Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Titanic specials

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    503

    Titanic specials

    I watched several 100th anniversary Titanic specials, but some highlights:

    I just saw an amazing new special on the Titanic that said that Titanic no way would have sunk were it not for the refractive effects of the atmosphere that night. The iceberg they hit was camoflouged by a mirage for 30 minutes and did not clear up until the last few seconds, and by then it was to late.:

    http://natgeotv.com/ca/titanic-case-...eate-the-scene

    on coast to coast, a famous ocean archaeologist, Charles Pellegrino:

    http://www.charlespellegrino.com/

    described the rusticles and details of the remains .

    A tremendous series of specials did justice to this fascinating topic.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,169
    Not to be outdone (or leave a spare shilling on the table) James Cameron produced and aired a 2-hour re-deux on the sinking with specialists and researchers from the US Coast Guard, US Naval Acamdey, the RMS Titanic Inc. curator, and a few other experts. Titanic: The Final Word with James Cameron.

    The show covered some of the areas they got wrong in the movie, such as the angle of attack (max was 23 degrees) and where the split occured (behind the wrong funnel). But they also looked at the debris field to see what it told researchers about the breakup, why the ship looks so flattened and why the stern section resembles a plane wreck. Towards the end the group discusses what Capt. Smith might have done differently immediately after the impact, such as drive north into the pack ice and disembark the passengers.

    For those who have access, the special is available on National Geographic Channel as an on-demand show.

  3. #3
    I'm sorry to say that I've missed most of the specials, though I hope to catch up on them (eventually). One of the most interesting Titanic specials I saw came on some years ago, wherein they tested the bizarre hypothesis (by some) that the ship would, ironically, have taken longer to sink if they had left the watertight compartments open. They built a model Titanic and flooded it as if the doors had been left open. The ship did settle slowly and levelly in the water, which would've made it easier to load the lifeboats, but they found out that past a certain point the structure became unstable and capsized, and in much less relative time than the actual sinking took.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    503
    Romanus,

    I recommend the special on National Geographic Special I referenced above , they are airing it again in November , if you get that . I just caught the last half of a 2 hour show and have already set my DVR to record it in November, and even am paranoid there will be a mixup because EDT changes to EST just one hour into the scheduled airing. It's called "Titanic: Case Closed".

    That one caught me, because it was the first extensive discussion I heard of a mirage being responsible for the wreck.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,433
    Wasn't there some theory floated (pardon the pun) that if the Titanic had just piled headlong into the berg, it could have stayed afloat? The number of compartments compromised would have been fewer than those exposed by the glancing blow, and it wouldn't have flooded as severely.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Doodler View Post
    Wasn't there some theory floated (pardon the pun) that if the Titanic had just piled headlong into the berg, it could have stayed afloat? The number of compartments compromised would have been fewer than those exposed by the glancing blow, and it wouldn't have flooded as severely.
    I recall seeing that somewhere as well years back and IIRC the reason it didn't happen was that doing so ran counter to the crew's training to avoid objects. I suspect it was a scenario for which the crew never trained and which would seem to fly in the face of common sense if for no other reason that doing so would have immediately killed and injured the people in those forward compartments.

    Then again, maybe folks on this forum who have crewed on large ships can weigh in (sorry, now I'm punning) about avoidance and collision training. Is there ever a time when it's better to smash headlong into an object at sea and under full power?

    I also saw one of the specials which said the lookouts should have seen a berg on the horizon, even without a moon. But the crewmen apparently fell victim to the mirage referenced earlier. Contributing were the calm seas which greatly reduced the waves breaking on the berg; lookouts were trained to look for the white froth.

    ETA: In my post above I meant that Cameron speculated that Smith could have driven intio the pack ice and dismebarked the passengers onto the relatively flat ice and not in the boats.
    Last edited by schlaugh; 2012-Apr-22 at 02:38 PM. Reason: ty

  7. #7
    Re "head-on": Pretty much agree; though I've heard that a head-on collision would have been survivable, it runs contrary to instinct even if made sense to some of the people there immediately afterward (perhaps Andrews?). It would've taken some extraordinary nerve and quick-thinking to decide to plow directly into an iceberg that would, survivable or not, result in a collision that might have still injured or killed scores of people. Of course, suppose the ship sank anyway, in which case we'd be talking about the morons who decided it was better plow head-on into an iceberg than sensibly try to turn away from it...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Romanus View Post
    Re "head-on": Pretty much agree; though I've heard that a head-on collision would have been survivable, it runs contrary to instinct even if made sense to some of the people there immediately afterward (perhaps Andrews?). It would've taken some extraordinary nerve and quick-thinking to decide to plow directly into an iceberg that would, survivable or not, result in a collision that might have still injured or killed scores of people. Of course, suppose the ship sank anyway, in which case we'd be talking about the morons who decided it was better plow head-on into an iceberg than sensibly try to turn away from it...
    Yep, agree. I have also heard the idea that a head-on collision would have been more survivable than a glancing blow. However, the first thought would surely have been to try and avoid contact altogether (knowing that such an action would undoubtedly cause death and injury to many passengers and with such a ship on its maiden voyage). Had they been able to avoid the collision, the bridge crew could all wipe the cold sweat from their brow and talk about how "that was a close one...".

