Lets say that the Titanic do not hit the ice berg in 1912 and reach New York. How fast will she depart back to UK? The reason i ask is that the hull is weakened becauce of a coal fire that might have weakened the hull prior to the impact and let water in. If Titanic needed repair how long would that take to replace the damaged section.
Titanic do not hit ice berg, what is the impact of the coal fire
- Thread starter mattep74
- Start date
It would have no effect on the Titanic, small fires were a fact of life on large coal powered steam ships. The crew knew of the issue and had dealt with it accordingly before the impact. So Titanic would've arrived in New York and prepared for her trip back to Southampton.
Coal bunker fires were a routine nuisance that all ships of the period experienced occasionally, not an existential threat (unless it cooked off a capital warship's main magazine). If it hadn't been for the minor inconvenience of sinking en route Titanic would have coaled, turned round, embarked Europe-bound passengers, and been out again within a few days
Last edited:
It was. It was also, as others have said, utterly inconsequential.
A lot of butterflies are going to be possible with the likes of Astor, Guggenheim, Widener, et al now alive. Major Butt being alive... I don't know enough about him or Taft, but it could have an impact on the 1912 election. And there's also all those third-class passengers making it to shore and possibly achieving the American Dream...
the coal fire was a serious threat theory is nonsense made up by people who wanted to clickbait titantic and 1500 lives a few more times....lets not start on that awful documentary.
Fires happened regularly and it was out by that time.
Titanic makes it to New York to a fair bit of fanfair, sails back on the 20th, is rapidly eclipsed in size by Imperator and if she doesn't get straight up sunk in ww1 she has a good career with her sister serving white star.
Means some differences to the US ice patrols set up, regulations etc but thats waiting for another disaster to be change, or once they start building things approaching 60k board of trade gets their shit together, I could be completely wrong but i feel it was being reveiewed around the time they were under construction anyway.
We can discuss the passengers but what'd be interesting in my opinion is Andrews surviving and Ismays reputation doing the same, White Star and H&W will go down very interesting paths..
Fires happened regularly and it was out by that time.
Titanic makes it to New York to a fair bit of fanfair, sails back on the 20th, is rapidly eclipsed in size by Imperator and if she doesn't get straight up sunk in ww1 she has a good career with her sister serving white star.
Means some differences to the US ice patrols set up, regulations etc but thats waiting for another disaster to be change, or once they start building things approaching 60k board of trade gets their shit together, I could be completely wrong but i feel it was being reveiewed around the time they were under construction anyway.
We can discuss the passengers but what'd be interesting in my opinion is Andrews surviving and Ismays reputation doing the same, White Star and H&W will go down very interesting paths..
GeographyDude
Gone Fishin'
Which gives a big, main reason the captain wants a fast, successful time he can receive compliments for, and winningly defect to his officers and crew.
But the coal fire is a nice add-on reason.
And we humans are more affected by small add-on reasons than we probably rationally should be. We like achieving several goals at the same time. Of course, we do. In particular, if it’s a “logical” reason to do something we emotionally want to do anyway.
A lot of dead passengers, some of them rich and influential, live. The White Star Line probably does better business up until World War I. The Titanic itself probably gets comandeered by the Royal Navy for service in World War I and maybe gets a U boat torpedo while transporting passengers and hidden ordnance from New York instead of the Lusitania, or otherwise sunk by U boats.
Back in the day bunker fires were an ordinary occurrence on the coal fired ships. The problem is when you are dealing with partially filled bunkers and the fact you might get a coal dust explosion, coal dust and grain dust explosions were a common occurrence back then, from an adjacent bunker on fire. You might go so far as to flood a partially or almost empty bunker to prevent this.
I don't really understand this sentence but if im reading it right
Theres no rush to get Titanic to New York to put out the fire, it was already out and the ship minus her iceberg encounter is completely seaworthy. Speeding through icefields was common practice (you either got the hell out of there or you got blocked in and stopped)
funny enough, had her watertight doors been closed, Titanic would've probably survived the damage lusitania took. Britannic would've likely survived too but it happened during a shift change and thus the watertight doors were opened, and then when the mine struck and warped the ship slightly, said doors jammed.
