|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:55 pm
Game. Set. Match.
This thread must now be closed. For I have deemed all other arguments invalid. :P
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:35 am
OBJECTION! Here cones a new challenger! Er...what I mean to say is, what if it did really happen...in someone's mind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:26 am
/koffhopethey'reinstitutionalizedkoff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:37 am
GoldDiggingWhore Barrett Jaeger Of course Titanic and Pearl Harbor are real events, they're in movies for God's sake! Not only were those events real, but I know for a fact that Leonardo De Caprio drowned in Titanic and that Tom Hanks was also a Captain in WWII and a Private in Vietnam.That amuses me greatly~ Is it funny that I was thinking of you the whole time that I was mentioning Pearl Harbor and WWII? Yes, actually. Yes it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:04 pm
Ya know, according to 9 Persons 9 Hours 9 Doors, the events of the Titanic were published in a novel before the events actually happened. Coincidence? Probably. But it's still interesting to think about
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:31 pm
Titantic, the holocaust, 911, the moon landing, the Y2k bug, the mousketeers, FFXIII, gold, the 2012 apocalypse...how could anyone not believe in any of them.
But yeah I have been to belfast (where the titanic was built)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:49 pm
Sagebomb Titantic, the holocaust, 911, the moon landing, the Y2k bug, the mousketeers, FFXIII, gold, the 2012 apocalypse...how could anyone not believe in any of them. But yeah I have been to belfast (where the titanic was built) That is actually pretty cool! 2012 is going to be the biggest non-event since Y2K. It'll be hilarious. DID YOU KNOW that if the Titanic had hit the iceberg head-on it wouldn't have sunk? It would have been in really bad shape, but it still would have been able to crawl into port. Or so I've heard. That could be entirely false.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:51 am
GoldDiggingWhore That is actually pretty cool! 2012 is going to be the biggest non-event since Y2K. It'll be hilarious. DID YOU KNOW that if the Titanic had hit the iceberg head-on it wouldn't have sunk? It would have been in really bad shape, but it still would have been able to crawl into port. Or so I've heard. That could be entirely false. Indeedy so, 2012 is just a way to sell stuff to the stupid...but the stupid keep the economy turning...so *shrugs* Indeed you are correct, the titanic was one of the first ships to use waterzone locking for the case of a breech in the hull. Although the integrity of its zones could have been compromised from any collision, if only one was breeched the ship could have handled only flooding one section. Since it scrapped pass multiple sections, most of the zones were flooded, and well...with that weight of water in all those zones it was only a matter of time before the ship broke completly. We have 36 watertight doors on floors 1 - 3 (below water level) and 34 splashtight doors on level 4 (just above water). So should we get a regular breech as well we would be fine, but if most our bottom was cut open too...well lets just say we would have to go into a extreme emergancy prep mode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:38 am
Sagebomb ndeedy so, 2012 is just a way to sell stuff to the stupid...but the stupid keep the economy turning...so *shrugs* Indeed you are correct, the titanic was one of the first ships to use waterzone locking for the case of a breech in the hull. Although the integrity of its zones could have been compromised from any collision, if only one was breeched the ship could have handled only flooding one section. Since it scrapped pass multiple sections, most of the zones were flooded, and well...with that weight of water in all those zones it was only a matter of time before the ship broke completly. We have 36 watertight doors on floors 1 - 3 (below water level) and 34 splashtight doors on level 4 (just above water). So should we get a regular breech as well we would be fine, but if most our bottom was cut open too...well lets just say we would have to go into a extreme emergancy prep mode. The big difference in the case of your ship being that IF something happened and you started to go down, you guys have enough life boats for the whole ship...right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:43 am
GoldDiggingWhore Sagebomb ndeedy so, 2012 is just a way to sell stuff to the stupid...but the stupid keep the economy turning...so *shrugs* Indeed you are correct, the titanic was one of the first ships to use waterzone locking for the case of a breech in the hull. Although the integrity of its zones could have been compromised from any collision, if only one was breeched the ship could have handled only flooding one section. Since it scrapped pass multiple sections, most of the zones were flooded, and well...with that weight of water in all those zones it was only a matter of time before the ship broke completly. We have 36 watertight doors on floors 1 - 3 (below water level) and 34 splashtight doors on level 4 (just above water). So should we get a regular breech as well we would be fine, but if most our bottom was cut open too...well lets just say we would have to go into a extreme emergancy prep mode. The big difference in the case of your ship being that IF something happened and you started to go down, you guys have enough life boats for the whole ship...right? We have enough lifeboats for all people on board + 25% extra. In the impossible case that all bearths were filled (not ever going to happen), then we have enough life rafts for that +5% Besides lifeboats, we have Marine Evactuation Systems and a rescue craft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:51 am
Sagebomb We have enough lifeboats for all people on board + 25% extra. In the impossible case that all bearths were filled (not ever going to happen), then we have enough life rafts for that +5% Besides lifeboats, we have Marine Evactuation Systems and a rescue craft. I'm glad to hear that. The last thing we need is to lose our Sage. It's just too bad that there had to be a massive tragedy like Titanic before worst case possibilities were taken serious and planned for properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:46 pm
GoldDiggingWhore Sagebomb We have enough lifeboats for all people on board + 25% extra. In the impossible case that all bearths were filled (not ever going to happen), then we have enough life rafts for that +5% Besides lifeboats, we have Marine Evactuation Systems and a rescue craft. I'm glad to hear that. The last thing we need is to lose our Sage. It's just too bad that there had to be a massive tragedy like Titanic before worst case possibilities were taken serious and planned for properly. Regardless of whether you are superstitious or not, I think we can all agree that it also didn't help that they had a plaque on the main deck that read "Even God couldn't sink this ship."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GoldDiggingWhore Vice Captain
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:15 pm
Barrett Jaeger Regardless of whether you are superstitious or not, I think we can all agree that it also didn't help that they had a plaque on the main deck that read "Even God couldn't sink this ship." I think I'm about to go into shock from an irony overdose. I'm sorry, it totally shouldn't be funny. but I just can't help but think, "IZZAT SO?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:49 pm
Those were nearly my exact thoughts when I read about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:59 pm
Hey! I’m talking! cat_scream
...and the sad part is that there had been room for both on that thing in the movie.
Ok, I’m done. Go back to your babble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
