Have a look at the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/sc...15titanic.html

Is there any thing to this or is just some more "N.Y. Times Science"?


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

bad rivets...

oh,, and the fact that the #$%^% ship was going full speed into an iceburg!


Isn't there another wreck that is interesting ,, this one is getting
so yesterday.


===
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
...


Have a look at the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/sc...15titanic.html

Is there any thing to this or is just some more "N.Y. Times Science"?


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

"Thomas, Spring Point Light" wrote in message
news:TFkNj.7272$HJ1.7167@trndny01...
bad rivets...

oh,, and the fact that the #$%^% ship was going full speed into an
iceburg!


Isn't there another wreck that is interesting ,, this one is getting
so yesterday.



Glad you asked... loss of the SS Atlantic was the worst disaster in the
North Atlantic before the Titanic
http://www.ssatlantic.com/

http://www.norwayheritage.com/articl...eid=1&zoneid=1

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:14:23 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

Isn't there another wreck that is interesting ,, this one is getting
so yesterday.



Glad you asked... loss of the SS Atlantic was the worst disaster in the
North Atlantic before the Titanic
http://www.ssatlantic.com/

It may not be particularly interesting, but the record for loss of
life, anywhere, was a shipload of Germans who were fleeing the
Russians at the end of WWII. The ship was torpedoed by a Russian sub
and about 5000 died.

Casady