Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11   Report Post  
posted to alt.sailing.asa,rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,579
Default Interesting article about Jim Gray who went missing


"Roger Long" wrote in message
...

"Joe" wrote

Looking at the gouge is just a small view, you need to see Titanic
bottom for the full picture.


I've actually seen more of the Titanic's bottom than all but a roomful of
people on the planet.

--
Roger Long


You ain't just whistling Dixie, Roger. ;-)


  #12   Report Post  
posted to alt.sailing.asa,rec.boats.cruising
Joe Joe is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,698
Default Interesting article about Jim Gray who went missing

On Jul 25, 1:05 pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
"Joe" wrote



Looking at the gouge is just a small view, you need to see Titanic
bottom for the full picture.


I've actually seen more of the Titanic's bottom than all but a roomful of
people on the planet.

--
Roger Long


I'm aware of what you have seen and done Roger, cool gig if you can
get it.

Question:
How did you go under the Titanic and look at her bottom?
She's sitting on her bottom...on the bottom...did you tunnel? ;0)

http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...teractive.html

Joe

  #13   Report Post  
posted to alt.sailing.asa,rec.boats.cruising
dt dt is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 119
Default Interesting article about Jim Gray who went missing

Joe wrote:

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


http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp

DT
  #14   Report Post  
posted to alt.sailing.asa,rec.boats.cruising
Joe Joe is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,698
Default Interesting article about Jim Gray who went missing

On Jul 26, 1:06 pm, dt wrote:
Joe wrote:
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


http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp

DT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Still a good rendention of shape by a berg expert, I never said it was
a real picture DT. Every berg is different but all fit into class
shapes like domed, drydock, tabular, blocky, wedge, pinnacle.

I bet it was a drydock or tabular type berg that cause the pressure
to decrease as she ripped Titanics hull side (not Bottom),as Roger
Long stated puzzled the computor models and experts, that.... and the
icecube bounce effect.

In my oilfield days I worked in some large tow groups that had a few
X berg wranglers running tugs, and they always said to keep a wide
wide berth as 90% of a big berg is underwater and often in the form of
shelfs, like hitting a rock bottom.

Joe
..

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Very interesting article riverman Touring 4 June 22nd 07 01:25 PM
Interesting article on Applied Aerodynamics DSK ASA 0 November 4th 03 10:26 PM
Noisy Gray D Milne General 4 July 25th 03 09:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017