Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Final Plunge: Titanic's HORRIFYING Last 5 Minutes" video.

  1. Really? You have, I assume, evidence to support your post? What? You haven't? Oh dear.
    5
  2. You obviously enjoy believing conspiracist videos. Titanic, like her sister, was only insured for two thirds of her building costs, which meant that White Star lost a major asset and £500,000 when she sank.
    4
  3.  @litepaw7  I fear it is a case of someone accidentally stumbling across a conspiracist video, and swallowing everything it says whole. Still, easier than trying to think, I suppose.
    4
  4.  N-Murder-Drones-  Which is not how alcohol really affects body temperature.
    4
  5. Olympic was damaged in a collision with HMS Hawke in the Solent in September, 1911. She returned to Belfast, where Harland & Wolff repaired her in order for her to return to sea before the end of November. The captain was not negligent, as Olympic was in the charge of a Solent Pilot at the time. White Star were so obviously not short of funds that, in the same month that Olympic returned to sea, they ordered the third Olympic, RMS Britannic, from Harland & Wolff. No repairs can be seen on the wreck, although a number of features unique to Titanic and not to be found on the Olympic of 1912 can be. Typing in capitals doesn't make a comment any less daft, by the way.
    4
  6. Where switchers & conspiracists are concerned, I gave up on it a while ago.
    3
  7. No, they weren't. Unless of course you choose to believe an evidence free myth invented in the 1990s.
    3
  8. How do you explain her sister Olympic, which was equally lavish and was also a successful liner for 23 years?
    3
  9.  @bullruncrypto1503  Olympic's sea trials lasted two days. Titanic's sea trials began at 6 A.M. on Tuesday, April 2nd 1912, just two days after her fitting out was finished and eight days before she was due to leave Southampton on her Maiden Voyage. The trials were delayed for a day due to bad weather, but by Monday morning it was clear and fair, with only a light breeze. Aboard were 78 stokers, greasers and firemen, and 41 members of crew. No domestic staff appear to have been aboard. Representatives of various companies travelled on Titanic's sea trials, Thomas Andrews and Edward Wilding of Harland and Wolff and Harold A. Sanderson of IMM. Lord Pirrie was too ill to attend. Jack Phillips and Harold Bride served as radio operators, and performed fine-tuning of the Marconi equipment. Francis Carruthers, a surveyor from the Board of Trade, was also present to see that everything worked, and that the ship was fit to carry passengers. The sea trials consisted of a number of tests of her handling characteristics, carried out first in Belfast Lough and then in the open waters of the Irish Sea. Over the course of about twelve hours, Titanic was driven at different speeds, her turning ability was tested and a "crash stop" was performed in which the engines were reversed full ahead to full astern, bringing her to a stop in 850 yards (780 m) or 3 minutes and 15 seconds. The ship covered a distance of about 80 nautical miles (92 mi; 150 km), averaging 18 knots (21 mph; 33 km/h) and reaching a maximum speed of just under 21 knots (24 mph; 39 km/h). After her sea trials her sailing safety certificate was certified for one year. Put simply, more extensive trails were carried out in Olympic because she was the first ship of her class. There was no logical reason to repeat such a detailed trial for Titanic.
    3
  10. How?
    2
  11. Well, at least they did in the movie.
    2
  12.  @tims_always_fishing7117  Why? The evidence for it is just as absent now as it was in 1912.
    2
  13. Wilheim Gustloff wasn't an 'accident.' It was a German auxiliary warship sunk by a Soviet submarine in wartime.
    2
  14. Can you name any other liner of the period so designed?
    2
  15. Perhaps you aren't aware of the size of the berg?
    2
  16. Feel free to name any ship, then or now, which had such lights.
    2
  17.  @Tomb-Wraith  Californian's watchkeeping officers weren't confused at all. They were concerned enough to bring the matter to the attention of Captain Lord, who chose not to investigate. Not even having his wireless operator switch his set back on. Carpathia was also unable to help. Should she not have bothered to try, either?
    2
  18.  @miniflem1  Agreed. 'The raging fire below the water line exasibated the vulnerbaility of the strutcural integrity' was a comment in the original pos, not yours.
