Thom, This is my theory as well. I have often thought the Fitz had a structural problem. There was a guy who posted years ago that said they ( the shipyard) would actually stuff metal between the keel and the outer plates, and then weld them in. And , it was at the area called the hinge. I believe Dudley Paquette of the Sykes also either saw this area or was also told about it.. He too was on the lake that night, He said it was the only time on the lake that he thought he was going to die. He said they actually had green water come over the boat, to the point where he could only see the stack. Can you imagine the Fitz with structural problems, overloaded, running hard, In a hurricane like storm? It would have lifted the rear up, bent her in the middle, pushed the nose down, That is when a structural defect or damage would show itself. And remember, the lake was only what 400 feet deep where they were. What if the Fitz hit the bottom with the front and the rear broke off, but not completely, and then swung around and hit the front. that would account for the damage to the wheelhouse. It was such a combination of little things that all lead to the outcome. Did the guys not batten down the hatches? did they hit the 6 fathom shoals? Was she abused to the point where the bottom was comprised? was McSorley running her hard/ Could be all those things or a couple. I think It really comes down to the fact that she had a deep structural problem for years, and they ignored it,,, Ignored it.... The day when everything had to be up to snuff, it wasn't. Why did all the other boats of the same age and design make it to port and the Fitz didn't.. 29 guys payed the price. If that was my dad or brother, I would like that question answered. To my opinion, that has never been addressed. And why did they ignore the problem??? the bottom line.. But the guy or people responsible for making that decision should have been on that boat sometime when the lake got rough. Then the terror of it might have swayed them to fix the boat at all costs.We all need to make a small prayer for the guys and their families, for peace and closure. God bless all you people for helping to figure out this puzzle.
@klrrafman
3 жыл бұрын
This ship was so long and heavy under load, it was going more or less flat over the water with waves going over her like a battleship which you can see in the videos of her. I think she broke on the surface from bending when she was getting suspended in the middle over two waves. The water would simple disappear from under her in 25-30' seas. So first bend down in the middle braking some of the frame and then bend up in the middle way too much and now the nose would go down plowing in the waves breaking the rest of the frame.
@gilliankingston8259
3 жыл бұрын
The problems should have been addressed before it came to that point (10:11:75); without having the experience of being out on a ship similar to the "Edmund Fitzgerald" when the seas were that high/rough it was too easy to ignore. Captain McSorley, being aware of at least some of the problems, should have kept the Edmund Fitzgerald and her Crew, including himself, with the other ships who chose to not take the chance on going out to be met by the storm that was on it's way, there is a good chance they would be with us today (possibly not all, depending on age).😢🔔🌹
@banjoist123
3 жыл бұрын
In Sebastian Junger's book "The Perfect Storm" he talks about seamen saying "If the wave is white, you're in the foam. If it's green, you're cutting through the wave. If it's black, you're a submarine (paraphrased.)"
@joycelampton170
3 жыл бұрын
Oh
@aspiceronni4462
2 жыл бұрын
She was supposed to undergo major work at Frasier shipyard after the season was over. There are still plates that say Edmund Fitzgerald out in there yard that were meant for her repair.
@dennisn1672
3 жыл бұрын
The Edmund Fitzgerald was not investigated very well. Especially being owned by an insurance company. Easier to call it a act of mother nature or the fault of the crue rather than pay out millions in claims to the families. Typical.
@79rustyk10
2 жыл бұрын
Exactly. Probably the real reason dives aren't allowed also.
@milojanis4901
Жыл бұрын
Crew, NOT crue.
@ZombieSlayer-dj3wb
Жыл бұрын
And after divers found a smear of red paint near caribou islands , the wreck was off limts for divers
@richardbullwood5941
Жыл бұрын
This is accurate. In fact the original claim that the crew was negligent in ceiling and clamping the hold covers shows that the investigators were seeking a outcome of negligence rather than the fact that the Edmund Fitzgerald had what was called its winter loading.. tons more than it was actually designed to carry, although deemed safe at the time. And another important fact.. it was one of the first large ships to be assembled in a modular Construction process, meaning it was 100% welds and not a mixture of welds and rivets like earlier ships. The testimony of former crew was hushed up. They claimed that welds were broken, you could hear welds breaking in rough water, on previous voyages, and the ship would bend so badly that paint would pop off interior walls. She was overloaded, hit a once in a decade storm, and was it the worst possible place to be at the worst possible time. She had already taken on a list according to Captain mcsorley, so obviously she had already taken on water. No matter how she sank, she simply was not buoyant enough to fight Rogue waves, which the Arthur M Anderson had reported
@ZombieSlayer-dj3wb
Жыл бұрын
@@richardbullwood5941 And it didnt help that when the fitz nose dived all the tactaniote went to the bow cause the ship had mesh netting for bulkheads and when it was being loaded , the rail cars were half full and the weight had to be guessed
@patriciablue2739
6 жыл бұрын
This explanation is the best I've heard. it makes sense. What those poor souls must've seen.
@kc9602
4 жыл бұрын
I've watched quite a few of the doco's on the Edmund Fitzgerald on here, and I've got to admit that THIS one is THE most plausible I've heard. SOME of the answers, like Mr Holden said, were right there in the pictures he reviewed. Rest Easy, Men of the Big Fitz. You may be gone, but You are far from forgotten.
@dickjohnson4268
4 жыл бұрын
This addresses the loading bending moment and tortional harmonics. Thanks for the best explanation of the disaster.
@TheWitchOvAgnesi
10 жыл бұрын
This is the most logical explanation I've heard to date.
@Chief2Moon
4 жыл бұрын
SpikeFlea I'm convinced, it was so well explained
@kennybyrd5642
4 жыл бұрын
I just came across this video and I know it's a 6 year old comment...but I have to say I'd love to hear some more from this fella. His explanation is the most convincing I've ever heard.
@hammerthor6441
3 жыл бұрын
Agreed .
@felixcat9318
3 жыл бұрын
I couldn't have said it better than you did!
@robertschildt306
3 жыл бұрын
That boat was never sound! They built it in sub sections! Captain Mcsorley was a heavy weather captain and never hauled down! So who is to blame? I'm learning and leaning towards Mcsorley!
@FrunkleFucks
12 жыл бұрын
It was also documented that the Fitzgerald "groaned" a lot more than other ships normally did. And a former 3rd mate stated that the Fitz did bend a lot even in 10 ft seas. Poor servicing combined with accidents and skimping on repairs ultimately did her in.
@hammerthor6441
3 жыл бұрын
Plus she had slammed a lot of locks and wasn't checked out.
