Was The Titanic Destroyed By A German Submarine?

Originally posted by Montana
reply to post by blocula

 

I can't believe you are still attempting to defend this theory. A torpedo explosion is a huge violent cataclysmic event. There is a HUGE shudder throughout the entire ship- even in vast battleships! Everything and everyone is thrown to the deck, quite frequently causing broken bones and deaths from the sheer ferocity of the explosion. The explosion almost always causes large fires that are nearly impossible to extinguish by a civilian crew.

NONE of these events have ever been reported by the survivors. There could be no mistake about this.

The water started flowing in through a 12ft square hole,thats a 3ftx4ft opening,a gigantic iceberg cannot make a hole that size.the Titanic was'nt sailing sideways into the ice and the ice didnt punch inwards and then suddenly pull itself out,which is what it would have had to do in order to have made that size of a hole into the "moving" titanic and the ice could not have went through steel anyways.Steel vs Ice...Steel Wins..."Everytime".

But something shot at the hull would do it and they could have very easily altered the explosive effect and power of a torpedo if they chose to do so...

If a torpedo hit the Titanic,it would have taken about 1/5th of a second for it to explode...I dont think anyones first comment or thought would have been."Listen to that sound,a torpedo just hit us" Even if it was a torpedo...

They still would have thought it was something else.Most people on the ship would not have even known in 1912 what a torpedo was,never mind know what one sounded like exploding against steel underwater.They heard what torpedos sound like exploding against steel before?...I doubt it...

Ever think of that?

And this happened around midnight in the dark and it was cold outside and i dont think many people were standing around on the outside decks then and those that may have been,could have been 200 or 300 feet away from the point of impact,or even further...

Just like the people who did not see anything but only "heard" sounds and later said..."It sounded like the ship hitting ice"...How would they know what massive sheets of moving steel scraping against gigantic chunks of floating ice sounds like?...They heard massive sheets of moving steel scraping against gigantic chunks of ice before?...I doubt it...

Ever think of that?

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by blocula

 

A logical fallacy. A sledgehammer (a solid lump of iron) is entirely different to a sheet of steel less than 2 inches thick (especially one that is exposed to extreme cold and saline water when it is already weakened by a high sulphur concentration). Also, a block of ice out of the freezer is different to a block of ice you'll find in an Iceberg, which has formed over years of ice compacting in layers.

Ice can and does penetrate steel hulls. You can find plenty of examples of this throughout history.

Ice can penetrate steel?...how?...i doubt it..."maybe" if the ice was shot out of a cannon...

reply to post by blocula


THE TITANIC WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!

THE TITANIC WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!!!!

THE TITANIC WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!!

THE TITANIC WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!

I used to yell this out of car windows as a joke... somehow I'm not surprised that this is a serious thread on ATS, though I am disappointed.

Metal versus ice...

This kid, in the following video, does ask to spread the truth...

Watch from 0.49





Undeniable !!!

Another steel hull ship that was sunk by an iceberg.

Snippet:


Name: SS Islander
Operator: Canadian Pacific Steam Navigation Company
Builder: Napier, Shanks and Bell of Glasgow
Yard number: 41
Launched: 1888
Fate: sunk on 15 August 1901
General characteristics
Class and type: Steam merchant ship
Tonnage: 1519
Length: 240 ft (73 m)
Beam: 42 ft (13 m)
Draught: 14 ft (4.3 m)
Propulsion: Dunsmuir & Jackson triple expansion steam engine
twin screw
Speed: 15 knots (28 km/h)

The SS Islander was a 1519 ton, 240-foot (73 m) steel hull, schooner-rigged twin-screw steamer, built in Scotland in 1888, and owned and operated by the Canadian Pacific Steam Navigation Company.

She was built especially for the Inside Passage to Alaska and was reputedly the most luxurious steamer engaged on that run. As a consequence, she was favoured by many wealthy businessmen, speculators, bankers, railroad tycoons and the like who had a stake in the lucrative Klondike gold fields.

Wreck of the Islander
Headline announcing sinking of Islander, reporting 65 lives lost

On August 14th, 1901 the Islander departed Skagway, Alaska for Victoria, British Columbia, filled to capacity with passengers and carrying a cargo of gold bullion valued at over $6,000,000 in 1901 dollars. Sometime after 2:00 am on 15 August, 1901 while sailing down the narrow Lynn Canal south of Juneau, she struck what was reported to be an iceberg that stove a large hole in her forward port quarter. Attempts to steer the foundering vessel ashore on nearby Douglas Island were in vain; within five minutes, the tremendous weight of the water filling the ship's forward compartments had forced her bow underwater and her stern, rudder and propellers completely out of the water.

After drifting for about 15 minutes in a strong southerly outbound tide, the Islander began her final plunge to the bottom and sank quickly. In total, 40 lives were lost.

Source: en.wikipedia.org...


Another German torpedo conspiracy strikes again, this time in a canal.

