On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:01:35 GMT, "Steve R." wrote:


"SteveB" wrote in message
news

"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:29:57 -0500, Ignoramus15568
wrote:

The article does not amount to proof, but it is interesting. Another
one mentioned that if quality welding was available and used to make
the hull, then it would not open up the way it did due to the
collision.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/sc...15titanic.html

the problem was caused by the cold temperature properties of the
particular alloy used in the plates of the hull.

I heard it was inclusions of higher than normal levels of things that had
undesirable properties at low temperatures, sulfur being one of them,
IIRC. May have been beryllium. Or Einsteinium. I'm not sure.

Steve


I have an old structural engineering book, published about 2 years after the
sinking. The problem caused by too much sulphur was well known at the time.
It's a UK textbook, "Theory of Structures".

Steve R.


I'm going to quote a portion of a post from a chap named Roger Long on
rec.boats cruising. I will not quote the entire post as you can
contact him on that group if you are interested.

Quote

Yes, the rivet lady. Cute gal. I was really looking forward to being
flown out to Seattle to be filmed with her as part of the show but she
wouldn't even answer our phone calls.

They kind of overlook some basic engineering and structural facts.
With a structure as heavy and delicate as the Titanic, and even a
modern welded ship would be considered delicate in these terms, and
something as immovable as a iceberg entrained in the water mass, the
damage path was going to be determined by the geometry of the
encounter.

Unquote

Science via the New York Times is a sometimes thing.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)