The Mystery of the Titanic's First Watertight Compartment!

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 вер 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 388

  • @jonilougy6608
    @jonilougy6608 Рік тому +123

    I find it fascinating that, to this very day, we're still gathering new information on the most iconic shipwreck of all modern history.
    Bravo segment, Sam. 🏆

    • @lpquagmire3621
      @lpquagmire3621 Рік тому +9

      It's doubtful Titanic will ever give up all her mysteries.

    • @jonilougy6608
      @jonilougy6608 Рік тому +3

      @@lpquagmire3621 good point, friend 🙂

    • @peeko_luxx2873
      @peeko_luxx2873 Рік тому +2

      @@lpquagmire3621Something dark, yet beautiful about that sentiment. Some things don’t have clear answers. Life can be fickle like that. The way she goes boys.

    • @lanthanumlanthanium6373
      @lanthanumlanthanium6373 Рік тому +1

      John Jacob Astor, Benjamin Guggenheim and Isador Strauss. The fact that youtube has a context segment on this video, shows something fishy(pun intended) happened with the Titanic.

    • @teijaflink2226
      @teijaflink2226 Рік тому +2

      Titanic was an incredible ship with incredible design even if she happened to sink but you can never 100% account for everything.

  • @spencershark
    @spencershark Рік тому +24

    I had read about this quite some time ago (and actually won a point for the comment section in trivia one Sunday live stream for a question about this), and I'm glad to see Compartment One is getting the attention it deserves!

  • @happym3mes
    @happym3mes Рік тому +10

    another BANGER be watchin this over bright side 110% of the time

  • @macsteed01
    @macsteed01 Рік тому +3

    I started reading about Titanic back in 1968. Back in the when we read books we got in a library. Your presentation and knowledge is very good.

    • @koubenakombi3066
      @koubenakombi3066 Рік тому

      It was never Titanic... it was Olympic - Titanic twin ship - it had suffered damages while Titanic was being built... they simply changed their plates and sunk the damaged Olympic. It was the fist big fraud scam of the century, by JP Morgan.

    • @virgilflowers9846
      @virgilflowers9846 4 місяці тому

      Oh staaahp. Lots of people still read books and belong to libraries 😉

  • @eliasthienpont6330
    @eliasthienpont6330 Рік тому +11

    Titanic had sixteen "watertight" compartments. But they were not really watertight since they were open at the top above the waterline. The Battleship USS New Jersey is about the same size of the Titanic and it has well over 2000 watertight compartments and none of those were open anywhere.

    • @CactusQuade
      @CactusQuade Рік тому +1

      hence why it'd take a heck of a lot to sink her ;) In my opinion, I'd like to think the best way to imagine the watertight compartments on the Titanic is to be as 'firezone boundaries'. A very detailed and exact frame of a ship from the water line to the bottom of the hull where if all watertight doors are closed it is completely isolated from the rest of the ship.

    • @ryans413
      @ryans413 10 місяців тому

      A battle ship and an ocean liner are not the same thing there built differently. A battle ship is built to withstand blasts and stay afloat to stay in battle. An ocean liner is just sailing the seas it’s not going to battle.

    • @mermaidcattt
      @mermaidcattt 10 місяців тому

      What do you mean by "open" at the top? Please explain for someone who doesn't know how ship building works

    • @ryans413
      @ryans413 10 місяців тому

      @@mermaidcattt the watertight bulkheads only went as high as E deck so once the water reached E deck it just spilled over the top and flooded the next area of the ship. Think of an empty ice cube try the area you fill the water would be Titanic’s water tight rooms you can literally watch an ice cube tray fill up and spill over into the next area. Do you understand what I’m trying to explain.

    • @PaulStudd-l4x
      @PaulStudd-l4x 4 місяці тому

      @@ryans413 Like we couldn't forget? You must be Tommy Ryan.

  • @N330AA
    @N330AA Рік тому +3

    The ballast tanks on a passenger vessel are really from trim rather than stability. It's cargo vessels where they are important for stability, specifically when the ship is unloaded and would sit extremely high in the water. But of course when loaded these tanks are emptied as the cargo is providing the ballast, and emptying them allows more cargo.

