New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

Updated: 10:13 AM EST
Titanic Likely Sank Faster Than Thought
By JAY LINDSAY, AP

FALMOUTH, Mass. (Dec. 6) - The discovery of two large pieces of the
Titanic's hull on the ocean floor indicates that the fabled luxury
liner sank faster than previously thought, researchers said Monday.

The hull pieces were a crucial part of the ship's structure and make up
a bottom section of the vessel that was missing when the wreck was
first located in 1985, the researchers said.

After the bottom section of the hull broke free, the bow and stern
split, said Roger Long, a naval architect who analyzed the find. The
stern, which was still buoyant and filled with survivors, likely
plunged toward the ocean floor about five minutes later.

"It would have been immediately terrifying," he said.



Previous researchers believed the ship broke in just two major pieces,
the bow and stern, which was how the sinking was depicted in the 1997
film version of the catastrophe. David Brown, a Titanic historian,
estimated before the latest find that the stern took 20 minutes to
slide into the water.

"It turns out the Titanic was more merciful. It was over more quickly,"
Brown said.

The newly found hull sections, located about a third of a mile from the
stern of the wreck, were examined during an expedition in August
sponsored by The History Channel. On Monday, Titanic experts met at
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution to discuss their analysis of the
find for a documentary to be aired on the cable channel on Feb. 26.

The sections, both about 40 feet by 90 feet, were once a single section
and were found in good condition, with red bottom paint still visible.
The missing sections had been believed to have fragmented into hundreds
of small pieces.

"The breakup and sinking of the Titanic has never been accurately
depicted," said Parks Stephenson, a Titanic historian who took part in
Monday's conference.


"The breakup and sinking of the Titanic has never been accurately
depicted."
-- Titanic historian Parks Stephenson

The 46,000-ton ocean liner was billed as "practically unsinkable" by
the publicity magazines of the period. But it struck an iceberg on its
maiden voyage just before midnight on April 14, 1912, and sank the
following day. About 1,500 people died.

Explorer Robert Ballard found the bulk of the wreck in 1985, at a depth
of 13,000 feet and about 380 miles southeast of Newfoundland. Ballard
was not impressed with the expedition's find.

"They found a fragment, big deal," he said. "Am I surprised? No. When
you go down there, there's stuff all over the place. It hit an iceberg
and it sank. Get over it."


12-06-05 04:21 EST


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
Updated: 10:13 AM EST
Titanic Likely Sank Faster Than Thought

That wouldn't have made for a very good movie though. Imagine how much
money Cameron could have saved if he only had to pay DiCaprio for 15 minutes
of his time.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 6 Dec 2005 08:23:12 -0800, wrote:

~~ snippity snip ~~

Explorer Robert Ballard found the bulk of the wreck in 1985, at a depth
of 13,000 feet and about 380 miles southeast of Newfoundland. Ballard
was not impressed with the expedition's find.

"They found a fragment, big deal," he said. "Am I surprised? No. When
you go down there, there's stuff all over the place. It hit an iceberg
and it sank. Get over it."

Typical. As a long time supporter of the Mystic Aquarium and the
Institute for Exploration Kids program, I've had the opportunity to
attend lectures and speak to him personally.

Trust me on this - if HE had made the discovery, it would have been
the greatest Titanic event since it's discovery in 1985. Somebody
else's discovery is just another piece of debris.

The guys abilities in the area of self promotion are amazing. Which
is not to say he doesn't do good work and solid science.

Interesting article Chuck - enjoyed it.

Later,

Tom

I'm considering this new theory, (of a rapid sinking), in light of the
recollections of survivors
viewing the sinking from nearby lifeboats. I seem to recall a number of
accounts that support the long, slow, agonizing submersion and then the
final upending and ultimate sinking. However, I'll bet that any sense
of time gets distorted in a terrifying situation and
maybe some of the survivors who reported a longer time required to sink
were merely reporting general impressions, or confirming times
suggested by somebody else.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

On 6 Dec 2005 08:23:12 -0800, wrote:

Updated: 10:13 AM EST
Titanic Likely Sank Faster Than Thought
By JAY LINDSAY, AP

FALMOUTH, Mass. (Dec. 6) - The discovery of two large pieces of the
Titanic's hull on the ocean floor indicates that the fabled luxury
liner sank faster than previously thought, researchers said Monday.

The hull pieces were a crucial part of the ship's structure and make up
a bottom section of the vessel that was missing when the wreck was
first located in 1985, the researchers said.

After the bottom section of the hull broke free, the bow and stern
split, said Roger Long, a naval architect who analyzed the find. The
stern, which was still buoyant and filled with survivors, likely
plunged toward the ocean floor about five minutes later.

"It would have been immediately terrifying," he said.



Previous researchers believed the ship broke in just two major pieces,
the bow and stern, which was how the sinking was depicted in the 1997
film version of the catastrophe. David Brown, a Titanic historian,
estimated before the latest find that the stern took 20 minutes to
slide into the water.

