Is there really such a thing as an unsinkable ship?
Is there or has there been a ship that simply cannot be sunk by the conditions faced at sea?
>>897397
Difficult to imagine a small wood or foam core boat sinking. Flipping over and breaking up perhaps, but not sinking. Buoyant hull materials as a saftey feature would not practically scale up to ship size though.
>>897397
Lifeboats and submarines. Though the subs technically do sink ...
>>897397
No, no ship is impossible to capsize but the really massive ones are difficult to push over just by waves. The Costa Concordia has proven that even large ships can be brought down pretty easily. Theoretically if you enclosed the top half of a ship with an airtight material and added gyroscopes to the bridge, you could make a vessel immune to capsizes. Of course if the material is punctured it could sink.
>>897397
The titanic should not have sunk, the captain was not smart enough to counterflood the aft compartments
>>897397
Most vessels nowdays cannot be sunk by conditions faced at sea, if procedures are properly followed.
Ships, as was the case with the Titanic, usually sink because of the human factor involved.
>>897397
What an unsinkable ship might look like.
>Captcha: Select all images with boats
>>897397
>a ship that simply cannot be sunk
Our friendship :-)
One would have to break the hull into little pieces and even then the little pieces would probably refuse to sink.
>>897445
Look at pic related. This is how far Titanic could flood before compartments started going under.
Titanic had the first six compartments flooded, out of a possible four. If aft compartments were flooded, she would STILL sink too low in the water to stop sinking. Her sinking was inevitable given her damage.
Now, you COULD make the case that Britannic should have counterflooded, since she only sank because port holes had let in too much water into the after compartments.
>>897955
counterflooding would have worked, only 3 compartments were comprimized by the gash, the reason that 6 compartments got filled is because water went over the top of the bulkhead, the watertight compartments only worked for the lower decks. Counterflooding would have prevented the bow from sinking so low that the water would have gone over the watertight compartments
>>897432
Cruise ships are deliberately designed to have a high center of mass, which makes for a more comfortable cruise.
But it also means it will tip over relatively easily.
As for an unsinkable ship, not really. Sea conditions can get really bad. Think passing through a hurricane. It's going to fuck you up.
But if you allow controlled sinking, a submarine can feasibly make it through almost any kind of seafaring. Even if powerful underwater currents throw it around, it will probably not be compromised by them.
>>898014
>Cruise ships are deliberately designed to have a high center of mass, which makes for a more comfortable cruise.
that doesnt sound right, could you explain how having a ship that can easily heal side to side would be more comfortable?
>>898016
G is the center of gravity
M is the height of the metacenter (basically the point about which the ship rolls)
The distanace between G and M (GM - or metacentric height) determines how quickly the ship rolls.
GM essentially determines the lever arm that gravity uses to try and return the ship to upright.
When you raise G (bringing it closer to M). The lever arm is smaller, the ship takes more time to roll (a more comfortable ride). The difference in ride is referred to as being "stiff" or "tender". On a passenger ship you want to be as tender as possible while maintaining a safety factor of GM.
>>897955
Didn't Titanic not have tops on those compartments that overflowed into the adjacent one and the next so on and so forth?
Seems really stupid and obvious.
>>898094
This was still the age of wooden decks. Hull compartmentalization wasn't what it is today.
>>898094
They understood the risks, but they only wanted to build so many waterproof hatches. They are expensive. No matter how safe you make it, it will still be saferer yet if you compromise other design goals even more. There were (and are) dudes sailing around without any compartmentalization at all.
>>897397
not to get all /x/ but the Titanic was a JP Morgan run conspiracy.
>>898102
>There were (and are) dudes sailing around without any compartmentalization at all.
namely people who sail sailboats. I have never once seen any cruising/racing sailboat with watertight compartments, not even the big 100'+ ones. and sailboats are the most likely boats to sink by running aground
>>898115
when you say cap I assume you are referring to the top of the compartments, and yes, those caps are referred to as decks. the designers of the ship were assuming no more than two compartments could be breached by hull damage so they were no anticipating the need to seal the decks above the compartments.