    It would seem that only if a collision were completely unavoidable, then heading headlong into the iceberg might be considered an option.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,018
    In other news, a billionaire wants to build a 1:1 replica--an actual ship (Titanic II)

    VLCC and supercarriers are still larger

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr View Post
    In other news, a billionaire wants to build a 1:1 replica--an actual ship (Titanic II)
    VLCC and supercarriers are still larger
    I don't know if you are implying that size has something to do with this endeavor by stating the two.
    But; Yes... Titanic was large, but not as famous for it's size, but for it's safety features and opulance.

    The QE2* is larger, the Queen Mary is larger, as are most larger cruise ship and anything that is built to either the old or new Panamax specifications.

    *I can't remember it's new name.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr View Post
    In other news, a billionaire wants to build a 1:1 replica--an actual ship (Titanic II)

    VLCC and supercarriers are still larger
    I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for him to see this through. The guy that mooted this is a notorious publicity hound - he's not happy unless he's making headlines. I think he tries to portray himself as an Australian Richard Branson, but in reality he comes across as a guy who is either desperate or as daft as a fairy-floss toilet brush.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by AGN Fuel View Post
    I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for him to see this through.
    I have a little more optimism about this. It is one of a small fleet of luxury ships that he has a deal with, although, I don't know how solid that deal is.
    It's basically going to be just another luxury cruise ship in the shape of the Titanic.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,148
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    I have a little more optimism about this. It is one of a small fleet of luxury ships that he has a deal with, although, I don't know how solid that deal is.
    It's basically going to be just another luxury cruise ship in the shape of the Titanic.
    Just don't get Zapp Brannigan for Captain.

    Seriously, I'd like to see what consumer research they did on that. On one hand, it would have name recognition, and some people might want to get on the ship for that reason. But other people would avoid a ship with that name. Which would outnumber the other?

    Also, if it gets anything worse than a paint scratch, I could see it making the news.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,726
    I wouldn't invest any money on any of them being built. As said, he lives for the headline, after which he loses interest.

    He made the announcement re Titanic 2 on the same day that he announced he wanted to contest the local seat at the next Federal Election. Against the current Federal Treasurer. After having lost pre-selection in his last attempt to a man who is currently embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal and standing down from parliament in disgrace until it is investigated.

    That evening, 100 satirists & cartoonists across the country put down their pens for ever - disillusioned that nothing they could invent would ever top that circus.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by AGN Fuel View Post
    I wouldn't invest any money on any of them being built. As said, he lives for the headline, after which he loses interest.
    Aside from his political views and personal life, he must know something about business ventures to become a billionaire.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    Aside from his political views and personal life, he must know something about business ventures to become a billionaire.
    Palmer is one of a new breed of "mining baron" in this country, a very powerful and politically influential (to put it nicely. They possess and have demonstrated the ability to destabalise a federal government that they find inconvenient to work with) lot who have grown almost inconceivable wealthy on the back of the mining boom, selling Australian minerals to a resource-hungry China.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    Aside from his political views and personal life, he must know something about business ventures to become a billionaire.
    I'm not sure that I share your confidence that rich = astute about business.

    As Scriitor notes, he happened to own a iron ore mining company at a time when China developed an insatiable desire for minerals - rather more good timing than good management. Reporters love him because he never met an idea that was too ludicrous - for example, his recent press announcement that Greenpeace were being funded by the CIA to bring down the Australian coal mining industry, which breathless statements were supported by no evidence whatsoever. Soccer supporters on the Gold Coast had to live with him firstly only allowing them to sit in one grandstand at their home games, then red-ragging the governing body of soccer in this country so much that they had no alternative than to throw the team out of the national competition.

    If I may quote from today's front page of the SMH:

    "Plans by the billionnaire (name) to dig one of the world's biggest coalmines have been rocked by the cancellation of a contract to buy half the output."

    Such stories almost invariably follow about 4 weeks after one of his excited press releases. I await the equivalent one regarding the Titanic II.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Just don't get Zapp Brannigan for Captain.
    I think there's an Italian cruise ship captain who is out of a job now, Francesco something or other.
    As above, so below

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: