was already filling with water.

So what were the three men, and only three men, doing in the boiler room?  They were starting up the 4 boilers for the high speed run for the rest of the voyage to best Olympic’s record.  I have read it takes about eight hours to start up a large coal fired scotch boiler and it has to be done carefully.  The start up details can be found elsewhere. 

These considerations lead to the following speculative scenario.  Sometime before the Sunday evening meal, Ismay confers with chief engineer Bell about the condition of the running gear and is informed that everything is performing better than could be expected and Ismay is assured that the propeller RPM’s could be increased without due concern.  [The DVDs give the impression that the Bell-Ismay conversation took place after the collision which is borderline non-sensical since the ship’s engines had been stopped for good within ten minutes of the collision and Ismay without much doubt knew it.]  During that evening meal Ismay let it be known that arriving early would be a good thing and Smith, possibly with some misgiving because of the ice warnings, agreed.  After the meal Smith orders Bell to start up the boilers beginning with 8pm watch after Bell assures him the ship is up to a higher speed.  Smith also hedges his bet by ordering a slight southward correction to the helmsman.  Both men then retire to the security of their magnificent private lounges and the rest of the scenario is well known by most.

3.4 Wholly, hole, holy mackerel

In my youth the expression holy mackerel was popular in my neck of the woods being less offensive than similar expression except to certain religious types (the context of which I was unaware in my younger years).  I find it a bit ironic that this memory comes to mind in a Titanic context.  In this section, we are going to consider the holes in the Titanic’s hull that were a consequence of the collision.  In my opinion there is something fishy about the estimates of their sizes—and yes this hole mackerel is part of the background material so hang in there.

In the past a whole lot of attention has justifiably been given to these Titanic holy holes, especially the uncertainty of their size location and geometry (that pretty well includes everything).  However, with some certainty we can narrow attention down to the bow section—in fact, what is postulated for boiler room 6 is fairly well believable.  To give a concrete example of the whole difficulty with the holes, the following table has been constructed from the analysis provided in Reference 2.

Table 3.4-1

Water Intake per compartment at 12:25 am

(from Ref. 2)

	COMPARTMENT	H2O Tons	AREA *        **
1	Forepeak tank	190	0.06	trace
2	No. 1 cargo hold	1,730	0.55	0.47
3	No. 2 cargo hold	3,040	0.96	0.80
4	No. 3 cargo hold	3,515	1.11	0.74
7	N0. 4 boiler room	187	0.06	trace
6	No. 5 boiler room	180	0.06	0.04
5	No. 6 boiler room	4,658	1.47	1.47
totals		13,500	4.27	3.52

                                                                          

                                                                           (  hole area in sq. ft. )

Table 3.4-1 shows a compartment by compartment tabulation of the amount of water that invaded the ship by 12:25 am or forty-five minutes after striking the iceberg.  [ H₂O data in table 3.2-1 from Reference 2 pg.111 ].  The fourth from the left column of table 3.2-1 (*) gives the area of the other holes (likewise assumed to be slits) obtained by prorating (ratioing) the amount of water in the other compartments to the water and area of compartment 5 (boiler room 6).   The right most column (**) is the area of each opening determined from the opening lengths given in F 3.1-3 multiplied by a presumed ½ inch width.  The correlation between the two different area determinations is surprisingly good except for cargo hold #3 (compartment 4).  The “water ratio” technique produces an opening area of 1.11 sq. ft., while the ½ inch technique produces an opening of 0.74 sq. ft.  There are at least two possibilities for this discrepancy.  First, the opening is much wider than ½ inch; the second possibility is that there is at least one or more openings in cargo hold #3 (compartment 4) not detected by the sub-bottom profiler.  Survivor testimony suggests that the latter possibility is more likely.  This testimony will be important in latter sinking analysis.

But it is the total area values at the bottom of the table that are disquieting if not downright alarming.  These values of less than five sq. ft. are a far cry from the nominal 12 sq. ft. determined by others or even the 10 sq. ft. the Reference 2 authors claim to have determined. The reason(s) for this disparity are not obvious to the present author and underscore his uncertainty about the published hole areas and their possible location. 

