One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

In article ,
Ed Pawlowski wrote:


I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

Weren't the tubs of the time heavy metal things that probably would have
just sunk like a rock anyway.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.

I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And - I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.

On Apr 14, 10:12*am, Home Guy wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.

I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And - I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.

most passengers didnt believe there was real danger, after all it was
advertised as unsinkable, and it went down fast.

recent news said most passengers thought it was safer to stay onboard

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:12:03 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.

I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And - I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.

Wow, if only you were aboard, no lives would have been lost.
Considering this took place 100 years ago and you've never seen the
ship, you sure made a lot of suppositions. What wee the tubs made
from? Used to be cast iron, but on the ship, I have no idea.

On 4/14/2012 9:12 AM, Home Guy wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.

I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And - I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.

another major problem is that the situation was downplayed until the
latter minutes and no one actually thought she would sink.

--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email

In article ,
Steve Barker wrote:

another major problem is that the situation was downplayed until the
latter minutes and no one actually thought she would sink.

Sounds like the Costa Concordia all over again.

m

"Home Guy" wrote in message ...
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have been
lots of wood crates, etc.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have
been used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs,
plugging drain holes and getting them launched is quite the
fantasy.

I'm sure the tubs had plugs or stoppers as standard equipment.

And I'm sure there were plenty of axes and other tools on a ship like
that.

And I think the staterooms were on the upper levels of the ship (not far
below decks).

And I think there was enough time to hack or break out the tubs (didn't
the ship take more than 2 hours to sink?).

And - I would think there would have been enough life-or-death
motivation to make all this happen.

The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a couple
of minutes
Most if not all of the people who ended up in the water, went down a few
minutes later.
Hypothermia is a very fast killer
http://www.startribune.com/local/146536735.html

"Attila.Iskander" wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

The ship was carrying lots of cargo, so I'm sure there would have
been lots of wood crates, etc.

The only problem is that survival in arctic waters is a matter of a
couple of minutes

What part of "finding enough wood or other junk to use as a raft" don't
you understand?

I can't believe the number of people that don't understand the concept
of assembling a pile of floating junk to sit on during the 3 to 6 hours
that the survivors in lifeboats had to wait until they were picked up.

The Titanic hit the iceberg at 11:40 pm, and the stern went under at
2:20 am. The first survivors were picked up at 4:10 am, and the last at
8:30 am.

For the others here that claimed that "people stayed on the ship -
believing it wouldn't sink" - ya, well, when the bow is so low and about
to go under, and you've got maybe an hour to make a crude raft, do you
still think that people on the ship are still thinking that the ship
won't sink???

On 4/14/2012 9:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

The comment did come from someone who lives in fantasy land...

On 4/14/2012 8:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

there was plenty of stuff to grab onto not to mention they had on life
vests. The main problem was the 29 degree water. A person only last a
few min at that temp even if they are in good shape.

--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email

On 4/14/2012 8:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?

There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.

One idea was to tie all the deck chairs together.

There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.



It is difficult to second guess...

One possible solution might have been to remain close to the iceberg, and
find a way to climb aboard the iceberg. I imagine that is not easy but
might be the best alternative. It was the only thing for miles around
floating.

It's a real shame that the wireless (radio) safety rules were not in effect,
there were other ships in the area but their radios were off for the night.

Mark

On Apr 14, 7:22*pm, gonjah gonjah.net wrote:
On 4/14/2012 8:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:





On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home *wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers *were drowned including several
American millionaires.
I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?
I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?

There have been studies done on "what they could have done" but
unfortunanly that's Monday morning quarterbacking. I think many believed
it wasn't going to sink, until it did.

That was what happened on the Costa Concordia too.

In article ,
gonjah gonjah.net wrote:

I can possibly agree with the wood theory, but removing tubs, plugging
drain holes and getting them launched is quite the fantasy.

If you're going to drown nothing is out of the question. Would a
bathtub float with a person in it?
I think the main concern was time to get all that done,
especially since it would have taken time to decide that you weren't
going to get in the lifeboats.
The REAL problem of all those scenarios is, even assuming you can
get it out, lug to the main deck and get it launched, how do you then
get down to it without getting wet?




One idea was to tie all the deck chairs together.

See above (g)

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

" wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?

Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or objects to
make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.

Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:57:37 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

" wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?

Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or objects to
make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.

LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.

Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...

No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.

" wrote:

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in
April?