Originally posted by DrunkenDonuts

Originally posted by blocula
Another thing,every countries "true level" of its technology is always kept secret and is not made common knowledge,just like the USA right now,we do not know the true extent of the USA's present military technology and so in 1912,Germanys actual level and extent of submarine knowledge would have remained secret...

So Germany has been keeping the capabilities of their subs of 1912 classified for 100 years?

Whatever the true extent of any modern countries military technology may be,it would stay a secret at the time.Like whatever germany may have had kept secret in 1912.But some things would be forgotten and altered after the hell of 25 million dead in WW-1 and the 50 million dead in WW-2 were endured

Ask an american citizen what a nuclear bomb was in 1944 and 99.999 percent of people would be clueless,just as they were clueless that vast proportions of their tax money was being funneled into the atomic weapons program...

I just mentioned it as a thought about what Germany might have invented back then.Germany didnt need any secret technologies to sink the Titanic in 1912...

There were 8 different U-Boats built and launched by Germany before 1912 that all had ranges of 3,356 miles,the U-9 through the U-16 and to add on an extra fuel tank,or a larger fuel tank for a "special mission" would have been easy enough for them to have done,if they felt like it and they may have been re-fueled at sea or just carried a few drums of extra fuel with them.Those submarines were about 200ft long...

reply to post by blocula


the rivets have been a culprit in some thoeries, they were made cheaply and popped like champagne corks

This has to be the most asinine theory I've seen on ATS this year.

There is no supporting logic on any level whatsoever.

The German submarine tech at the time simply wasn't capable of such long range feats, no one's tech was. And although torpedoes were used at Tsushima, they were delivered by torpedo boats, i.e., surface vessels, not submarines.

Some relevant links:

uboat.net...

militaryhistory.about.com...

During the Russo-Japanese war, Japan also made frantic efforts to develop and construct a fleet of submarines. Submarines had only recently become operational military engines, and were considered to be special weapons of considerable potential. The Imperial Japanese Navy acquired its first submarines in 1905 from Electric Boat Company, barely four years after the U.S. Navy had commissioned its own first submarine, USS Holland. The ships were Holland designs and were developed under the supervision of Electric Boat's representative, Arthur L. Busch. These five submarines (known as Holland Type VII's) were shipped in kit form to Japan (October 1904) and then assembled at the Yokosuka, Kanagawa Yokosuka Naval Arsenal, to become hulls No1 through 5, and became operational at the end of 1905.[60]

en.wikipedia.org...

The only boats Germany had in commission at the time were the gasoline-powered boats: the first diesel boat wasn't commissioned until 1913.

The most advanced vessels the Germans had at the time were the U-16, U-17, and the U-18. A look at their specs shows that their range was 6700 miles at 8 knots, or a combat radius of some 3,000 miles, with a maximum speed of 14 knots surfaced. To reach the position of the sinking a journey of over 3,000 miles is required, placing it at the uttermost limit. However, the time it would take to reach that spot means that the journey would need to begin some two and a half weeks before the Titanic sailed. Unless you can show those boats were at sea in the Atlantic on those dates the entire premise falls apart, since no other boats had anywhere near the range required.

Locating a ship at sea, at night, without radar or support, without long range radio equipment, is nearly an impossible task. Actually tracking and successfully firing a torpedo at a target that is moving at nearly twice your best surface speed is also nearly impossible. Adding extra gasoline storage on a boat where space is at a premium is not only nearly impossible, but also genuinely, insanely, suicidal: far too dangerous to contemplate.

So to make the premise even remotely reasonable, we need to pile several near-impossibles on top of each other, and garnish the mess with an absolute lack of a reason for doing it in the first place.

The single most amazing thing to me about this entire thread is it's continued existence. The whole premise is an insult to reason and logic, and a sign of the deterioration of the quality here.

reply to post by apacheman
Asinine theory?...No its not...

If anyone doubts the likely possibility that the 882ft Titanic was sunk by a German Submarine in 1912,killing 1,503 people,lets go to the bottom of the ocean and ask the ghosts of the 1,198 victims of the 787ft Lusitania that was sunk by a single torpedo launched from a German Submarine in 1915,i'm sure they would agree its very,very possible...

reply to post by blocula


is your rudder stuck ? you are going round in circles , that element of your fantasy has already been addressed by another ATS member

to recap :

in 1912 imperial gemany was at war with no one - thus had no motive to sink liners

in 1915 germany was at war with britain - thus saw any UK flagged vessel as a legitimate target

In 1912 you would have been very hard pressed indeed to find a crew for a u-boat to sink an unarmed passenger liner full of innocent men women and children in peace time... whatever the reason!. Developed european societies in edwardian times including Britain and Germany, gave considerable respect for each other. The 'cruiser rules' for example, supplemented by various international agreements including the Declaration of Paris (1856) and the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907) would have made an attack on the Titanic unthinkable by such a country as Germany. The cruiser rules or prize rules made it a crime to sink a passenger ship.