3. SIGNIFICANCE OF BOILER ROOM No. 6

It is somewhat difficult to separate out the true significance of boiler room No. 6 from what is public record and what is not. The inflow of water and the reaction of the ship’s personnel to it has been written about and dramatized over and over again.  On the other hand, attention seems to be focused on saving boiler room No. 5 from flooding as if that will save the ship from sinking.  In so doing, the audience has been deluded into downplaying the role of boiler room No 6   This then is the public record and part of the background to the Titanic sinking; and as such it could have been in the background section.   But it is not in the background  section because of the special significance it played in the sinking scenario.

3.1  Overview

To help the readers orient and familiarize themselves; especially those new or forgetful like me, a brief review of the front end of the Titanic is offered up.  This will help those who would like to know where boiler room No. 6 was located.  Figure F-3.1 gives sort of a cut away view of the ships guts in the forward area where all the damage occurred.  This view is before the Titanic struck the iceberg.

The numbering of the various features of the ship was somewhat unusual and somewhat confusing.  For the most part numbering sequences advanced from the front end, (the bow) to the backend, (the stern); except for the boiler rooms for which the numbering was opposite.  The use of Table T-3.1 in conjunction with F-3.1 will help clarify the nomenclature that was used by the ships designers.

The forepeak was separated from the forepeak tank by a horizontal bulkhead (heavy solid line).  The forepeak contained a separate chamber for storing the huge chains to which the anchors were attached.  This was called the chain locker.

Note in particular the watertight bulkheads labeled WTB-A, WTB-B, etc. (heavy mostly vertical lines) which are not included in the following table: 

      

                     Table 3.1

                 Titanic Numbering

FEATURE from left to right	COMPARTMENT  number
(stern to bow)
boiler room No. 4 boiler room No. 5 boiler room No. 6 cargo hold No. 3 cargo hold No. 2 cargo hold No. 1 forepeak tank forepeak	7 6 5 4 3 2   1   1

Not shown

Not shown

Now we start to go into the middle ground between public and non-public knowledge.  As any school-boy in his mid-twenties or thirties knows, Thomas Andrews said it all.  In many of the docudramas the chief technical man, Thomas Andrews, representing the ship builder Harland and Wolf, is seen explaining to the captain that the ship would not sink if only the first four compartments dividing the ship were flooded (compartments number 1-4 in table T-3.1).  This was an essential part of the philosophical basis upon which the ship was designed.  The other parts of the design philosophy are not germane to the discussion here and can be found elsewhere.  Bruce Ismay, the virtual owner of the ship, was told the same.  With some measure of authority, Andrews asserted that more compartments than four, the ship would sink.  That next vital compartment going aft, was compartment number five, which was, of course, boiler room six as explained previously ( F-3.1 and T-3.1).

After the sinking, the chief naval architect for Harland and Wolf, who reported to Andrews, said essentially the same thing during the inquiries in 1912 as his boss had on board the Titanic.  The amazing conclusion that can be drawn from this is ( never firmly stated in the resources I have studied) —the Titanic would not have sunk at all if boiler room six had not been damaged.  Not a single soul would have been injured let alone killed. 

According to Wielding’s presentation at the inquires, in this condition (only the four forward compartment flooded—holds 1-4) the ship would have been down by the bow only about 1-1/2 degrees with the propellers under water.  Possibly it could have made it to safe haven under its own power.  Figure F-3.2 depicts this happy ending..

[A number of these images were actually presented at the disaster inquiry in England in 1912 by Wielding himself .  These here have been taken from Reference 2.]

          Figure F-3.2  Titanic with only compartments 1-4 flooded

Unfortunately, such was not to be the case.  Figure F-3.3 provides a view of the damage sustained by the compartments —1-5  (which now includes boiler room 6) as determined by side scanning radar.  The source of this image is again Ref. 2.

