http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBOPqNR_nN0" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBOPqNR_nN0

My first duty station was on the Abraham Lincoln.  Carrier duty is an experience.

IH sure got its money's worth, offa that lil decal!

And It should be left alone, its a war monument!

When it went down, were the aircraft on deck or in the air? And if in the air, where did they land?

shameless dude wrote: that's a heck of a hole below it

Just how thick is the metal where that hole is?

Walker wrote: At 6000 feet by all rights that radiator should be about the thickness of a quarter. Water pressure is pretty heavy duty down there. Which makes me wonder, does water pressure have any affect on something filled with water?

At 6000ft, the ambient pressure will be 182.5 atmospheres... 2680psi.

IF the radiator was filled with gas, it would have been crushed... but several things in play here... first being, that it, and the block, was mostly full of liquid coolant... second, is that the system is inherently vented above a certain differential pressure.  the cap on that tractor was probably good for not much more than 6psi or so, and the cap seal is certainly incapable of  much more than that in any direction.  Second, is that if there was any pressure crushing the upper or lower tanks, it would breach the solder joints in where the tubes meet the tanks FIRST.

Any of those circumstances would allow immediate inflow of seawater, and thus, compress any entrapped gasses, and allow any NOT trapped to escape.

This means the pressure INSIDE, is equalized with OUTSIDE, which means there's NO additional deflection imposed on any part of it.

Same would be true for the gas tank, as it was vented via the cap.

Many of you may have already seen the news...but for those who haven't... marine surveyors operating deep-see exploration equipment were doing forensic examination of the wreckage of the Titanic, to learn more about the techniques of shipbuilding and engineering.

The engineers were amazed that even though the boilers were down 12,500ft for over a hundred years, there was still water in them!!!

Only ever seen two strings that had to be recovered due to someone forgetting to fill internally while running to the sea floor. Do not remember at what water depth the engineers later figured up the one failed at but made a helluva mess, flattened that heavy wall casing like a paper towel tube.

We got one string back but on the other the snaplock connector parted between casing joints and we dropped the casing. Took an ROV to find it, latch us on with drill pipe/giant cables so we could get it back up under the rig to the moonpool and cut it apart with torches.

We wanted to leave it on the sea floor (2000') but Korean govt. wanted it recovered due to US subs patrolling that area, took us nearly a week.

chaskaduo wrote: Probably different alloying of the steel and paint for corrosion resistance.

This is a very, very important factor... they're two entirely different materials.

Britan's iron industry in the late 1800's was huge in comparison to the US... around 7 million tons of IRON produced in the mid 1870's, and reaching 10 million tons around the time the Titanic's keel was laid (1909).  This production was split- half was iron, the other was early alloys (steels).  Although the ship's design technology was formidable for it's time (1909), the metal, and method was absolutely outclassed in every way by later technology used in US warships.  the Titanic's plates are more iron than 'modern' steel. 

In stark contrast, the CV-8 Hornet's Yorktown-class 1939 hull is STEEL, produced using much better raw materials, process control, alloy chemistry, and quality control.  The US's steel industry went from 2 million tons in the early 1870's to 26 million by the time Titanic was built... and a huge jump up by the time the Yorktown-class carriers were built.  A large majority of the US's ferrous production output was true steel, from the furnaces in Allentown/Bethlehem, Pittsburgh, Birmingham Alabama, Gary, Indiana, Milwaukee, and elsewhere.

The reason why this matters so much... is because the Titanic rests in a spot in the north atlantic where a combination of water temperatures, minerals and gases ejected from rifting have made wonderful home for a type of bacteria that voraciously consumes iron.  The Hornet's aquatic environment is much different with respect to bacteria and algae.

X 2

The rear tire at the bead isn't centered on the rim if it is still on the rim, I don't think that it is the camera angle making it look that way. The front tire looks ok. There is something half round at the front between the front wheels sticking out whatever that is.

I wouldn't be least bit surprised if there was a coal bunker fire... it happened all the time... Towboats pushing barges up the river in front of my house would have fires every so often...  but I doubt it had much contribution to the sinking.  Suffice to say that an iceberg was essentially a filet knife to the ship's belly.

CV-8 was beat up pretty bad by three Japanese bombs and two torpedos.  The crew did an incredible job of damage control, kept it afloat, but disabled, it was put in tow behind the Northampton... but at only 5 knots, and no maneuverability, it put TWO ships at serious risk.  Hornet took another torpedo hit, so the crew was pulled off, and they attempted to scuttle it with five inch rounds and torpedos... but it simply would NOT sink.  As it was adrift and abandoned, two Japanese destroyers sent it down with four torpedos.  Because of it still floating after all that damage, guys said the Hornet was a supernatural beast... and it was for that reason, that sailors were proud to see then name was revived with CV-12 (the Essex-class Kearsarge was renamed Hornet when it was finished in '43).  It probably confused and then mortified Japanese naval intelligence a bit to find that a ship they'd just reported sunk, was bearing down on the Caroline Islands only a year-and-something later... but with a totally new look, bristling with weapons and technology they'd never seen.

I'm certain that tug was 'tied down'.  Standard procedure for mobile equipment on ship to be secured when not in use.

CrestonM wrote: I've heard that theory, and I'll admit I don't know a lot about steamships, but I've often wondered even if they were burning so much coal, couldn't they still keep the reciprocating engines slowed down and just vent excess steam?

Dmiller is spot on...  it's not doing much work, it'd just be making lots of noise...

But also... the steamship's system was a CLOSED LOOP... steam went through the quad-expansion engines, THEN through the turbine, then through ships's dynamos, refrigeration system, cabin heating, and other functions, and condensed as it cooled... finally returning to the boiler feed nurse tank.  This did several things- first, it made absolute greatest use of all fuel energy, next, it provided universal power source for everything... and finally, eliminated the problem of desalination, and RAISING THE TEMPERATURE of feed-water.  If they desalinated and boiled seawater, it'd have to start at about 28F, and be raised to 350F to be ready for propulsion.  Condensing and recovering water meant that it was returning to the water feed tank at about 100F... and it was CLEAN (no salt). 

Them guys a hundred'n something years ago... they were smart.  Mebbie not good at dodging an iceberg, but if they had radar like we do now, it'd be a different story.  If they had genuine steel and arc welding technology (like what was used in the Hornet), it would've bounced off, with a really bad dent down the belly, and been in New York by the afternoon.