2006-07-30 23:42:11 · 5 answers · asked by naturalselection 5 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Boats & Boating
Yes is the answer. Hitting the iceburg full on would have prevented the side from being ripped open like a can of beans.
When the Titanic struck the iceberg the crew were steering to avoid it. This meant that the Titanic hit the iceburg with it's starboard side. Once it had struck, the crew then put the ship into full reverse on the port engine and flank speed ahead on the starboard engine with the keel hard to starboard and this caused even further damage. The side of the ship was ripped open below the water line for almost 9 meters.
Which is why the ship sank so quickly.
2006-07-30 23:50:45 · answer #1 · answered by Susan W 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of how the ship would of impacted the materials(steel) used to manufactured it at the time were not properly created for such a huge sctructure and the temperature at which it happened. As a matter of fact it will never be know if the ship impacted head on or from the side, though there are many answers that could be answered simply by what is left over, this would be something that only visual accounts could verify along with the findings.
2006-07-31 06:59:12 · answer #2 · answered by wiseornotyoudecide 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, if it had run directly into the iceberg it would not have sunk; it was designed for that type of impact. By trying to veer off course, it cause the iceberg to graze the ship down one side, tearing out a huge gash that ultimately finished the ship.
2006-07-31 06:47:13 · answer #3 · answered by grinningleaf 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
true, there was too much Sulphur mixed with the metal however, A ship is built much stronger on the bow because, at some point it will have to break through ice (OK not an iceberg but say like "Harbor ice"), so the Bow of a ship is "RE-INFORCED" much better than the sides.
2006-07-31 22:23:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the truth is, we will never know for sure
2006-07-31 15:22:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