       Figure F-3.3  Hull Damage Profile Measured by Side Scanning Radar

Titanic’s forward or bow portion is buried in the sea floor nearly up to its retracted anchors so the hull damage is only discernable through the bottom mud by radar.  There was minor damage done to compartment s 6 & 7 in addition to what is depicted but it could not be detected by the radar system and so is not shown in Figure F-3.3.  From the water intake reported by survivors, Wielding estimated the hull damage to be about 12 square feet which meant it could not have been a continuous gash in the hull for three hundred feet as was first thought.  The radar images show Wielding was correct.  Modern calculations (Ref. 2) indicate the damage amounted to something slightly less than 12 sq. ft.  Figure F-3.3 shows  that the damage length was greatest in boiler room 6 and the damage extended into boiler room 5 a short ways. 

Boiler room six would then seem to be the whole crux of the sinking disaster. Despite what the DVD’s depicted, the activity in boiler room 5 to save the ship was mistaken and futile.  Titanic was going to sink no matter what the crew did.  It was going to sink even if the coal bunker door had not failed.  However, other scenarios are possible and will be discussed much latter in this story.

How big was the hole in the side of Titanic’s hull in boiler room six.  Calculations by Charles Weeks and Samuel Halpern indicate that water came into boiler room 6 through a relatively small hole, less than 1-1/2 square ft. (Ref. 2, pg. 113) .  That is equivalent to about a sixteen in diameter circle.  What is being said here is that the fate of over 2,000 people depended on a hole in the ships side not a whole lot bigger than a large dinner plate.   On the surface of it, this would seem to be ludicrous situation in as much as the Titanic was the largest moving object made by man at the time.  No wonder there is so much fascination with the Titanic story.

This then is pretty much where the  boiler room 6 story available to the public ends; there is a bit more in what the survivors in boiler room 6 had to relate at the time of the collision Their stories will be woven into the narrative to follow and their stories are public knowledge.  Next we will provide a sneak preview into the proprietary analysis of what happened in boiler room 6.  Table 3.2 shows a compartment by compartment tabulation of the amount of water that invaded the ship by 12:25 am or forty-five minutes after striking the iceberg.  [ data in the two leftmost columns of table 3.2 ]

Table 3.2

Water Intake per compartment at 12:25 am

COMPARTMENT      H2O        AREA                                    tons       *        **
Forepeak tank	190	0.06	Trace
No. 1 cargo hold	1,730	0.55	0.47
No. 2 cargo hold	3,040	0.96	0.80
No. 3 cargo hold	3,515	1.11	0.74
N0. 4 boiler room	187	0.06	Trace
No. 5 boiler room	180	0.06	0.04
No. 6 boiler room	4,658	1.47	1.47

         

( area in sq. ft.)

The data in these first two columns is taken from Reference 2; page 111.  Through the use of the suitably modified bournuli equation along with appropriate Reynold’s number, flow coefficient, and water density (which the author’s did not disclose), Weeks and Halpern determined the area of the hole (opening) in boiler room six was about 1.47  sq. ft. (bottom row of T-3.2).  A simple calculation results in the hole of 1-1/2 sq. ft. being rather slit like with an average width of less than ½ inch. 

The third from the left column of table 3.2 (*) gives the area of the other holes (likewise slits) obtained by prorating (ratioing) the amount of water in the other compartment to the water and area of compartment 5, boiler room 6.   The right most column (**) is the area of each opening determined from the opening lengths given in F-3.3 multiplied by a presumed ½ inch width.  The correlation between the two different area determinations is surprisingly good except for cargo hold #3.  The “water ratio” technique produces an opening area of 1.11 sq. ft., while the ½ inch technique produces an opening of 0.74 sq. ft.  There are at least two possibilities for this discrepancy.  First, the opening can be much wider than ½ inch; the second possibility is that there is at least one or more openings in compartment 4 not detected by the sub-bottom profiler.  Survivor testimony suggests that the latter possibility is more likely.  This testimony will be important in latter sinking analysis.

Let us now return to boiler room 6 for a more detailed discussion of what happened there.  Figure 3.4 depicts a simplified cut-away view of boiler room 6 looking forward as if the boilers were not there.    This is how the structure would have looked before the collision with the iceberg.

