After the video was uploaded to UA-cam, there is a few audio errors spread throughout, I'm not certain if everyone will hear them or not. Sorry if you do, they aren't major though, so I can live with them being there. Conspiracy theories are a somewhat hot topic in discussion, so do try to remain calm and logical in any potential opinion you may post.
Central, I agree with you. The Lusitania Conspiracy, like the Kennedy Conspiracy will never be proven. Some of the theorists are just reaching at stuff.
very good video, as usual. Filled with Information, and straight to the point. I remember reading a book from my local library as a child (this was probably 15 years ago or something like that), where they discussed the depth charge theory, the ammunition explosion theory and the coal dust theory. The depth charge thing was claimed as fact, in a "we know" kind of way. This wasnt the case with the 2 secondary explosion theories, though they did say that the ammunition explosion theory was less likely than the coal dust theory. They also used the exact same picture of the torpedo impact location as Dr Ballard did. I believed them right up until this video (though to be fair I completely forgot about this as well).
To be quite honest, most articles I read online talk about the depth charge theory as 'we know.' It's really weird as there is never any proof given, just circumstances that heavily vary. Thanks for watching
Conspiracies at Sea by J. Kent Layton goes into the issue of the 2nd explosion examining torpedo location possibilities and possible causes in depth. If you haven't read it I do recommend it.
Great video, mate. Put that way, a boiler explosion looks far more plausible than all the other "reasons" given. It could even be a combination of both a coal dust cloud being set off by particle friction after the impact into a low-yield explosion and cold water hitting the boiler system. It's very interesting how much dust becomes airborne when you watch a ship being hit (or anything else, at that), so a flash explosion in the coal bunker compounding the damage done to the hull by the torpedo and the boilers wouldn't be too far fetched. But that's just my take on another possible scenario, working on what you presented. Cheers.
Well done!! A while back I read an excellent book (Night Probe) written by Clive Cussler. Much of the book was about the Empress of Ireland, starting with the horrible night she sank and a (fictional) conspiracy that almost led to a shooting war between Canada and the US. I imagine you have a full time job and this channel is a side gig, therefore your time is short, but the Empress and Andrea Doria sank in nearly identical situations (a possible new topic-just an idea).
Yes, I do hold a full time job with this being a side thing. I am experienced with Empress, not so much Andrea. I'll keep them both in mind for future topics though. Thank you
So is it correct that the secondary explosion idea is based on what survivors heard but did not see? Cause I'm sure there are a lot of loud noises as a torpedoed ship sinks. Big things--like boiler parts, funnels, bulkhead sections, etc.--start moving in ways that were never intended.
@@chrislondo2683 This is the closest video to that subject I have available. I did make 2 other videos regarding the ship's loss that were taken down by a couple copyright claims that detailed the torpedo damage and second explosion. I will not be touching the topic again to avoid the claimant.
The definition I'm working with is "ammunition includes shells, powder, fuses, and bullets, and the munition includes everything such as guns, revolvers, rifles, special arms, bombs, and missiles." Based of that, I'm using the proper term. The ship had 4,200 cases of rifle rounds and 1,200 fuses and shell casings. True, explosions travel in the path of least resistance, which I also provide in the video when I go over the cargo hatch and coal shute doors. These are clearly paths of least resistance in comparison to a sealed bulkhead and boiler system. I understand I didn't outright say that, but it's clearly implied.
After the video was uploaded to UA-cam, there is a few audio errors spread throughout, I'm not certain if everyone will hear them or not. Sorry if you do, they aren't major though, so I can live with them being there.
Conspiracy theories are a somewhat hot topic in discussion, so do try to remain calm and logical in any potential opinion you may post.
The information is utmost important for me, and not the audio issues.
Take care, and all the best.
I really didn't notice any standout audio problems. But I'm just a casual listener with a cheap set of bluetooth headphones. 😊
Central, I agree with you. The Lusitania Conspiracy, like the Kennedy Conspiracy will never be proven. Some of the theorists are just reaching at stuff.
very good video, as usual. Filled with Information, and straight to the point.