@theoldgalah
11 жыл бұрын
what a great presentation.Makes the coastguard investigation look like an extremely amateur attempt or maybe they were just covering the companies arse blaming dead men who couldn't defend themselves
@jetdriver
4 жыл бұрын
An interesting view point to be sure and a plausible explanation for the condition of the wreck. The key of course is what initiates the fatal dive and or breakup. In this regard I think the NTSB which modeled multiple failure modes is still correct. First the hatches were leaking not because of crew error but rather faulty design. This resulted in the ship taking on water that the crew could not detect or pump out. Add in the flooding they were already fighting and she is getting lower in the water with each hour. With no real way for the crew to detect this. Finally she gets boarded by the large sea reported by the Anderson with which her already reduced freeboard overloads the forward hatch covers which collapse in. Now the flooding is immediate and catastrophic. The already low bow is driven down like a submersible doing a crash dive until it impacts the bottom. The shock of the sudden stop along with all the other strains causes the ship to break apart as described here. The key is that the breakup doesn’t cause the sinking but rather that the ships sinking causes the breakup.
@richardunicorn7879
3 жыл бұрын
Having done research on this, this video is very interesting. McSorley once said that they (the shipyards) were "killing the boat" by overloading repetitively.
@toddcrickmore7196
2 жыл бұрын
Blame the Fitz’s owner, Ogleby-Norton, for continually raising the load line and reducing its freeboard without devoting adequate time & resources to structural maintenance. Greed and profits > safety!
@jdtractorman7445
2 жыл бұрын
That is up to the captain of the vessel as to how loaded up the ship will be. No one else.
@tomwhent8073
8 жыл бұрын
At the request of the families of the crew, any further diving on this wreckage has been disallowed. Given the plausible theories of structural integrity, loading practices and overloading the vessel's structure, one could speculate that this exploration ban does more to insult the memories of the crew since it prevents any further investigation into the true causes of the sinking and leaves the blame squarely in the sailor's hands - reflected in the outcome of the official investigation. There are no other shipwrecks that are off limits to exploration because the crew perished there. In fact there is one wreck in Superior (Kamloops) where the engineer is still found "on duty" and in the flesh within the engine room - yet diving is still permitted. Diving this wreck is only discouraged because of the depths involved. Who's reputation does the Fitz diving ban protect?
@crooked-halo
6 жыл бұрын
Tom Whent - Agree. If we were forbidden from walking/exploring/driving/moving upon the dead's final resting place, there'd not be many places we could go. The ban should be lifted for the benefit of investigation, which would be more honoring to the families than disrespectful IMO.
@cbwelch4
4 жыл бұрын
Timothy Verrinder I wholly agree with you. Humans are fallible. One doesn’t speak ill of the dead with discovering the truth and it won’t bring the Fitz or her crew back. My theory is that McSorely was compromised and should have been relieved. His wife was ill at home after just having had a stroke. He should have been with her, not Captaining that ship. He was desperate to get back to her. That could have played into his decision to pass so close to Caribou Island. The Capt.of the Anderson said so explicitly after the wreck. The fence being compromised and the list and the timing of the loss indicate she had bottomed out and broke her back. She sank mere hours after passing Caribou and very shortly started listing. That’s the story. She nosed under and her prop ran her to the bottom quickly. The front of the ship is deformed at the wreck. She hit bottom nose first at an angle and the stern crumpled and flipped over. I’d bet the portion of the boat that bottomed was obliterated in the midsection. That’s my belief. God rest their souls.
@mglenn7092
4 жыл бұрын
If there is a theory to be tested, something more to be learned, then an expedition to the wreck should happen. If all it is is some more "artifact recovery" (tomb robbing), then leave the wreck alone. I'm certainly against banning all dives/expeditions to the wreck, but banning looters and treasure hunters is reasonable. On a 2nd point brought up in this thread... personally, I don't think the Fitz bottomed out. Mr Holden's explanations for the ship flexing, being "too loose" inside the outer skin, etc., are reasonable and do show how the ship could have started to fail, sprung leaks, and ultimately broke up without needing a strike on some shoal along the way. Equally to the point, if the Fitz had bottomed out hard enough to cause a serious hull breach, one would expect to find the marks of Fitz's impact on the shoal. The shoals around Caribou Island and elsewhere on Fitz's route have been checked - none of them show the kind of damage one would expect to see had the Fitz made contact with any of them.
@hammerthor6441
3 жыл бұрын
It protects the ships owners. $$$$$$$
@tomwhent8073
3 жыл бұрын
@@cbwelch4 I would hate to say that McSorely was compromised, otherwise I agree. He was a seasoned Master and to speculate on his fitness for duty is an insult to him and his crew. We are only guessing at what they faced out there on the lake. Both he and Captain Cooper agreed on that course to try to avoid the severity of the storm. They had no way of knowing that they were steaming into the worst of it. With the weather and lack of navigation equipment, it is impossible to say if and how close they passed to Caribou Island, with the exception of what was seen on the Anderson's radar.
@WillieWonka928D
5 жыл бұрын
I personally think the hatch covers not being clamped down fully is the most prominent theory because it absolves both the owners of the ship the Coast Guard of responsibility for overloading the ship by about 4,000 tons and lowering the load line *3 feet* and instead puts the blame on the crewmen. Same with the shoaling theory, as little to no evidence was found that she hit bottom. Several people who worked on the Fitzgerald at one point have attested she had bad structural issues, was heavily abused, and poorly maintained for years. One of these men worked under McSorley on a different ship and McSorley himself said he'd hate to be on the Fitzgerald during a bad storm as she was worn out from years of overloading when they passed the Fitzgerald around 1970-71. I think either water was coming in from the damaged vents or there was a stress crack, which caused the list. Given the huge seas and the ships behavior just in calmer seas, its likely it could've caused the ship to flex in a way that caused the fence rail to snap. And finally, I think she was finally overwhelmed by those Three Sisters that the Anderson reported, which caused the front hatches to cave in, allowing hundreds or thousands tons of water to instantly flood in, putting the bow under and torpedoing right to the bottom. She broke from the force of hitting the bottom in the way that Thom describes here, the bow settles down, the stern bobs on the surface for a minute has it floods, spilling taconite all over the bow and the sea floor, before finally turning over from the torque of the propeller and sinking in the position it appears now.
