Dumb Titanic Idea?

[DougM]

So we get a LOT of Titanic ideas on here and I had one but I am not sure if it is possible or if I am missing something as I am NOT a expert on Titanics construction and design.

My idea for a drastic Point of departure is that during the breakup of Titanic is that she breaks ina slightly different location and in such a way that the front sinks but that the rear breaks in a location that allows the watertight bulkhead to act in such a way that the rear stays afloat. At least for a few hours.

Not I understand that the weakness in the Titanic caused her to break in such a location that it took the rear down with the rest of the ship. But would it have been possible with a slightly different construction/design that the breaking would leave the back section buoyant?

Logically it is possible that a ship could split in half and a watertight bulkh allows the rear to not flood and thus it stays afloat. But that is at a very high level of looking at things where a lot of things are theoretically possible but in the real world where the nitty gritty reality is these theoretically possible things turn out to be unworkable.
And as I said I am not that familiar with the Titanic’s design to know if the rear could have floated if the ship had broke apart in “just the right way”

This brings up a few questions. Could it have happened? If it had happened how long could the rear had stayed afloat? Long enough for rescue? Long enough to be salvaged and towed in? Or so short a time it would not change much of anything. I mean in reality the rear DID float for a very short time after the split vs splitting apart and going down instantly. And this was with the front pulling it down.

So what do you think would have happened? And how do you think this would change the “story”?

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

Not an expert on this but isn't this what actually happened in OTL, basically the rear section got dragged down with the front as they were still connected via the keel then separated completely either on the way down or when hitting the sea floor.

Sounds like a good idea but as I've said you need somehow for the keel completely snap and completely separate for this happen so as not to drag the rear section down with it.

There's a good range of stories about how ships have done this in reel life after hitting tough weather or in combat such as WWII. One of the RN destroyers had to be towed in reverse after getting damaged at the Battle of Narvik when her bow was completely destroyed.

But as I said, I'm not an expert.

 

[DougM]

It SORT of happened. But the breakup was such that the rear could not maintain watertight integrity. And the front remained attached long enough to help pull the rear down and to cause more damage to the aft section thus increasing flooding.
I am wondering if it could have broken up in such a way that the aft end is separate so it doesn’t get pulled down and it maintains watertight integrity. A faster cleaner break that perhaps keeps the aft section floating for a few hours.

 

[acgoldis]

I wonder what would have happened if the captain deliberately grounding the Titanic on the iceberg once he concluded that the ship was irrevocably lost. Had he done so he could have conceivably evacuated the crew onto the ice and used the lifeboats to shuttle people back and forth. Grounding the ship would also ensure it wouldn't sink as deep.

 

[aoifeloveskhoward]

Wouldn’t be as famous but

 

[lionhead]

2 things AFAIK.

1. Before the ship split the aft section was already dragged unwater considerably. So even if they did split fully at the time of the break, a large portion of the aft section would already be flooded and sinking will occur almost as quickly as it was when it was supposedly dragged under.

2. any real split would not be a neat break and the damage to the broken section would be too severe that any wateright bulkheads would serve no more function. The hull itself is bent and torn, water will pour in from everywhere.

How many people would it actually safe anyway? A lot of people were already in the water, freezing to death. They can't get back on board, and the boats were not returning anyway. Only the people still on it may have been spared a few minutes not in the water at most.

 

[DougM]

Other ships have broken in half and had part of the ship stay afloat for a while, so in theory it can happen. Not sure if the aft of Titanic was buoyant enough yo do so but in theory it is conceivable l

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

I wonder what would have happened if the captain deliberately grounding the Titanic on the iceberg once he concluded that the ship was irrevocably lost. Had he done so he could have conceivably evacuated the crew onto the ice and used the lifeboats to shuttle people back and forth. Grounding the ship would also ensure it wouldn't sink as deep.

Interesting story behind that. Second Officer Lightroller, who was not on watch, had been sunk a few years earlier. The ship was off course at night & the haze prevented the watch standers from seeing a series of rocks ahead until too late. The captain who was on the bridge and allowed the ship to run up on the rocks, immobilizing it and raising the damage/holes to the water line to reduce flooding. Had the ship attempted a turn it may have gashed the hull with probable full flooding. If Lightroller had been on watch aboard the Titanic would he have remembered that decisions and tried it in this case? Who knows.

Trivia note Harry Lightroller was sunk again, surviving a collision in the Great War, then commanding a destroy that had its bow destroyed. navigating 90+ Nautical Miles in reverse to reach port Coming out of retirement for WWII he took his yacht into Dunkirk evacuating 122 Soldiers & 8 boat crew. He held a number of support tasks through WWII & retired from Naval service in 1946.

Charles Herbert Lightoller : Titanic Second Officer

Charles Herbert Lightoller had an eventful seafaring career both before and after the Titanic and served with distinction in two world wars...

www.encyclopedia-titanica.org

 

[DougM]

Well we trully have no idea of the shape of the Burg other then it was bigger below water then above. But who knows if it flaired out big enough to ”beach” on. Not all icebergs are so called classic triangular shape we all drew as kids.
And based on the location of the cash in Titanic’s hull it is not likly that it had a place to beach or it would have more likely torn out the bottom not ripped open the side