Manufacturing flaw in Titanic: cheap rivets.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/scien ... ic.html?hp
Iceberg 1, Rivets 0
-
nitrah55
- Posts: 1613
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:46 am
- Location: Section 239, Yankee Stadium
Iceberg 1, Rivets 0
I am about 25% sure of this.
-
PlacentiaSoccerMom
- Posts: 8134
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:47 am
- Location: Placentia, CA
- Contact:
-
MarleysGh0st
- Posts: 27965
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
- Location: Elsewhere
From the article:
I just saw a show on the History Channel this weekend that analyzed a couple pieces of the ship's bottom from where it broke in two. They determined that the ship must have split when it had lifted up to a much shallower angle than as depicted in the movie. That, in turn, let more water rush in, sinking it faster than they expected. Without out that, it might have stayed afloat long enough for the Carpathia to arrive in time for a rescue.
Gotta love marketing labels!Adding to the threat, the company, in buying iron for Titanic’s rivets, ordered No. 3 bar, known as “best” — not No. 4, known as “best-best,” the scientists found.
I just saw a show on the History Channel this weekend that analyzed a couple pieces of the ship's bottom from where it broke in two. They determined that the ship must have split when it had lifted up to a much shallower angle than as depicted in the movie. That, in turn, let more water rush in, sinking it faster than they expected. Without out that, it might have stayed afloat long enough for the Carpathia to arrive in time for a rescue.