@BrettHartleygetfitwithbrett
9 жыл бұрын
just my opinion of what happened....I have great respect for the sailors of the great lakes. I have studied the Fitz a lot over the years. So this is just speculation at this point. But that is the point of this post.....so very interesting to talk together about this tragedy and try to find out why..... I think it was a combination of a number of things. A tragic sequence. First was the perfect storm. We are talking about a storm that made sailing men of 40 years on the lakes talk about it being legendary conditions. second you have the freeboard at under 12 feet. Fitz was running deep. third you had its crazy keel and construction. fourth, poor overall conditions of the boat due to years of overloading and captains pushing her to perform. The Fitz was battle weary. Now you put the fitz passing close to Caribou Islands with that free board and those lake conditions and I think she bottomed out on a shoal. Even the Anderson took a wider route around the shoals. It could have been a shoaling that was not severe. That they could have limped to port in better conditions. Or if the boat was in tip top shape it could have handled the jolt in better weather.. But, McSorely or crew probably didn't even hear the shoaling damage because of the storm. She didn't break up on the shoals she steamed for miles in heavy seas before she went down after long term effects. . The fitz didn't sink because of damaged vents, or hatch covers or water coming in from above. The pumps could take care of that. I don't buy the hatch cover theory because that would be something McSorely would have reported as damage. The damage that did her in was not noticeable to the crew I think. But the list and the rail down proves that it was more than just green water. Combine that with the over the deck water with the now incoming water from the breech and now you have a recipe for pumps not keeping up. The fitz was settling deeper into the water. But so much action going on with the weather left them few options. They couldn't turn around. Couldn't stop. They slowed to try to get the Anderson closer to them. But that no doubt allowed more time for water to collect in the hold and keep them from Whitefish. Now we have the Fitz with a list and rails down and the storm is epic. The Anderson encounters huge sister waves from behind. Cooper said they came over the top of the back end and washed right up to the doors of the pilot house. That is amazing to me. In my opinion those were what did the Fitz in. I think those waves came up from behind lifted the fitz's ass in the air and the Fitz drove right to the bottom. Or broke up. Or combination of both. 30+ foot waves in rapid succession with that ship at 11 foot freeboard and with a list? All that water and ore sloshing to the front with huge force and the force of the wave and the screw plowing. also in my opinion I think if they had made Whitefish they would have been lucky to find it and probably sunk anyway. They had lost their navigation system. The storm was still raging and with that list she may have then rolled or just kept sinking slowly as she rain and eventually went under. It is hard to say if there would be have been less fatalities in those situations. The lake was wicked and cold. But getting to whitefish may have allowed the crew to put lifeboats in the water.. no offense to anyone else's opinion or experience. Just my own analysis.
@ZeeboLaywicker
7 жыл бұрын
I agree. even if they would have made whitefish bay that ship would have sunk. if they had reached the bay they may have been able to beach her.
@robertweaver5285
6 жыл бұрын
I like this thought-out process. It send logical to use land-lovers and novices to nautical engineering and tragedies. I think the NTSB screwed the family members as there was no one who could testify that the hatches were secured. They could come up with their own theories that, at the time, COULD have been plausible. But with technologies we have now, I wonder if the NTSB would reopen the investigation like police do with a cold-case and reevaluate...
@mitchagp1
4 жыл бұрын
Great theory. I really think you're theory is the best and makes total sense. Thanks!
@kevinmcneil3693
4 жыл бұрын
I have always thought pretty much the same, except to the point of the ship breaking up. I think it could have made it to the bottom intact, nosed into the bottom and the impact broke her, the front inundated with water and load just settled hard, but any remaining air would have been in the rear, and that portion rose slightly, expelled any remaining air then fell back to the bottom settling upside down. Just my thought....because if it were that common for a ship to break on the surface, it would happen way more often.
@cbwelch4
4 жыл бұрын
Brett Hartley Agree with you. The other circumstantial evidence is that she listed almost immediately past Caribou Island and sank less than five hours afterwards after making it most of the way across the lake. The Captain of the Anderson said it best, “She steamed a lot closer to Caribou Island than I would’ve wanted to...”
@tonycrocisi9242
4 жыл бұрын
This is the best explanation I have heard, a combination of human errors and design.
@moemanncann895
4 жыл бұрын
I agree, this theory makes the most sense considering the Fitz had hull modifications and a loose keel,both proven. Add overloading, numerous round trips ,rough waves and the straining loading sequence. The storm broke her overworked hull and keel not any grounding or loose hatch, vent covers. Water intake, causing list came from a slowly separating hull. Another documentary mentioned steel plate spacers marked for the Fitz in a shipyard at seasons end...... My observations, with no bias towards any involved parties.
@GH-oi2jf
3 жыл бұрын
and weather.
@kingbee48185
3 жыл бұрын
Talked to 2 men who worked at the steel plant where the Fitz was built. Both swore defective welds were passed off during her construction. How much of a factor would that play?
@redroj33
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks for your video Thom. I felt it said in relatively few words a great deal more than most of what I have read and seen about the disaster. I liked your way of presenting the information in a really logical way and supported by enough evidence with the green stick analogy explaining something which had long puzzled me about what happened. Very informative, thanks for posting.
@oldninjadude1
11 жыл бұрын
Iv read all the books on the Fitz, & seen many videos, This theory may be the best out there. Thanks for sharing.
@JoeLewis14
6 жыл бұрын
Wow. That guy's mustache sure knows a lot about the Edmund Fitzgerald.
@Iwillnotbepushed
3 жыл бұрын
Over the years I have heard multiple reasons why the Edmund Fitzgerald went down. Including a theory that they struck bottom in the trough of the massive waves she was in. Your explanation is the AH HA moment for me in this tragedy. You make perfect sense in your explanation.
@chvfd687
6 жыл бұрын
Another major factor was being overloaded. The fitz was rated to 23k tons but sank carrying closer to 27k tons
@Houndini
3 жыл бұрын
Appears what I read this was done a lot on that boat. Plus production was over maintenance. As 40+ year cert. Welder I seen this happen time after time again before. Little hair line crack can turn into huge crack or major break within few hours if not less time. That night everything happened just right on them poor guys. I do think they lightly scrape the bottom too. Not much but that started the chain of events that put boat on bottom. Difference between a loaded & overloaded could made the difference. You max out metal all the time it not going end very well. Crew did what they told to do.
@patnor7354
2 жыл бұрын
Being allowed to carry summer load in winter time... Madness....
