No no no, you don't want to piss off James Cameron and his Hollywood investors. There is..er..was a lot riding..er..sinking on this staying afloat..er..sinking. Oh blast. Forget it.

Titanic was not "state of the art" in 1912 although they thought it was. It would take another 40 years before they got it right. Unfortunately, knowledge of the Titanic comes from the movies, hearsay and lots of assumptions. Could the sinking have been delayed? I don't think the Captain or crew could have anticipated such a disaster happening and were not prepared for such an event.

I just heard some guy talk about a "super mirage" occurring that night? Any thoughts on this?

Who would've thought that this would have anything to do with the Titanic.

It was all faked, just like the moon landings.

The CIA planted the fake Titanic where it was found.

"The CIA planted the fake Titanic where it was found."

Damn you! I'm trying to keep a straight face whilst telling you that you are indeed a person of Great Faith. Not only, but I believe you've just shed some new light onto why the CIA weren't aware of bin Lyin's plot to take down the WTC (also faked according to Neil Armstrong). They were busy!

Sadly, I must also bring you up-to-date: the CIA had no part in faking the Titanic's sinking. The truth is, the Van Allen radiation belts are to blame. That and that big solar flare. Bad timing.

"I can fly, Jack!" Dead giveaway.

All I could find is the DVD, but for those interested, this documentary starts on Sunday night in the US. I think it's at 9 PM..............History Channel.

http://shop.history.com/titanic-at-100-mystery-solved-dvd/detail.php?p=366770&v=history_subject_titanic

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17669380

I liked Redfred's answer clear, concise and to the point, and this shows why you need to analyze things a bit before you ask questions

It is apparent that Titanic had no damage control procedures, or the cracks in the hull were in-accessible from inside the ship. If the damaged hull was accessible, it should have been relative easy to use mattresses, planks, and timbers to block the leaks from the inside.

IF they would have opened the water tight doors would that have at least allowed the water to disperse evenly throughout the ship possibly slowing the sinking?

I'm never going on a ship with you.

Um, not sure where to start on this one - I thought this was an engineering based forum, not an 'Complete morons asking ridiculous questions' based forum.

Answer one (question), what were you smoking just prior to thinking up this save?

Answer two, look to your common sense, if that doesn't work - visit any seaport nearby and stand dockside next to any large ocean going vessel, then look to your common sense.

Well, don't start by telling us how you want the forum run!

Your characterization of the forum as "Complete morons asking ridiculous questions' only goes to prove your arrogance. Not to mention making many friends along the way.

So go away and start your own perfect forum, with you as King, or sit on your hands for a week or two and see how the "morons" do it.

You have a lot to learn.

Basically, this really is a stupid question - I mean, it really is! So I will agree to disagree, on the fact that I really should not even bother wasting my time here. Perhaps when you have grown up we can continue this discussion

Don't waste any more of you intellectual capital here. We don't deserve someone as smart as you.

Look on the bright side. We've got an expert who is willing to point out all the stupid questions for us.

And he seems willing to tell us how to run the forum, to boot.

Ok, now I'm being petty, I know. I think "Pud" is a good name though, don't you?

Second or third comings don't count here, because there is no official history to refer to. Yet, your earlier thousands of post in your previous incarnation, should provide some perspective.

Now, one may think these alleged posts are a figment of my imagination - so there

NewAge Virtual Reality has no material realisation except for a string of bits written on some obscure data server somewhere, momentarily displayed on a screen, in some momentarily preferred symbolic arrangement.

Never has fame been such evasive, fleeting vapour on any one's mind as it is these days. everything and anything is "Alleged", "So-called" and "Seemingly-Possible"...

I miss the old days

I never knew they left it there, and intact. Thanks for the link

Well, that's another tip for that mug survey

"I thought this was an engineering based forum, not an 'Complete morons asking ridiculous questions' based forum."

You obviously haven't spent a Friday afternoon in a pub with a bunch of engineers. Starts off serious but quickly degrades like this discussion has.

Whose round is it <hic> ?

How about a trip to the curry house afterwards?

You mean we're not there yet? With all these Bog-Irish GURUS about, I thought ...

Oh never mind.....WAITER!!!

Right!

