Page 17 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 19 - 22
P. 17
front. 20283. (Mr. Rowlatt.) What you mean is that the ship would have telescoped herself? - Yes, up against the iceberg. 20284. And stopped when she telescoped enough? - Yes, that is what happened in the “Arizona.” 20285. Now, the watertight subdivisions - you have a heading in your report as to that? - Yes. 20286. You say it was arranged that the bulkheads and divisions should be so located that the ship should remain afloat in the event of any two adjoining compartments being flooded.” Was that achieved in this ship - that she could float with any two watertight compartments flooded? Have you any little picture of that? Do not go into it in detail. - I have a plan showing the original calculations which were made. 20287. We do not want any calculations, because we should not understand them? - Well, I can show the results of them - the effect on the ship of flooding each pair of compartments, my Lord. (A plan was handed to the Commissioner.) It is the original calculation which was made and a copy of the original plan. It was to show the effect on the trim of the ship of flooding each pair of watertight compartments. 20288. (The Commissioner.) Is this a plan for this Enquiry, or made in the course of the construction of the ship? - The plan was made in the course of the construction of the ship to satisfy ourselves that she would comply with this condition, which was put to use as one of the conditions. The Commissioner: I should like Professor Biles to see this. Mr. Rowlatt: May we begin at the other end of the plan, my Lord? - Your Lordship sees this is a series of sections arranged so as to show every possible combination of adjoining compartments. 20289. (The Commissioner.) Were these plans submitted to the Board of Trade? - No. 20290. (Mr. Rowlatt.) I will ask one question. Have you drawn here a picture of each pair of adjoining compartments being flooded, beginning at the bow, exclusive of the collision bulkhead? - Exclusive of the forepeak, which has quite a small effect - only a few inches. 20291. Have you put upon this longitudinal section of the ship, where the waterline would be if those two compartments were flooded? - Yes, and in each case, as you will see, the line comes nearer and nearer to the deck line. It comes closer up, and then begins to get further down again. 20292. That, of course, depends upon intricate calculation? - More or less intricate calculation. Professor Biles is familiar with it. 20293. It is the fact, as I understand it, that any two adjoining compartments may be flooded and the top of the bulkhead will still be above the water? - Still be above water. It will be above the waterline by an amount which is about double the amount recommended by the Bulkhead Committee in 1891, and also be more above the waterline than in the case of an awning deck ship near 300 feet long, undamaged. 20294. How much? - The lowest case, I think, was 2 feet 7 inches. 20295. Two and a half to 3 feet was the worst? - Yes, and only one as bad as that. 20296. Now, suppose two compartments flooded which are not adjoining? - It is usually a great deal less severe on the ship, the compartments being substantially the same size as they are in this case. 20297. (The Commissioner.) I am afraid I am interrupting your story, but can you tell what plans were submitted to the Board of Trade? - Offhand I cannot, my Lord. 20298. But you will ascertain for us? - I can ascertain. 20299. What assumption have you proceeded upon when making these calculations as to the cargo in the ship? - There are quite a list of deductions. In the first place, it is assumed that 5 percent of the volume of the space flooded will be occupied by the structure of the ship, such as
   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22