@LakesideRocker66
9 жыл бұрын
I've read all the books and in my opinion, a lot of what Mr Holden says holds water. He touches on "the wiggling thing" which was discussed at great lengths in, what I believe is the most informative and knowledgeable books on the subject, Dudley Paquette's "The Night The Fitz Went Down." (author Huge Bishop) Paquette, captain of the Wilfred Sykes, was out there that night, but chose lee to anchor down. He worked with some of those men and knew the reputation of the Fitz and her loose keel. Like captain Cooper, he knew damn well that she 'hogged' at Caribou. Hogged bad enough to pop a railing from the upward force of the mid hinge area. He was listening to their Caribou transmissions and told his first mate, "He's gonna get into trouble!" After that, she was sucking water at the hinge fracture, which worked farther open with the seas. OglebayNorton got Paquette and the cook who was supposed to be on the boat, out of town so they couldn't testify. They rigged the hearing, so stop blaming those deckhands for not fastening the hatches. OglebayNorton screwed those families. They upped the load lines past what she was designed to hold and hired McSorley, a known hard weather captain. He decided to make a run rather than anchoring down. He was in way too close to Caribou. He knew she had a loose keel and once, he even told his first mate, "Oooh sometimes this bitch scares me." Sheer negligence. Gentleman, she lost buoyancy due to sucking water at the hinge plate after hogging (shoaling) at Caribou, and plowed into the bottom while the aft was still above water*
@ZeeboLaywicker
7 жыл бұрын
I agree. very good analysis.
@oldmanfunky4909
6 жыл бұрын
You are parroting the account of Red Burgner who had an axe to grind with OglebayNorton. He is the only person to make claims of a lose keel and his statements are suspect at best. Michael Schmacher's book "Mighty Fitz" addresses all this in detail.
@Bowbender8
5 жыл бұрын
Bowhunter8 There was steel cut for another repair of the loose keel in the off season. There are photos somewhere of that pile of steel for hull 301. I don't know that the photos of the flexing hull in the video here are actually the Fitz' or some other boat. I would expect one might find such film for the Merrill (sp) also.
@deanladue3151
5 жыл бұрын
@@Bowbender8 those pieces of steel that were to be used to reinforce the Fitzgeralds keel are still sitting in that yard today.
@deanladue3151
5 жыл бұрын
The one video of a ship "flexing", it appears to be the Stewart J. Cort. The first 1,000 footer.
@richierich396
4 жыл бұрын
Totally agree! And the ferocity of this storm finally did her in. Ty 4 sharing and uploading.
@machbaby
10 жыл бұрын
I still believe the Fitz shoaled near Caribou Island and didn't even know it. Capt. Cooper from the Anderson was convinced that the Fitzgerald went over the 6 fathom area. And I don't think was just a coincidence that Capt. McSorley reported his problems (fence rail down, missing vents and a list) precisely at that time. Now missing hatch covers would certainly have played a role in her sinking, but the Fitzgerald was already in trouble prior to any subsequent event. My question: if one or more hatches collapsed or went missing, the crew certainly would have known. Wouldn't the Fitz have reported such an catastrophic situation? I understand that any type of rescue in those seas would have been near impossible, but wouldn't the captain or first mate have given the crew a least a chance?
@smokedaddy258
10 жыл бұрын
Not to sound flippant but HOW doe an overloaded ship drawing 29 feet or better cross a shoal of 24 feet? the 1st time I heard that haunting song in Nov 1976, maybe it was released on the anniversary?, I was getting in bed on a cold night after getting off work at a steel plant where safety measures were ignored often under order, OSHA came out and 1/2 ass walked through the plant and then went out for lunch and hookers, golf and 12 year old bonded Bourbon with that brass. So I know what sunk it, Extreme pressure to do more that it and the people maybe were capable of.How many men have been practically murdered by corporate greed and pushing the Captain t take dangerous chance under threat , implied or expressed, of their job. It look to me like they hatch covers got smashed in by a gigantic wave , flooded te hold too quickly and took her down and at some point she snapped sorta like the Titanic, so when Gordon Lightfoot sings :"she may have broke deep and took water" that could be true and a tremendous contributor to the destruction of the ship. The song says 36,000 tons. I wonder what , after all the altered documents and bills of lading what her tonnage with cargo really was.May the crew res in peace from their labors in GOD's hands.
@jdtractorman7445
9 жыл бұрын
smokedaddy258 It was not 24 feet by that shoal, it was 36 feet. A fathom is 6 feet so 6x6=36 (six fathom shoal). The song also states "26,000 tons more" not 36,000. It's very easy to see how the Fitz could have struck that shoal, especially as rough as it was that night, only 7 feet of clearance if the ship was drawing 29 feet.
@wendygoerl9162
7 жыл бұрын
Some captains push it harder than others. McSorley had a reputation as a "heavy weather" captain and running full steam through everything. And her load was 26,110 long tons.
@theivory1
7 жыл бұрын
He checked up though. Well before she went down.
@machbaby
7 жыл бұрын
I believe you mean checked down (slowed down for the Anderson to catch up)- do to the problems the Fitz was having.
@48alfaone
11 жыл бұрын
Thanks Thom...good presentation. Your theories sound as good as any....in fact better than most! I believe what you say did happen, plus a possible grounding & rouge waves times 2 as reported by Captain Cooper & his crew following aboard the Anderson that night. When the EF went down, it was very fast, within seconds most likely being dangerously low in the water already ...(No chance for a Mayday Call)! Poor maintenance, gross overloading & the super storm killed her. "The Company is to blame"!
@lmf0114
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for such a wonderful and seemingly logical explanation of such a horrible accident.
@georgegray6829
4 жыл бұрын
Ductile to Brittle Transition Temperature phenomena surely was a contributing factor along with fatigue stress.
@palindrome1959
4 жыл бұрын
As SpikeFlea mentioned below that has to be the most concise, logical and minimally speculative explanation I've ever heard. You sold me. One question, do you think the ship hit the shoal near Caribou Island or was it a coincidence that all the trouble began after they passed the island?
@robertweaver5285
6 жыл бұрын
Very interesting thoughts. While Scraping or bottoming out, unsecured hatch covers, and rogue waves are common thoughts, this adds another piece to an unsolvable puzzle.
@theoldgalah
12 жыл бұрын
Got it in one. Well done and thanks for posting this vid..
@Johnny53kgb-nsa
3 жыл бұрын
Good information Thom. I seen somewhere that when loading the Fitz there were 3 colored lights, and if one side needed more material to equal the other sides, that light would come on. It just went back and forth until the Fitz was fully loaded. But, like you said, it's seems that constant flex, over and over again, for year's, could eventually create a weak point. Then all it needed was something to push that weak link, which was the powerful storm and wave action that fateful November night. Thanks, John G.
