Was The Titanic Destroyed By A German Submarine?, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 18 times


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:33 PM by blocula
Originally posted by Aliensun
reply to
post by blocula



As I recall from the video of a few years ago of the ship, that mere "gash" was over a hundred feet long. No torpedo or interior explosion will leave that type of evidence. Unless you want to invent a conspiracy of coverup for this event, you gotta go with the evidence.
"Though the damage in the hull was 220 to 245 feet long, the most recent evidence shows that there was only a 12 square foot opening,the size of a refrigerator,in the hull allowing water inside the ship"...Hmmmmm...I knew it !
edit on 24-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:36 PM by dcmb1409
more eye witness accounts of that fateful night from 1912.

Snippets:

Frederick Fleet sights an Iceberg
Sunday 14 April 1912
The ship is steaming at 22 1/2 knots. Lookout Frederick Fleet sights an iceberg. He rings the bridge. "What did you see", is the response. He replies "Iceberg right ahead"! It is estimated that 37 seconds pass between the sighting and the collision.

source:
www.encyclopedia-titanica.org...


Iceberg Dead Ahead
Lee and Fleet were the two expert lookouts on duty in the crows nest that night. Shortly after 11:30pm, Lee and Fleet became aware of a misty haze on the horizon. A few minutes later, at 11:40pm, Fleet peered out once more into the darkness and saw all his worst nightmares in one menacing black shape. Fleet instantly rang the 6-inch brass bell in the crow’s nest three times and lifted the telephone to the bridge.

Sixth Officer James Moody answered. Fleet’s message was chillingly brief: "Iceberg right ahead."

"Thank you," replied Moody.

Out of the darkness, Fleet could see the iceberg moving nearer by the second. Witnesses described it as being of a similar shape to the Rock of Gibraltar. In the bridge, William Murdoch responded to message from the crow’s nest by giving the order, "Hard a-starboard." This meant that the ship’s bow would swing to port. At the same time, he gave an order to the engine room, "Stop. Full speed astern." Acting swiftly, he also pushed a bell-button for 10 seconds to warn those below that he intended to close all the watertight doors. He then pulled the switch that automatically closed them. It was too late, evidence suggested that Fleet had spotted the iceberg at a distance of less than 500 yards, and unfortunately, the Titanic took over 850 yards to stop at that speed.

Murdoch’s actions caused the Titanic to avoid a head-on collision, and nearly the entire iceberg; however, there was only enough time to turn the ship two points, which resulted in a devastating blow, which as it transpired, was the worst possible scenario. As it moved along the side of the ship, it scraped along the first 300 feet of the hull. As the iceberg passed amidships, Murdoch ordered the helm hard to port in order to clear the stern. The berg passed beyond the stern and drifted silently away into the distance.

source: library.thinkquest.org...
edit on 24-11-2011 by dcmb1409 because: (no reason given)




reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:49 PM by scotsdavy1
reply to post by blocula



The person replying to my original post said I was being insulting in saying what I said not in anyway was I insulting the memory of the people who died.
If you read my first post you will understandcwhatbi meant by it.


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:50 PM by dcmb1409
Modern surveys and engineering data:

snippets:

