"Titanic" in the realities of the 21st century
Often, when watching movies on the catastrophes at sea, thoughts about how real and possible everything in life on the screen comes to mind: whether this or that situation actually happened, whether this or that rescue tool worked or did not work, the heroes of the film, etc. In this article I would like to try to figure out how things are with safety at sea today, and how people should act in modern realities in order to escape, using the example of situations from a fairly well-known feature film based on real events - “Titanic”. Immediately make a reservation, to consider all aspects, I will not, because of their huge number. I will consider only the brightest, global and interesting (of course, in my humble opinion).
It is known that the film “Titanic” is based on real events of the beginning of the twentieth century, when it was not strictly required that the number of ship collective rescue means corresponded to the number of people on board the ship. The death of "Titanic" was the impetus for the creation of the first edition of one of the fundamental international conventions - SOLAS. What has changed since its adoption? Someone might think that, going on a world cruise, in the saddest case, there is enough space in the lifeboats, without exception, but this is not quite so. On the "Titanic" boats were enough to accommodate about 1/3 of the passengers.
Lifeboats of the m / v "TITANIC"
Nowadays, the minimum requirements for the capacity of lifeboats on passenger ships have really changed in a safe direction: lifeboats should have lifeboats on each side of the passenger vessel with a total capacity sufficient to accommodate 50% of people on board, that is, in theory, there should be enough space in the boats .
')
Modern Lifeboat
In addition, in addition to the lifeboats, life rafts should be installed on the passenger vessel, the capacity of which is sufficient to accommodate 25% of passengers and crew members.
It should be noted that the requirements for cargo ships are much stricter: there, in general, there should be enough boats on each board to accommodate all the people on board. This is quite logical: to ensure the availability of lifeboats for 20 people of the crew of a cargo ship on each side is much easier than for 5,000 cruise liner passengers.
What is better for rescue in an extreme situation, boats or rafts? It is hard to say. In my daily work, on duty, I often communicate with sailors, and often I hear that fleeing on rafts for them seems much easier and more efficient than on boats. Imagine: the ship is sinking (controlled), a storm at sea, crazy pitching. You need to sit in a boat, suspended on 2 hooks (hooks) and a pair of cables at a height of 10 meters above the water (small? Take the ship larger, although it will hurt from 4 meters), then praying that nothing is stuck and that the remote The control of the davit brake worked and you successfully descended, experiencing hard strikes on the ship’s side, so that the hook at the end of the descent surrendered without problems and did not turn soured; or, in the event of a strong roll under the impact of the waves, go down the storm-jumper in full gear (diving suit + life jacket) into the already launched boat; or jump into the water not far from the boat, risking hitting my head about her darling; or sit in a free-falling lifeboat and simply “fall” with it from a height of 15 meters (dubious pleasure, isn't it?).
Free Falling Lifeboat
With rafts everything looks simpler: you just throw the container into the water, it opens, inflates, and you just have to get into it by any means (the same ladder or just jump, it’s not so bad to fall on the soft one). For some reason, most sailors prefer rafts in this case, although there are exceptions: it is unlikely an inflatable raft will help you if there are burning oil products around you, but there are special boats for this case and they are widely used on oil tankers.
"Tanker" boat with water irrigation system
In any case, today, unlike the realities of the Titanic, you will almost certainly be able to find a place in a boat or in a raft in case of danger on any cruise ship (and on any ship).
The history of "Titanic" shows us that the vessels have the properties to break in half. We will not discuss whether this is real or not - this is a fact. But what has been done today to reduce the risk of such a “breakdown”?
Scene from c / f "Titanic"
In the marine engineering industry, there is a concept - overall longitudinal strength. This, if very simplified, is a certain criterion that ensures the strength of the hull of the vessel with longitudinal overall bending.
Sense of longitudinal bending moment
In a nutshell: due to the uneven distribution of masses along the length of the vessel, the force of gravity and keeping the vessel in calm water, together with wave loads, may cause the hull to bend or bend (and even curl, but this is a different story). Naturally, the Titanic broke because its aft end almost completely emerged from the water, and the bending moment became such that the hull simply could not stand it.