    2
  19. Five of Titanic's boilers were never connected. She was never at full speed. Moreover, Smith was not pressured into trying to make record time to New York. The Olympics had two propellers driven by reciprocating engines, and a centre one driven by a low power turbine. Their Cunard rivals the Mauretanias had four turbine driven propellers. The Mauretanias were, as a result, four to five knots faster. These are known facts, easily verifiable. A shame you didn't bother.
    2
  20. I challenge you to produce any evidence at all which suggests that Astor & Guggenheim opposed the Fed. There is evidence, of course, that Straus supported the idea. You are believing a 1990s myth. Good luck supplying your proof.
    2
  21. Third class passengers were not 'trapped' below. At least, not according to those who later gave evidence.
    2
  22.  @2012gallina  They were in lower sections of the hull which made their escape more difficult, Just as Titanic's engineers almost all died for the same reason. You used the word 'trapped,' however, which was not the case. Or, at least, the evidence given by third class survivors states that they were not trapped.
    2
  23. It may be an opinion. But it is an idiotic one.
    2
  24.  @almightywhitey6955  Philip Framklin was a businessman, not a marine architect, who made a statement designed to calm the anxieties of a crowd which had gathered at IMM's offices in New York. The comment was made from ignorance, and swiftly retracted. No-one from H & W, who built the ship, or from White Star's offices in Britain, ever made such a statement.
    2
  25. Indeed. The Olympics cost £1.5 million each to build. When Titanic sank, White Star lost a major asset, their safety record, and £500,000, as Olympic & Titanic were insured for £1 million each. Who came up with this brilliant scam? Cunard?
    2
  26. Except that neither the designers nor the company ever made such a claim.
    2
  27. Had you actually bothered to read the evidence give by third class survivors at the US Inquiry, you would have known that they were not kept below.
    2
  28. Remarkable! Titanic was never anywhere near Liverpool.
    1
  29. White Star didn't cut corners. They accepted a quorarion for the ships from Harland & Wolff, who built them. The design allowed for the provision of more lifeboats had the Board of Trade so required, but there was no such requirement and the Olympics actually carried more that the regulations demanded.
    1
  30.  @DANIELLE_BREANNA_LACY  Actually, there had been a lifeboat drill for the crew in Southampton, and after the order had been given to launch the boats, they were launched, but there was barely sufficient time to launch them all.
    1
  31.  @DANIELLE_BREANNA_LACY  ' I know there was supposed to be a lifeboat drill, but it got canceled out of overconfidence that the Titanic wouldn’t sink.' Then what you know is wrong. There had been a lifeboat drill in Southampton. Lifeboat drills did not involve passengers, only crew members. There was no overconfidence that Titanic wouldn't sink, only that the Olympics were as well designed as modern ship design and building techniques could make them. The myth of the claims that Titanic was described as unsinkable was, ironically, invented after she sank. Titanic struck the iceberg at 11.40 p.m. Boats were prepared for launch at 12.00 midnight, after Boxhall had completed his inspection. Andrews also did a detailed examination, and Smith seems to have known the worst by around 12.15 - 12.30. The first boat reached the water at 12.45 am. By then, the 'Women & children' order had already been given. It did not delay any launch. 'more lifeboats would’ve at least given more people something to float on like Collapsible A and Collapsible B did.' That is simply surmise. the collapsibles were not secured to the deck, but simply on chocs. Any extra lifeboats would have required connecting to the davits and then launching.
    1
  32. Wherever did you get such a bizarre idea?
    1
  33. You mean like Olympic, a successful and much loved liner for 24 years?
    1
  34. What political scam?
    1
  35. 'Andrews had said Titanic's pieces could float individually.' When did he say that, and to whom?
    1
  36. Ever heard of the designer of the Olympic class, Alexander Carlisle? Obviously not.
    1
  37. Brilliant! You managed to show your total ignorance of the subject in eight lines and two words. Congratulations.
    1
  38. Nonsense. The binoculars were irrelevant.
    1
  39. There whoever wrote that was a fool.
    1
  40. Her sister was a safe, successful, liner for 23 years.
    1
  41.  @CJ-zp7qj  Your question doesn't make sense.
