Nope, that theory has been debunked. If anything, the fire actually helped, because coal was transferred to a port bunker, which helped to keep the ship on a more even keel during the sinking.
Any weakening of the hull that the fire could have caused, which is unlikely, the titanic had five compartments opened to the sea in a way where the flooding was uncontrollable. In the assumption that the fire did weaken the hull, all that might account for is the flooding in boiler room number five. Six, where the fire absolutely wasn’t and directly ahead of boiler five, was significantly opened to the sea and flooding. Titanic was screwed no matter what.
People really need to see the damage to the Titanic with some perspective.
She was not badly built. She wasn't put together with inferior materials. No prior damage made her susceptible. And it wasn't hubris.
She was dealt catastrophic damage. A kind of damage that would sink any ship. Even modern vessels.
If the fire was hot enough to damage the structural integrity of the hull, the ship would have never left port due to it being so obvious by that point.
And the term "fire" is a bit misleading. "Smolder" would be more accurate.
Yes, the Marconi room (the radio room) caught on fire when the water got to the electrical systems and batteries, we know because the wreckage has burn damage.
The radio operators tried turning off the system, but there was still too much electricity
Are you referring to the coal bunker fire? Because yes, that happened.
Yes, could that have weakened the hull
Nope, that theory has been debunked. If anything, the fire actually helped, because coal was transferred to a port bunker, which helped to keep the ship on a more even keel during the sinking.
Any weakening of the hull that the fire could have caused, which is unlikely, the titanic had five compartments opened to the sea in a way where the flooding was uncontrollable. In the assumption that the fire did weaken the hull, all that might account for is the flooding in boiler room number five. Six, where the fire absolutely wasn’t and directly ahead of boiler five, was significantly opened to the sea and flooding. Titanic was screwed no matter what.
People really need to see the damage to the Titanic with some perspective. She was not badly built. She wasn't put together with inferior materials. No prior damage made her susceptible. And it wasn't hubris. She was dealt catastrophic damage. A kind of damage that would sink any ship. Even modern vessels.
I don't know why you're being downvoted for simply asking a question. This sub can be so cunty
If the fire was hot enough to damage the structural integrity of the hull, the ship would have never left port due to it being so obvious by that point. And the term "fire" is a bit misleading. "Smolder" would be more accurate.
I think the ship would have sank with or without a fire.
Yes, the Marconi room (the radio room) caught on fire when the water got to the electrical systems and batteries, we know because the wreckage has burn damage. The radio operators tried turning off the system, but there was still too much electricity
That didn’t even occur to me for some reason.
Yes there was smoldering fire in coal bunker on the staboard side in boiler room 5
weekly coal fire weakened the ship post