Comments:UK documentary claims fire weakened RMS Titanic
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Comments on this page were originally made using the LiquidThreads extension, which is no longer supported. It has since been exported to wikitext, but the export process was not perfect so comments may appear slightly oddly.
Usual 'weak' evidence 'documentary'
[edit]I agree (as an ex Metallurgist) that temperature (heat is a different thing) can effect the strength / ductility / hardness etc of steel. Depends on the temperature and time and removal of the heat source ( quenching) together with the original materials consistency. And that is a simple explanation of the variables.
I haven't watched the program, so maybe I am being over critical and dismissive. Did they find records of any of the above variables....appears to me they can't even validate the occurrence of the fire in the first instance.
Or maybe after 15 years of watching the World Trade Centre fall down they have decided the viewing public deserve greater enlightenment.
From David in Thailand, sat on a beach, watching people enjoy themselves making their own entertainment. SheffieldDavid (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds like you're in the right place. ;)
- Molony just gets too excited and overstates his case, it seems. Titanic: Something That May Well Have Happened or Not, We Don't Really Know doesn't make for prime time TV. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 18:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)