The Titanic's Hidden Weakness | Disaster Documentary
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ต.ค. 2024
- With new evidence as to why the ‘unsinkable’ Titanic sank, uncover the real truth behind the biggest maritime disaster of our time. Discover the untold story of the Titanic's demise and the lessons learned to prevent future tragedies.
Subscribe to WONDER to watch more documentaries: / wonderdocs
Follow us on Facebook: / thewonderchannel
WONDER is packed with binge worthy reality documentaries for hours of entertainment. Check out our hub of diverse and empowering stories which explore the extreme side of life!
#wonder #documentary #titanic
"from the very day that she was designed she was almost doomed"? Except there were two other identical sister ships, one was sunk by a sea mine during WW1, the other was scrapped after a long career. Hardly doomed from their conception, especially since the Olympic was older than Titanic by at least a year and had no issues until she was scrapped.
Yes. Just another asinine quotable made for generating interest in the crapumentary.
In a way she was. The Titanic's troubles begin with her very name; Titanic is the adjective for Titan, and the Titans in Greek mythology were a race who waged war against Zeus, the so-called "god of gods." This is the part of the story that seems familiar to quite a few. The part that seems unknown to most, shipowners at the time included, is that - guess what - the Titans lost. So, the Titanic was eventually defeated by her very name, as it were - and during her maiden voyage, at that .
Exactly, I was thinking the same thing. "Doomed from the beginning", what a load of rubbish!
End of the day an arrogant captain ignored Information and advice, that's the real and ultimate demise.
EXACTLY.
Ismay is often portrayed as a greedy coward but there are accounts of him helping women and children into the lifeboats and only boarding one when the deck was cleared and the not full lifeboat was being lowered. There was no reason not to get in at that point and spent his entire fortune after taking care of the families of as many lost employees as he was able, he died a broken man.
Indeed! Well said.
Ismay was a good man his story gets sadder the more you learn about it
Doesn't cut it I'm afraid. It was he who requested the structural modifications which ultimately doomed the ship. If the captain was to go down with the ship, Ismay should've done so as well. He actually went on to have a more than cushty life with residences both in England and Ireland. The property in Ireland even came with its own private fishing rights ONLY for Ismay. He spent the rest of his days fishing and doing whatever he wanted. Luxuries well in excess of 1,500 didn't live to enjoy.
The titanic build quality was very good for the time and although she sank, she fought to the very end and even snap her back in half trying to stay afloat. The greatest disaster was the USS Californian not waking up the wireless operator after seeing the distress rockets and a ship on the horizon which wasn't moving. The titanic crew should be commended for their bravery and dedication.
The problem with the Californian is that they didn't knew what was happening with the ship, even further from their perspective what they saw was perfectly normal for anyone who sailed those waters at the time. To make the long story short:
For a rocket barrage of any kind to be considered an "distress signal" it had to be launched by a 5 minutes interval between each rocket. Otherwise it would be accepted as "company signals" since most ships didn't had Marconi communication onboard and they used this rocket system to communicate with other vessels far in the distance. The crew of the Titanic fired the rocket at an interval of about 12 to 15 minutes.
During the night the Californian notified to the Titanic that they were forced to stop due to a wall of ice in front of them. By the time they saw the Titanic sitting cold far away, they assumed the ship did the same for the night, and with the rockets the crew thought they were sending signals to other ships around who might not have communication equipment aside from Morse lamps, again a standard practice of the time.
As for those Morse lamps, the Californian did sent many signals to Titanic but they never got a reply.
Finally, due to the cold mirage in the horizon, the very same one that cloaked the iceberg for the Titanic, it was impossible to see the ship with clarity from Californian's perspective, the light was very distorted so much in fact that the light signals sent back and fort between the Californian and Titanic never reached their destinations. Titanic never knew the Californian was sending Morse code thru the lamp at the bridge, nor the Californian knew the Titanic was doing the same to them.
Maybe as a final point: The Californian stopped and vented most of its steam if not turned down its boilers, so there is a possibility that even if they wanted to go for a rescue, it would require them an hour or so just to have enough steam for movement, then maybe 30 or more minutes to navigate the wall of ice around them (with the danger of a catastrophic collision) and ONLY THEN steam towards the sinking ship. For the record, during the early lights of the morning when the Marconi operator at the Californian returned to his station and notified the captain that the Titanic had sunk, it took the Californian more than an hour and half in open daylight to restart the boilers and navigate the ice in order to reach the Titanic's last position. Of course this last part, the Marconi operator, is the only real BLAME we can put over the captain's shoulders, he should have asked for the operator to be waken up, but then again, from the crew's perspective in the bridge, the Titanic was just a ship sending company rockets into the sky, dead in the water due to the wall of ice (as them), therefore from their perspective there was no indication of a disaster happening over there in the distance.
I know this is one hell of a wall of text, in a "long story short" arc, but still I hope it served you well.
No it wasn't. The build quality sucked did you not watch the video? 🙄 Idio t
Esotericcelt, I don’t know where you got the idea that the Californian was titled the USS Californian, she was the ss Californian, a British leyland line steam ship.
I understand that the color of the rockets were the wrong color, and signal something other than RESCUE US!!!
The ss californian was actually 19 nautical miles away from the distress signal given my the titanic (which was actually wrong) she wouldn't have made it in time to save anyone as she was approximately 3hrs away as well. There were closer ships like the Samson, mount temple, parisian were all closer,
As a Titanic researcher I can tell you that Titanic didn't have design flaws. She was built by one of the world's top shipyards in that day, and what probably doomed her were two things: Since being docked at Southampton Titanic had an ongoing coal fire in one of the coal cribs on the forward starboard side. At the time of her sailing, the fire was still going, although contained. This would have weakended the steel of the hull plates on the forward starboard side. Because she hit the ice berg at that spot, a collision that she normally would have survived doomed the ship because hull rivets were blown out that connect the overlaping hull plates, thus letting in thousands of tons of water. The second thing that doomed Titanic was the ridiculous speed she was going at through a known ice field. Captain Smith was probably pressured by White Star LIne head Bruce Ismay to go fast because Ismay was under the delusion that Titanic could beat RMS Mauretania's crossing speed. The three Olympic class liners were not designed for speed, just consistent sailing for her wealthy passengers to enjoy. Mauretania and her sister Lusitania were build for speed and were about a hundred feet shorter than Titanic. For a captain with a lifetime of experience, Smith should have automatically known to go slow and easy through that ice field.
