Titanium hull?
 

Joe wrote:

Yeah Steel rivits annealed ...

Wrought iron.

Rick

Titanium hull?
 

"Joe" wrote in message
om...
The_navigator© wrote in message
...
Steel? Irish?


Yeah Steel rivits annealed and made in Belfast and applied to the hull
at Harland & Woff Shipyard in Belfast Ireland. Thats the place where
the Titanic was made BTW.

The steel hull plates where made by D. Colville & Co from Scotland.

Most experts think the rivits failed at the head loads, allowing seams
to rip open on the Titanics hull. Many think the same flawed riviting
might have doomed the HMS Hood.

I don't think so, Joe. The Germans dropped a 16" shell right down into her
main magazine and the resulting explosion sealed her fate whtever the rivits
might have been. HMS Hood was not a battleship but a battle cruiser with
relatively light armour to allow a very high top speed so a direct hit in a
vital area was her undoing.

Titanium hull?
 

Sorry, it wasn't built in steel but iron plate and rivets.

Cheers MC

Joe wrote:

The_navigator© wrote in message ...

Steel? Irish?



Yeah Steel rivits annealed and made in Belfast and applied to the hull
at Harland & Woff Shipyard in Belfast Ireland. Thats the place where
the Titanic was made BTW.

The steel hull plates where made by D. Colville & Co from Scotland.

Most experts think the rivits failed at the head loads, allowing seams
to rip open on the Titanics hull. Many think the same flawed riviting
might have doomed the HMS Hood.

Joe
MSV RedCloud
Still made of the finest British Steel & Monel money could buy.



Cheers MC

Joe wrote:


Vito wrote in message ...


Joe wrote:


MSV RedCloud......Made of the finest English Steel money could buy!

Awww...errr.... (shuffle feet) ... didn't they say the same about
Titanic?


No. The Titanic was buildt of Irish Steel.

Joe

Titanium hull?
 

"Edgar Cove" wrote in message ...
"Joe" wrote in message

Most experts think the rivits failed at the head loads, allowing seams
to rip open on the Titanics hull. Many think the same flawed riviting
might have doomed the HMS Hood.

I don't think so, Joe. The Germans dropped a 16" shell right down into her
main magazine and the resulting explosion sealed her fate whtever the rivits
might have been. HMS Hood was not a battleship but a battle cruiser with
relatively light armour to allow a very high top speed so a direct hit in a
vital area was her undoing.


Greetings Edgar,

With reference to the steel used in the Olympic class, two
catastrophes from British maritime history comes easily to mind. Until
recently the sinking of the Titanic and the loss of the British
Battleship HMS Hood had only been linked by the huge loss of life and
the subsequent damage they both caused to Britain’s national
prestige.
To those not conversant with the HMS Hood, she was a 44,600 ton
battleship. (originally a heavy cruiser) To the British public, she
was
called, "The Might Hood". She above all epitomised British naval
supremacy. On the 24th May 1941 she tried to prevent the German
battleship Bismarck from breaking out of the Baltic to prey on the
North Atlantic convoys. A second direct hit from Bismarck penetrated
one of her magazines setting off a chain reaction that culminated in
massive explosion. To the astonishment of those whom witness the
incident, the Hood broke in half and sank in less than a minute. Only
3
survived. HMS Hood now lies 2400m below the Denmark Strait.
I believe research into the sinking of the Hood is currently underway,
some claim they have found an intriguing link between the Titanic &
Hood that may provide an extra dimension to their demise. They were
both built from the same type of brittle steel, in both cases supplied
from the now defunct manufacturer D. Colville & Co, of Motherwell in
Scotland.
Researchers believe that the Hoods steel, alleged to have been
state-of-
the-art at the time, was "very strain-rate sensitive." That means it
would stretch if pulled apart slowly, but would snap if pulled very
quickly. As an example, during the 2nd World War, serious hull
fractures of some early British Naval vessels, Liberty ships and T-2
tanker hulls were of great concern, not until 1947 was the phenomenon
fully recognised and that the composition of ship’s steel was
strictly
regulated.

When the 16 inch shell exploded it snapped her in half. Had she had
better steel, or was re-enforced with strakes like the liberty ships
that were breaking in half perhaps she would not of snapped. A very
costly lesson.

Now how true this is I’m not certain, but it was believed that
during the
final stages of the Olympic’s hull being dismantled at Jarrow in
1936,
pneumatic hammers were used to fracture the ships steels plates. This
allegedly expedited the removal of the ships external steel strakes
while also providing manageable lengths for later removal from the
site
as well as for disposal.

Joe
MSV RedCloud

Titanium hull?
 