@BabyPuma124
12 жыл бұрын
I like the tree branch analogy coz even full grown trees flex & bend usually without snapping either.
@jetcat132
Жыл бұрын
That is an excellent explanation, no sensationalism, just a combination of factors that lead to catastrophic failure, as many of these things tend to be…
@FarSeeker8
9 жыл бұрын
On a small point: The pictures I've seen of the wreck show a deep scar on the starboard side of the bow. What do you think caused that?
@theothertroll
8 жыл бұрын
+FarSeeker8 Godzilla
@FarSeeker8
8 жыл бұрын
Which one, the lizard or the dinosaur (the NYC one or the Tokyo one)?
@FarSeeker8
4 жыл бұрын
@Michael Conner Impact with what? The current theory of how it wrecked would mean the bow actually impacted the bottom of the lake.
@Big_Sierra
3 жыл бұрын
He more or less explains this in the video. Basically when the ship hit bottom and accordioned the stern twisted around at like a 90° angle to the bow section due to the screw turning and the water current. I’m guessing it passed the bow section by, scraping it as it turned over and made its descent to the bottom.
@davidclark3304
4 жыл бұрын
This has been thought through by many better thinkers than I, but it's possible that the hatch covers collapsed after the sinking began. This happens as the ship descends into water pressure at depth. Maybe that's what's meant, but I've never heard it explained that way.
@Jamestele1
3 жыл бұрын
That was one of the most intelligent theories I've heard. This guy obviously knows a thing or two!
@garywilson818
9 жыл бұрын
Absolutely exellent explanation. Thank you, Sir.
@allanr6132
5 жыл бұрын
Seeing that simulation of the Fitz nosediving at 5:45 is just horrific. I can truly see that having happened and happen quick just as it demonstrates. It just rode the waves right to the bottom and at some point during the decent it broke in two. The guy putting on this program is very knowledgeable and presented a couple facts I'd never heard before. I didn't quite understand that the two hatch covers that supposedly came off had actually been forced into the cargo hold. Didn't know they were the numbers 1 and 2 covers as well. Also, had always read and saw that the roughly middle third of the ship had simply disintegrated and broke apart into pieces and there was nothing left attached to the two remaining sections of the boat on the bottom. Hearing this guy tell it I now know that there are sections of the middle still attached to each piece and it's just what might have been in between those (top to bottom) that's scattered on the lake bed. Well done video and very informative. Why hasn't this guys theory's been more widely known?
@Kusoka1
3 жыл бұрын
Spot on analysis A tragic day that will never be forgotten!
@Zeldarw104
4 жыл бұрын
Wow! Makes plenty of sense this is the best explanation I've heard so far, very interesting.🤔
@mikesquire7731
3 жыл бұрын
The coast guard reducing the freeboard again and again until the ship’s construction issues caught up with her and her crew is the driver for the USCG blaming a lazy crew.
@FrunkleFucks
12 жыл бұрын
Her construction was not sound either. Although she was a strong ship, her structural beams were tack-welded rather than riveted. Over time, fractures begin to appear on welds.
@beenaplumber8379
5 жыл бұрын
I would really like to see the 200 feet of hull that would connect these two pieces. If it did bottom out on Six Fathom Shoals (my preferred hypothesis), and if it bottomed out on that point on the hull (on the side of the keel toward which it was listing - starboard?), that would, I think, explain everything - the list, the weakening of the hull, the vulnerability to the extreme seas (the two waves reported by the Anderson), and a logical fracture point for the superstructure. The eventual failure was catastrophic, and so rapid that the first two hatches were compressed inward, as he says, into the holds. I don't see how a wobbly keel/hull joint gains anything over bottoming out, especially in those seas, and especially when that's where the Fitz was seen on radar - over the shoals. And especially with the timing of McSorley's damage reports. (As I recall, that was right after the Anderson observed the Fitz on radar over the shoals?) Yeah, this hypothesis is just as weak as all the others, but I'd sure like to see the rest of the hull. Since that's where she broke in half, I think it would be the logical place to look for the cause of that breakup. (And it's not at all where he says the hinge point is located. He says 2/3 - 3/4 toward the aftercabin. The Big Fitz broke right in the center.)
@dennisryan6370
2 жыл бұрын
I concur w/ you, Sir. I'm still waiting for for the explaination..... of the forces necessary to implode (2) hatch covers, each weighing 7 tons and each, clamped 68 times, over an outer steel flange.....INTO the cargo hold???
@daltonheightman6048
9 жыл бұрын
Thom excellent job, and to Gregg Chapman, the Edmund Fitzgerald, did not have loose hatch covers the night she went down the crew was experienced and would of had those covers tight especially in November with a gale warning, and she did have a loose keel and these problems she was constantly welded and braced and repaired. she was a good ship but did have problems. water did not have to enter the hold only the ballast tanks to sink her if she bottomed out that would of been more then enough in that storm. and the reason any hatches are caved in or loose now is simply from the force of the water and impact of the ship on the bottom
@ZeeboLaywicker
7 жыл бұрын
my thoughts as well.
@burker1301
7 жыл бұрын
Dalton Heightman the crew was observed securing the hatches as she was backing out at the dock. Yet many of the clamps were found to be not damaged at all. If they had secured everyone impossible for them to come off. But doing every fourth or fifth? I too believe she hit six fathom.
@alexsandrarokas7117
6 жыл бұрын
By the law of Physics the TIME it took to hit bottom (it had to be a fast sinking) and the PRESSURE of the water affected how hard the fitz hit bottom. Probably that’s what caused the hatch covers to pop open: it was FORCE.
@Big_Sierra
3 жыл бұрын
@@alexsandrarokas7117 530 ft at 35mph... 10 seconds to the bottom.
@carlblaskowitz7817
5 жыл бұрын
Tragic man... to suffer with that heavy sea and die anyway. Thanks for the thoughtful details, sounds plausible to me.
@milojanis4901
Жыл бұрын
I've lived in Michigan all my life, and I'm here to tell you that unless you've lived in Michigan and seen how violent these lakes can get, and fast, you have no idea how terrible it can get, and quickly. The Fitzgerald encountered seas that were whipped by 75-80mph winds, and some reported gusts over 100mph. This created 30-35ft waves! This is Cat 1 hurricane stuff. Can you imagine how terrible it must've been to suddenly have your body thrust into 35-40° water, in the dark, with no lights in sight anywhere. The biggest ship on the Great Lakes just broke in half before your eyes. You have-At most-5 minutes to live-IF you escaped the ship before you were carried 530 feet down to the bottom. They have a glass bottom boat excursion that you can buy a ticket for, and view shallow water wrecks, which are everywhere, their wooden hulls fated to be trapped forever under water. Nobody can see the Fitzgerald. After around 200 feet, all light disappears, even in bright sunshine. At 530 feet, you have to swim up over 300 feet before a trace of light appears. God help these poor sailors.....