  • @GeneralKenobiSIYE
    @GeneralKenobiSIYE Рік тому +3

    As a 7 year old ( it was when I first started getting really into studying Titanic) why all the illustrations back then showed the compartment flooding early on with the rest of the compartments when there had been no breach in the hull in that compartment. No one ever explained it back then, and said illustrations made it see like the compartment was not watertight or it seemed as if someone left a door open. Even today few people ever talk about it, and I think this is the first video I've ever seen to discuss this topic. I mean that compartment's rear bulkhead is also the collision bulkhead so it HAD to be watertight, or at least it had to be as watertight and as strong as possible to hold up to the ship smashing into various threats to the hulls of the Olympic Class. It had to at the very least slow any leaks enough that the crew could shore it up. The ship still had to sail to a safe harbor with its bow crushed in, and that would put A LOT of stress on any bulkhead. Ships of the US Navy were well known for the strength of their bulkheads during WWII. Countless times a heavily damaged USN ship could sail at speed or close to it with huge gaping holes in the hull while Japanese and German ships had to slow considerably as their bulkheads and any shoring up would fail if they travelled to quickly. Especially the Germans. I guess the USN wasn't too keen on having its ships travelling across the Pacific backwards... Well except for that one time! 🤣🤣🤣
    The KMS Bismarck ( along with the Scharnhorst Class ) are a good example of this as the bulkheads and shoring up would fail over and over when the ship violently maneuvered trying to evade the torpedoes dropped by Ark Royal's Swordfish. USN and Royal Navy ships were able to, more often than not, travel at or near top speed as well as dodge incoming torpedoes. USS South Carolina is a good example of this when she was torpedoed. I'm still wondering why other nations designed such weak bulkheads when both the USN and RN could make their bulkheads so much stronger without adding too much weight if any excess weight at all. I mean the German ships had their sterns falling off if the enemy so much as looked at said sterns.

    • @EnjoySackLunch
      @EnjoySackLunch Рік тому +2

      Wow

    • @qwertykeyboard5901
      @qwertykeyboard5901 Рік тому

      Probably resource limitations/cost budgets. Thicker bulkheads means more metal, and that costs money!

  • @richarddavenport31
    @richarddavenport31 Рік тому +2

    THERE IS ALWAYS SO MUCH MORE TO LEARN about the TiTANIC!!!!!

  • @paulboger3101
    @paulboger3101 Рік тому +2

    Thanks Sam for another great video!! Keep up your brilliant work!!!

    • @koubenakombi3066
      @koubenakombi3066 Рік тому

      It was never Titanic... it was Olympic - Titanic twin ship - it had suffered damages while Titanic was being built... they simply changed their plates and sunk the damaged Olympic. It was the fist big fraud scam of the century, by JP Morgan.

  • @carpathia8689
    @carpathia8689 Рік тому +2

    Excellent work as always, Sam!

  • @Whookieee
    @Whookieee Рік тому +1

    I just love your channel! Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

  • @Jessie_V486
    @Jessie_V486 Рік тому +3

    i could listen to sam talk about literally anything for hours

  • @Faygris
    @Faygris Рік тому +9

    But does this mean that relatively small breach of the sixth compartment was actually the reason the ship couldn't stay afloat?

    • @davidknowles2491
      @davidknowles2491 Рік тому +10

      Sadly yes.

    • @ThisIsNotAhnJieRen
      @ThisIsNotAhnJieRen Рік тому +3

      Which makes it all the more ironic..... Biggest, most luxurious, and most technologically advanced ship during that time yet all it took was a small breach...😞😞😞

  • @christiangarrett8297
    @christiangarrett8297 Рік тому +1

    Great video and very informative!!! Keep them coming!

  • @Basslightning666
    @Basslightning666 Рік тому +5

    Great content, and objective evidence to back up the details. My question, was the rear deck of the Titanic called the "Poop Deck," and if so, why was it called that awkward name?

    • @CETravelGames
      @CETravelGames Рік тому +1

      Naval architecture describes a poop deck as the superstructure that contains the cabin's roof in the rear, or stern, of a ship. The poop deck extends from the main deck by a few feet. It includes the roof of a cabin in the aft of a ship. Technically speaking, this area is called a stern deck for sailing vessels.
      The name originates from the French word for stern, la poupe

    • @sabrinastratton1991
      @sabrinastratton1991 Рік тому

      ​@@AnimationByDylanuhhh no it comes from the French word for "stern"

  • @RuralJuror420
    @RuralJuror420 Рік тому +2

    I adore the way you pronounce the word “dry” 😌🎖️🥉

  • @Biscuit_42
    @Biscuit_42 Рік тому +1

    When the live chat stopped working, it was sad days for everyone

  • @dc8029
    @dc8029 Рік тому

    Very good job. Great analysis and fascinating new news as to how the Titanic sunk.