The stoker survivors who later testified said that the fire had been dealt with around 24 hours before the collision, and damaged nothing more than the paintwork inside the affected bunker. The bunker itself, by the way, was not part of the bulkhead system.
The fire, by the way, was well aft of the iceberg impact point.
Five of Titanic's boilers were never connected, and the idea that Ismay, or anyone else, thought that Titanic could beat the record of the ( four to five knots faster, turbine driven ) Mauretania is simply absurd.
Despite opening up six watertight bulkheads, Titanic took a couple hours or so to go down. Lusitania, built to Admiralty specifications, sunk in fifteen minutes.
For a real hoot check out the British R-100 vs. R-101 competition. Why the goobs even initiated the whole thing. So the R-100 was to be commercial and the R-101 goobs.
Spoiler alert.
The ending could not be more symbolic. The R-100 on time, on budget and passed it's transatlantic round trip to Canada, with passengers, with flying colors.
The R-101 well past schedule, well over budget. You're not going to believe the level of symbolism here folks. The R-101 on it's maiden passenger flight to India made it across the channel and within a few minutes CRASHED AND BURNED!!!!!!!! LITERALLY!!!!!! IN COASTAL FRANCE FER CRYIN' OUT LOUD!!!
Now those in the know will say it crashed in a thunderstorm something it was highly vulnerable to. That is true but see the R-101 having had their faced shoved in it by the R-100 and being far past schedule and overbudget was under severe pressure by the political leadership to make it happen. Well they made something happen.
FYI both Barnes Wallis (I love that guy. Britain's version of the Mad Scientist) and Neville Shute worked on the R-100.
The much more modern Costa Concordia also sank in less time. That proves the design of the Titanic was not so bad as some people say, considering the time she was built, when a lot of things that are common knowledge in engineering now, were unknown.
@@chezsnailez Titanic did not develop a list, so all lifeboats could be launched. It has been suggested that if there had been forty lifeboats, rather than twenty, there would not have been sufficient time to launch all forty, however, if there had been onboard lifeboats, these could have been unlashed and would probably have floated free. There were no rafts. The designers thought them old fashioned and dangerous, since they had to be thrown into the water after which the passengers would have to climb down rope ladders.
@@jmrodas9
Although according to this documentary there were a few issues with subpar rivets in the forward compartment, I believe that it was clearly human error and pure bad luck that caused the sinking over any single design flaw.
Watch the documentary on Tubi and you’ll think more differently about why she sank.
What struck me the most about this tragedy is how much it mirrored the most serious airline crashes. What I learned is that it is RARELY as the result of just ONE issue, but a terrible confluence of negative coincidences that add up to one, terrible disaster. I must have counted at least 20 such incidences that ultimately ended in this catastrophe.
There is a thing in airline safety that recognises these cumulative events . I'm not sure what the name is but they use it in the airline industry to mitigate disasters .
I wish I could recall what the strategy is called .
@@lifesahobby
Yes, it's called "travel insurance."
This story will captivate many generations of people. Many coincidental occurrences plus unfortunate decisions and human hubris make this tragedy so eternally interesting AND pertinent.
How old is this documentary? The design and materials were impressive, having survived over 100 years in saltwater. The first ship of the same design was the Olympic. Titanic should have had taller watertight compartments.
All should be water tight, if u really want floatation
I first remember buying this documentary around 2010; as far as why the bulkheads were not taller, they designed the Titanic from the most EXPENSIVE hotels at the time. They didn’t want people to believe they were on a ship, except a high end hotel. Naturally, that illusion was gone after this incident and they literally rebuilt the Olympic and Britanic from the flaws of the Titanic. Taller bulkheads and double skin around the waterline. Ocean Liner Designs explored this evolution of Ships quite thoroughly and a channel I would heavily recommend.
What is called the "titanic" is in reality the "olympic", ol EJ Smith carried out his jesuit handlers plans, olympic was damaged badly from previous crashes and no longer insurable, white star line would take a complete loss on that ship so they changed her name over to an insured ships name and sunk her deep so they would for sure collect on the insurance, for one they should have hit the ice berg head on, the ship likely would have not sunk but they went full speed through an ice field, that's like you driving in the snow and ice with your foot all the way down on the go pedal, of course you will hit something, and EJ always intended to hit a berg, he was ordered to do so.
They said the titanic sank 96 years ago, so simple maths would mean this doco was made in 2008. In other words 16 years ago.
@@darrellhicks360 What?! Titanic had the same design as Olympic. 100% the same. Except for the lux.
RMS Olympic was built with the same materials, but because it wasn't driven so as to keep crashing into stuff, it sailed on until 1935 (24 years)..
In other words, Titanic had no 'hidden weakness' but was simply the victim of a circumstance far beyong anything which could have been predicted, or for which she had been designed.
there was a rumour that the 2 ships had been swapped...so that the titanic that sunk was really the olympic...while the titanic continued to operate as the olympic until 1935...
@@libbychang413 No there wasn't. There was, however, a book written by an amateur historian and professional plasterer, one Robin Gardiner, called 'Titanic - The Ship That Never Sank,' in the late 1990s, which made the claim that Titanic and her sister Olympic had been secretly switched after Olympic had been crippled beyond repair following a collision with a Royal Navy cruiser in the Solent in September, 1911.
Mr Gardiner had an inspired method of proving this, in that he ignored the vast quantity of contemporary evidence which disproved the idea, choosing instead to invent his own supporting evidence.