@cbwelch4
4 жыл бұрын
Another problem with this theory is by all accounts what took the Fitz was sudden and catastrophic. It appears none of the crew had time to radio or call distress. Another freighter that broke in two on Lake Eerie had a soul survivor, but many went into the water and the survivor on the lifeboat had a couple dead crew mates on it with him. Also the stern and the bow were found miles apart as the stern kept steaming for a bit. This was different. She went straight to the bottom and broke up there as evidenced by the proximity of the sections. Also the only body found was that of a crew member fully dressed with a lifejacket at rest on the lake bed next to the Fitz. Experts think he was sucked out of the boat when the glass ruptured due to water pressure at the depths. Must have been terrifying.
@kleetus92
3 жыл бұрын
This is the first time I heard there was ever a recovered body from EF...
@tonyperone3242
3 жыл бұрын
They say the Fitzgerald has a 120 foot extension added to lengthen the ship and increase the carrying capacity. Is it not possible the ship failed somewhere along this point?
@wmiekka
3 жыл бұрын
The Fitz was not lengthened in her lifetime. I have heard there were plans or at least talk of lengthening her during 1975-76 winter layup.
@derekquintal
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent explanation, very good.
@beachdweller3378
2 жыл бұрын
wow. great insight. Makes me wonder since the aft of ship is upside down if there were any indications of scraping bottom as many have theorized that possibly led to taking on water combined with structural damage.
@greggonzalez8659
11 жыл бұрын
You seem to be the only person commenting with actual experience on Lakers. In your professional opinion, do you believe that the Fitzgerald might have survived if her keel and keelsons had been riveted to the rest of the ship, rather than tack welded? Sources I've studied assume that rivets allow a ship to flex more without sacrificing its hull integrity. I have heard that big-ship riveting has become almost a lost art, I suppose because welding is more economical.
@michaelfrost4584
Жыл бұрын
As an ex Australian Navy man, l served on HMAS MELBOURNE our very old Aircraft carrier,l have been in very bad storms and was on the Bridge when a couple of wavesv hit the bridge and l have heard the ship grown ,and that was in a Aircraft carrier, l can only imagine what it was like for those poor sailors on that storm. May they all R.I.P you brave men.
@nfd1960
11 жыл бұрын
I think you are correct,I don't think a seasoned crew, which is what most of the man on board were, would have left port without properly securing hatches.The hatches were damaged by a wave or waves crashing over her and I think this is what caused her to start taken on water and more waves just finished the job, this is why she went down so fast, because even if she simply broke in 2 she shouldn't have gone down in the time frame she did
@spartonboat1
7 жыл бұрын
At the very least, the hatch loading and battening is supervised by a Mate. So to assume securing the hatches was solely on the crew ignores the role that the supervising Mate would have or should have had to ensure full and complete battening of the clamps!
@twwap294
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Excellent hypothesis of what happened...
@southtowns27
12 жыл бұрын
@KB4QAA Just an FYI, the footage of the ship flexing is on board the 1000' Stewart J. Cort, not the Fitz. All the lakers work like that, they have to, to some degree. If they were so rigid as to not bend at all, they'd just simply break. Think about bending a piece of glass. I have my own theories (I've been a Merchant Marine and sailing on the boats on the Great Lakes for almost 10 years) but I do think the Fitz had a design flaw in the hull that unfortunately led to her demise.
@johnderekmitchell1510
4 жыл бұрын
Could it be the built in flex, as all ships have to a certain extent, could have been compromised to some extent. Remember the early Liberty Ships of WWII were prone to splitting right down the middle where they flexed.
@spencerkimble3824
2 жыл бұрын
This is the best explanation I’ve heard. There’s no evidence it shoaled. We don’t know which vents were damaged nor why the railing was down, it could be a structural failure. We don’t know which way it was listing (transcripts do not specify starboard.). We DO know it went down fast, really fast. The helmsman couldn’t reach 3ft and tap a push-to-talk radio fast. It was sudden Slow loss of bouyancy due to taking on of water- through bad gaskets around the hatches, and possibly from broken vents or the damaged keel was occurring. The boat’s bow went down, either from the large wave the Anderson had mentioned or another (though Cooper mentioned a 30+ wave hitting the Anderson a short while before the fitz disappeared- I would guess that one) with the stern still in water, the screw pushed the bow further into the water. Then any cargo and free water rush forward ending any chance of the ship righting itself. The wreckage on the lake floor shows it hit going ~30mph. The bow went straight down, the stresses ripped the well deck apart, turning the stern over as it hit. That’s the best we can do with the evidence currently available, and foreseeably available since Canada doesn’t allow diving the wreck
@cbwelch4
4 жыл бұрын
If the Fitz had broken near the surface vs when she bottomed out the two halves would have been further apart. Her sister ship fared much better.
@Butterball3588
3 жыл бұрын
45 years ago today. This was a great explanation on what happened.
@nfd1960
11 жыл бұрын
He talks about the way they loaded as if this was bad, All ships have to be loaded from the center out otherwise they sink in port, it doesn't matter if its a rowboat or ocean going tanker/cargo ship, 6yrs ago a Russian cargo ship was being loaded in the port of Albany NY with heavy steel and capsized in port because cargo was being loaded improperly to only the starboard side, I believe 15 men died on board
@patdwyer5204
6 жыл бұрын
The colder steel gets the more brittle it becomes .
@misterodors
6 жыл бұрын
Which is why sailors in the olden times would oil up the cold steel and rub it vigorously until it became hard.
@OttoByOgraffey
2 жыл бұрын
That had to have been terrifying. God rest their souls.
@jerryfrederick6610
2 жыл бұрын
Check out the song "November Bells" by Kurt Puffpaff on Reverb Nation. The song contains actual short wave radio transmissions from the Coast Guard Station in St. Ignace from the night The Fitz went missing. It will send a chill up your spine. Another thought if The Fitz were standing on end at 729 feet in length it would be sticking out of the water by about 200 feet. Now that's a crazy thought.