I remember reading a book from my local library as a child (this was probably 15 years ago or something like that), where they discussed the depth charge theory, the ammunition explosion theory and the coal dust theory. The depth charge thing was claimed as fact, in a "we know" kind of way. This wasnt the case with the 2 secondary explosion theories, though they did say that the ammunition explosion theory was less likely than the coal dust theory. They also used the exact same picture of the torpedo impact location as Dr Ballard did. I believed them right up until this video (though to be fair I completely forgot about this as well).
To be quite honest, most articles I read online talk about the depth charge theory as 'we know.' It's really weird as there is never any proof given, just circumstances that heavily vary.
Thanks for watching
Good stuff. Keep it up
Good insights.
Conspiracies at Sea by J. Kent Layton goes into the issue of the 2nd explosion examining torpedo location possibilities and possible causes in depth. If you haven't read it I do recommend it.
Great video, mate.
Put that way, a boiler explosion looks far more plausible than all the other "reasons" given. It could even be a combination of both a coal dust cloud being set off by particle friction after the impact into a low-yield explosion and cold water hitting the boiler system. It's very interesting how much dust becomes airborne when you watch a ship being hit (or anything else, at that), so a flash explosion in the coal bunker compounding the damage done to the hull by the torpedo and the boilers wouldn't be too far fetched.
But that's just my take on another possible scenario, working on what you presented.
Cheers.
The very best theorie is,the beastly germans had a bunch of trained sharks attaching explosives to lusitanias hull !!
Well done!! A while back I read an excellent book (Night Probe) written by Clive Cussler. Much of the book was about the Empress of Ireland, starting with the horrible night she sank and a (fictional) conspiracy that almost led to a shooting war between Canada and the US. I imagine you have a full time job and this channel is a side gig, therefore your time is short, but the Empress and Andrea Doria sank in nearly identical situations (a possible new topic-just an idea).
Yes, I do hold a full time job with this being a side thing. I am experienced with Empress, not so much Andrea. I'll keep them both in mind for future topics though. Thank you
Great video keep up the greag work my man
Very nice research and presentation!
How interesting, never thought that sinking conspiracies existed
same at first
These are always great, sad this is mired in controversy, and the tragedy itself.
Take care, and all the best.
some of the ship should of been recovered so we can set our minds to that day
Have a great Christmas, take care, and all the best!
Same to you kind sir!
Awesome video, I knew it was going to be good before I even watched it! What’s next in the Lusitania wreck series?
The condition of the wreck since the 2 part already available cover the necessary events to explain lusitania's condition
So is it correct that the secondary explosion idea is based on what survivors heard but did not see? Cause I'm sure there are a lot of loud noises as a torpedoed ship sinks. Big things--like boiler parts, funnels, bulkhead sections, etc.--start moving in ways that were never intended.
It is a scenario where people both heard and saw it
What happened to your video on the coal bunker explosion?
@@chrislondo2683 This is the closest video to that subject I have available. I did make 2 other videos regarding the ship's loss that were taken down by a couple copyright claims that detailed the torpedo damage and second explosion. I will not be touching the topic again to avoid the claimant.
An excellent, well explained and analyzed video, well worthy of an upvote.
Munitions, not ammunition. Gun cotton is not loaded ammunition. Explosions travel in the direction of least resistance
The definition I'm working with is "ammunition includes shells, powder, fuses, and bullets, and the munition includes everything such as guns, revolvers, rifles, special arms, bombs, and missiles." Based of that, I'm using the proper term. The ship had 4,200 cases of rifle rounds and 1,200 fuses and shell casings.
True, explosions travel in the path of least resistance, which I also provide in the video when I go over the cargo hatch and coal shute doors. These are clearly paths of least resistance in comparison to a sealed bulkhead and boiler system. I understand I didn't outright say that, but it's clearly implied.
@@centralcrossing4732 munitions is the more appropriate term. Not earthshattering, but for future reference.
@@bobkohl6779 It results in the same message, also not earth shattering. I'll carry on as I wish, but thanks for the input.
Hi
stop taking commissions. it ruins your credibility
What commissions and what credibility?