Curious Dragonfly Monthly Science Newsletter

TITANIC...UPDATE?! The sinking of RMS Titanic on April 14th, 1912 is one of the most well- documented and studied tragedies in all of history. Countless books, movies, and articles have shown the scope of the sinking from all sides. There is even a website -- www.En- cyclopedia-Titanica.org -- dedicated to preserving the legacy and story of everyone aboard the doomed liner.

There are firsthand accounts from survivors, additional biographies onthose who perished in the Altantic Ocean that evening, and transcripts of the hearings conducted by the United States Congress after the event.

So that's why it's difficult to post the title 'Update' on such a historic event. And while we have listed it as just that, note that the information present-ed in this newsletter is not newly-revealed details regarding the ill-fated voyage of the Titanic. Instead, it is a series of facts that have resurfaced due to a documentary film.

The film, titled Titanic: The New Evidence originally aired on January 1, 2017 on the United Kingdom's Channel 4. In it, the documentary does not set out to show new evidence of the sinking. Rather, it presents the theory that a long-lasting, smoldering fire was responsible for two key compo-nents related to the sinking:the weakening of the Titanic'sdefenses to a collision withsomething as fierce as aniceberg, and the ship's highrate of speed across the ocean. So what does thetheory suggest? Let's take a look.

A NEW THEORY

What do you feel is the true purpose of a documentary film?

The RMS Titanic leaving South-hampton, England April 10, 1912..

HULL DAMAGEIrish author and journalist Senan Molonyhas spent more than 30 years researchingthe Titanic. For the documentary, Molonystudied a series of rarely seen photographsof the doomed vessel before it left harborin the Belfast shipyards. It was during thisstudy that Molony and several other histor-ians and experts discovered what appearedto be long black marks along the starboardhull of the Titanic. But were these marks froma massive on-board coal fire? Or was the explanation -- poor photographquality, a difference in paint color in that section of the hull -- far simpler?

"We are looking at the exact area where the iceberg struck," Molony saysin the documentary. "and we appear to have a weakness or damage tothe hull in that specific place, before she even left Belfast." But what exactly was the fire Molony and others was investigating?

Senan Molony

DuPage County Register April 26, 1912. Pg.7

Do you think an iceberg alone could have caused the sinking of the Titanic?

As Molony points out in the documentary, numerous eyewitness accounts (like the one in the image below, from a testimony given by John Dilley, a member of Titanic's fire crew) attest to the presence of a of a coal fire prior to the ship's maiden voyage. The fire is said to have raged at tempsof over 1,000º and resisted attempts by a 12-man crew to extinguish it.However, it continued to burn in coal bunk bunker 6 throughout the ill-

fated voyage, as one of the ship's surviving stokers testi- fied. It was the belief of many workers that fireboats in New York Harbor would need to be called upon to put out the fire, and that they hoped to reach New York before any "inevit- able explosions" tore through the ship's hull. But as we all know, it was not an explosion that sank the Titanic.

THE PHOTOS IN QUESTIONThe seeds of Molony's breakthrough canbe traced to an attic in Wiltshire, in south-west England, where a series of photo-graphs stashed away for more than 100 years were discovered. The photos were from a private collection of the Titanic's Chief Electrical Engineer, John Kempster. The photos show the momentous launch of the great ship. But they may also show clues to its impending catastrophe.

Those who contest the photos' validity claimthe burn marks do not match the location of

coal bunker six, as seen above.

Molony and others wereshocked to discover a 30-foot-long diagonal blackmark on the hull's starboardside, close to where the shipwas pierced by the iceberg.An analysis by engineers atImperial College London sub-sequently revealed that themark was most likely causedby the fire raging in coalbunker 6. Molony contends that the ship's owners knew about the fire but chose to let it go, since delaying the ship's journey would have been financially ruinous. Other con-tributing issues factor in, as well, such as the use of substandard materials and shoddy workmanship primarily due to shipbuilders under intense press-ure to complete the largest ship in the world on time and within budget.

Further proof that the ship's own- ers were aware of the fire damage, Molony claims, is that, at the time of departure, the ship was berthed so that the marks caused by the fire were facing the sea, away from the dock, and therefore concealed from passengers.

A highlighted image of the burn mark.

The first of Kempster's lost images.

Do Kempster's photos show concrete proof of fire damage to the ship?

Curious Dragonfly LLCTrina Terrellwww.curiousdragonfly.com303.903.5319

ENGAGING QUESTIONS!

1. What do you think is the main purpose of a documentary film?2. In what ways can photography be used to prove or disprove a scientific theory?3. What does Molony mean by a 'perfect storm...?' 4. What other methods could historians or scientists use to determine if the fire in coal bunker 6 affected the ship's hull?

HISTORY ON THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN"This isn't a simple story of colliding with an iceberg and sinking," says Senan Molony. "It is a perfect storm of extraordinary factors coming together: fire, ice, and criminal negligence. The fire was known about, but it was played down. She should never have been put to sea."

No matter the cause, the tragic loss of life on that fateful night in the Atlantic will be one of the world's defining tra-gedies. And our need to understand and revisit the Titanic proves how the ship continues to capture the global imagination. It is most certainly not the worst catastrophe at sea, but it is the one everyone remembers.

And it is one in which the search for answers may truly never be over.

A photo by John Kempster.