The entire bottom of the ship was found, side to side and a length spanning several compartments; it had been ripped off entirely and sunk down to the bottom miles away from the rest of the wreckage.
This is why it sank so fast.
What you describe would have never been able to sink that ship, which is why it remained a mystery for over 100 years.
The holes were on the starboard side where the iceberg hit. Edward Wilding was the Harland and Wolff engineer who predicted that uneven filling of the chambers would cause the ship to sink. A gash wouldn't do that.
In 1996 Robert Ballard's team photographed the damage which was made up mostly of long thin slits with the total combined area less than 15 square feet, so more than a few but not much compared to the size of the hull.
There was one slit that was more like a punched hole but I can't find the reference to that exact quote. It was in the documentary though by Ballard.
Paul Mattias is the guy who did the sonar work on this. You can look it up.
"Uneven filling of the chambers." Ok we've gone from water in one chamber to two, based on bad rivets. Water seeks it's own level. You'll have more water on the side coming in, but unless there's something dividing those 2 breached chambers further, that's going to be fairly level.
Eyewitness testimony has the ship listing to port.
I'm not seeing any of this bringing the ship down, or if it could, it would take a lot longer. Whereas the Titanic sank in no time flat, consistent with the whole bottom being ripped off over a length of several compartments. Not just two, but several. Enough to sink the ship, unquestionably.
This makes the most sense to me, but it's also the documentary I saw after the bottom was found, separate from the rest of the wreckage that had been discovered previously.
Bringing the ship down as fast as it sank would require a lot more than 2 compartments being uneven. Especially if we're talking about a 35 mph plunge like a submarine to rip the bottom off after it sank.
Edward Wilding, Harland & Wolff’s senior naval architect, subsequently testified at the British Inquiry, which commenced in London on May 2, 1912. In the report dated July 30, 1912 Wilding stated that TITANIC would most certainly have survived a head-on collision with the iceberg, crushing the bow section back to the second watertight bulkhead. This would have killed 56 off-duty firemen berthed in the forecastle of the ship.
Wilding also calculated buoyancy loss, using reports of observations by the survivors, in particular the officers. TITANIC remained afloat for 2 hours and 41 minutes.
Wilding calculated that the iceberg-induced hull damage extending back to Coal Bunker 10/Boile Room 5 was likely a series of discontinuous cracks, irregularly distributed along the first 200 to 300 feet of hull, with an average area of breech of only 12 square feet.
The average width of such a crack would have been only 3/4 inch, which caused him to speculate that buckling of the hull plates at rivet laps was most likely responsible mechanism.
Wilding also calculated that 16,000 tons of seawater taken into the bow section would have been required to bring the bow down 40 feet, where it dipped beneath the surface around 2 AM.
100% wrong.
The entire bottom of the ship was found, side to side and a length spanning several compartments; it had been ripped off entirely and sunk down to the bottom miles away from the rest of the wreckage.
This is why it sank so fast.
What you describe would have never been able to sink that ship, which is why it remained a mystery for over 100 years.
The holes were on the starboard side where the iceberg hit. Edward Wilding was the Harland and Wolff engineer who predicted that uneven filling of the chambers would cause the ship to sink. A gash wouldn't do that.
In 1996 Robert Ballard's team photographed the damage which was made up mostly of long thin slits with the total combined area less than 15 square feet, so more than a few but not much compared to the size of the hull.
There was one slit that was more like a punched hole but I can't find the reference to that exact quote. It was in the documentary though by Ballard.
Paul Mattias is the guy who did the sonar work on this. You can look it up.
"Uneven filling of the chambers." Ok we've gone from water in one chamber to two, based on bad rivets. Water seeks it's own level. You'll have more water on the side coming in, but unless there's something dividing those 2 breached chambers further, that's going to be fairly level.
Eyewitness testimony has the ship listing to port.
I'm not seeing any of this bringing the ship down, or if it could, it would take a lot longer. Whereas the Titanic sank in no time flat, consistent with the whole bottom being ripped off over a length of several compartments. Not just two, but several. Enough to sink the ship, unquestionably.
This makes the most sense to me, but it's also the documentary I saw after the bottom was found, separate from the rest of the wreckage that had been discovered previously.
Bringing the ship down as fast as it sank would require a lot more than 2 compartments being uneven. Especially if we're talking about a 35 mph plunge like a submarine to rip the bottom off after it sank.
Wilding's calculations:
Edward Wilding, Harland & Wolff’s senior naval architect, subsequently testified at the British Inquiry, which commenced in London on May 2, 1912. In the report dated July 30, 1912 Wilding stated that TITANIC would most certainly have survived a head-on collision with the iceberg, crushing the bow section back to the second watertight bulkhead. This would have killed 56 off-duty firemen berthed in the forecastle of the ship.
Wilding also calculated buoyancy loss, using reports of observations by the survivors, in particular the officers. TITANIC remained afloat for 2 hours and 41 minutes.
Wilding calculated that the iceberg-induced hull damage extending back to Coal Bunker 10/Boile Room 5 was likely a series of discontinuous cracks, irregularly distributed along the first 200 to 300 feet of hull, with an average area of breech of only 12 square feet.
The average width of such a crack would have been only 3/4 inch, which caused him to speculate that buckling of the hull plates at rivet laps was most likely responsible mechanism.
Wilding also calculated that 16,000 tons of seawater taken into the bow section would have been required to bring the bow down 40 feet, where it dipped beneath the surface around 2 AM.