                                                 F-3.4 Boiler Room 6 Undamaged

[ F-3.4 was taken from the DVD “Titanic Achilles Heel” (Ref. D1) and which then would ostensibly infer the image was boiler room 6 of the Titanic.  However the original image in the DVD showed an inner “skin” of steel plating.  In the view above, this inner plating (“skin”) has been removed since the Titanic did not have an inner “skin”.  Inner plating in the boiler rooms was added to both the Britannic and Olympic sister ships after the sinking of the Titanic as added precaution (and face-saving promotion by White Star line).]

This type of construction is still used today, the only difference being the welding of the structure together instead of using rivets.   Much attention has been given to the possibility that rivet failure played a significant role in the sinking, but laboratory testing has pretty well downplayed this theory.  Brief scenes of this testing can be viewed in DVD’s, and technical reports are also available.   No doubt it is possible some rivets failed in the forward part of the Titanic which took the brunt of the impact with the iceberg initially.

The next view is boiler room 6 about 8 seconds after the collision with the iceberg.  There is now a ½ inch crack in the  hull plate about 2 feet up as surviving fireman  xxxxx described in his court room appearances.

                                                F-3.5 Boiler Room 6 Damaged***

            (*** time=approximately 8 seconds after initial contact with iceberg)

The amazing revelation that is being disclosed here is that apart from the crack, there is absolutely no new deformation of Titanic’s structure—no bent web or channel members what so ever!  At this time, approximately 8 seconds the iceberg is still in contact with the hull outside of boiler room 6 and is preventing significant water entry.  The next view depicts water flow into boiler room 6 through the ½ inch crack.  The reader is reminded of scale disception—the plates shown in F-3.5 (and the one with the crack) are six feet high!

Crack dynamics is the subject of the next section.  Because of its proprietory nature it, the discussion of crack dynamics, cannot be presented in the blog at this time.

 What can be said at this point is this crack formation is a consequence of steel embrittlement which, in the case of the Titanic is public knowledge.  Aside from striking the iceberg itself, steel embrittlement at water freezing temperatures is the fatal flaw in the Titanic disaster, the root cause of the ship’s sinking and the resultant loss of life.  Although made of the highest quality steel at the time of Titanic’s construction, the consequences of steel impurities at low temperatures was unknown to steel makers and users, and therefore not a subject of quality assurance.  Reference XXXX provides a thorough discussion of this subject as applied to the Titanic situation and for the non-faint hearted it is recommended reading.  In a nutshell, under the conditions that prevailed that night in the mid-Atlantic, the Titanic’s steel shell was shock sensitive…a metalugical “fatal flaw”,  Note, as depicted in F-3.5, it was the steel plate itself that failed, not a riveted seam.  A question remains!  What caused the crack to be ½ inch wide?  That is the subject of the next section, section 3.3.

3.3  Crack dynamics

MATERIAL IN THIS SECTION IS PROPRIETARY

NOT CONTAINED IN THE BLOG

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

2.4 Titanic's final moments w/ Violet

2.4  Titanic’s final moments w/ Violet Jessup

Now we go back to the actual sinking of the Titanic during its final moments.  A number of survivors recalled hearing a tremendous roar go up as the ship went under (including Violet).  Some have explained the “roar” having been caused by equipment (i.e. boilers) breaking loose and cascading down a vertical or nearly vertical hull destroying bulkheads in the process.  This will be discussed later.  One survivor sketched a view showing both the bow and stern pointing upward with the majority of the hull under water.  Other survivors remembered the stern portion first sinking then falling back to the surface giving them some hope for refuge, only to see it seemly pulled down almost vertically as depicted in the movie “Titanic”  These witness accounts will be addressed later.  Here is what Violet remembered as she wrote her memoir years later.  The following is her account of the initial impact:

”Crash!....Then a low, rending, crunching, ripping sound, as Titanic shivered a trifle and the sound of her engines gently ceased”; (page 125 of John’s book).

The accounts of what happened during and after the crash by other survivors differ in detail from Violet’s recollection she had years later.

 Next we have her remembrances aboard lifeboat #16:

“…… I sat paralyzed with cold and misery, as I watched Titanic give a lurch forward.  One of the huge funnels toppled off like a cardboard model, falling into the water with a fearful roar.  A few cries came to us across the water, then silence, as the ship seemed to right itself like a hurt animal with a broken back.  She settled for a few moments, but one more deck of lighted ports [portholes] disappeared.  Then she went down by the head with a thundering roar of underwater explosions, our proud ship, our beautiful Titanic gone to her doom.” (page 133 in John’s book).

Author Maxtone-Graham inserts an additional detail on page 140 of his book—(ref. 1): but first some remembrances by Violet that triggers his detail.

“It is only when something is over, when your mind is detached from immediate surroundings, that you visualize actual details. One of these surviving officers had gone down with the ship and then been blown up with the explosion; he somehow managed to get clear and was picked up by one of the boats. “

Maxtonel-Graham then inserts the following comment:

“This was, of course, Second Officer Herbert "Lights" Lightoller who, struggling in the water near the sinking ship, had been drawn down and affixed atop an engine room grating as sea water flooded into it. But that same flow of water proved the instrument of his salvation. It apparently struck a still-hot boiler, fracturing it. The ensuing explosion miraculously blew Lightoller clear of the wreck and he managed to clamber aboard an overturned Englehardt collapsible lifeboat that had been launched inverted when Titanic went down. His subsequent leadership throughout the night on that overturned boat with thirty precarious survivors standing atop it remains one of the most heroic sagas of the wreck.”

There you have it—a seasoned veteran of the seas using the words explosion(s) and an authoritarian naval historian backing her up with the same words.  These passages triggered my return to writing of this disaster and subsequent re-analysis based on the explosion premise.  It is ironic that it was Lightoller’s testimony during the hearings that the Titanic sank intact, and this is what I think led to the dismissal of boiler explosions being involved in the sinking.  I find it remarkable, perhaps even incredible, that the other technological experts, and there are many involved, refrain, for reasons best known to them, from even considering boiler explosions in their forensic analysis of the Titanic disaster. 

INERTIA IMPULSE AND RABBIT HOLES

TITANIC CONCLUSIONS

Titanic's Fatal Flaw
Mystery Unsolved  

Copyright August 2016 by Ronald D. Grose

What do rabbit holes have to do with inertia and impulse?  Very little actually, nor very little to do with the Titanic story either, but there is a commonality.  There are so many fascinating facets to the Titanic story that it is difficult for a person like me to keep on track.  I will call this tendency to wander off on side issues the “rabbit hole factor or by the acronym “RHF” (not to be confused with Rh Factor).  Since RHF is not a common acronym, its meaning will periodically be brought forth.  Some, who may not be rabbit hole knowledgeable, like myself, may want to know the significance of RHF.  This just happens to take us into the story of Alice In Wonder Land which is pretty far afield from the Titanic story.  But there you have it—an example of RHF.  I mean, have locked in urbanites even seen a large field let alone a rabbit hole in one ?  Relatively speaking I’m a rural kind of guy  and I’ve only seen one rabbit hole in my life and that was because it had a horse leg sticking out of it—but that leg story is probably an RHF on an RHF etc. etc.!

[For those of you who are too busy to look it up—a rabbit hole leads to a “borrow” which has a number of subsidiary passage ways for purposes we need not get into.  The borrows themselves can be interconnect into what are called “warrens”.]

So much for glowing examples of RHF—the rabbit hole factor.  I personally favor the Urban Dictionary definition of rabbit hole which in part states: “metaphor for conceptual paths to the true picture of reality, infinitesimally deep and complex….”  Infinitesimally is a bit strong for my tastes but the essence of this definition is what I’m endeavoring to accomplish in this writing on the Titanic. There just has to be a limitation established on the RHF(s).

INERTIA

We will consider two kinds of inertia.  Inertia obviously derives from the word inert which means, according to our English dictionary, powerless to move (in essence).  The etymology for inert is not helpful.  The two ways I wish to use the word inertial are physical and mental.  Here my large dictionary is even less helpful when it comes to inert and I quote “tendency to be physically or mentally inactive; dull, slow.  The synonyms chosen are equally negative—like lazy.  This is not the connotation I wish to express.  We do better with inertia- in summary it is a “resistance or disinclination to motion, action or change”.  This is not necessarily bad.  When it comes to mental we call inertia “mindset”.

Let’s consider mindset in context with the Titanic.  As mentioned previously, boiler explosion has not been considered in previous forensic analyses I have read and the reason for this seems to be best known to the analysists themselves.  Perhaps it may hark back to the inquiries held immediately after the tragedy in 1912..  Second Officer Lightoiler’s, testimony was held in high regard as well it should have been; after all he was the highest ranking officer to survive the sinking  He alone is mentioned by name in the British final report on the their investigation.  To illustrate, the following is an excerpt from the full report furnished in Ref. pg. ???:

“…..Very shortly afterwards, the vessel, according to Mr. Lightoiler’s account seemed to take a dive, and he just walked into the water.  When he came to the surface all the funnels were above the water.

Her stern was gradually rising out of the water and the propellers were clear of the water.  The ship did not break in two and she did eventually attain the perpendicular when the second funnel from aft about reached the water.  There were no lights burning then, though they kept alight practically until to the last

Before reaching the perpendicular when at an angle of 50 or 60 degrees, there was a rumbling sound which may be attributed to the boilers leaving their beds and crashing down on to or through the bulkheads….”

Three other witnesses agreed with Lightoiler’s recollection but fourteen other witnesses thought they had seen the ship split apart before it sank.  The fourteen were not navel experts and their view was obviously subordinated.

There you have it.  For almost seventy years that official view of the sinking held—Titanic sank intact (which implies no boiler explosion of significance), the funnels were intact (at least until it disappeared), the “roar” reported was due to the ship being perpendicular (hull keel vertical instead of horizontal) and equipment, e.g. boilers, falling through bulkheads.  This view held because the Brits were the foremost ship builders in the world. 

It held until 1985 when Dr. Ballard’s team made their famous discovery. Even up to the mid twentieth century artistic representations showed an intact vessel.  There was a book cover showing a salvaged Titanic shooting up out of the ocean surface bright and shiny as new with everything intact including the relatively delicate antennae wires strung between the two masts.  [I have made a post regarding artistic impression on my blog: lusitaniaconclusions.blogspot.com.]

The British experts were wrong; modern experts now agree --the Titanic broke apart near the surface; some funnels fell off before it sank completely; and the roar was not due to boilers falling through bulkheads.  Beyond that, there are competing theories on what really happened.   Still no boiler explosions though!

What is the boiler evidence discovered since 1985.  In summary it would appear that all boilers in the forward portion of the hull are intact—this would be boilers in rooms 3 through 6.  Five intact boilers lie on the sea floor well apart from other major wreckage pieces.  I presume these are the five double boilers from boiler room 2.  Others do not seem to agree and apparently think they are single ended boilers from boiler room 1. Is this disagreement a consequence of mindset?   If so—by whom?

Enough on mental inertia now consider the physical.  There are two kinds of physical—physical and physical.  As you can tell they are closely related like my two brothers; Bill and is identical twin sister Billy—just kidding; RHF.  For the most part we will be talking about the non-biological physical; and for those of you who majored on both kinds you will want to skip over this discourse; but for those of you, like me, who were deprived of this intellectual enterprise, the following is fundamental to understanding the dynamics of what happened to the handsome Titanic; (handsome would seem to me a mixed metamorphic adjective).  But then dear Violet said (wrote) it well.  Remember she had been on Titanic just a few days and was well ship acquainted; yet she already had formed a special attachment to it; quote: Then she went down by the head with a thundering roar of underwater explosions, our proud ship, our beautiful Titanic gone to her doom...   There it is—physical to physical.  But alas I have drifted off the subject.

Before we can get into the sinking scenario we have nagging questions which require the use of the physical side of inertia—Sir Isaac Newton’s inertia theory developed well before the ships of Titanic’s size were conceived.  Oh!; I’m sorry, I must apologize to those readers who don’t want to remember high school or college physics, I must also consider a topic related to inertia—namely “impulse”.  Those of you who know more about inertia and impulse than I do can skip over the next section, but I, and the rest of us, need to review the following or look it up on google.