"Joe" wrote in message
m...
"Edgar Cove" wrote in message
...
"Joe" wrote in message

Most experts think the rivits failed at the head loads, allowing seams
to rip open on the Titanics hull. Many think the same flawed riviting
might have doomed the HMS Hood.

I don't think so, Joe. The Germans dropped a 16" shell right down into
her
main magazine and the resulting explosion sealed her fate whtever the
rivits
might have been. HMS Hood was not a battleship but a battle cruiser
with
relatively light armour to allow a very high top speed so a direct hit
in a
vital area was her undoing.


Greetings Edgar,

With reference to the steel used in the Olympic class, two
catastrophes from British maritime history comes easily to mind. Until
recently the sinking of the Titanic and the loss of the British
Battleship HMS Hood had only been linked by the huge loss of life and
the subsequent damage they both caused to Britain’s national
prestige.
To those not conversant with the HMS Hood, she was a 44,600 ton
battleship. (originally a heavy cruiser) To the British public, she
was
called, "The Might Hood". She above all epitomised British naval
supremacy. On the 24th May 1941 she tried to prevent the German
battleship Bismarck from breaking out of the Baltic to prey on the
North Atlantic convoys. A second direct hit from Bismarck penetrated
one of her magazines setting off a chain reaction that culminated in
massive explosion. To the astonishment of those whom witness the
incident, the Hood broke in half and sank in less than a minute. Only
3
survived. HMS Hood now lies 2400m below the Denmark Strait.
I believe research into the sinking of the Hood is currently underway,
some claim they have found an intriguing link between the Titanic &
Hood that may provide an extra dimension to their demise. They were
both built from the same type of brittle steel, in both cases supplied
from the now defunct manufacturer D. Colville & Co, of Motherwell in
Scotland.
Researchers believe that the Hoods steel, alleged to have been
state-of-
the-art at the time, was "very strain-rate sensitive." That means it
would stretch if pulled apart slowly, but would snap if pulled very
quickly. As an example, during the 2nd World War, serious hull
fractures of some early British Naval vessels, Liberty ships and T-2
tanker hulls were of great concern, not until 1947 was the phenomenon
fully recognised and that the composition of ship’s steel was
strictly
regulated.

When the 16 inch shell exploded it snapped her in half. Had she had
better steel, or was re-enforced with strakes like the liberty ships
that were breaking in half perhaps she would not of snapped. A very
costly lesson.

Now how true this is I’m not certain, but it was believed that
during the
final stages of the Olympic’s hull being dismantled at Jarrow in
1936,
pneumatic hammers were used to fracture the ships steels plates. This
allegedly expedited the removal of the ships external steel strakes
while also providing manageable lengths for later removal from the
site
as well as for disposal.

Joe
MSV RedCloud

Hi Joe! Well, regardless of the composition or heat treatment of the steel
I would expect an explosion of the main magazine to sink any ship pretty
quickly. Hood had plenty of heavy artillery and was very fast but to
achieve this was relatively lightly armoured for such a big ship. She was
built just after WW1 and an 'old' friend of mine, now aged 103 served on her
in the 1920's.
I think the Liberty ship problems arose from the welded construction and the
failures occurred along the welds. Can't remember the full details but I
think in that case the wrong kind of steel was certainly a factor and I seem
to remember also that low temperatures did not help the situation.

Titanium hull?
 

Joe wrote:


To those not conversant with the HMS Hood, she was a 44,600 ton
battleship. (originally a heavy cruiser)

Apparently, you are 'not conversant' with her yourself. HMS Hood was a battle cruiser.

http://hmshood.com/

DSK

Titanium hull?
 

DSK wrote in message ...
Joe wrote:


To those not conversant with the HMS Hood, she was a 44,600 ton
battleship. (originally a heavy cruiser)

Apparently, you are 'not conversant' with her yourself. HMS Hood was a battle cruiser.

http://hmshood.com/

DSK

Thanks for the link Doug,

Very interesting! I did not know the HMS Hood had a Mutiny onboard.

You learn something new everyday!

Joe

Titanium hull?
 

Joe wrote:


Thanks for the link Doug,

You're welcome.



Very interesting! I did not know the HMS Hood had a Mutiny onboard.

heh heh.... there have been a number of mutinies in modern navies, usually hushed up and
called something else.




You learn something new everyday!

Yep... it makes life much mor interesting.

FB- Doug King

Titanium hull?
 

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:25:45 -0400, Scout
wrote:

Check out Scientific American (Oct 2003) article "Alchemy of a
Supermetal" A new process for wresting pure titanium from ore may
soon make the affordable titanium hull and other sailboat components a
reality.

If I remember my technical resources (some Tom Clancy novel), titanium
is very difficult to work with. Any money saved by lowering the price
of the raw material may well be eaten up by what companies will charge
to mess around with it at all.