The late Mr. Gardiner has latterly acquired a host of disciples, who have since invented all sorts of further nonsense involving wealthy American financiers, in particular one J. P. Morgan, the US Financial Reserve, planted explosives, imaginary rescue ships, porthole patterns on the two ships, secret U-boats, and vast and evil cunning plans orchestrated by 'them.'
These conspiracy fantasists view the issue simply as a matter of faith. Sadly, facts and proof mean precisely nothing to them. A bit like a mate of mine who, though in most things totally rational, is absolutely certain that there is a Plesiosaur inhabiting Loch Ness.
@@libbychang413this would have been confirmed after the sinking if it was true and not remained a rumour
@@7577ia they would still deny
and not menton it at all
Oh the wonders of hindsight! The materials were probably the best of their day as was the knowledge of the effects of the cold on sheet iron. And it not the worse maratime disaster, but probably the most well known.
The binoculars was not the issue. There was a small thermal inversion, just above the water. The night was clear and cold, calm, no wind, however, the water while colder than the Gulf Stream, was still warmer than the ambient air. If the water would have been from the Gulf Stream, it would have generated fog. But like it was, the temperature difference between the water and the air, created a small thermal layer, the air just above the ocean, was warmer than the main air mass. This creates a thermal layer light refraction, which lifts the horizon, because you can't see through the thermal layer. It acts like a mirror. Thus the part of the Iceberg where you would expect breakers, could not be seen at a distance. The Iceberg seemed to come out of nowhere once this effect vanished at a closer distance. The rest is history.
Exactly, the word you're looking for is it created a mirage. The watchmen testified as much saying the night was weird, clear and "hazy/foggy" at the same time. Because they all properly believed they should have seen the iceberg in time given the clear weather conditions, yet somehow they didn't. The thermal differences also made the attempts for the nearby ships to communicate via light signals/flares to fail as well as it disrupted those lights as well.
Interesting
Well said, that's my understanding as well. Strange they didn't mention it.
Above your reply reads like a chinese fire drill...tooo goofee...
Olympic and Britannic looking at each other like eh? 35:30 i thought he was gonna say, "Well you shoulda gone to Specsavers!"
Hats off to the Carpathia, it outdid the top speed, coming in despite the ice field, furnaces red hot. The old girl gave her all. Her crew wasn't even sure she would make the journey.
Except, of course, Titanic was never at full speed, as five boilers were never connected.
'Her crew wasn't even sure she would make the journey.' Where did you get that nonsensical comment from?
@dovetonsturdee7033 Carpathia was an old, slow ship--but with a smarter, more ice field savvy captain than the Titanic. They put lookouts on the bow of the ship as well as in the masthead, plus gave them all binoculars. Its max speed was only 16 knots and it went far faster than the engines could safely go through the dangerous ice field to rescue the Titanic survivors.
@@egm8602 Carpathia was only nine years old at the time, and not slow by any standards other than the Mauretanias of the Olympics.
Are you sure about the lookouts and their binoculars? I have not seen any reference to Carpathia's lookouts being issued with these items.
@@dovetonsturdee7033all ships would have multiple pairs of binoculars. But binoculars can make scanning more difficult. If you're speeding through an ice field you would want people scanning with and without binoculars and an alert Bridge crew ready to respond.
@@jice7074 In accordance with the practice of the time, Titanic's lookouts had already been alerted of the need for particular vigilance, and the Bridge crew were were they were because of their ability to respond to any situation.
The purpose of lookouts was to alert the Watchkeeping Officers of any sightings. Those officers, who had binoculars, would then identify the object and determine a course of action.
The unusually calm sea, and the abnormal weather conditions, resulted in the iceberg not being seen until too late.
Thank you kindly for sharing this documentary.
Where did this artistic profession go? Homes too! Even some of your city dwellings have from eras gone by are full of design and superb craftsmanship. Homes now are slapped up so fast that the lumber isn’t even dry yet.
The footage of the ship leaving port in the beginning is the Olympic. There is no footage of Titanic setting off on her maiden voyage. 😔
The titanic is really the olympic and visa versa, they changed the names to protect the insured.
@@PatrickBaptistthey was not the same they was a bit different from each other but you never know
@@adriantowe278 Yeah we don't really know, most of us were not even there, but who would want to eat that kinda loss? Companies sure won't, they were already bad off in the money department, as even with the loss covered that still didn't stop white star from burning as a company, they would have much sooner with the insured loss, hey I'd want to keep my homies at work with me, insurance would be the first thing most any of us wouldn't care to let suffer rather than us, insurance companies have it coming anyways, specially today.
When you learn about the occult cults that run our countries and world, it all starts making more sense why things happen the way they do. It was all planned out before the boat set sail, answers why anyone you take off in a boat with a fire in coal hold, fire at sea is a sailors worst nightmare.
@@PatrickBaptist thanks for your comment I appreciate it take care mate
I dont think that's the real Capt Smith either!
PSA: if you already know how Titanic sank, skip to 37:45. Spoiler below if you want to save yourself an hour. Edit, they continue to talk about how she sank even after 37:45, and there is very little about the title of the video (Titanic's hidden weakness). There is maybe 5 mins. about the title, the rest of the video is about how she sank.
Spoiler: Titanic had no. 3 iron rivets instead of no. 4 iron rivets. The no. 3 iron rivets were too weak to hold the iron plates of the hull. There, I saved you an hour. You're welcome. 🙂
Thanks
Thanks, I saw the info about cheaper, inferior rivets being used in another, older documentary - this appears to be a rip off of that. I'd like to know what year this show was made.
Thanks legend
@@glamdolly302008
Many thanks, heard rivet theory before. But how come Olympic built with same rivets survived for decades?
For the time it was cutting edge. In 1912 steel works was still new, they didn't know all the proprieties of steel and how it reacts to cold or heat, they didn't know about mixing metals to make them stronger. For it's time it was the strongest it could be. Olympic proved it
Steel was made during the classical eras of Ancient China, India, and Rome.