  • @andrewdoubtfire4700
    @andrewdoubtfire4700 Рік тому +3

    So, could the final flooding of the first compartment be responsible for the often reported “sudden lurch” the bow took after about an hour?

  • @teijaflink2226
    @teijaflink2226 Рік тому +1

    I'm so amazed by the Titanics design, pretty much the perfect ship, for it's time at time at least. Though you can never 100% account for everything. Even if she sank she was an incredible ship.

  • @HoosierDaddy_
    @HoosierDaddy_ Рік тому +1

    Was there a "Scotland Road" designed into the Olympic or the Britannic?

  • @ericlew9992
    @ericlew9992 Рік тому +5

    Since there is a 5 hour time difference between London and New York, how did/do ships crossing the Atlantic deal with that? Do they slowly change their clocks during the crossing? I'm really asking because the Titanic struck the berg at 11:40PM and sank at 2:20AM, but was that Eastern time, GMT? or something in the middle?

    • @HistoricTravels
      @HistoricTravels  Рік тому

      Eastern time is one hour behind titanic time. 11:40pm titanic time is 10:40pm eastern timr

    • @indylover2010
      @indylover2010 Рік тому +2

      When I was on a ship that sailed through timezones, we would get a notice slid under our cabindoor every night we passed a time zone, instructing us to change our watches by an hour (either ahead or back). I guess the clocks on the ship were then changed by the crew, so I'd imagine something similair happened on the Titanic.

    • @danielbishop1863
      @danielbishop1863 Рік тому +3

      Something in the middle, *approximately* 3 hours behind GMT.
      If you play the "Titanic: Honor and Glory" demo, you'll see signs that say "The clock will be set backward at midnight 49 minutes." The amount was not constant, but based on the estimated amount of longitude the ship would cover that day. (Keep in mind that standard time zones were a relatively new thing, and there were countries that kept solar time instead of offset-from-GMT time.)
      In modern times, ships making long voyages use simple whole-hour time adjustments.

    • @canuckprogressive.3435
      @canuckprogressive.3435 Рік тому

      @@danielbishop1863 Right. It was "ships time" not any standard time zone.

    • @JoshuaTootell
      @JoshuaTootell Рік тому

      Because ships are so slow, we would set them forward or back in the middle of the night as we reached various time zones.

  • @donbenson2099
    @donbenson2099 Рік тому +1

    The fore peak tank the same as the aft peak tank is a fresh water tank for the ships usage.

  • @sunsetmeadows5729
    @sunsetmeadows5729 Рік тому

    Great video, Sam 🙂 I didn't know about this happening so i learnt something new! I love your channel ❤

  • @mikehenson819
    @mikehenson819 Рік тому

    Sam I’ve watched most of your videos and have greatly enjoyed your insights . But being an old Navy guy, it’s clear to me that the Titanic’s “ water tight compartments” weren’t actually water tight. At least not in the sense of modern Naval vessels.
    In my world, water tight compartment bulkheads terminate with the deck directly above them, and that deck requires a watertight hatch . Therefore, the term watertight compartments could not have made the ship “ unsinkable” in any sense of the term, and I’m sure the designers knew it.

  • @Godzilla20191
    @Godzilla20191 19 днів тому

    1:03 I love floating sandbox

  • @wonjez3982
    @wonjez3982 Рік тому

    "He said thank you and headed back up to the boat deck." Little did he know at this point the rest of the ship would go down behind him very soon...

  • @speak_er_up
    @speak_er_up 2 місяці тому +1

    It just made me think. If the first compartment was only breached in the water tank compartment filled with water anyway and the damage in boiler room number 5 was very small in the coal bunker, was there any possibility they could prevent the Titanic from sinking if they managed to control the water in boiler room 5? Any thoughts?

  • @sabrinastratton1991
    @sabrinastratton1991 Рік тому

    Nice short video. Didnt know anything about this. Thanks

  • @tmbsports3720
    @tmbsports3720 Рік тому +1

    There’s still rumours that the first compartment was double enforced and had it hit head on it would’ve been fine

  • @simisback1869
    @simisback1869 Рік тому +1

    another AweSAM video :D

  • @shawnd567
    @shawnd567 3 місяці тому

    Man. Imagine if the first couple water tight compartments had bulkheads that were truly sealed. Perhaps even just number 1 could have potentially saved the ship or bought enough time for Carpathia to get there.