TO BE CONTINUED

Background Part 4 Titanic's Final Moments w/ Violet Jessop

2.4  Titanic’s final moments w/ Violet Jessup

Now we go back to the actual sinking of the Titanic during its final moments.  A number of survivors recalled hearing a tremendous roar go up as the ship went under (including Violet).  Some have explained the “roar” having been caused by equipment (i.e. boilers) breaking loose and cascading down a vertical or nearly vertical hull destroying bulkheads in the process.  This will be discussed later.  One survivor sketched a view showing both the bow and stern pointing upward with the majority of the hull under water.  Other survivors remembered the stern portion first sinking then falling back to the surface giving them some hope for refuge, only to see it seemly pulled down almost vertically as depicted in the movie “Titanic”  These witness accounts will be addressed later.  Here is what Violet remembered as she wrote her memoir years later.  The following is her account of the initial impact:

”Crash!....Then a low, rending, crunching, ripping sound, as Titanic shivered a trifle and the sound of her engines gently ceased”; (page 125 of John’s book).

The accounts of what happened during and after the crash by other survivors differ in detail from Violet’s recollection she had years later.

 Next we have her remembrances aboard lifeboat #16:

“…… I sat paralyzed with cold and misery, as I watched Titanic give a lurch forward.  One of the huge funnels toppled off like a cardboard model, falling into the water with a fearful roar.  A few cries came to us across the water, then silence, as the ship seemed to right itself like a hurt animal with a broken back.  She settled for a few moments, but one more deck of lighted ports [portholes] disappeared.  Then she went down by the head with a thundering roar of underwater explosions, our proud ship, our beautiful Titanic gone to her doom.” (page 133 in John’s book).

Author Maxtone-Graham inserts an additional detail on page 140 of his book—(ref. 1): but first some remembrances by Violet that triggers his detail.

“It is only when something is over, when your mind is detached from immediate surroundings, that you visualize actual details. One of these surviving officers had gone down with the ship and then been blown up with the explosion; he somehow managed to get clear and was picked up by one of the boats. “

Maxtonel-Graham then inserts the following comment:

This was, of course, Second Officer Herbert "Lights" Lightoller who, struggling in the water near the sinking ship, had been drawn down and affixed atop an engine room grating as sea water flooded into it. But that same flow of water proved the instrument of his salvation. It apparently struck a still-hot boiler, fracturing it. The ensuing explosion miraculously blew Lightoller clear of the wreck and he managed to clamber aboard an overturned Englehardt collapsible lifeboat that had been launched inverted when Titanic went down. His subsequent leadership throughout the night on that overturned boat with thirty precarious survivors standing atop it remains one of the most heroic sagas of the wreck.

There you have it—a seasoned veteran of the seas using the words explosion(s) and an authoritarian naval historian backing her up with the same words.  These passages triggered my return to writing of this disaster and subsequent re-analysis based on the explosion premise.  It is ironic that it was Lightoller’s testimony during the hearings that the Titanic sank intact, and this is what I think led to the dismissal of boiler explosions being involved in the sinking.  I find it remarkable, perhaps even incredible, that the other technological experts, and there are many involved, refrain, for reasons best known to them, from even considering boiler explosions in their forensic analysis of the Titanic disaster. 

Background Part 2 Maritime Incidents w/ Violet Jessop

Background Part 2 Maritime Incidents w/ Violet Jessop

While the spotlight in this blog is on the Titanic, the personal, human interest spotlight is on our star witness Violet.  It will be helpful I think to have a list, a chronology, of the maritime incidents involving Violet that have a bearing on the unfolding of the Titanic drama.  This will give perspective on the timeline and tie together the Titanic story as well as the other disasters considered in my other blogs.  Violet spent some forty years at sea so there well have been other incidents in her long career that I am unaware of.  The following are the ones I know about and which have a bearing on my blogs.  First I should state that her maritime career began near the end of October in 1908 when, at age 21 she became a stewardess on the Royal Mail liner Orinoco.  A year later she  began employment with the White Star line on board the Olympic.