@mikeb949
2 жыл бұрын
It's interesting how it's almost impossible to view any of the photos or videos that were taken from expeditions
@scottrmclaughlin3495
3 жыл бұрын
Thank you~excellent explanation~ very clear..?..!..! ✌🏼😎🇺🇸
@lestergillis8171
3 жыл бұрын
According to the HISTORY CHANNEL presentation about this, since Edmund Fitzgerald lost it's radar, it was getting voice updates from the Aurther Anderson, a few miles behind. The skipper of the Edmund Fitzgerald allowed the ship to cruise too close to "SIX FATHOM SHOALS". (That's about 36 feet). Considering the fully loaded condition, there was a good chance that the Edmund Fitzgerald may have grounded against SFS. The skipper said on the radio that he noticed the ship riding lower than usual after passing SFS. He confirmed to the skipper of Auther Anderson that he did turn on all bilge pumps, which seemed to stop any further listing. That was about the last communication Aurther Anderson received from Edmund Fitzgerald.
@snaojao8136
4 жыл бұрын
Wow...nice explanation
@deanladue3151
5 жыл бұрын
In 2002, and again in 2017 (I think) there were side scan sonar images taken of the Fitzgerald wreck site. And the images clearly show that the forward cargo deck has completely collapsed, straight up gone! This probably why the Canadian Government banned any future dives on the wreck. It's clearly deteriorating. One reason? Lake Superiors water temperatures have been increasing, and this may have sped up the decomposition process of the wreck. The ship was already badly torn up on the lake floor, now with the decks giving away, the wreck is potentially very dangerous, or even worse for any divers.
@Big_Sierra
3 жыл бұрын
Lake Superior water temperatures have not been warming you goof. Tighten your tin foil hat :p
@knightlife98
3 жыл бұрын
Whoa, I had no idea ships can flex like this!? It's crazy to see the bow go one way, and the stern go the other.
@gilmanwi
13 жыл бұрын
Great job. Thank You. Fascinating. Just fascinating!!!! What a sad tragedy! Jesus Saves!
@kevinmcclelland3845
6 жыл бұрын
Except when your on a Great Laker during one of the worst storms ever. Then Jesus says your on your own.
@neuralmute
4 жыл бұрын
@@kevinmcclelland3845 "Does anyone know where the love of god goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?"
@robertmccardle5113
2 жыл бұрын
l read years ago about how the Fitz had a " worrisome wiggle" . l just watched a doc about the Arthur B. Homer, her sister ship also had a loose keel. l never bought the coast guard theory, the Capt. Knew the weather was gonna turn and would have made sure all on deck was secure.
@rickster1957
4 жыл бұрын
Take it to the max! Is a recipe for catastrophe. If she was rated for 23,000 tons and caring 26,000 tons and hinged like we saw in the video. The captain 👨🏼✈️ error. I never knew the ship hinged like in the picture. The captain would’ve known about the loose keel tack welds needing to be constantly repaired. With the extra cargo weight The ship would’ve been riding lower in the water , which would make it more susceptible to big waves. Didn’t the captain check the weather forecasts? They never should’ve loaded that ship to the max
@48alfaone
11 жыл бұрын
Very good thoughts on what most likely happen before & after! To often people including design / structural engineers & ships crews believe they're ships are stronger than they really are! The sea forces are so intense. Capt. Cooper of the Anderson reported 2 huge 50 foot rouge waves that would have hit the wounded Fitz, these could have held for a few seconds against the pilot house and put her down. The screw also would have been Twisting against the middle while the ship was held by 2 waves
@dr.buzzvonjellar8862
2 жыл бұрын
Why is it that common sense is so uncommon in government agencies?
@paulhogan2389
2 жыл бұрын
Finally someone with logical reason. And to just take it one step further. The vessel was designed more so to get through the lock and not for the large loads it was forced to carry.. Please someone tell me if this is correct.. The first skipper never allowed the vessel to be over loaded where the second skipper was company inclined to run the vessel with higher loads. I wonder how involved the first captain was involved or observe it to the vessel while it was being built. That certainly would have gave the old man some insight of it's capabilities and short comings never brought forward to the second Skipper or just ignored by the second captain.
@HugsBach
2 жыл бұрын
Very good investigation!
@kingbee48185
3 жыл бұрын
the list (hit Caribou shoal) taking on water/develops a list, the collapsed hatch covers, 2 giant waves drove her water heavy bow down under as the rotten/defective keel's fractures lined up, she breaks apart on the surface .No time for a distress call. McSorley should have tried to run her aground in shallow waters along the Canadian side. He never should have sailed that day, or slowed down to let the Anderson catch up to her. He knew it was going to sink when he slowed down
@WolfesOwn47th
4 жыл бұрын
Great explanation, except for the loading thing. That is not how anyone loads at a chute dock.
@KB4QAA
12 жыл бұрын
Very credible explanation. The scenes of the ship flexing are unbelievable. That alone shows how weak the hull design is, and thus susceptible to failure in heavy seas.
@nancyjanzen5676
5 жыл бұрын
Aircraft carriers do that all the time. The long deck has expansion joints to allow for it.
@ronosga5072
4 жыл бұрын
The front two hatches being caved in by a wave is an issue. If a wave did it the back of the piolet house would show more damage, also a full hold would not leave room for them to be caved in that far. I think the vacuum of the cargo sliding out pulled the hatches in, which would mean a break at the surface. She hogged between to two large waves Cooper reported and just broke in the middle and the stern hung on with the top decking and got pulled along till the bow made her dive. Just my opinion from what the wreckage is showing plus the loose keel made the middle of the ship most venerable. I also think she bottomed out since high winds can seiche the water levels by quite a bit and if she didn't hit even coming close to hitting could cause a hydraulic effect with that much weight slamming down and cause damage. If 15k GPM pumps can't control flooding you got more than missing vents and some loose hatch clamps.
@ZeeboLaywicker
10 жыл бұрын
i have a serious issue with blaming any part of the crew for not applying the davits to the hatch covers correctly---they were experienced, and on the great lakes in november of all months--they know wicked storms could hit them quickly--they would have stuck their necks out? i dont think so. that being said, i cannot for the life of me explain why 1 and 2 hatch covers are in a V shape and down in the cargo hold. massive weight from wave? then why didnt 3, 4 and 5 fold under? i still believe like cap cooper said that she struck 6 fathom shoals, and right after that complained of the fence down, vents missing and a list--at that point the ship was doomed, IMO, large rogue waves or not, she was going to sink.