Surely, if you put almost any modern ship longer than 100 m in similar conditions, it will crack no worse than the "Titanic". But such a situation can occur in the modern world without any collisions with icebergs.
In the practice of shipbuilding in the USSR, there was a good tone rule, supported by the requirements of the USSR Maritime Register: to avoid intersecting butt joints of hull structures located in the same plane.
According to the Rules of the Russian Register, the distance d must be at least 200 mm. Applies to welded joints
This is due to the fact that, while engineers at the strength calculations, the characteristics of welded joints (now the main joints in shipbuilding, your cap) are the same as for the base metal, in practice this is not quite so: a violation of the welding technology can lead to the formation of concentration stress, increased brittleness of the material, lack of penetration ("voids") inside the seam, etc. However, modern world shipbuilding, in particular, Asian shipbuilding, has moved away from the “Soviet” traditions. This, can lead to sad consequences.
The design has all the joints in the same plane. The same technology was built MOL COMFORT
MOL COMFORT after a crash
From myself I can say that in Russia these traditions, although they are respected by engineering personnel, are not welcomed by "effective managers", because the technologically "Asian" version is many times simpler and, as a result, cheaper.
I happened to work at the Samsung Heavy Industries shipyard (one of the world leaders in the shipbuilding industry), and there every project is done according to this scheme. Even ships of the same project as the broken MOL COMFORT are built in the same way as he.
Of course, in the event of any catastrophe, one can talk for a long time about violations of the rules of operation, improper loading, etc., but even from the point of view of the fundamentals of philosophy, which so often in vain the young engineers neglect, the “Soviet” option has advantages in terms of strength characteristics.
In marine practice, there is such a thing as “straightening a vessel” (in various variations). Roughly speaking, when a ship gets a hole and part of the compartments begins to fill with water, in order to avoid getting the ship too much roll or trim, the captain may decide to intentionally fill this or that compartment with water, which of course will speed up the process of diving the ship, but will avoid very large angles. Remember how people fell, slid, and what happened on the Titanic when the feed rose too much from the water?
Frame from c / f "Titanic"
Moreover, if the captain fails to take corrective measures in time, the vessel can simply roll over, and then hardly anyone will be saved. There is an expression among naval engineers: "the vessel must sink without turning over."
As you all remember, in our film, the character of the now defiant Leonardo froze and drowned. Could today the situation be different if he could not get into the raft or the boat? The answer is hardly. Today, passenger ships should have hydrothermal suits in an amount of at least 3 for each boat, and heat protection equipment (a warm bag to keep warm after you are taken out of the water) provided for each person painted in the boat. In rafts, by the way, there are also stored heat-protective equipment, sufficient to accommodate 10% of people on a raft. That is, everything is tied to boats and rafts. Leo had no chance then or now, and his only option was a raft or a dinghy.
But Leo settled himself as a sailor on a freighter - he would definitely have a personal hydrothermal suit designed for him, in which you can hang out in icy water a little longer (up to 1 hour) and survive quite well. Again, cargo ships are much safer in this regard.
The sea is an element that is extremely unfriendly to humans, and navigation, respectively, is a very dangerous occupation. So it was at the dawn of shipping. So it was a hundred years ago. So it remains now. Far from shipping, a person might think that with modern technologies and the development of communications and other progress, people at sea are not in danger, but this is far from being the case. Much depends on the case, and engineering thought here is not able to foresee all possible scenarios of events. Yes, and it is not necessary - there are optimal solutions, economically viable, which the designers of vessels, rescue equipment and supplies adhere to, finding a money / security compromise. This situation takes place in the field of transport as a whole: no one designs airplanes that are able to “safely” fall from 20,000 meters, no one builds ships that will withstand a collision with the pier at full speed, no one will give each of the 5000 passengers a personal wetsuit, etc. Hence the quite acceptable and often used term in marine engineering is “good marine practice”, a certain mixture of traditions that did not lead to tragic consequences, with conclusions drawn after tragedies and problems, such a generalized experience. After all, shipbuilding is one of the most traditional branches of heavy industry.