During RMS Titanic, Inc.'s fourth expedition to the wreck, they brought with them Paul Matthias, who had built a specialized low-frequency sonar device with him. This deice would allow him to probe through the mud around the Titanic 's bow and "see" the actual damage done to the liner that night so long before. His efforts were successful, and the truth can finally be revealed. As Wilding had concluded back in 1912, the iceberg damage that stretched across 249 feet of the hull was intermittent, not continuous; in fact, only six small deformations caused by popped rivets and burst seams had sealed the ship's fate. When the iceberg was first spotted and the evasive action was taken, the ship bore down on the berg without turning for what seemed an eternity. Then, slowly, the helm answered and the bow began to turn to port. Unfortunately, it didn't turn enough - probably by as little as 5-15 feet - and the very bow smashed into the berg. The impact caused a rupture described as a "trace" in length, which penetrated the Forepeak. The ship continued on for some time before the berg ruptured the hull again. Then came two quick blows in rapid succession; the second and third deformations, five feet and four feet long, respectively, penetrated Cargo Hold No. 1. As the hull of the ship began to widen, and she continued to turn at the same rate, however, the side of the ship was exposed more dangerously. The fourth rupture, at fifteen feet long, damaged Cargo Hold No. 2. Next, the berg created a 32-foot long rupture - more than twice the length of the previous one - that started in Cargo Hold No. 2 and continued past the transverse bulkhead into Cargo Hold No. 3. One last time, the hull was forced into contact with the berg. This sixth rupture was the coup de gras which sealed the Titanic 's fate and the fates of 1,500 people aboard her. This fatal blow tore open the forward coal bunker of Boiler Room No. 6, past the retaining wall and into the Boiler Room itself, all across the entire length of the compartment, through No. 6's aft coal bunker, past the watertight bulkhead, and ended between 2 and 5 feet inside Boiler Room No. 5's forward coal bunker. This wound was by far the longest of all six, being some 45 feet in length. None of these ruptures by themselves posed any threat to the Titanic 's safety. Even the first four or even five of them wouldn't have sunk the ship. But all six were enough. . . The ship, designed to float with her forward two, three, or even four compartments flooded, had the first five compartments begin to flood uncontrollably, with a sixth compartment compromised. With the seams between the hull plates knocked apart twenty feet below the surface, the outside water pressure forced the torrent into the hull at the astonishing rate of seven tons per second. By midnight, over 8,000 tons of water had collected in her forward compartments, beginning to pull the bow lower in the sea.

source:
www.atlanticliners.com...


Undergraduate Engineering Review:

Causes and Effects of the Rapid Sinking of the Titanic

source: www.writing.eng.vt.edu...

edit on 24-11-2011 by dcmb1409 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:51 PM by scotsdavy1
reply to post by blocula



There was no possibility at all that it was hit by a submarine, then if as you say it was, why Germany? Why not America, Japan, Russia or any other country?


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 09:59 PM by blocula
reply to post by SonoftheSun




"As I recall from the video of a few years ago of the ship, that mere "gash" was over a hundred feet long. No torpedo or interior explosion will leave that type of evidence. Unless you want to invent a conspiracy of coverup for this event, you gotta go with the evidence"...Aliensun
______________________________________________________

"Though the damage in the hull was 220 to 245 feet long, the most recent evidence shows that there was only a 12 square foot opening,the size of a refrigerator,in the hull allowing water inside the ship"...

Hmmmmm...I knew it! www.eszlinger.com... < look under collision/damage...

A 12 foot hole equals torpedo damage imo,not from scraping against a gigantic ice berg and that 200 ft long damage,if there even is any and i think someone above explained how there was'nt,was caused after impact,as the ship broke up and or was torn...

I fixed the link...

edit on 24-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:01 PM by SonoftheSun
Originally posted by CosmicWaterGate
reply to
post by blocula

