Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!lll-crg!nike!oliveb!hplabs!sdcrdcf!lwall
From: lwall@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Larry Wall)
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.rumor
Subject: Re: The TITANIC
Message-ID: <2928@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 4-Aug-86 19:52:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.2928
Posted: Mon Aug  4 19:52:52 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Aug-86 02:40:45 EDT
References: <221@petrus.UUCP> <1198@rayssdb.UUCP> <55@rb-dc1.UUCP>
Reply-To: lwall@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Larry Wall)
Distribution: net
Organization: System Development Corporation R&D, Santa Monica
Lines: 17
Xref: watmath net.misc:9955 net.rumor:2992

In article <55@rb-dc1.UUCP> dwren@rb-dc1.UUCP (Doug Wren) writes:
> As for the explorers' comment that TITANIC did not have a gash
> from her encounter with the berg, but rather just a bunch of
> burst seams - I'm skeptical. TITANIC had a double
> hull starting with the fifth watertight compartment, and it
> was the flooding of the fifth and sixth compartments that
> doomed the ship. These compartments flooded pretty quickly.

What really got me was that in practically the same breath they said
that she was buried in mud up to the anchor.  The anchor rides above the
water line.  The gash, if any, would be below the water line, and
presumably below the mud line as well.

There seems to be a bit of an inconsistency here.

Larry Wall
sdcrdcf!lwall