  • @michaelhill2844
    @michaelhill2844 Рік тому +1

    But, where did this "exhaust" pipe lead to? Outside? Or to the area above the Forepeak Tank? One would think that when the Forepeak Tank was full, then water would travel through this pipe after the air was all gone. Where would this water go?

  • @OnePandeh
    @OnePandeh Рік тому

    Fascinating that there’s still so much I haven’t learnt

  • @the_guys790.
    @the_guys790. 9 місяців тому

    Fun fact, how did the titanic split? When the titanic hit the iceberg, the hull splits open and continued cracking as the water floods the ship. The hull plates is what makes the titanic split when the ship hit the iceberg.

  • @morgan9146
    @morgan9146 Рік тому

    I was wondering historic Traveler, do you even try discussing 9/11 since that is a historic event? Btw, love your videos man!

    • @HistoricTravels
      @HistoricTravels  Рік тому +2

      I actually just made a survival story video from that day. It was about a man who was at the top of the south tower when the attacks began and he made it out alive. However when I uploaded it UA-cam blocked it. So that’s why you never saw that video.

  • @allen6310
    @allen6310 Рік тому

    I happened to notice your Revell RMS Titanic model box in the lower left of your video. My wife bought me that model probably 25 years ago and i haven’t assembled it yet. Is it built and on display in your videos?

  • @timmylozza4611
    @timmylozza4611 4 місяці тому

    Loving the videos Sam can u do the Estonia?? Cud it of been saved would love to know but like I say it's upto you

    • @timmylozza4611
      @timmylozza4611 4 місяці тому

      I'll tell ya what I'm like you brother did you know atlantis did not exist I'm 99% sure of this aswell would love to know your thoughts. Tim

  • @josteinlorentsen8239
    @josteinlorentsen8239 Рік тому

    Would closing the exhaust pipe have done any difference? keeping the tank from flooding? ang did they purge the remaining ballast tanks to gain more buoyancy?

  • @Voxac100b
    @Voxac100b 6 місяців тому

    We don't need all the hand movements! Pointing and hand number's. Good videos

  • @goldfing5898
    @goldfing5898 Рік тому

    3:46 What exactly is the "tank top deck"? I still don't completely understand your explanations, because the sketch from 2:50 does not show this name. Also, this sketch does not show the bulkheads which separated the compartments (these are shown in the other sketch at 0:25 with red lines).

  • @JeffreyBarkdull
    @JeffreyBarkdull Рік тому

    Can you explain how Ice got onto Titanic's Boat Deck at the Bow?

  • @merafirewing6591
    @merafirewing6591 Рік тому +1

    What if the board decided that Titanic needs to spend more time in drydock to have her watertight compartments and a slightly increased amount of lifeboats?

    • @joshuacheung6518
      @joshuacheung6518 Рік тому

      Then they might have missed the timing needed to hit the iceberg at all, as performance characteristics would be affected ever so slightly

  • @doctorrayvennevermore37
    @doctorrayvennevermore37 Рік тому +1

    Not trying to be a jerk, but your lego Titanic's anchor crane on the bow needs to be facing the other direction. It didn't face forward until the bow hit the sea bottom

  • @robertzollna7094
    @robertzollna7094 Рік тому

    I wonder if they closed the bleeding valve if the trapped air could have bought some time

  • @zeph0shade
    @zeph0shade Рік тому

    I wonder if the sinking could've been at least delayed a bit longer if at some point the doors had been re-opened... As in, perhaps it would've more evenly distributed the water along the length of the ship so it wouldn't have "leaned" so heavily to the point where the deck on one end was underwater before the other end.

  • @mrcheesecake-z4d
    @mrcheesecake-z4d 10 місяців тому

    i like ow he uses floating sandbox for afference

  • @cdybft9050
    @cdybft9050 Рік тому

    I wonder had they dropped and disconnected all the anchors and chains if that would have helped

  • @NellWatson
    @NellWatson Рік тому

    I wonder could the flooding of the 1st compartment be the cause of the sudden lurch around the point when the bridge was flooded?

    • @HistoricTravels
      @HistoricTravels  Рік тому +2

      no, it flooded long before then. The 1st compartment would of started flooding when the water in the 2nd compartment reached D deck.