Incident 1 September 20, 1911  12:45 pm  (Olympic and Hawke)

Violet was now a stewardess on the almost brand new White Star liner Olympic that had been launched in 1910 and had its maiden voyage in May of 1911.  Leaving the port of Southampton in a tricky channel a string of bad luck for the White Star line began to unravel.  There was a collision between the Olympic, under the command of the port pilot, and the British warship HMS Hawke.  A cruiser, considerably smaller than the Olympic, Hawke had a reinforced bow designed for ramming and sinking enemy vessels.  Damage to the Hawke was extensive, but the Olympic barely quivered.  Violet never mentions the collision in her memoir probably because she was busy getting her passenger responsibilities taken care of and was not an eye witness.  There can be no doubt she later became aware because the voyage was canceled and Olympic had to return to South Hampton. Consequently Violet was transferred to the Titanic but not without losing several months’ pay.  While not in command during the collision, Captain Smith was on the bridge of the Olympic; he too was transferred to the Titanic.

The gash in the Olympic’s hull was large; not much different than from a torpedo of that era.  This damage will be considered relative to other shipwreck damage in section 2.3.

Besides the gash, the Hawke was turned like a toy after her bow pieced the Olympic’s hull and Hawke's hull then collided with Olympic’s starboard propeller damaging both it and the driveshaft.  The replacement driveshaft was taken from the Titanic during it’s construction, delaying Titanic’s launch by a month, thereby setting the stage for its disastrous sinking.  After Olympic repairs were completed, Violet made a number of “sailings” on the Olympic with Captain Smith to New York and back and then, with construction completed, they both had the honor of being selected for the Maiden Voyage

Incident 2  April 10, 1912  12:01 pm  (Titanic and New York)

Leaving the dock area in Southampton, the Titanic passes several ships moored semi- permanently because of a coal strike.  One, the New York, is pulled to the Titanic by the Titanic’s propeller suction and snaps its restraining hawsers.  The two ships nearly collide but quick thinking by Captain Smith (perhaps as a consequence of the Hawke collision) averts it.  No damage is done but the incident is given bad press by the superstitious.   Apparently Violet is not one of these because no mention of the incident is found in her memoir.  As was in the prior case, Violet would not have been an eye witness but it is very doubtful that she would not have heard about it.
   

Incident 3  April 14, 1912  11:45+  (Titanic and iceberg)

We know all about this one.  Violet was put into lifeboat 16 (furthest aft on the port side) to induce other reluctant women to climb aboard. One of the last to be launched, it was lowered about an hour and a half after the collision .

Incident 4     October 27, 1914   “early morning”    (Olympic and Audacious)

The HMS Audacious was a brand new battleship for the Royal Navy when during gunnery practice it struck a German mine which did more harm to the ship then it should have.  By chance, the Olympic with Violet onboard, was in the vicinity and was able to rescue most of the crew with her lifeboats (other nearby vessels also helped in the rescue).   Understandably, Violet must have thought that it could have just as well have been the Olympic hitting the mine instead of the Audacious.  With the Titanic sinking still a fresh memory, Violet decided to become a Red Cross nurse on land.

[Although she was not on board the Lusitania when it sank on May 7, 1915, the sinking may have influenced her employment decision.  On this part of her life I find John’s book a little confusing and it may be a consequence of wartime secrecy.  According to her memoir, incident 5 concluded her sailing on Olympic until after incident 6.  There is a gap in John’s listings from 4/25/14 to 11/12/16.  From 4/25/14 until 10/27/14 she sailed on both Olympic and Clyde.  Her memoir definitely states her being on board the Olympic in August of 1914.  It is unclear when she took up Red Cross nursing.]

Incident 5     November 21, 1916  8:12 am       (Britannic and underwater mine)

Violet’s star seems to be as cursed as that of the White Star.  She finds herself assigned to a hospital ship as a Red Cross nurse (refer to Introduction).  If she felt any apprehension about possible ship disasters her memoir doesn’t reveal it; instead she is looking forward to reuniting with her brother serving in the military.  Besides the ship reminds her of the Olympic—huge and safe looking; it’s the sister ship to the Olympic after all—it’s the Britannic.  Not to be so lucky!  The Britannic hits a mine, sinks out of sight in fifty five minutes and this time Violet is nearly killed.  Now she has had enough of sea dangers and human suffering so at this point in her life she takes a desk job on land.

 The details of the Britannic disaster are considered in my blog:

                                               “britannicconclusions.blogspot.com”.