>
>Yes. She was designed to withstand flooding of three compartments, so
>if only the foremost three were damaged/crushed in a collision, she
>might have survived. It would depend on the speed at impact, as
>Momentum (Mass x Velocity) has to be dissipated in the energy of
>deforming a mass of steel.
>
>It would be a brave Master (or OOW) who kept the rudder amidships to
>deliberately hit an iceberg head on (one can imagine the Court of
>Inquiry questions). Such an impact would have killed many of the
>firemen who were berthed right forward.
>
>Ian Buxton
>
Thanks much for the (as usual) most informed comment. Heaven knows I was not
second guessing anyone on the Titanic’s bridge. Neither was my old bud that
made the observation. The observation was more in the mold of “There but for
the grace of God….” or, good grief the Titanic had lousy luck. Mistakes
made too of course. As our highschool football coach used to tell our
players: “When you lose 63-0 it takes a team effort.”
Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Tom, you might want to subscribe to MarHst-L and submit these inquiries
there. That list has many experts who can answer detailed questions
about ancient ships and related topics such as whaling and keelhauling.

Send “subscribe marhst-l [your name]” to listserv@post.queensu.ca. I
subscribed last year but dropped off because the message volume was too
high. That was even before “Titanic” was released.

> Information, please, on a ship, probably a Liberty Ship,
> named the *Jane A. Delano*.
>
> Judging from the name, I assume this person was some relation to
> Franklin Roosevelt?
>
> When/where was the Delano launched, built by whom, when/where scrapped, and
> other interesting history will be much appreciated.
>
> Also, does anyone have any info on a Troop ship called the *Cape Canso*?

On 10 Jan 98 at 19:49, Eric Bergerud wrote:

> BTW: years ago a geologist who was also a Titanic junkie told me he thought
> that the ship could have survived had it not turned away, but would have
> rammed the berg headon. Sound plausible?

Hello Rick,

I’m not a geologist, but it’s been accepted theory in NA circles since the
collision that had the Titanic struck the berg head on, she would have most
likely not only survived, but probably arrived in NYC under her own steam
and only slightly late.

As to her “brittle” shell plating, the weak link in a riveted hull is the
rivet, not the plate. When I started sailing and had the opportunity to enjoy
an interesting trip on an old riveted hull, after the storm had
passed we could
wander the lower holds and pick up rivet heads by the bucketful.

The “T” wasn’t holed by the collision, she had many seams opened by the
deformation of the hull shearing the rivets in half. There’s been quite a bit
of speculation over the years as to her chances of survival had she been a
welded hull.

Regards,

James

Capt. James H. E. Maugham, President
J.H.E. Maugham and Associates, Inc.
Naval Architects, Marine Engineers, Marine Surveyors, Salvors
CaptJHEM@waterw.com

>On Sat, 10 Jan 1998, Matt Clark wrote:
>> Adding to the theory you’re referring to: It isn’t that “it wasn’t an
>> iceberg,” it was that the brush with the berg didn’t slice the hull like a
>> can opener, which has been the conventional wisdom. Instead, it caused
>> plates at three different levels to pop their rivets and let the sea in. A
>> major contributing factor was that the “curing” of the steel used in the
>> plates made them brittle at low sea temperatures. Several publications,
>> including the NY Times, published on this within the last three or four
>> months.
>
Metal vessels were not exactly new in 1912. Nor were ship designers unaware
of the fact that cold and heat change the qualities of solids. Now I would
not be stunned to find out that the theory of rivet failure caused the
Titanic’s sinking becomes accepted over time. Moving “plates” were only a
theory when I first studied geology a few eons ago and now are a foundation
of the science. Yet, think of it. The impact of a ship the size of a
Titanic, traveling fast, hitting a glancing blow against something with the
mass of a large iceberg would have been EXTRAORDINARY. (I grew up in
Minnesota and have seen what happens to cars when they hit snow banks that
have had time to become essentially ice walls.) It could very well be that
the ice both penetrated the hull and shattered the rivets. BTW: years ago a
geologist who was also a Titanic junkie told me he thought that the ship
could have survived had it not turned away, but would have rammed the berg
headon. Sound plausible?
Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Hi again…
the following question is rather strange, many of you may think, but it is
nevertheless one I never got an answer on.
It’s about Japanese codes and codebreaking and radio transmissions on
the whole.
I just don’t get it…
If I am not mistaken, radio transmissions work on the basis of morse.
Now, what kind of system did the Japanese use? Morse makes no sense here, does
it? Second, how did the US know, after solving the code and having clear text
before them, which succession of dids and dads meant what?
Also, how does coding work with regard to Morse? The codes I know are using
single letters (for example “AG”) to indicate a word or phrase (for example
“attack”). Did the Japanese employ roman letters for this purpose or arabian
numbers or something similiar?