  • @Voxac100b
    @Voxac100b Рік тому +2

    Bin the hand movements..we can count! Pointing eek..but a great video as always

  • @CarlKem
    @CarlKem 5 місяців тому

    Just a thought here- I have heard is how the Titanic would have fared better if she hit the iceberg head on. Would it? That would have destroyed the decks discussed in this video, but I have wondered if the iceberg could have ripped the hull open underneath the vessel. In such a case, how much of the forepeak and forecastle would have been destroyed as the initial impact would have acted as a brake (of a sorts). So would it have sank, or...?

  • @jeanineseah2694
    @jeanineseah2694 2 місяці тому

    8:11, me: wait lightoller opened the d-deck gangway doors
    Thanks Sam for letting me know

  • @PizzerGames
    @PizzerGames Рік тому

    He Used Floating Sandbox again :D

  • @AvatarVader
    @AvatarVader Рік тому

    I do have a question, did ships of this age not have a Bilge Pump? Obviously it wouldnt do MUCH to stop the Titanic from sinking with all 6 (?) compartments from being filled, couldnt it have helped?

    • @Potato_power12
      @Potato_power12 Рік тому

      the titanic did have bilge pump but they wernt on for conserving power for other vessels to see the titanic,some of them probably were on in the middle/electrical room.

  • @Infinite.Worldz
    @Infinite.Worldz Рік тому

    I always wondered what would have happened if she sank during the day.

  • @narsimhamurthy1014
    @narsimhamurthy1014 Рік тому

    Right side of the ship damaged and water rushed into the inside. If they could have make a big holes on the left side of the ship water would have flown outside. The ship will not sink in 2 hours. Correct me if I am wrong

  • @GrahamWalters
    @GrahamWalters Рік тому

    The only problem with this "witness account" is that the crews quarters were in the stern of the ship on decks D,E and F, about as far away from the peak tank as you can get.

  • @nigelparker5886
    @nigelparker5886 Рік тому

    Why were the watertight compartments left open at the top then? Had they have been closed, would they not have fully flooded and the hip not sunk? If not, why not? Anyone? Cheers

  • @InanimateOdyssey32
    @InanimateOdyssey32 Рік тому

    yo historic travels! Can u make a video if titanic was able to get towed to land while it was sinking?

  • @emoji1o799
    @emoji1o799 Рік тому

    Can you do a video on the SS Naronic

  • @stoneostrich129
    @stoneostrich129 Рік тому

    Hey Sam, have you read Titanic: End of a Dream by Wyn Craig Wade?

  • @mithramusic5909
    @mithramusic5909 Рік тому

    And this is why I never understand why double hulls and more vertically-divided compartments still aren't a given, even to this very day.

  • @ggoddkkiller1342
    @ggoddkkiller1342 Рік тому

    How exactly water can overflow from a water tight compartment? Then those compartments weren't water tight at all..

  • @Av-vd3wk
    @Av-vd3wk Рік тому +1

    Is the big titanic behind you the Lego Titanic?

  • @randomrazr
    @randomrazr Рік тому

    if the bottom part of compartment 1 wasnt penetrated (no pun intended) , coudl titanic stay afloat?

  • @BrylanHillman-mh2ek
    @BrylanHillman-mh2ek Рік тому

    Titanic!!

  • @TheDeputy173
    @TheDeputy173 Рік тому

    Now I'm confused, so if only 4 compartments were breached, then why did she sink? She could only sink with 5 compartments flooded, right?

    • @DiscoTimelordASD
      @DiscoTimelordASD Рік тому

      Maybe the ship was unbalanced and the waves that night unhelpful?

    • @thefitzthewitz
      @thefitzthewitz Рік тому +1

      The forward coal bunker in boiler room 5, just aft of the watertight bulkhead separating the rapidly flooding boiler room 6 from boiler room 5, was also breached, but only by a little bit. The men in boiler room 5 closed the coal bunker door which contained the flooding to this coal bunker for about an hour and a half before the door, which was not watertight, finally gave way under the building water pressure in the flooded coal bunker. With boiler room 5 now fully open to the sea, Titanic's bow would continue to slowly dip below the surface, causing the water level to overtop the watertight bulkheads between the first and second compartments and the fifth and sixth compartments. From that point, there was no stopping the ship from sinking.