@@allyedowd yes, but that is Sword smithing, engineering steels are quite different
They used wrought iron for the rivets.....
@@PatrickBaptist That is only on a tiny area of the ship where the machinery couldn't reach and they had to manually place them. They used steel everywhere else. And the wrought iron was for it's time good as far as they knew how it worked
@@allyedowd Steel wasn't used in ships until 20 or so years prior to Titanic...
Every time we start our steam, I always think about the ships that sailed before me going full ahead with no radar. Crazy
Man, are we so spoiled
She had two sisters ships that survived a lot more time, the design and materials were good.
One of them, the Britannic, didn't really last that long; she began service in December 1915 and she sank in November 1916. Like the Titanic she lasted less than a year (if slightly) .
Actually, Titanic was not the largest loss of life in"modern history. " that dubious honor goes to the Wilhelm Gustloff, with 6,000 - 9,000 lives lost on Jan 30, 1945. It was severely overload as it was taking Getmans from a conflict zone as the Russians advanced, and no one kept an accurate (or any) passenger list.
Peace time. Peace time.
a BIG What IF here. IF the Olympic was never caught in the accident with the HMAS Hawke, TITANIC's maiden voyage would never have been delayd and she would've sailed at her original date and never encountered the weird weather that made them not able to see the iceberg and also Never hit the iceberg
The date for her 2nd departure from Southampton was 10th April, so her sinking would have happened during that voyage instead.
Fate sank Titanic.
Just when I think a NEW Documentary on the Titanic 🤗 I get cozy in my bed, lights out and prepare to drift off to sleep when it suddenly dawns on me, I'm literally narrating along with this documentary, this documentary that I've seen A MILLION TIMES!!! BAM!! Disappointment hits me like a massive iceberg as I sadly sink below my blankets. (No pun intended 😉)
Then take a sleeping pill, Doofus . . .
@@quietguy1948I would love a sleeping pill I struggle to get to sleep
Not all of us refer to drugs to solve our issues. But to each their own. @@quietguy1948
The titanic was the safest ship of its time. The sinking whas not due to a design error.
yes it was , weak riverts
@@CristinaSimonsen nah, the rivets they had at the time were the highest quality
It was all because of faulty design; the watertight bulkheads weren't capped off with watertight tops so the Titanic sank like an ordinary ice cube tray. No one imagined anything worse than two breached compartments
@@fmyoung there was also a coal fire going on during the final fueling process, witch weakened the hull at the spot of impact , there's pictures they found years later that shows a darker location were the ice burg hit from scorching marks and the bulkhead near the fire was warped, the photos were found in an attic of an old person that took them as the ship was leaving harbor, i know some people say that the fire wouldn't have done enough damage but imo it probably made it easier for the burg to pernitrate the hull
@@albiedam33122nd highest quality, they talk about it in this documentary. They shouldve had number 4 rivets but opted instead for number 3 which were a poorer quality
A primitive long disproved nonsense. Titanic wasn't "doomed from the first day" just like her sister ship Olympic wasn't. There wasn't any "hidden design flaw". Their steel was top notch for its time, just like Lusitania's and Mauretania's.
The only ones who responsible for her sinking were the captain and the officers, who just like most of maritime officers of that time took unacceptable risk and with infuriating hubris demonstrated by Lightoller during both the American and British inquiry thought that they have the North Atlantic "all figured out" and could cut corners.
Thankyou
The greatest weakness of the Titanic was a captain that sailed through an ice field at too high a speed. If your ship and the lives of your passengers requires luck to make it through the ice field you slow down or stop. Let everybody enjoy themselves an extra day.
Problem was that she was on fire in the coal bunkers
@@andyb.1026 No, she wasn't. Stoker survivors testified that a fire in one of 19 bunkers had been dealt with at least a day before the collision, and that the only damage was to paintwork in the affected bunker.
Of course, you haven't read the minutes of either Inquiry, have you?
The procedure at the time was to maintain course and speed, but to alert lookouts of the need for extra vigilance. Which Smith did.
In fact several Master Mariners & Liner Captains testified that, in a similar situation, they would have acted as Captain Smith did.
But, of course, you probably haven't read the Inquiry Minutes, have you?
@@dovetonsturdee7033 No I have not read them. The procedure at the time was to slow or stop if you get ice warnings. Plus the lookouts did not even have binoculars. It was just a perfect storm of bad luck.
@@richardmcdowell534 The procedure in 1912 was to get through possible hazards as quickly as possible. Seems ridiculous now, but that's how it was.
great dialog
captain smith "its cold"
officer Murdoch "yes it is sir"
That was the kind of dialog Cpt Smith and Lightoller had too when they discussed ice precautions. They both talked like teens.
@@fmyoung Source? None, I assume.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 "Highlighted reply" here too "Source? None, I assume"
I know right Just like teens really As Walter Lord puts it in "The Night Lives On" at the end of ch. 6 "Everything was against us? The wonder is that [the Titanic] lasted as long as she did"
@@fmyoung Thank you for confirming that you read my last message.
Even if, evidently, you are unable to provide an answer to it.
They keep going on about the life boats.. but even if they had 48 or 100, or 17. They BARLEY had time to fill 15 out of the 16. So it doesn't make sense to go on about that. Time wasn't on their side to fill them. Most didn't even believe it was sinking up until the end. Or last half hour.
Yes, she did have enough time. Had the lunatics aboard that ship actually done the lifeboat drill, atleast half of people there would've survived. Had the Californian been online that day, all people would've survived. Around halfway through the sinking, all the lifeboats have been taken. Many of them less than halway full. One life boat was filled up with a mere 12 1st class passengers, who weren't allowing others in.
Titanic was 1 of the worse Maritime disasters, but it wasn't the worst. That goes to the MV Wilhelm Gustloff that history Has all But forgotten.