Yes - hence the point about using any available materials or
objects to make a raft or floation aid to stay above the water.

LOL! A raft wouldn't keep them warm.

Including ripping out any handy bathtubs...

No chance of swamping a bathtub, either. What a moron.

LOL yourself.

You'd beat your own mother for a chance to float on the last pile of
wood or in the only bathtub available if it meant saving your own hide.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:35:13 -0400, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in April?

Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the water;
it would have been extremely difficult to launch anything and end up on
top of it without getting soaked in the process, and then odds are pretty
good that hypothermia will get you before someone rescues you.

Jules Richardson wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in
April?

Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!

Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the
water;

If the boat is on an even keel.

I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:24:18 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

Jules Richardson wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in
April?

Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!

Rafts *don't* stay above the water. Wood will only "float" about 10% of its
weight. If you can't displace water you're not going to stay dry. ...but I
wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, even after many have tried to
explain it to you.

Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the
water;

If the boat is on an even keel.

I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.

Those in the life boats didn't think it was very "easy".

It's truly amazing that you always have all the answers but none who were
actually there did. what a bozo

"Home Guy" wrote in message ...
Jules Richardson wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

You do know the water is rather chilly in the N. Atlantic in
April?

Again, how many times do I have to point out that the idea of making a
raft is to stay above the water???!?!?!



And how many times do we need to point out that
1) It would be difficult to assemble a raft on a sinking ship
2) It would be difficult to float the raft from a sinking ship
3) It would be near impossible to get the raft away from the sinking
ship, and thus not getting it sucked down WITH the ship
4) It would be nearly impossible to go from ship to raft without getting
soaked. A soaking that would result in hypothermia in minutes, whether you
are in or out of the water
5) Going unprotected into arctic water can case heart failure the moment
you go in.
It will also cause death within less than 10 minutes if you don't
have special gear to keep you warm (gear that did not even exist at the time
of the titanic)

Indeed... plus it was quite a long way down from deck level to the
water;

If the boat is on an even keel.

I don't know if you noticed or paid attention in history class, but the
boat began sinking bow-first. It made a rather shallow and easy entry
point into the water from the deck about an hour after it hit the
iceberg.

And the part were the boat is sliding under the water a t increasing speed,
is a place where there is so much suction that just about anything within
reach will go under WITH the boat, people and UNMANEUVERABLE rafts included.

There is a huge gap between your ignorant theories and reality.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:28:54 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

"...At 2.20 am, it sank, breaking loose from the bow section. The
remaining passengers and crew were plunged into lethally cold water
with a temperature of only 28 °F (-2 °C). Almost all of those in the
water died of hypothermia or cardiac arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....

Oren wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....

Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?

They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...

In article , Home Guy wrote:


They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...



But you need to not only float but to stay out of the water. How
would you go about doing that? Besides, it sank within 3 hours (~2:45
IIRC). Who would you pull off of manning lifeboats to get all this
stuff? How would you move it from the hold, especially with many of the
decks already flooded? How is all this supposed to happen in the small
time frame?

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:59:40 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

Oren wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....

Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?


Only in the movie.

They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...

Some wood floats better than others.

Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?

Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?

You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.

On 4/14/2012 2:04 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:59:40 -0400, Home wrote:

Oren wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.
Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....
Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?

Only in the movie.

I saw parts of it at the Titanic exhibit.



They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...
Some wood floats better than others.

Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?

The sea that night was dead calm.



Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?

You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.

True enough but there was lots of material to make quick floatation
devices (and filling the life boats would have helped immensely)

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:04:48 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:59:40 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

Oren wrote:

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to
make ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Almost all of those in the water died of hypothermia or cardiac
arrest within minutes or drowned"

A floatation aid wouldn't help....

Have you seen what the inside of that ship looked like?


Only in the movie.

They must have used several forests worth of wood.

Last I heard, wood floats...

Some wood floats better than others.

None floats very well. To survive in that environment one has to stay *dry*.

Have you been in rough 8 foot seas in the North Atlantic?

Floating on a pile of garbage?

Maybe they could get some hammers, nails and duct tape in the ship's
gift shop?

You don't build a raft like Huck Finn's in a short time.

....and sail it in the N. Atlantic in April. ...but that's a Canuckistani, for
ya, eh?

On 4/14/2012 7:28 AM, Home Guy wrote:
harry wrote:

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.

I thought it was too big to sink.

Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several
American millionaires.

I always found it strange that there wasn't enough wood or other
light-weight materials onboard that could have been scavanged to make
ad-hoc rafts or other floatation aids.

Weren't there enough bathtubs in the staterooms that could have been
used as one-person mini-boats?

Even with something to cling to, the water temperature was thought to
have been around 28°F. This is cold enough to kill an average person
through hypothermia in 15-45 minutes. Unconsciousness would occur after
a few minutes. o_O

TDD

harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Eighty-five percent of the women and children survived; seventy-five percent
of the men were lost.

It was a different time.

"harry" wrote in message
...
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Good British quality construction

On Apr 15, 2:55*pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...

One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers *were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Good British quality construction
There were three identical ships. One struck a mine in WW1 and sank.
The other was scrapped 50 yars later.

Amazingly, a survivor of the Titanic was on the Britannic when it
sank. (Survived again.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop


Never heard of the "SS San Franciso" then?
American ship built in New York sunk on maiden voyage in the same part
of the ocean without even hitting anything.

http://www.maritimeheritage.org/ship...nFrancisco.htm

It too was supposed to be unsinkable.
A gripping story of incompetence.

On 4/14/2012 4:41 AM, harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Many stories have come to us from the tragic sinking of the great
ship The Titanic...some are not as well known as others.

Most people don't know that back in 1912, Hellman's mayonnaise was
manufactured in England. In fact, the "Titanic" was carrying 12,000
jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico which
was to be the next port of call for the great ship after New York. To
date the largest shipment ever exported to Mexico.

The people of Mexico, who were crazy about the stuff, were eagerly
awaiting delivery and were disconsolate at the loss.

So much so thatthey declared a National Day of mourning which they still
observe today. It is known, of course, as Sinko de Mayo.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:49:19 -0400, Frank
wrote:

On 4/14/2012 4:41 AM, harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Many stories have come to us from the tragic sinking of the great
ship The Titanic...some are not as well known as others.

Most people don't know that back in 1912, Hellman's mayonnaise was
manufactured in England. In fact, the "Titanic" was carrying 12,000
jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico which
was to be the next port of call for the great ship after New York. To
date the largest shipment ever exported to Mexico.

The people of Mexico, who were crazy about the stuff, were eagerly
awaiting delivery and were disconsolate at the loss.

So much so thatthey declared a National Day of mourning which they still
observe today. It is known, of course, as Sinko de Mayo.

It took 20 days for the news to reach Mexico? Incredible!

On 4/15/2012 12:49 PM, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2012 4:41 AM, harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

Many stories have come to us from the tragic sinking of the great
ship The Titanic...some are not as well known as others.

Most people don't know that back in 1912, Hellman's mayonnaise was
manufactured in England. In fact, the "Titanic" was carrying 12,000
jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico which
was to be the next port of call for the great ship after New York. To
date the largest shipment ever exported to Mexico.

The people of Mexico, who were crazy about the stuff, were eagerly
awaiting delivery and were disconsolate at the loss.

So much so thatthey declared a National Day of mourning which they still
observe today. It is known, of course, as Sinko de Mayo.

GROAN! ^_^

TDD

On 14/04/12 4:41 PM, harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

.... because there were not enough escape pods!

--
@~@ You have the right to remain silent.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
�借貸! ��騙! ��交! �打交! �打劫! �自殺! 請考慮綜� (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 01:51:41 +0800, Man-wai Chang
wrote Re OT 15 April Titanic.:

On 14/04/12 4:41 PM, harry wrote:
One hundred years ago today (15 April) the Titanic sank.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic..._commemoration
Almost 3/4 of the passengers were drowned including several American
millionaires.

... because there were not enough escape pods!

But there was plenty of room for Bruce Ismay. He was on one of the
first lifeboats launched.

After the disaster, Ismay was savaged by both the American and the
British press for deserting the ship while women and children were
still on board. Some papers called him the "Coward Of The Titanic" or
"J. Brute Ismay" and suggested that the White Star flag be changed to
a white liver. Some ran negative cartoons depicting him deserting the
ship. The writer Ben Hecht, then a young newspaperman in Chicago,
wrote a scathing poem contrasting the actions of Capt. Smith and
Ismay. The final verse reads: "To hold your place in the ghastly face
of death on the sea at night is a seaman's job, but to flee with the
mob, is an owner's noble right."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.