>>898113
Spread the truth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI
>>897397
Nope
The Habbakuk looks like it would have been a good candidate.
I mean, you could sink it, it'd just take several weeks
>>898184
>inb4 Russian sabotage.
http://jornaloide.com/witch-dog/
self righting, self bailing
>>898201
I've been here too long. I read that as self baiting.
>>898014
Not quite, they're designed for as much accommodation as possible on the smallest hull, which is what drives the structure upwards and increases the topweight. For vessels where stability is deliberately reduced try bulkies carrying high density cargos like ore
>>898666
Stability is further reduced by free surface from many more domestic tanks located higher than normal in the vessel.
>>898666
And yeah, small GM on purpose.
Some even have stabilizer fins.
>>897397
We've built a few already, actually.
Not intentionally, but they're out there.
>>898779
>Somebody believes this.
shaking my head to be honest family
>>898783
>I can't into science
>>898201
Invincible M* F*
>>898826
is it a ship though?
>>898832
Ships have boats. It has a boat.
>>898845
1,000 feet long and its called a boat. an ore boat, as it were.
>>898848
Row your ore with an ore
>>898848
I think it's crazy that the Edmund Fitzgerald sank in water shallower than it was long.
>>897397
A pontoon barge?
>>898865
The Edmunt Fitzgerald should have been the wake up call the industry needed to include attitude control on the MEL.
>>898817
>I can't tell the difference between science and liberal pseudo-science propaganda
>>898783
It exists, but not in the way most people think about it. It's really just an area with an unusual concentration of garbage. You can't walk on it or anything, but if you put a fine mesh net in the water you'd come up with bits of plastic. You'd also see floating debris (buoys, nets etc) more often than you would elsewhere.
Vice did a documentary on it. Don't watch it for the garbage patch, watch it for the unintentionally hilarious sexual tension of the crew that goes out to find it.
>>898941
Link or title please?
I went and searched their site and got a ton of results.
>>898953
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D41rO7mL6zM
It's a slow burn, like an hour long. But still pretty funny.
>>898941
I know it's a thing, but it certainly isn't the unsinkable mountain of trash that people portray it as.
>>898779
ship
noun
1.
a large boat for transporting people or goods by sea.
Read a fucking book
>>897445
I think going full speed when there's icebergs around was a bigger mistake...
>>897516
One of the concrete canoes did that a couple years ago at the eastern competition. Still didn't sink because they use special lightweight concrete.
>>898865
Go out on Michigan or Superior even in October. They are brutal. I actually got seasick on Lake Michigan because the waves come so quickly one after another.
>>897397
The Great Eastern had a double hull and took a gash 9 feet wide and 83 feet long and kept sailing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Eastern#Great_Eastern_Rock_incident
Double-hulls are pretty boss.
>>898202
Uh, no. If one compartment flooded and was sealed, the ship's buoyancy would keep the top of the compartment faaar above the level of water actually in the compartment.
Ahem
>>903137
comfy as fuck
>>898832
no fucking shit
>>903137
It's got a million holes all over it
>>903137
Can't say for sure, but on the cruise ship I worked on, boats that size were dual purpose. Lifeboats obviously, but also used as 'tenders' to ferry pax from the sideport to shore when we anchored/drifted/DPed.
>>903386
What did you do?
>>898848
Are lakers like this sea worthy?
>>897397
I'm pretty sure the Titanic's parent company didn't claim it was unsinkable.
That was some dumbass newspaper reporter who was overly impressed by it.
>>904522
Deck Cadet.
>>907711
>However, even though countless news stories after the sinking called Titanic unsinkable, prior to the sinking the White Star Line had used the term "designed to be unsinkable", and other pre-sinking publications described the ship as "virtually unsinkable".[13]
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_legacy_of_RMS_Titanic#Legends_and_myths
