On Jul 25, 12:33 pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
"Joe" wrote



Oh a a point you missed on your Titanic assumption is when ordered
hard astern the wheel walk of the titanic also pulled her stern to
stbd, creating more force against the hull as she grazed the berg.

The best evidence, from both ship motion simulators (full size bridge
training versions) and study of the hystorical record, is that Titanic's
engines were never actually reversed. The center screw was non-reversable
and is the only one that would have created significant wheel walk. The
wing screws were along side the keel so very little side flow could be
created by them.


Do you know what type screws she had outboard to stbd, I'd bet she had
a LH .




It's actually the lack of side movement or pressure of the hull against the
iceberg that is one of the hardest things to explain about the accident.
The after part of the ship was swinging away from the iceberg by the time
ice reached it.

Looking at the gouge is just a small view, you need to see Titanic
bottom for the full picture. Most bergs are 90%+ submerged and the
bottom may have taken a harder shove lessing the side gouge.

http://defiant.corban.edu/gtipton/net-fun/iceberg.html


It's a subject I've had more than usual opportunity to consider but this
isn't a Titanic forum.

It's OK to talk about Titanic stuff here Roger, after all she was
manned by sailors right?

Could you imagine the ride down to the bottom on Titanic? Looks like
she was hauling ass when she plowed into the mud.

Joe


--
Roger Long