PLEASE HELP!

Tim

Tim Lanzendoerfer | “I have just taken on a great
Amateur Naval Historian | responsibility. I will do my
Email: BWV_Wiesbaden@t-online.de | utmost to meet it” – Nimitz
—————————————————————–
The United States Navy in the Pacific War 1941 – 1945
http://www.microworks.net/pacific
The ships, the men, the battles
—————————————————————–

On Sat, 10 Jan 1998, Matt Clark wrote:
> Adding to the theory you’re referring to: It isn’t that “it wasn’t an
> iceberg,” it was that the brush with the berg didn’t slice the hull like a
> can opener, which has been the conventional wisdom. Instead, it caused
> plates at three different levels to pop their rivets and let the sea in. A
> major contributing factor was that the “curing” of the steel used in the
> plates made them brittle at low sea temperatures. Several publications,
> including the NY Times, published on this within the last three or four
> months.

Hmm … How would cold have affected *armor* plate, I wonder. ??

Would HOOD and SCHARNHORST have had their armor brittled/weakened by the
cold, too?

Fascinating implications, Matt. Thanks.

Lou

A third installment of books for you, I hope you are not tired yet of
telling me
your thoughts.

Cogar, William B., Dictionary of Admirals of the U.S. Navy

Kemp, Anthony, Allied Commanders of World War II (what exactly does this book
deal with?)

Kilduff, Peter, U.S. Carriers at War (I think there has been a review
by Brooks
Rowlett on this one…right?)

Parkin, Robert S., Blood on the Sea, American Destroyers Lost in World War II

Reynolds, Clark C., Admiral John H. Towers, the Struggle for Naval
Air Supremacy

Rose, Lisle A., The Ship That Held the Line: The USS Hornet and the First Year
of the Pacific War

Stern, Robert C., The Lexington Class Carriers

Utley, J: An American Battleship at Peace and War: The USS Tennessee

Also, can someone provide info on the book on USS Washington (title, ISBN,
review?)?

Thanks a lot,
Tim

Tim Lanzendoerfer | “I have just taken on a great
Amateur Naval Historian | responsibility. I will do my
Email: BWV_Wiesbaden@t-online.de | utmost to meet it” – Nimitz
—————————————————————–
The United States Navy in the Pacific War 1941 – 1945
http://www.microworks.net/pacific
The ships, the men, the battles
—————————————————————–

Despite my untimely absence, work on the site has continued, and will in the
next minutes be uploaded to the site (now accesible through www.microworks.com
as well). This includes: additional biographies, more planes, and if
you do not
mind incompleteness of proof-reading, and missing back-links, the
Battle of Savo
Island.
Also, the site has undergone a COMPLETE rebuild, to which I would like to know
your opinion.

Enjoy your visit (while I go and figure out what EXACTLY I changed
over the last
month…),
Tim

Tim Lanzendoerfer | “I have just taken on a great
Amateur Naval Historian | responsibility. I will do my
Email: BWV_Wiesbaden@t-online.de | utmost to meet it” – Nimitz
—————————————————————–
The United States Navy in the Pacific War 1941 – 1945
http://www.microworks.net/pacific
The ships, the men, the battles
—————————————————————–

I recently (Dec 31st) managed to acquire the domain name MICROWORKS.COM to
go along with the current names MICROWORKS.NET and the older MICROWRKS.COM.

So now when you are sending a message to the list you can use either of the
above names and your message should go through.

FYI, just to let you all know that in addtion to the list being up for a
year we have 112 Subscribers.

Dave Riddle

|———————————————————–|
| David W. Riddle | http://www.microworks.net |
| (O) 602-813-4569 | http://www.openlines.com |
| (F) 602-813-4659 | http://www.surfpools.com |
| | |
| 1958 TR-3A TS34575L | An interesting company legal |
| vintage racer | history website! |
| | http://www.splashpools.com |
|———————————————————–|

Ladies, Gentlemen,
if anybody tried to get ahold of me during the last five to six
weeks, I’m sorry
for my inability to be reached. I have moved house two weeks ago, and my
telephone account has not moved along in the same speed. I have only recovered
my Email and Internet connections today. Sorry for the inconvenience thus
created. I will respond to all Emails as soon as I can, but I would
like to say
also that if you wrote to me, you should better resend those mails – I am
unsure if I will manage to recover any of them.

Thanks for your patience,
Tim

Tim Lanzendoerfer | “I have just taken on a great
Amateur Naval Historian | responsibility. I will do my
Email: BWV_Wiesbaden@t-online.de | utmost to meet it” – Nimitz
—————————————————————–
The United States Navy in the Pacific War 1941 – 1945
http://www.microworks.net/pacific
The ships, the men, the battles
—————————————————————–