Taking a real world view, to slow the inevitable descent of the vessel, there would have had to be materials, equipment and personnel at hand, trained and ready to go. This assumes constant drills, preparedness and all the other good stuff that goes along with it that makes people act like a team and not an undisciplined mob.

Far better and cheaper to MISS THE BLOODY ICEBERG IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Moving on from this, you enter the realm of fantasy, the old trousers of time hypothesis. You can know make up any solution you desire, 'cos it's your rules. How about tuning on that huge bilge pump that everyone forgot about and pumping out all the water? You could transfer the engine power to run it, no worries!

Also, this would save the ship.....

"Yellow alert! Evasive manoeuvres!"

Whose round was it <hic>?

That doesn't look like a tub to me.

Sinking Of The Tub never hapened in the first place. It was fabricated in a Holywood studio back in the early sixties to test the basic filiming facilities, for the later executed fabrication of the Landing On The Moon...

Damage control on naval vessels is SOP but on civilian vessels almost non-existent. Considering that this was the inaugural voyage, half the crew was probably unfamiliar with the layout and got lost from time to time when you think how big it was by comparison to other ships in passenger service. As to getting passengers to help, we were lucky if they could find their assigned lifeboats when we had lifeboat drill. Troop ships during WWII had life rafts hanging about or stacked in piles. Of course if no one cut them loose they went down with the ship.

Had a crew mate go on the John F Kennedy aircraft carrier many years ago when it was docked in Boston, way before 9-11. He asked one of the crew where the engine room was and the reply he got was "I don't know sir, I've only been on the ship for 2 years."

"He asked one of the crew where the engine room was and the reply he got was 'I don't know sir, I've only been on the ship for 2 years.'"

According to the Pentagon the official answer is, "Google it."

Harland and Wold certainly learned their lessons from the loss of the Titanic. Titanic's sister ships had the double bottom hull extended up to above the waterline for about two thirds of the ships length.

Next they increased the number of life boats per davit to 4 as was first designed by the engineers meaning there was enough space for 4,000 people.

Finally they redesigned the davits so that they could pick up and launch boats from either side of the ship so that in the event of a list they could still launch all the lifeboats.

That last little modification seems to be something that modern ship designers have forgotten as on the Costa Concordia. Many of the life boats on the port side couldn't be launched because of the ships list to the starboard meaning there were nowhere near enough launchable life boats to accommodate all those on board. Had the ship not bottomed out as it did, but rather sank in deeper water then the loss of life could have rivalled the Titanic.

By the way the Costa Concordia isn't the only super liner with that problem, all the super liners I have seen having the same problem. Sooner or later one is going to go founder in deep water and if it lists as just about every ship that sinks does you going to lose up to 3,000 people.

It seem engineers learnt a lot from the Titanic disaster, but in the century since some of those lessons have been forgotten and the potential for a disaster on twice the scale of the Titanic is now present.

There's a very good special on one of the channels now.

My TV's broken so I can't find which channel right now.

Da.N satellite crap! (Direct TV) That IS NOT an endorsement!

Wolfus-san? Don't let the Pud-Unit dissuade you from posting questions.

I, for one, think yours was a good question and well-framed. I'm no ship-wright but there are those here who really know their stuff (Masu comes to mind) and it's why we come here and ask questions: to get good answers.

For my part I'd like to learn more about the magnetohydrodynamic properties of fractured, specular bathing apparatus. Wish someone would start a thread on that. I'm much too shy for that and, sadly, not nearly British enough (you know who you are).

Darts, anyone?

I agree. Crappy threads don't live this long.

I have only 2 giga RAM, so I'll never be able to load the monstrum in full - if only to lookup for what's new there

I think that in the state of panic and lack of communication that the sinking of the ship could not have been avoided. However I have not been able to shake the idea that if the captain were to have turned the ship about and returned to the iceberg, then the crew may have been able to escort a large number of the passengers to safety ON the iceberg. Furthermore I can't believe that if I had an hour onboard a sinking ship that i couldn't make something that would float enough to keep me mostly out of the water. I agree that it was a tragedy and that panic would set in and people won't react according to the most sensible options, however there has to be some "McGiver" out there who decided that a large leather suitcase, placed upside down on the water would keep you dry?

http://news.yahoo.com/titanic-anniversary/