  • @alexrompen805
    @alexrompen805 Рік тому

    Its likely that anyone survived the Titanic at all, by the fluke chance that ONLY the tank was punctured. If the first watertight bulkhead itself was punctured and filled, the sinking of the Titanic would have been exponentially faster.

  • @keith800
    @keith800 Рік тому

    So if this first compartment had not flooded the Titanic may have still have stayed afloat.

  • @HistoricExplorer
    @HistoricExplorer Рік тому

    And I thought I knew history well😂

  • @RMSOlympicnerd
    @RMSOlympicnerd Місяць тому

    Wait so if that coal bunker in boiler room 5 titanic wouldn't of sunk

  • @gamerboi101
    @gamerboi101 Рік тому

    Just remember even tho the titanic sunk
    At least the pool is still full 😅

  • @MeaHeaR
    @MeaHeaR Рік тому

    the fourfeet tank waz good fore safetey be

  • @tymiller9714
    @tymiller9714 Рік тому

    Im a deckhand on a barge and thats real shit, for example our water tanks have special "vent" to puush all the air and more importantly pudhs watter out

  • @James.G.Ireland
    @James.G.Ireland Рік тому

    Hkw does anyone know if it flooded or not

  • @williamlouie569
    @williamlouie569 Рік тому

    Could not claim to be water tight when the ship sunk because it failed.

  • @jeniferengelage8181
    @jeniferengelage8181 Рік тому

    Have you ever heard the theory about Titanic being the Olympic?

  • @frankanddanasnyder3272
    @frankanddanasnyder3272 Рік тому

    Your twang accent shines through...

  • @damonmeriweather8026
    @damonmeriweather8026 Рік тому

    On your olympic complete story you isn't gonna use the picture of titanic also I subbed

  • @SteveMrW
    @SteveMrW Рік тому +1

    Does it really matter?……….It sank.

  • @sebastjansslavitis3898
    @sebastjansslavitis3898 Рік тому

    if only he had closed that hissing exhaust pipe

  • @joelbranscum6001
    @joelbranscum6001 Рік тому

    They didn't build it to blueprints the blueprints were unsinkable then they half assed it like everything when contractors and material suppliers and businessmen suck the budget dry.

    • @dovetonsturdee7033
      @dovetonsturdee7033 Рік тому

      No. The ships were built according to Alexander Carlisle's original design.

  • @Danger_N00dle
    @Danger_N00dle Рік тому +95

    This has been my hypothesis for years actually. I used to toy around in the game "Sinking Simulator" and the best way to recreate the sinking of the Titanic involve not flooding the first compartment as it would help keep the bow buoyant long enough

    • @jeroenboth167
      @jeroenboth167 Рік тому +14

      Now you have given me an idea about what I might play again thanks

    • @koubenakombi3066
      @koubenakombi3066 Рік тому

      It was never Titanic... it was Olympic - Titanic twin ship - it had suffered damages while Titanic was being built... they simply changed their plates and sunk the damaged Olympic. It was the fist big fraud scam of the century, by JP Morgan.

    • @trentonking8054
      @trentonking8054 Рік тому

      ​@@koubenakombi3066??

    • @jessicahurlburt8487
      @jessicahurlburt8487 2 місяці тому

      Where to get

  • @PeterChadwell-bz5xn
    @PeterChadwell-bz5xn Рік тому +243

    I like how he uses survivor testimony to support his claims because there is a lot of evidence in those claims and that’s what I like about his videos

    • @macsteed01
      @macsteed01 Рік тому +16

      He did better than James Cameron who slandered William Murdoch. Take a look at actor and picture of Murdoch. Besides he was too busy that night

    • @jonilougy6608
      @jonilougy6608 Рік тому +1

      @@macsteed01 I completely agree with your excellent point 👍

    • @koubenakombi3066
      @koubenakombi3066 Рік тому

      It was never Titanic... it was Olympic - Titanic twin ship - it had suffered damages while Titanic was being built... they simply changed their plates and sunk the damaged Olympic. It was the fist big fraud scam of the century, by JP Morgan.

    • @lanthanumlanthanium6373
      @lanthanumlanthanium6373 Рік тому +1

      John Jacob Astor, Benjamin Guggenheim and Isador Strauss. The fact that youtube has a context segment on this video, shows something fishy(pun intended) happened with the Titanic, follow the money and power.

