Humanities desk
< October 11	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 13 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 12[edit]

Michigan online high schools[edit]

Are there any completely free online high schools that meet Michigan's requiremets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A quick google search turned up this: Michigan Virtual High School. I have no idea what the requirements or quality of this program are, but it may give you a start. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic[edit]

I have a few questions about the titanic.

1. How could the ship have been considered to be "practically unsinkable" by shipbuilder magazine if the bulkheads didn't seal fully?

2. Why did the funnels buckle so easily, were they really only held up with cables?

3. Which company built the original fore Grand Staircase? Would it have been Harland and Wolff's fitting out section?

Thanks guys, Hadseys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.192.59 (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did the engineers ever say the ship was unsinkable or was that just the marketing people? The ship was designed to stay afloat with 4 compartments flooded, the collision resulted in 5 compartments flooding, so it sank. Sounds to me like it performed within expected parameters. And did the funnels buckle easily? As I understand it, the boat was at a significant angle before they fell. Once it reached that angle sinking was probably inevitable so there was little point designing the funnels to survive it. I can't help you with the grand staircase, though, sorry! --Tango (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it was any 2 compartments or the 4 front compartments, not any 4. And the reason why at least some people thought that was sufficient was simply that they did not imagine an accident that would open more compartments than that. The worst case (they thought) was a heavy impact between the ship and an obstacle or another ship. If the Titanic hit something head-on, it might bash in not one or two, but as many as three or four compartments at the front; if another ship smashed into the Titanic's side, it might breach as many as two compartments. Nobody considered that a light, glancing collision might open five or more compartments. It was worse than what was thought to be the worst case that could be "practically" expected. Now we know better. --Anonymous, 03:51 UTC, October 13, 2008.

So the mistake was in trying to avoid the iceberg? Had they just kept going they would have survived... oops... --Tango (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main mistake was in proceeding into a known icefield at almost full speed at night. And if they had crashed into the thing head-on, people might have been killed in the collision. But, yes, if the damage was confined to the front of the ship as the designers expected, it is quite possible that it would not have sunk. --Anonymous, 11:40 UTC (Yeep! The time of the collision was 11:40 pm ship's time), October 13, 2008.

The funnels of passenger liners at the time were remarkably tall and were stronger at the bottom than at the top. They were designed to remain upright and not for the eventuality of the vessel moving from a horizontal to a vertical position. (We can notice in passing that one of Titanic's four funnels was a dummy, but it seems to have been less of a dummy than the master, Captain Smith.) Strawless (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]