On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Liam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>I've heard mention that because of that, they would have been better hitting >>it head on. > > Me too. > > A head-on collision would have broken open only the fore-most > "watertight" compartment, which, even if full of water, would > apparently not have caused the ship to sink. >
Ah, but would either of you choose to hit the iceberg (at the risk of damaging millions of pounds (in todays money) of internal fittings and the hull), and then explain to the captain you thought it would be safer to hit the iceberg than go around it! :-) It seems that a huge amount of bad coincidences all just built on each other caused her to sink, however the board of trade was mostly responsable for the loss of life (though not having a lifeboat drill didn't help), and was then hushed over by the same. Mike -- Michael Askin http://shoestring_DOT_zapto_DOT_org/