@spartonboat1
7 жыл бұрын
It would not have been necessary to physically strike the shoal. The hydraulic forces between the ships hull and the shoal would have sufficient to cause a rupture, so the coming down within 2 to 4 feet, at speed, would have been close enough for the rupture. When Captain McSorley reported a fence rail down that could well have been because she was sagging, due to the rupture, and there was no tension on the rail, which is a string of heavy wire braid; the bow and stern would have been higher than amidships, cause the loss of rail tension. Also, a post sinking hydrological survey was performed and it was found that the charts, at the time, were inaccurate and the shoal came out from the island for a considerable distance further than thought. So per the charts, the Fitz might have been in safe depths, but per actual findings, she may have been in relatively shallow waters.
@Big_Sierra
3 жыл бұрын
Hatch covers collapsed on her way to the bottom. Crushing pressure at those depths
@ZeeboLaywicker
3 жыл бұрын
@@spartonboat1 interesting thought about how close to the shoal they needed to cause damage..however, it would be "hogging" not "sagging" to break the fence.---hogging is where the ship is higher in the middle than either end--as im sure you know. that would snap the fence. and if she hogged---very good chance its because she hit those shoals--even grazed them would be enough to do damage.
@1911olympic
3 жыл бұрын
My compliments to this man! His explanation is really well thought through. 👍👍👍
@larrywoodruff7530
2 жыл бұрын
When you lose hatch covers in waves like that, carrying that much cargo weight, the ship is doomed, those poor souls........
@amandajstar
8 жыл бұрын
Fascinating.
@kelliebrooks9094
Жыл бұрын
One thing back in those days was loose pellets cargo baffles doubt full the had any back then to keep the iron from moving around...it showed they are rounded shot gun pellets...easy enuf fir them to shift
@Johnny53kgb-nsa
3 жыл бұрын
It must have happened so fast, the captain didn't even have time to make a distress call, and he probably was within arm be reach of a radio.
@chrisguerra2341
2 жыл бұрын
Beautifully done Thom
@1shinytop686
Жыл бұрын
That is the most logical explanation I have heard to date. Just good old common sense.
@Bridging_the_Political_Divide
4 жыл бұрын
Didnt realize the first 2 hatches are slammed inside their cargo holds. That could only mean huge waves crashing down, like the 25-30 foot waves reported by the other ship right behind the Fitz. Probably nosed in in the matter of a second or two.
@michaeldomansky8497
2 жыл бұрын
When it was launched seven port side panels buckled due to a “bad launch”….
@lonewolf9390
Жыл бұрын
I remember hearing that story here on KZitem. Some guy whose dad was a ship captain had one of the shipyard workers come running through the crowd looking for him, on the day that the Fitzgerald was launched and said 'Clem, Clem! You're not gonna believe this! She broke the forward hawser and buckled seven plates on the port side!" The dad turned to the kid and said 'I NEVER want to sail on that ship!'
@moosiem60
2 жыл бұрын
what about the two vents thy lost an the fence rail that was down.
@SteveCarrDrivesAPrius
6 жыл бұрын
I am so glad Milt found work after his office was "accidentally" burned to the fucking ground.
@otmargreb6110
2 жыл бұрын
Mercy! It must have been horrible!
@flashy5150
3 жыл бұрын
I think the most of what he is saying is right but before it totally broke in half, Cpt. McSorley said that the boat was listing and I believe that the hull had a stress crack in it at that point and was taking on water. Also, the Captain said that two hatch covers came off, which added to the weight in the middle of the ship. The middle of the ship started sagging more and more until it just gave way and the bottom of the middle of the hull ripped wide open and the ship broke in half. I would think that the back half flipped over because it might have been top heavy to begin with but I can’t confirm that. That is where the engine was. It was really rough water obviously, so there was a lot of swooshing going on, plus some of the metal might have been hanging on to the other half, just long enough to give it a spin on the way down. I think it was a big mistake for Cpt. McSorley to say that they were “holding their own”, when they were clearly in distress. I think the smarter reply would have been “we’re in trouble, I think we’re gonna sink” and to have gotten his crew into life boats “when it started to list”, but he was thinking about all the money that the ore company was going to lose if he didn’t make it to Ohio. He was also thinking “if I abandon ship and the ship doesn’t sink, I will be fired and look like a sissie to all the sailors”. It was his guilt that killed himself and everyone else. The sad thing is, those iron ore tycoons didn’t give a crap about human life, only their money. They actually over loaded the “Fitz” too and this combined with the rough water is what doomed it.
@GH-oi2jf
3 жыл бұрын
I think the hatch covers came loose when the ship went down. I doubt they were the cause.
@htc6600
11 жыл бұрын
Photos during several dives have shown most of the hatch clamps are intact and not deformed which would indicate that they were not down.
@kristopherleopold9828
4 жыл бұрын
BUt the #1 and #2 hatches behind the pilothouse are caved in and inside the boat. This means that water accumulating behind the pilothouse caved them in and took in more water.
@copescale9599
2 жыл бұрын
that website don't work anymore
@MrDarcykampe
5 жыл бұрын
Nosedived. Did not sink like the Derbyshire and break up on the surface.
@lawrencecarpenter638
3 жыл бұрын
I saw a doc where the cook said to fill the void between the keel and skin they stuffed welding rods into the gap.And that was done during its construction not later on.He said a normal ship had 65' of weld done per day.But the Fitz was welding 150' a day.U work to fast u make mistakes.
@kelliebrooks9094
Жыл бұрын
Bad thing is something that big needs ti have a little give or flex to it....to stregthen metal u heat treat it welding is heating if u keep welding ur taking the flexabilty out of it if u weld to close together u dont allow the natural movement that was built into the design....the main thing is the storm the one man mentioned they reduce the loads for november so the ship sit high an is floating better....to handle ruffer conditions...safely it was old ship...technology keeps on improving
@Davehash
3 жыл бұрын
Everybody is focused on structual integrity, list etc. Nobody is looking at the obvious. There are two huge holes in the lower starboard bow. Water was coming into the bow making the Fitz flood not only in the middle where it bottomed out but from the bow too. So the Fitz was riding low in the water with a list and the weight of the water shifted and the Fitz rolled over which accounts for the missing hatch covers then righted itself just as it hit bottom tearing the middle in half. The stern stayed upside down while the bow plowed into the bottom. An interesting fact. The Fitz's engine was found on stop. Did the crew try to abandon ship as the sister waves caught up to it? No crew were found anywhere on board. Which in my opinion either means they were all huddled in the stern or they tried to abandon ship and got caught and were swept out into the lake. There were no bodies found on the bridge either. So in my opinion they tried to abandon ship knowing she was going under and got caught by the sister waves and the bodies aren't on the ship.
Пікірлер: 271