"It turns out the Titanic was more merciful. It was over more quickly,"
Brown said.

The newly found hull sections, located about a third of a mile from the
stern of the wreck, were examined during an expedition in August
sponsored by The History Channel. On Monday, Titanic experts met at
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution to discuss their analysis of the
find for a documentary to be aired on the cable channel on Feb. 26.

The sections, both about 40 feet by 90 feet, were once a single section
and were found in good condition, with red bottom paint still visible.
The missing sections had been believed to have fragmented into hundreds
of small pieces.

"The breakup and sinking of the Titanic has never been accurately
depicted," said Parks Stephenson, a Titanic historian who took part in
Monday's conference.


"The breakup and sinking of the Titanic has never been accurately
depicted."
-- Titanic historian Parks Stephenson

The 46,000-ton ocean liner was billed as "practically unsinkable" by
the publicity magazines of the period. But it struck an iceberg on its
maiden voyage just before midnight on April 14, 1912, and sank the
following day. About 1,500 people died.

Explorer Robert Ballard found the bulk of the wreck in 1985, at a depth
of 13,000 feet and about 380 miles southeast of Newfoundland. Ballard
was not impressed with the expedition's find.

"They found a fragment, big deal," he said. "Am I surprised? No. When
you go down there, there's stuff all over the place. It hit an iceberg
and it sank. Get over it."


12-06-05 04:21 EST


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

Are you saying it *didn't* sink on my birthday?

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

12-06-05 04:21 EST


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

Are you saying it *didn't* sink on my birthday?

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of
OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

John H - April 14 is my b-day too... weird....

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 15:36:13 -0600, "Dan J.S." wrote:



12-06-05 04:21 EST


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

Are you saying it *didn't* sink on my birthday?

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of
OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

John H - April 14 is my b-day too... weird....

Mine is the 15th, but I was wondering if the Titanic went down *really* fast, then it may have sunk
on the 14th.

With the other great things 15 April is noted for; Income Tax Day, the day Lincoln died, and my
birthday, the sinking of the Titanic was a crowning achievement.

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

On 6 Dec 2005 08:23:12 -0800, wrote:

After the bottom section of the hull broke free, the bow and stern
split, said Roger Long, a naval architect who analyzed the find. The
stern, which was still buoyant and filled with survivors, likely
plunged toward the ocean floor about five minutes later.

"It would have been immediately terrifying," he said.

==========================================

For those who may not know, Roger Long is a regular contributor on
rec.boats.cruising

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On 6 Dec 2005 08:23:12 -0800, wrote:


After the bottom section of the hull broke free, the bow and stern
split, said Roger Long, a naval architect who analyzed the find. The
stern, which was still buoyant and filled with survivors, likely
plunged toward the ocean floor about five minutes later.

"It would have been immediately terrifying," he said.


==========================================

For those who may not know, Roger Long is a regular contributor on
rec.boats.cruising


When did he say the tv program would air?
There will be lots of interest in this area...as the rescue ships
brought both survivors and bodies here after the sinking.

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

Don White wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
On 6 Dec 2005 08:23:12 -0800, wrote:


After the bottom section of the hull broke free, the bow and stern
split, said Roger Long, a naval architect who analyzed the find. The
stern, which was still buoyant and filled with survivors, likely
plunged toward the ocean floor about five minutes later.

"It would have been immediately terrifying," he said.


==========================================

For those who may not know, Roger Long is a regular contributor on
rec.boats.cruising


When did he say the tv program would air?
There will be lots of interest in this area...as the rescue ships
brought both survivors and bodies here after the sinking.


The History Channel, February 26

New theory about the sinking of "Titanic"
 

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 11:31:32 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:
Hey Wayne!!! Missed your return - or did I?

I'm so confused... :)

I dare you to make that trip again next year.

ON second thought, I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU... :)

Liz is still talking about your GB and I keep putting up the hex sign
to dissuade her from trying to persuade me from making the conversion.

I mean, length, room and appointments are all well and good, but no
speed and diesels are just such a turn off. :)

Glad to see you made it back in one piece.
======================================

Tom, thought I included you on my "back home in one piece" EMAIL to
everyone but perhaps missed you. We arrived back in Cape Coral
mid-November after 6 months and 4,000 nautical miles on the road with
the GB last summer. Most of October and early November were spent
hiding out from the hurricanes in either Chesapeake Bay or along the
ICW in North Carolina. The NC ICW is one gorgeous cruising area, just
wish it was a little warmer in the winter, otherwise would have
considered it as a retirement spot. They get whacked with about as
many hurricanes as Florida though and don't have the nice winter
weather that we do.

We have great fishing near here as NOYB can attest, so plan a trip
down this way sometime and let us know. If you're worried about Liz
being spoiled by the GB, you can camp out on the Winner 24. :-)
No luxuries there...

You have a problem with diesels? Those big beautiful beasts never
missed a beat the whole trip, even when we ran them for 48 hours
straight. Who needs speed when you can do that?