General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: sinking
Posted by:
kurt
()
Date: June 18, 2001 01:27AM
<HTML>That\'s an interesting question, Tony - and a very valid one for this forum.
There are a number of factors that make every sinking different. I\'ve never (knock on wood) been in one, but here are some thoughts...
The Titanic sank rather slowly - three hours or so, allowing a lot of time for drama, and therefore the basis for a \'really cool movie\'. The Titanic also went down on an even keel (allowing lifeboats to be launched) in perfectly calm waters (storms and waves did not overturn any lifeboats). Most sinking were not so kindly situated...
Some ships sink slowly, some quickly.
Most ships torpedoed in WWII were much smaller (avg about 4,000 to 5,000 tons vs the 40,000 ton Titanic) and sank quickly. Many sank very quickly, in only a few minutes, some in a few seconds. Others slowly sank over a period of several hours or even days as damage control parties desperately tried to save their ship from raging fires and crippling floodwaters....
If the torpedoes hit gasoline, or explosives, or the ship\'s boilers, the ship tended to explode and sink almost instantly. There would be little time for launching lifeboats - if you survived the initial explosion. Few did.
If a ship was hit, but did not explode, there might be fires, and certainly flooding. Some crewmen and passengers might be injured, or burned. Desperate attempts would be made to stop the flooding, repair damage, and put out fires. Power would often go out as floodwaters shorted out motors and extinguished boilers, leaving the interior pitch black, and the firefighting pumps useless.
If there was a fire, it might cause explosions later on when it reached gasoline or explosives. Even coal or wheat dust can be explosive under the right conditions. These secondary explosions would often kill or injure those working on the repair of fire and flooding damage.
A boat rarely sank into the water evenly, usually tilting over at a great angle, making it hard to stay on the deck, or launch lifeboats. As the boat sank, it would tend to suck swimmers underwater and drown them.
If the water was cold (like in the North Atlantic) people would die in minutes if not fetched up into a rescue ship. In warmer waters you might survive for days or weeks - if you had a raft or boat - there are some amazing survival stories - though most would die of exposure and thirst....In tropical waters there might be sharks to deal with.
In WWII, chances are that other ships would not stop to help you - they were afraid of getting torpedoed too - though \'rescue\' ships - escorts that trailed the convoy - tended to try to pick up survivors.
Basically, being torpedoed and sunk was a very dangerous and terrifying experience - many crewmen would die, fighting fires, flooding, or freezing or drowning in the ocean.
These pitiful and horrible deaths of civilian merchant mariners is the main reason why the allied powers during WWI, and initially in WWII, believed that sub warfare was immoral - sinking a civilian ship without warning, and then leaving the survivors to their fate in the open ocean was a cruel act of murder, or so it was felt at the time.
And, Tony, I understood that you said that you thought the Titanic was a cool movie, not that being on a sinking ship was cool. No need for anyone to be offended by your question or its wording..... </HTML>
There are a number of factors that make every sinking different. I\'ve never (knock on wood) been in one, but here are some thoughts...
The Titanic sank rather slowly - three hours or so, allowing a lot of time for drama, and therefore the basis for a \'really cool movie\'. The Titanic also went down on an even keel (allowing lifeboats to be launched) in perfectly calm waters (storms and waves did not overturn any lifeboats). Most sinking were not so kindly situated...
Some ships sink slowly, some quickly.
Most ships torpedoed in WWII were much smaller (avg about 4,000 to 5,000 tons vs the 40,000 ton Titanic) and sank quickly. Many sank very quickly, in only a few minutes, some in a few seconds. Others slowly sank over a period of several hours or even days as damage control parties desperately tried to save their ship from raging fires and crippling floodwaters....
If the torpedoes hit gasoline, or explosives, or the ship\'s boilers, the ship tended to explode and sink almost instantly. There would be little time for launching lifeboats - if you survived the initial explosion. Few did.
If a ship was hit, but did not explode, there might be fires, and certainly flooding. Some crewmen and passengers might be injured, or burned. Desperate attempts would be made to stop the flooding, repair damage, and put out fires. Power would often go out as floodwaters shorted out motors and extinguished boilers, leaving the interior pitch black, and the firefighting pumps useless.
If there was a fire, it might cause explosions later on when it reached gasoline or explosives. Even coal or wheat dust can be explosive under the right conditions. These secondary explosions would often kill or injure those working on the repair of fire and flooding damage.
A boat rarely sank into the water evenly, usually tilting over at a great angle, making it hard to stay on the deck, or launch lifeboats. As the boat sank, it would tend to suck swimmers underwater and drown them.
If the water was cold (like in the North Atlantic) people would die in minutes if not fetched up into a rescue ship. In warmer waters you might survive for days or weeks - if you had a raft or boat - there are some amazing survival stories - though most would die of exposure and thirst....In tropical waters there might be sharks to deal with.
In WWII, chances are that other ships would not stop to help you - they were afraid of getting torpedoed too - though \'rescue\' ships - escorts that trailed the convoy - tended to try to pick up survivors.
Basically, being torpedoed and sunk was a very dangerous and terrifying experience - many crewmen would die, fighting fires, flooding, or freezing or drowning in the ocean.
These pitiful and horrible deaths of civilian merchant mariners is the main reason why the allied powers during WWI, and initially in WWII, believed that sub warfare was immoral - sinking a civilian ship without warning, and then leaving the survivors to their fate in the open ocean was a cruel act of murder, or so it was felt at the time.
And, Tony, I understood that you said that you thought the Titanic was a cool movie, not that being on a sinking ship was cool. No need for anyone to be offended by your question or its wording..... </HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
sinking
|
tony | 06/17/2001 09:40AM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Don Presley | 06/17/2001 10:56AM |
|
RE: sinking
|
JD Thomas | 06/18/2001 02:10PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
parade | 06/17/2001 11:27AM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Brian Corijn | 06/17/2001 04:43PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Hans.peter.Lau | 06/17/2001 08:35PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
james Stewart | 06/18/2001 02:05AM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Walter M. | 06/17/2001 05:54PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Don Presley | 06/17/2001 06:54PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
JD Thomas | 06/18/2001 02:13PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Roy Prince | 06/17/2001 10:29PM |
|
RE: SS Katha
|
Brian Corijn | 06/18/2001 08:53AM |
|
RE: SS Katha
|
Roy Prince | 06/18/2001 09:51PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
tony | 06/18/2001 03:36PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
JD Thomas | 06/18/2001 04:12PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
Roy Prince | 06/18/2001 09:35PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
kurt | 06/18/2001 01:27AM |
|
RE: sinking
|
JD Thomas | 06/18/2001 02:08PM |
|
RE: sinking
|
MPC | 06/18/2001 05:23PM |