I wonder what the odds of hitting an ice berg, that broke free 2 years earlier, in the middle of the ocean are, taking into account that only a small percentage survives the journey through Baffin Bay + all the other circumstances. And then compare it to the odds of winning the lottery
If the design was 'doomed' how do you explain the longevity of RMS Olympic?
yeah Britannic hit a mine, lasted twice as long as Lusitania.
Concordia got a few dings and was ferked almost right away.
Titanic exposed 1/3rd of her length to the ocean, took almost 3 hours, could have got all passengers and crew off with good enough training & lifeboats, nothing wrong with the design lol
Why didn't they break into the locker to get the binoculars? Since when does not having a key keep people from this very important safety measure?
These binoculars were a precious tool 😂. Safety was mostly just a word back then.
The binoculars were an irrelevant red herring. Lookouts rarely used them.
From what we've read, the White Star's binoculars weren't very good...
Good thing that Frederick Fleet instantly knew what that bump on the horizon was, binocs or no
@@dovetonsturdee7033 exactly, there's another docu on youtube that answered how Titanic missed seeing the iceberg in time and was the real cause. Yes, there was no moon, but the stars in the clear sky provided ample light to see it in time. The iceberg was inside a very cold front which created a mirage - unlike a heat mirage that forces the skyline to go down and objects float, cold forces it up and reduces your viewing distance. The watches testimony said as much, the sky was clear yet hazy - the hazy part was the mirage of the water being raised. This would hide the iceberg from being seen in time. Passengers commented on how fast it got very cold that night. The cold pocket would also disrupt the light messages/flares from the ships nearby making it impossible to communicate afterwards for help. This person found the logs of the ships near Titanic before/after the sinking and they all captured temperature data and he was able to map out the cold pocket that would create the mirage.
This was not the largest sea disaster during world war two at the very end of it a russian sank a passenger ship which are taking people away from that area and they figure between 678 ten thousand people died on that boat
so it looks like officer Blair
didn't have much to pack
only his pyjamas 😂😂😂
He must've been super-glad about the turn of events that prevented him from ever boarding the ship. That reminds me of Alfred, Bertram and Thomas Slade, along with trimmer Alfred Penney and stokers Alfred Podesta and William Nutbean who missed the Titanic after lingering at this pub, the Grapes, a bit too long. Five days later they too must've been super-glad about this totally unexpected turn in their luck .
How many times does the Titanic need to be rehashed ?
My heart goes out to the poor victims 💔 it's heartbreaking 💔😢😢😢😢
I don’t think hitting it head on would have mattered at that speed. No ship to this day had ever hit anything so solid and survived. It would have sheared plats off farther down than the damage believed it would have sustained.. there were the 3 ships during ww2 that hit cliffs,
The were welded and still sunk off the shallows. Even ruined the fuel tank 1/2 the id ship and ruptured them. This ship was always going to have a bad night
That's simply not true. The liner wasn't so rigid that all the hull's rivets would have instantly sheered off upon impact. The whole vessel would have absorbed the collision with the first two maybe three compartments flooding. That's not suggesting First Officer Murdock shouldn't have tried porting around the offending iceberg. He did everything he could have done, there simply wasn't enough ocean between Titanic and the berg.
@@RobbyHouseIV well considering they have done 3-D modeling. Because of the bulkheads being lower than most ships even to date. That it had a profounding effect on the way it absorbed energy. And it still sunk
After the strike head on.
But there are people that want to believe there theory that if they were in charge that the outcome would have been different. And been a silent hero in history.
But you are wrong brother. They was a firm in Japan that held the program for assignment
1. The amount of Lifeboats on the Titanic was actually more than what was required at that time. By then, the amount of lifeboats were based on weight not capacity, and these Boards of Registration were too slow to keep up with the large ships being built.
2. The theory of the binoculars might’ve changed things if the Titanic was in a different place and time. The reality was that night had no moon and waves were calm, it would’ve been impossible to spot an iceberg in that situation.
Thanks!
What year was this documentary made?
2008
1912
@@NikkaMunda-c2i that’s when ship sunk not when doc made
@@CristinaSimonsen the documentary is from 1912
@@Wildrover82 The disaster is from 1912, this doc is from 2008
Why is it everyone talks about the hit and damage it caused but no one really talks about the speed TITANIC hit the iceberg? Why and how did the Titanic stay stable while it sank rather than tipping over?
There are ships that lost 5x more people than this ship. It’s not the greatest loss of people.
Not even in the top 5.. but what ever it takes to sell a story.
The worst part of this story is the had enough time to get everyone on life boats. But not enough boats to do so
True
Took an hour an half to load 13 boats. The last 1 or 2 collapsible boats were wasted because it was just too late in the sinking process.
How long would it take to load 48?
@@seanharper8488 I hear they would've been able to load 48 boats if (a) they had realized the seriousness of the situation sooner (as opposed to thinking she was unsinkable) and (b) if the crew had been more organized and both crew and passengers had lifeboat assignments (so no one lost time wondering where to go)
It seems so gross to say “over 1500 ppl died” … every person went through hell.. and every person deserves to be recognized.
You need to take a time out.
Are you suggesting the names of all 1512 that perished should have been named instead? Don't know what that would do to the run time of the documentary.
Where's the new info? All of this has been know for a long time
Thank you for this
The Titanic was not one of the most famous disasters It is the most famous disaster By far
How the crew wasn’t held responsible for cruising at full speed through an ice field? The White Star line got out of paying any of the victims for this wonderful passage
The ship wasn't at full speed, and White Star did pay compensation. Apart from that, good points!
WS did pay for damages but the amount was whittled down to quite a bit, and then it doesn't help that in an effort to avoid lawsuits White Star sent representatives to hospitals where victims were recovering and tricked them into signing declarations that they wouldn't sue for damages in exchange for 25 pounds. That's downright obscene
Oh and they weren't quite going full-speed but they were super-close .