    1
  42.  @CJ-zp7qj  Because Titanic followed the normal route for transatlantic liners. The same as had been followed for many years, and was regularly used by both White Star & Cunard. You suggest that she should had followed a different course. Why?
    1
  43. No.
    1
  44.  @priatalat  But the entire engine room and boiler section of the ship was compromised and wide open to water ingress.
    1
  45. The builders never claimed anything of the sort.
    1
  46.  @adamirishconundrum851 But that only happened in a movie, not in fact.
    1
  47.  @Tomb-Wraith  I don't think you understand the Tradition of the Sea at all, do you? Of course they were concerned, or they wouldn't have drawn Lord's attention to the flares. Lord was vilified because of the improbable reasons he gave for not responding to the worries of his officers.
    1
  48.  @Tomb-Wraith  'Don't really believe in Traditionalism in any sense of the word.' Then let us all hope that someone as self-centred as you never gains command of a ship. Fortunately, Captain Rostron was clearly a better person than you will ever be, or there would have been no survivors. 'I honestly believe the confusion stemmed from the fact that Titanic not only did not fire the flares in correct intervals, they were the wrong color.' Then you simply display your ignorance. White flares were the correct means of signalling distress in 1912. That explains why Titanic was supplied with 36 state-of-the art Socket Signals, all of which were white with explosive heads. 'I don't blame Lord for writing off their worries.' Perhaps that explains why Californian's witnesses at the Inquiry did not attempt to support him, but largely wrote him off and distanced themselves from him?
    1
  49.  @Tomb-Wraith  'No. Red is, and has always been, the traditional standard for distress. Not white.' Not in 1912 it wasn't. Look up any book about the methods of distress signalling at sea in 1912. White flares were used because they were visible from a greater distance. You will not find any reference to the idea that distress flares must be red. Furthermore, you seem to be determined to ignore the anxieties of Lord's own crew. Why would Lord have been vilified had he not got there in time? Rostron didn't get there in time either, and was saluted worldwide as a hero. 'She could hold 54 passengers.' Wrong. She had CABINS for 54 passengers. Californian was twice as big as the V & W destroyers which took part in rhe Dunkirk evacuation, and had much greater on board space that a warship. Many of those destroyers brought over 800 troops back from Dunkirk on each of several trips. Moreover, Californian could have expected other ships, such as Carpathia, to arrive in two or three hours, which could them take off the survivors from her. ' I don't really care who supported him.' Apart from you, you would struggle to find anyone who comes into that category, then or now.
    1
  50. Indeed. The Olympics cost £1.5 million each to build. When Titanic sank, White Star lost a major asset, their safety record, and £500,000, as Olympic & Titanic were insured for £1 million each. Who came up with this brilliant scam? Cunard?
    1
  51. Has it not occurred to you that, had there really been a ' raging fire below the water line ' then the ship would not have sailed? Mariners of the time were not idiots, although clearly many people of today apparently are.
    1
  52.  @miniflem1  Yes, there was. A minor, smouldering, fire caused by spontaneous combustion of wet coal. It was already being dealt with by one of Joseph Bell's teams, and never at any time posed the slightest threat to the ship. It was certainly not 'a raging fire below the waterline.' At least, not according to stoker testimony at the British Inquiry.
    1
  53. Titanic was not shoddily built.
    1
  54.  @angloaust1575  Yet her sister Olympic, built from the same materials in the same yard, was a successful liner for almost a quarter of a century.
    1
  55.  @angloaust1575  Precisely! Which means that, except in totally extraordinary circumstances which had not been expected or even contemplated, Titanic was a safe and reliable vessel. Would you consider RMS Lusitania to have been shoddily built because Leonard Peskett did not incorporate anti-torpedo bulges into the design?
    1
  56. 'Who was on that ship that the DS wanted gone?' Nothing. It was a simple accident.
    1
  57.  @johngibson4834  Well, as you want a serious answer. No, they couldn't.
    1
  58.  @2012gallina  In your case, I suspect 'ignorance' is perhaps more appropriate.
    1
  59.  @2012gallina  No, but perhaps I have read rather more books and archives about the events surrounding Titanic that you clearly have.
    1