... I Can RV-SEE... that there was a low amount of 'tryptophane'...
In Ur 'Heritage' turkey... U-B AWOKEN ONE
U-are-deffinitly-on-target-But-humans-never-learn-to-invent-the-
PING)))))-PING)))))-PING)))))-> )sonar(... before the >radar<...



~~~(USO)~~~


edit on 24-11-2011 by CosmicWaterGate because: Maybe aliens with Tesla ray torpedoes did it...


No offense friend but is there a "CosmicWaterGate Translator" online anywhere to help us decipher your posts??




reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:07 PM by blocula
reply to post by SonoftheSun

They didnt need sonar or radar to sink the Titanic they could see it with their eyes or binoculars or through the periscope and everyone knew when it was sailing and where it was going...

And radar was first proven and tested in use in...guess where?...Germany!...in 1904...

edit on 24-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:12 PM by stumason
reply to post by blocula



You seem to totally lack any understanding as to why WW1 happened. Germany was never out to seek War, but it was rather as a result of an interlocking series of alliances that brought her and then the UK into war with each other.

With this in mind, it toally defies any logic that Germany would seek to start a War with the UK by sinking a passenger liner for no reason and you are still ignoring the rather telling and plentiful eye witness accounts from not only Titanic survivors but other ships in the area.

Another thing you seem to be ignoring is that the first German submarines such as the U-1 and U-2 simply did not have the range to operate this far out in the Atlantic. BY 1912, the Germans did start to build the more advanced 30 series, but the first of these wasn't actually launched until 1914


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:24 PM by stumason
reply to post by SonoftheSun



If anyone took the time to actually look into the extensive research done aboutn the Titanic, one would see that it was a glancing blow that sunk the ship, not a head on collision which would have been surviveable.

The reason the glancing bow killed the ship was that it buckled hull plating across 6 water tight compartments, when the ship could only survive 5 being flooded. The reason the plating buckled was that it used iron that was very brittle in cold, salty water as it contained higher than normal concentrations of sulphur and other impurities.

Analysis of the hull on the sea bed, pictures taken of it and tests done on hull plating brought back up show that the ship was not the technological leap forward it was claimed to be, but rather done on the cheap, with substandard rivetting used as well.

Still, no-one can answer the glaringly obvious.. Why would Germany attack a British ship in 1912? Of all the countries in the world at the time, the last one Germany wanted War with was the UK.


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:36 PM by Drunkenparrot
Originally posted by blocula
Originally posted by scotsdavy1
this place would have a conspiracy if someone went to the toilet and couldn`t pee!
for goodness sake, think before you open another one.
I presented enough information,facts and figures in my opening statement to give creedence to the very real possibility that the Titanic was sunk by a German Submarine launched torpedo.
edit on 24-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)


No you haven't presented evidence of anything other than submarine launched torpedo's had been designed and deployed prior to 1912.

The RMS Titanic hit an iceberg and sank.

First, check the range of the U-boats designs deployed in 1912 then check the position of the wreck.

The Titanic was travelling at 22 knots, twice the surfaced speed of any Unterseeboot in commission with the Kaiserliche Marine and 4 times the submerged maximum speed.

It would also be one in a million to have a U-boat staged from a hidden forward supply prepositioned that would chance upon the liner within the limited torpedo range at the time.

The final nail in the coffin is the wreck has been thoroughly surveyed and photographed by many different interests.

The gash in the hull is consistent with a collision, torpedo damage is entirely different and would have made for a big fuss by someone.

Honestly, enough with the poor attempts at historical revisionism. If you are going to rewrite history at least put in the time to learn the facts before you try and twist them...


reply posted on 24-11-2011 @ 10:37 PM by stumason
reply to post by blocula



Nice logic...No really, your criticial thinking skills are exemplary...

Titanic sunk in 1912, no war on, no reason to sink it, thousands of miles in the North Atlantic, with many other British ships around to choose from, in the middle of an ice field (which would have posed more risk to a sub without sonar than a surface ship) which was well beyond the range of any sub in service to Germany at the time.

Lusitania sunk in 1915, in British territorial waters, by a German submarine whom the UK was at war with and was probably a case of misidentification, although theories abound that she might have been carrying ordnance.

Two entirely different scenarios and you're trying to claim they're the same.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Did NASA "bomb" the moon to hide something?
  Posted 3 days ago with 76 member flags
New Plasma Battery Technology Probably Powering Stealth Sattelites
  Posted 17 days ago with 17 member flags
Will Planet X be visible during the eclipse on May 20th?
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags
Obama and the Card Game Illuminati
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags
The OKC bombing
  Posted 18 days ago with 6 member flags