    • @lacosanostra6032
      @lacosanostra6032 Рік тому

      It’s dry my ride

  • @siphillis
    @siphillis Рік тому +156

    You’ll note how in the 1997 film, Andrews warns that five compartments were flooded, even though six were breached. A nice attention to detail.

    • @finsfan90
      @finsfan90 Рік тому +14

      Incorrect. He said that because they didnt realize at the time that 6 were breached. They knew about the first 5.. but the 6th one wasnt known about until later on.

    • @darrenstuart3907
      @darrenstuart3907 Рік тому +9

      I think that was maybe more because although BR5 was breached, it wasn't flooding, the coal bunker doors along with the pumps were containing it.

    • @wahoo236
      @wahoo236 Рік тому +16

      I think the dialogue was: “ in the fore peak, all three holds, and in boiler room six”
      That’s five compartments .

    • @Deleted11100
      @Deleted11100 Рік тому +1

      Yeh, like the first reply said, they weren’t aware that 6 were breached

    • @valrond
      @valrond Рік тому +7

      @@wahoo236 You know, this thing has been bugging me. I wasn't sure, cause I've seen the movie more times in Spanish than English. I had to check. In English he only says boiler room six, but in Spanish they dubbed it as "las tres primeras bodegas y las salas de calderas 6 y 5 están inundadas" (the first three holds and boiler rooms 6 and 5 are under water).
      They didn't even properly translate the movie. Arg.

  • @TheSavagederek
    @TheSavagederek Рік тому +44

    I'm no engineer , but I'd imagine compartment 1 or that general area of the ship would be the strongest part given its shape and general strength.

    • @Cirux321
      @Cirux321 Рік тому +7

      Typically, yes. Even in Titanics era, ships was built with "Collision bulkheads" in the bows in the event of ships colliding with each other (or even piers). Also with most ships designs, the actual frames are closer together as the angle narrows at the bow (and stern depending on design and steering gear weight). So yes, the bow was in most cases, the strongest part of the ship structurally.

    • @ryans413
      @ryans413 10 місяців тому

      Actually it’s the weakest. Any part of the ships haul that starts to curve was weaker steal. The midship where all the steel was straight flat peace’s was the strongest.

    • @Tylerz_theman
      @Tylerz_theman 7 місяців тому

      Coo.

    • @Tempusverum
      @Tempusverum 3 місяці тому

      @@ryans413
      ☝️🤓”Ackshually”
      Nope. Wrong.

    • @ryans413
      @ryans413 3 місяці тому

      @@Tempusverumto bend steel it’s heated up and any bends makes it weaker a straight peace of steel is stronger then steel that’s been curved.

  • @darrenstuart3907
    @darrenstuart3907 Рік тому +18

    The problem with the first compartment is that its so small volumetrically (short and comes to a point at the prow) that it doesn't make much difference whether its flooded or not. The issue was the larger compartments like the 3rd hold and BR6. That's what it came down to in the end, if BR6 was intact the ship would either not have sank at all or sank much more slowly, we are talking about mere seconds, maybe even less than a second of contact with the iceberg making the difference between the ship sinking or not.

  • @leonamuwu904
    @leonamuwu904 Рік тому +18

    I noticed this happening in sinking simulator, whilst trying to sink the Titanic accurately
    I thought it was just a mistake in the ships image file, but now I know otherwise
    thanks Sam

    • @macflod
      @macflod Рік тому +1

      What simulator is that?

    • @leo12061
      @leo12061 7 місяців тому

      @@macflodSinking Simulator on Steam, it’s 75p

  • @ChairmanPaulieD
    @ChairmanPaulieD Рік тому +20

    Great job Sam 👏🏽👍🏽 I have always wondered about the areas of the iceberg damage below the waterline of the hull. It makes complete sense that the damage in the compartment #1 wouldn't have flooded as fast like it did for in Boiler Room #6, crewman's passage, the mailroom and Cargo Hold of compartment #2 bc those steel plates were breached MUCH WORSE. Didn't the breached steel plates in Boiler Room #6 was about 45 ft long ?