I remember reading how the White Star line representives showed up at the hospitals to have the victims of a unsinkable ship, sign their rights away (pretty much)
@@fmyoung 'That's downright obscene' It would have been had it been true, but the only supposed evidence was a single unsubstantiated allegation made by one person, Annie Kelly, in the Chicago Daily Journal. The allegation said $25, by the way, not £25. Of course, if you have actual evidence to the contrary, you could always present it?
Yes, of course the Company, as any other company would, defended itself in court and sought to limit the damages it was required to pay. When the cases were resolved, White Star abided by the judgements handed down.
Titanic was unsinkable, if head on she wouldn't sink, if 4 chambers filled with water wouldn't sink but it was the 5 th chamber leaked, the captain was told to to have a set speed to cross, he ignored it and have full speed to cross, error 1, the messager told to cut communication, error 2, no binoculars for the nest, error 3, all human errors
1). Smith was not 'told' what speed Titanic must maintain.
2). Cyril Evans closed down at the end of his shift. He subsequently testified that no offence had been taken by him. Wireless operators in their 20s were not the kind of shrinking violets you seem to believe.
3). Binoculars were irrelevant. Look outs at the time rarely used them.
why did it sink so quickly ? it didnt it took 2 hours 40 mins thats quite a long time. remember brittanic went down in around 20 mins and was virtually the same ship
What has always stuck out to me that if they would have hit the ice on the same exact heading they were on and not turned at all they most likely would have survived. They would have gotten a horrible rep from it slaming the brand new ship into ice and causing major discomfort to the pasengers, but most likely would have made it to New York.
Just one question for those who called Ismey a coward for boarding the boat in those terrible conditions: "What would you have done in those same conditions?"
Because it is very easy to be brave when you are comfortably sitting at a desk writing a newspaper about the cowardice of someone who is slowly being surrounded by water and wants to save his life.
Incredible work, thank you so much.
There are some fault’s here. The lookout’s never said they would have seen the Berg if they had binoq’s. Second: it is proven that there was a cold water mirrage that night witch would have helped hide the Berg within the raised horizon until your’e close enough to see it. So basicly binoq’s would not done any good… Logs of the sea and air temperature taken from ships around the same day shows a clear picture of that happening. But i would not expect a non seafearer to know this…
And the riverts at fault? Im sorry but no, a wielded ship would have sunk aswell. The impact force when two heavy objects like the Titanic and the Berg collide is massive. Its like a massive hydraulic press or dynamite.
Interesting to hear about the science surrounding the Titanic sinking and possibly why more clearly in the modern world today.
alot of mistakes.......but they should of paid attention to the ice warnings
Excellent video!
I usually like the documentaries on Wonder, and I have studied the Titanic since I was a kid, but this one just isn't very good.
You might not think this is very good, but it has a lot of truth to it. They were far too complacent They should have broke the lock on the locker to get the binoculars and not steamed full speed ahead during the middle of the night. Captain Smith sounds like he was senile and just coasting in his role as captain.
Rubbish, it's well done.
If I recall this one was from around 2009. So take it as it is I guess.
Most excellent documentary. I enjoyed it. Better than others
In reality, the cause of her sinking was the way she hit the iceberg. Looking at the wreck today, it appears she hit the berg at a near straight angle, slightly off to the side. Instead of the superstructure ramming the side, it crashed straight into it. The blunt force caused a zipper like effect, detailed in this documentary. Now, because Steel is a rather soft material, most of the passengers and crew barely noticed it. What this documentary might be implying is that the Titanic and ONLY the Titanic had the Iron 3 rivets. Even if they were Iron 4, it wouldn't have stopped the ship from sinking. So much of the ship had opened up that she was practically dead by the time anyone noticed anything.
0:58 baffled experts for “almost half a century”? Haven’t experts pondered the possible materiel issues for 112 years now?
No, they haven't. The supposed 'material issues' claims originated in the 1990s, with the rise of social media, where all and sundry found themselves in a position where they could comment on a subject, despite actually knowing little or nothing about it.
This was a godsend for the conspiracy fantasists.
And what about Carpathia ? she steamed to titanic full speed from ice fields area , disaster could happend there as well.
Their pre planned route was further south too to avoid ice.
If you are found of this channel spend the time and watch it. There are other documentaries, that are more topic oriented and contain less movie scenes.
RMS Titanic ! Now where have I heard that name before ?.🤔
Once you say Unsinkable your Tempting Fate!
Were those same rivets used in the Bow sections of Olympic and Brittanic? or were they changed after?. I think not, it would have taken too long, Olympic had to keep on sailing to earn money for the White Star Line to continue building the Britanic, which sadly hit a mine and sank. She was never used as a ship to sail across the Atlantic as it was converted into a Hospital Ship.by1918. The First World War.
I don't think it was the design of Titanic why she sank as a result of an iceberg collision, More like a stream of unfortunate circumstances why 1500 lives died with the ship that night.
Let's be honest here and say that the binoculars weren't an issue. Sure they were locked in the cabinet and the key got taken off ship by accident but the problem is they are no help in the dark on a moonless night. The ocean was calm and flat so the telltale sign of a iceberg being how the ocean breaks around the berg isn't going to be as pronounced. The lookouts even said that the binoculars weren't going to be helpful and it probably was a blessing that they were locked up.
This was a terrible disaster, but it was caused by many small things that went wrong that night. They all added up and are a reminder, no ship is unsinkable, and it pays to take precautions. Had the ship been sailing slower, she could have avoided hitting the iceberg. Had she carried enoght lifeboats, all would have been saved and only the ship itself would have been lost.
The greatest maratime loss in modern history was the Wilhelm Gustloff... not the freaking titanic. 30 seconds in and already total bs information
Exactly. I'm not even gonna watch the rest.
Sidenote: I've also heard the Titanic being called the worst maritime peace-time disaster, which is also not true. People keep forgetting about the Doña Paz with 4300 deaths.
@@echoplots8058 I stopped watching after 2 minutes. Couldn't stand the ammount of bs
@@AR_119 i recall a different scientist investigating the rivets not this woman.. back in the 90s
@@robert-h2x YES! I saw that original documentary too, this is a rip off.