Honour and Chivalry were still two qualities strongly adhered to in europe at that time, only after the first world war had started did countries soon realise the true horrors they had plunged themselves into and the 'fight to win' became a desperate struggle resulting in all out slaughter.

I could maybe look into the possibility of a conspiracy to sink the Titanic had the disaster occured during the great war of 1914 -1918 but 1912!!! lol

reply to post by blocula


How is your post relevant to anything in the real world?

Asking the dead their opinion of anything and then putting words in their skulls is pretty, well, asinine, in and of itself.

But just for the sake of argument, let's say you did, and got a response. What's that? They all say it was an iceberg, so that blows your theory out of the water.

Really, if you wish to make such an assertion, at least attempt a stab at logic, reasoning, and proper citations, and not just unsupported fantasies.

Originally posted by blocula
Why would'nt they have wanted to sink the Titanic in 1912 and provoke desired political reactions and war?...Germany provoked a lot things that resulted in misery and death throughout their history,like WW-2 in Europe for example...

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

Aren't you contradicting yourself here blocula..........the Germans go to all the trouble to sink the Titanic to provoke a war........and yet you say it was hushed up to prevent a war?

Well which is it.........it can't be both!

To those of you who have participated in this thread, this is just to let you know that it will be discussed on ATS LIVE RADIO SHOW tonight at 21:00 E.S.T.

Here is the link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Enjoy !!

Originally posted by blocula

"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"...

Thats what caused it to start sinking...^^^

Hmmmmm...www.eszlinger.com... < look under collision/damage...

Wow, your source looks so reputable /sarcasm

Why would they try it? To sink the Titanic in 1912? The same reason they sank the 787 foot Lusitania in 1915 with "one" torpedo and killed 1,198 people...They felt like it...

edit on 26-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)

That was during the war, the Titanic was before the war, and as someone has pointed out, Germany would have had no reason to provoke a conflict by attacking the Titanic.

One thing is certain, the hole in the Titanic was nowhere near as big, or as many, as the holes in your ridiculous theory.

From eyewitness testimony:

"Suddenly a queer quivering ran under me, apparently the whole length of the ship. Startled by the very strangeness of the shivering motion, I sprang to the floor. With too perfect a trust in that mighty vessel I again lay down. Some one knocked at my door, and the voice of a friend said: 'Come quickly to my cabin; an iceberg has just passed our window; I know we have just struck one."

“The starboard side of the Titanic struck the big berg and the ice was piled up on the deck. None of us had the slightest realization that the ship had received its death wound. "

reply to post by apacheman


and yours is one of the best replies i have seen this year .

i cant believe the OP cant see the facts .. the scientific facts !!....pointed out by members who know there stuff , some of them are ww1 and ww2 geeks , ( and i am sure they wont mind me saying so )

snoopyuk

Originally posted by blocula
Why would they try it? To sink the Titanic in 1912? The same reason they sank the 787 foot Lusitania in 1915 with "one" torpedo and killed 1,198 people...They felt like it...

edit on 26-11-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)

As I've said before, stop with the "Germans were bad guys, Allies were good guys" junk. You obviously have no concept of how the war started. It's too bad because WWI is a fascinating subject. But we're at an impasse, you believe the Germans did it because they felt like it, and you believe they had the range. The enormous scientific, observational, and historical facts completely disagree with your analysis. So that's pretty much it and nothing else will convince either opposing viewpoints otherwise.

Also, I should note with the sinking of the Lusitania, the Germans widely believed that the Allies were shipping weapons on cruise lines, which is why they sank it. However, even today it is up to debate whether the Lusitania was carrying weapons or not - I'm not an expert on that subject alone.

reply to post by DrunkenDonuts


To add to that, didn't the Lusitania suffer so much damage because it was carrying explosive war material which ignited with the torpedo hit?

I honestly don't know without googling.

reply to post by blocula


The studies done on the wreck of the Titanic, indicate that there was not a massive hole as had been believed for decades, but that the type of steel used in its hull was susceptible to the cold and therefore, rather brittle. When it hit the iceberg, rather than tearing a huge hole, it caused hull plates to buckle and rivets to pop, allowing seawater to flood into several sections. There was absolutely NO evidence of a torpedo strike.

Not to mention, crewmembers on board one of the rescue ships took photos of an iceberg with paint scrapes on it, in the vicinity the next morning.

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by DrunkenDonuts

 

To add to that, didn't the Lusitania suffer so much damage because it was carrying explosive war material which ignited with the torpedo hit?

It was carrying small arms ammunition and other war related supplies. Don't have any of my source books on me so I had to Google . It wasn't officially carrying explosives. No one is quite sure what the second explosion was - could be boiler, coal, explosives, extreme elite German u-boat skills, dunno.

Anyway, credit to the OP as this thread made it onto the ATS Live radio show.