    • @jonilougy6608
      @jonilougy6608 Рік тому +2

      Excellent observation, friend. ✌️

    • @andrewlucia865
      @andrewlucia865 Рік тому +5

      The damage to boiler room 6 might not have been quite THAT bad immediately after the collision, though it was still quite bad anyways. One thing that's important to remember is that for all the bow section is remarkably intact, it still slammed down quite hard when it reached the seafloor, with the section in front of the bridge sloping downwards into the sand while the rest of it lays flat on the sand.
      While I don't doubt that the damage to the side plating in boiler room 6 was still quite bad, I don't know if it was actually the same hole currently found on the wreck. With how hard the bow slammed down, it's possible that the damage to that area was made worse than it was immediately after the collision.

    • @ChairmanPaulieD
      @ChairmanPaulieD Рік тому

      @@andrewlucia865 well the breached steel plates below the waterline for Boiler Room #6 def had the MOST amount of water splurging in as you probably remember in the 97' JC movie that ALL the stokers, grease trimmers, just everyone was rushing through that watertight door and that one guy almost got his ankle caught. As I remember reading in Walter Lord's book that one of the crewmen at the stern section got his ankle caught in the watertight door and was stuck there for a long time till someone came and found him to raise the bulkhead door. I couldn't even imagine if I was that guy trapped under a bulkhead steel door 🤪😖

  • @sockjim9016
    @sockjim9016 Рік тому +19

    I came into this video thinking “hey, that can’t be right, I read some testimony from a crewman who heard a hissing sound near the front of the ship which would indicate flooding in that area” and what do you know, that same testimony is actually why the video *is* right 😂

  • @ExAnimoPortugal
    @ExAnimoPortugal Рік тому +8

    Titanic wasn't badly made. She fought against nature and always did her best until the end.

  • @adubbya1776
    @adubbya1776 Рік тому +17

    Amazing to think that compartment one staying buoyant perhaps helped the entire ship stay buoyant long enough to launch the vast majority of life boats thus saving many lives.

    • @teijaflink2226
      @teijaflink2226 Рік тому +1

      I seen people say a fire earlier that day was part of the slow sinking too, because the goal was moved to the other side of the ship and that stabilises it.

    • @tylere.8436
      @tylere.8436 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@teijaflink2226 Oh yes, the fire in the coal put more weight on the port side, so flooding on the starboard side slight leveled the ship early in the sinking. However, once the water reached the 1st compartment, Scotland road, and the open port side gangway door, it listed a lot to port.

  • @andrewts2067
    @andrewts2067 Рік тому +9

    Another great video Sam! Big fan of your work

  • @rileybridgham1963
    @rileybridgham1963 Рік тому +8

    I love your videos Sam, keep up the amazing Titanic content and I heard that they're going down to retrieve the marconi system from the Titanic wreck next year, I'm excited that they're finally doing it.

  • @82AIRBORNE82
    @82AIRBORNE82 Рік тому +3

    Hi Sam, can you making Lusitania story about Ian Holbourn & Avis Dolphin

  • @Titanic_person-1912
    @Titanic_person-1912 Рік тому +6

    At first I thought the first 5 water tight compartments were breached because of a huge gash then I heard the 6 compartments flooded and now I hear the small gashes were made instead

    • @koubenakombi3066
      @koubenakombi3066 Рік тому

      It was never Titanic... it was Olympic - Titanic twin ship - it had suffered damages while Titanic was being built... they simply changed their plates and sunk the damaged Olympic. It was the fist big fraud scam of the century, by JP Morgan.

  • @LucasMorar-h5m
    @LucasMorar-h5m Рік тому +8

    there is never a bad video from historic travels keep making great video sam

  • @thunderrobots1980s
    @thunderrobots1980s Рік тому +5

    ok now you got me wondering if draining or shifting the balance tanks, could have saved the ship or gave the ship a longer time afloat, do to the damage being raised out of the water and air being put in the tanks

    • @TheWPhilosopher
      @TheWPhilosopher Рік тому +1

      I think @HistoricTravels should do a vid on this as I may be wrong but I think fiddling with the ballast tanks at sea especially shifting would be difficult.

    • @joshuacheung6518
      @joshuacheung6518 Рік тому +1

      I don't really see how it would *help* actually.
      I could be mistanken, but since the forward ballast tank was breached, empting the other ballast tanks just raises the stern, which dips the bow deeper into the water and accelerates flooding.
      That said, I'm not a SME...

  • @merediths2cents
    @merediths2cents Рік тому +2

    Would you please cover the Edmund Fitzgerald?

  • @armyguy918
    @armyguy918 Рік тому +2

    Sam is it possible that there were some places in the Titanic that were still watertight and held air when she finally went down and hit bottom.