Are you talking about the idea that people wanted the Titanic to break the transatlantic record? Because that's a myth. It wasn't fast enough to set a new record and everyone knew it. Even if it was, arriving early by a day or more would've irritated both the passengers and American customs officials.
I have the definitive scholarly article on the coal fire story. Here is a precis: The fire was not serious, was put out, and did not damage the ship. The "photographic evidence" was by someone who did not understand what the ship normally looked like. I tried to post here, but the article was too large to upload on this site, and then I found that is has been removed from the public domain, because they authors want to sell copies. So just as well that I didn't post, because I don't want to get banned.
The problem is I cannot find out how to buy the article and in searching for how to buy it, I come across umpteen sensational articles, some on reputable media like the BBC with the fire theory story. So I can see how a casual observer would think the fire theory story is legit. Thanks for nothing again, internet.
Here is a quote of the Conclusions of the Article, with a press contact email. I hope this length is considered fair use by the moderators here. If not I will delete:
From Titanic: Fire & Ice (Or What You Will) 2017, by Wormstedt et.al.
The problem is I cannot find out how to buy the article and in searching for how to buy it, I come across umpteen sensational articles, some on reputable media like the BBC with the fire theory story. So I can see how a casual observer would think the fire theory story is legit. Thanks for nothing again, internet.
Here is a quote of the Conclusions of the Article, with a press contact email. I hope this length is considered fair use by the moderators here. If not I will delete:
From Titanic: Fire & Ice (Or What You Will) 2017, by Wormstedt et.al.
If John Jacob Astor IV survives, it's likely that he retains ownership of the original Waldorf-Astoria. IOTL the hotel passed out of his family's hands after his death, and eventually the Empire State Building was built on the site.
ITTL maybe the ESB never gets built and the makers of King Kong (1933) go with their alternate plan top have the film end in Yankee Stadium.
ITTL maybe the ESB never gets built and the makers of King Kong (1933) go with their alternate plan top have the film end in Yankee Stadium.
A result of the Titanic not sinking of interest to Canadians, is that Charles Melville Hays, the driving force behind the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, would not have died. The Grand Trunk Pacific was a competitor to the Canadian Pacific Railway, and was an ambitious railway, steamship, and hotel company. They chose their railhead to meet the sea at Prince Rupert, which is much closer to Asian ports by the Great Circle Route than Vancouver, which the CPR chose as their port.
Much of the expansion plans for the GTP seemed to exist only in Hayes's head, and the company lost its way after his death, going into receivership in the post-World War One economic slump and being nationalized and absorbed into the Canadian National Railway.
All that might have happened anyway, the railway business is fierce and fickle. But perhaps with the relentless energy of Hayes still at the helm, the GTP could have taken prominence and Prince Rupert would have replaced Vancouver as Western Canada's main port. Someone could write a convincing Alt History timeline to that effect anyway.
en.wikipedia.org
Much of the expansion plans for the GTP seemed to exist only in Hayes's head, and the company lost its way after his death, going into receivership in the post-World War One economic slump and being nationalized and absorbed into the Canadian National Railway.
All that might have happened anyway, the railway business is fierce and fickle. But perhaps with the relentless energy of Hayes still at the helm, the GTP could have taken prominence and Prince Rupert would have replaced Vancouver as Western Canada's main port. Someone could write a convincing Alt History timeline to that effect anyway.
Charles Melville Hays - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Coal fires were very common during this period and the established method dealing with it was - to not deal with it and simply try to empty the Bunker
Several ships (particulalrly earlier steel hull coal fired vessels) were lost due to coal fires weakening hulls during this period and almost certainly the cause of the USS Maine exploding in 1898
So I suspect that the issue was common enough to be understood - but I am not sure if such a fire would have compromised Titanic's hull to the point that a specific repair would be needed.
David Flin
Gone Fishin'
I can recommend Why The Titanic Sank, by Brad Rousse.
It goes into the various myths, such as the coal fire, the chasing a speed record, the issue over the radios, and all the others.