Yeah and there was another one also..but i.m not sure of the name ..was it the empress of Ireland maybe...I feel my memory at 70 rusting away like the ships...😮😮
It is often said that the Titanic sank because so many compartments were flooded and that if only one or two compartments had been flooded, she might have remained afloat. This is not, necessarily, the case. Consider the case of the Oceanos. A small leak developed in a valve in one of the compartments, causing sea water to enter. All of the watertight doors were closed. However, as it happened, fuel had not been drawn out of the oil tanks evenly. The oil tank on the other side to the side where the leak developed was empty and the tank on the side where the leak developed was full. So, the vessel was already quite unstable. The small quantity of sea water entering one compartment only caused the vessel to list, to the point where sea water was then able to enter through open port holes over the whole length of the vessel. She developed so severe a list that it was impossible to launch life boats from the high side. Fortunately, she was close to the coast and the passengers were able to be evacuated by means of helicopters from the shore before she finally went under. Most ships are inherently unstable and will sink very easily even if the damage is limited to one or two compartments. Something similar happened with the Andrea Doria - she was holed on one (or, possibly, two) compartments but rapidly developed a list, causing sea water to enter the whole length of the vessel. Fortunately, the Stockholm, which collided with her, was on hand to assist in evacuating the passengers and the Isle de France also arrived in time to assist with the rescue.
Two compartments were compromised when RMS Olympic collided with HMS Hawke. She was never in danger of sinking as a result.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 The Andrea Doria was struck in a similar way and foundered, for the same reason as the Oceanos, because she developed a list. It seems to depend very much on the trim of the vessel when it is struck. Possibly, by chance, the Olympic was more in ballast on the side opposite to the side which was struck. Or, it may depend upon how the water flowing in is able to settle. If the water is not able to settle evenly, because of the existence of bulkheads or other barriers running fore and aft, then the vessel will begin to list and once the list becomes severe enough, if there are open portholes, the ingress of water along the length of the vessel will exacerbate the list.
There are so many thigs that are common knowledge for sailors and ship deigners now, that were unknown then. Titanic was larger than most ships built in time only Olympic was the same size. The Captain should have ordered the speed to be reduced, when he knew icebergs were in the area, but he didn''t. Becaus of that Lord Mersañy castigated him postoumosly on the Titanic trial, held after the ship sank.
The moment someone said unsinkable.
👍🏻
Human hubris at its absolute finest.
Actually there was only one ad that had the "unsinkable" claim.
@@lisaw8741: That may be true but it has been made clear over the century since the sinking occurred that many people actually bought into that particular piece of propaganda - including those responsible for building and operating her.
@@lisaw8741 fascinating 🤨
titanic was well built people looking to make a story when there is not one her sister the Olympic was built the same way with the same materials and rivets she rammed and sunk the u boat u-103 and a collision with h.m.s hawke and stayed afloat she stayed in service up until she was scrapped in 1935
I suppose if the designers and builders of Titanic thought somebody would be stupid enough to test its invincibility by crashing her into an iceberg, they would have built her stronger.
0:37 “The greatest maritime loss in human history”.. That should be enough to know that this so called documentary is a load of bull..!
Good documentary. Not sure why everyone seems so annoyed. The Captain, Lightoller, Jack Phillips, everyone has this general negative mood before, during and after. Seems a bit odd.
3:31 I hear the Titanic is the world's 6th-deepest known shipwreck at 12,467ft/3800m
The makers of this video don't seem to realise the binoculars are of no use on a moonless night.
as some one commented
THEY ARE NOT MARINNERS
just land lubers
@@raypitts4880 🤣
58:15 He… he hit him with a human extinguisher!
An interesting informative new take on the matter.
I don't think the crew in the time they had could've launched 48 boats ,they barely had enough time to launch the 16 they had ....... would have more lives been saved? Possibly,the Women and Children first order would more than likely not have given, therefore men would have been given an opportunity to go with their wives, family etc.,all speculation of course.The loss of life would still have been high.
9400 died when the SS Gustloff sank in 1945. That's the highest lost, not Titanic.
A head to head collision with the iceberg would not have damaged more than 3 sections and the ship would still float.
Really? I doubt any sea officer of the time would have allowed such a collision when a swift course change might have avoided it completely. Do you find having the benefit of hindsight useful?
the very minute the pencils were put to paper she was doomed
Explain RMS Olympic then.
Basically once one rivet popped it was like unbuttoning a shirt it all just came apart
The rivets didn't pop, they were sheared off by the density of the ice and on a side note thousands upon thousands of the rivets were flush set rivets and thoroughly painted to make the steel appear smooth.
If the rules of the amount of lifeboats only demanded enough for half then I am not surprised of the effects on the solas regulation...
They need to make another movie about the Titanic .. one that shows this true story ... not some silly love story !!
She was not domed from the begining. Her sister ship ss Olympic, the old reliable, was built by the same principles and had a long life.
The only thing that went well that night was the Carpathia
Had the SS Californian had it's wire system on, lmany more lives would have been saved. I didn't hear the narrator say it but wasn't it mandated that all ships must have the Marconi systems on and manned 24/7 while at sea after the Titanic sinking?
@@zsigzsag I think what the new law mandated was someone on duty in the radio room at all times .
Watching this documentary is just yet another reminder as to how this country somehow continues with the same nonsensical pride driven practices even to this day! Present a ship as unsinkable, but it actually turns out that it was structurally weak due to inferior materials used! Makes total sense! It is British smoke and mirrors personified! We always exaggerate the cost of building structures or major projects, costing far more money than they should, and then when catastrophe happens, the reality is a whole other type of truth! Everything from cover ups to poor industrial practices and god knows what! Anything to save money, fill the coffers of rich businesses and ultimately it is always the poor and innocent people who end up paying for it! Both of the enquirers into the disaster was a complete whitewash and titanic even had a huge payout from Lloyd's! It basically meant that the families of those who lost breadwinners on the ship ended up with almost nothing as compensation! That's the Uk for you im afraid! HS2 and grenfell as the latest examples!
