alternatehistory.com

I managed to find something on this theory: It is from another site, so this is not my response:

It is a calculation of the kinetic energy of the collision:

"""""Here's my calculation.

From Wikipedia, the Titanic displaced 52,310 long tons, which is 5.315x107 kg. I couldn't find the impact speed, but taking your 20 mph, it's 8.941 m/s. Kinetic energy is 1/2 m v2 = 2.124x109 J. That converts to 0.5077 tons of TNT. By way of comparison, that's equivalent to a little less than two Mk-48 torpedoes. """"

And some other piece:

"""Also, keep in mind that the titanic was not hitting an immovable object. It was hitting a very massive, but object with considerable inertia that was nonetheless free-floating in water. Similarly, I'm not sure whether "incompressible object" is fair description, because it conjures images of a rigid body, while ice melting would be rather brittle *and ductile at that velocity, and therefore capable of substantial deformation. [Water is considered incompressible --less compressible than ice-- but a submarine's hull can sustain years of continuous 20 knot "impact" with water with only cosmetic damage.

I believe that the underwater ice ledge posited by wreck analysts could well have given the ship a good start on "grounding itself" in a head on collision. The strength of the bow and keel could have helped it "cut into" the ledge and berg before they shattered and crumpled. -- and the crumpling might help it lock in and increase the mating surface with the ice by sacrificing a region of low cross section for an interface of higher cross section. The iceberg's buoyancy might well have helped the ship remain afloat long enough for their radio calls to be heard, and a much more effective rescue to take place.""""

So, if the kinetic energy could be dispersed in the crumbling then maybe?

Comments on this?

Ivan
Top