The ship was never described as 'unsinkable' except by a small circulation engineering periodical and in a much later movie. The materials used were not 'inferior.' If they were, how do you explain the fact that her older sister, Olympic, built of the same materials in the same yard at the same time, had such a wonderful career?
There was no 'huge' payout from Lloyds. The Olympics cost £1.5 million each to build, and were each insured for £1 million, which is what Lloyds paid out.
Why do you believe that both Inquiries were 'whitewashes?' What facts did they conceal?
The rest of your post is largely irrelevant but, given your obvious lack of actual knowledge, I wonder why you even bothered to post at all?
@@dovetonsturdee7033 you have no idea what you're talking about! White star line received 12.5m payout from Lloyd's post the enquiry! You've spewed utter drivel in the face of facts and common knowledge so it really isn't worth it to say much more.
@@Baresi-Unico-Capitano Nonsense, little chap. You shouldn't believe everything you stumble across in conspiracy videos, as it makes you look rather silly.
Ismay went on public record at the April 1912 United States Senate Hearings and also it was reported in the official public findings that the value of Titanic was "$7.5million" a figure independently verified by the New York Times and The Spectator ("$8 million") while insured at only "$5 million" (as reported at the Senate Inquiry, The New York Times and Lloyds itself). If indeed Titanic had been insured at the last minute at "$12.5 million," as is alleged by conspiracy theorists, would this not have raised serious alarm bells in the minds of the insurers at the time, especially if it was part of the public record that the value was "$7.5million"?
Perhaps you haven't read the minutes of either the US or the British Inquiry?
Sorry. I am wrong. There is clearly no 'perhaps' about it.
People hate on Bruce for getting in a life raft but had he not, where would the valuable information have come from!
Didn't even complete the opening few sentences and... MISINFORMATION. This was a tragic event. The Drama occurred on the maiden voyage! But it was absolutely NOT the "Greatest Maritime Loss in Modern History" THAT would be the MV Wilhelm Gustloff with 6000-9000 lost when it was sunk by the Russians while trying to evacuate Germany at in the closing moments of WWII. The meterials discussion has been discussed fir nearly 40 years. Not new information. Waste of time watching a drama thats intentionally trying to fill in gaps.
Probably the essential difference is that the Titanic sinking occurred in peacetime, whereas Wilhelm Gustloff was an armed auxiliary warship, carrying troops and
U-boat crews. as well as refugees, when she was torpedoed by a Soviet submarine.
Hey! I’ve been to the cemetery!
Ismay really got it later...but if i saw a boat with room in it leaving............😮
He was unfairly vilified, especially on Cameron’s film. But according to witness testimony he was paramount at getting as many passengers in lifeboats as he could. I feel bad for him. The guilt destroyed his life
Ah the good old no.3 vs no.4 rivet theory. As if RIVETS are gonna help when you have over 40000 tons of steel and iron hitting millions of tons of iceberg at the same speed as a city car.
And ALL the force is concentrated on a small 3x3ft area, that's gonna puncture regardless what you do with rivets.
Have a look at the wreck and you'll see a lot more snapped no.4 rivet's than you'll see snapped no.3 rivets.
Look at Concordia, she got ripped up just as easily and she didn't use rivets on the hull plating, and she sank on uneven keel with half of the lifeboats useless (as per usual).
Titanic had the privilege of sinking on an even keel and took one quarter from 3 hrs to do it, and yet her lifeboats weren't loaded to capacity or quickly enough.
Issue was lack of crew emergency training and crew cohesiveness/loyalty, greedy wireless operators who shoo'ed off berg/floe warnings (and failed at using MSG in almost ALL their emergency transmissions which is what they blamed Californian for lol).
The crew of Titanic had hours, launched nearly empty boats lead by her own crew that didn't even come back.
I'd still sooner take my chances on a 1900's ocean liner with experienced crew that knew how to launch lifeboats quickly and efficiently, even Empress of Ireland was able to launch 6 lifeboats for the most part filled to capacity and they only had 14 minutes.
The last few lifeboats to leave Titanic were even overloaded, thanks to which I ran the numbers: Titanic could have actually saved ALL passengers from certain doom (if they omitted crew).
Look at the titan submersible all on board died while trying to go to titanic it breaks me into a million
Peacies
How thoughtless of those brutish men, that they were not watching this You Tube video! It was just now announced that the ship is only ten minutes from the iceberg. Giving due heed to this warning would no doubt have granted sufficient time to slow. This would not have allowed time, however, to return for replacement of the poor iron rivets, or quite enough time to redesign the bulkheads to extend to the deck, or even enough time to mount thirty two more lifeboats. But, had such improvements been made, we would not have had the movie, and the iceberg would not ever have had occasion to feel so infamously important.
This might sound crazy but I always think could they have put people on the iceberg and gone back for more people because they found the iceberg i don't know how long after .
I don't think it would be possible. The iceberg that struck the Titanic was probably like a mountain so it would be difficult to claim on it and of course an iceberg is cold. Frederick Fleet describe it as an iceberg with 2 pikes and it was very, but very dark that night so you wouldn't be able to see the iceberg anyway.
Yes, it does sound crazy. The iceberg and the ship were not in contact for any length of time.
We'd read about how the Captain of the Exxon Valdez managed to keep the ship from foundering completely by keeping its engine at 'dead slow ahead' against the rocks. This meant only one or two of the cargo tanks were split open, instead of all of them.
Imagine if Captain Smith (or Officer Murdoch) had had the presence of mind (and time) to back the Titanic up, nose her onto the iceberg and 'park' enough of her bow onto the berg and hold it there 'til help arrived. Maybe even to been able to patch the damage and get the pumps running to get to the nearest port...
@@chezsnailez Sorry, but the suggestion is pure fantasy.