What, after all, did people do after the death of the Titanic? Learned from mistakes. There is no guarantee that in a week, as a result of the tragedy with another cruise liner, it will not be revealed that we have not foreseen any mistakes. And there is no guarantee that we have learned quite well from the mistakes of the Titanic.
Thanks for attention.
Part One: Boat
It is known that the film “Titanic” is based on real events of the beginning of the twentieth century, when it was not strictly required that the number of ship collective rescue means corresponded to the number of people on board the ship. The death of "Titanic" was the impetus for the creation of the first edition of one of the fundamental international conventions - SOLAS. What has changed since its adoption? Someone might think that, going on a world cruise, in the saddest case, there is enough space in the lifeboats, without exception, but this is not quite so. On the "Titanic" boats were enough to accommodate about 1/3 of the passengers.
Lifeboats of the m / v "TITANIC"
Nowadays, the minimum requirements for the capacity of lifeboats on passenger ships have really changed in a safe direction: lifeboats should have lifeboats on each side of the passenger vessel with a total capacity sufficient to accommodate 50% of people on board, that is, in theory, there should be enough space in the boats .
')
Modern Lifeboat
In addition, in addition to the lifeboats, life rafts should be installed on the passenger vessel, the capacity of which is sufficient to accommodate 25% of passengers and crew members.
It should be noted that the requirements for cargo ships are much stricter: there, in general, there should be enough boats on each board to accommodate all the people on board. This is quite logical: to ensure the availability of lifeboats for 20 people of the crew of a cargo ship on each side is much easier than for 5,000 cruise liner passengers.
What is better for rescue in an extreme situation, boats or rafts? It is hard to say. In my daily work, on duty, I often communicate with sailors, and often I hear that fleeing on rafts for them seems much easier and more efficient than on boats. Imagine: the ship is sinking (controlled), a storm at sea, crazy pitching. You need to sit in a boat, suspended on 2 hooks (hooks) and a pair of cables at a height of 10 meters above the water (small? Take the ship larger, although it will hurt from 4 meters), then praying that nothing is stuck and that the remote The control of the davit brake worked and you successfully descended, experiencing hard strikes on the ship’s side, so that the hook at the end of the descent surrendered without problems and did not turn soured; or, in the event of a strong roll under the impact of the waves, go down the storm-jumper in full gear (diving suit + life jacket) into the already launched boat; or jump into the water not far from the boat, risking hitting my head about her darling; or sit in a free-falling lifeboat and simply “fall” with it from a height of 15 meters (dubious pleasure, isn't it?).
Free Falling Lifeboat
With rafts everything looks simpler: you just throw the container into the water, it opens, inflates, and you just have to get into it by any means (the same ladder or just jump, it’s not so bad to fall on the soft one). For some reason, most sailors prefer rafts in this case, although there are exceptions: it is unlikely an inflatable raft will help you if there are burning oil products around you, but there are special boats for this case and they are widely used on oil tankers.
"Tanker" boat with water irrigation system
In any case, today, unlike the realities of the Titanic, you will almost certainly be able to find a place in a boat or in a raft in case of danger on any cruise ship (and on any ship).
Part Two: Strength
The history of "Titanic" shows us that the vessels have the properties to break in half. We will not discuss whether this is real or not - this is a fact. But what has been done today to reduce the risk of such a “breakdown”?
Scene from c / f "Titanic"
In the marine engineering industry, there is a concept - overall longitudinal strength. This, if very simplified, is a certain criterion that ensures the strength of the hull of the vessel with longitudinal overall bending.
Sense of longitudinal bending moment
In a nutshell: due to the uneven distribution of masses along the length of the vessel, the force of gravity and keeping the vessel in calm water, together with wave loads, may cause the hull to bend or bend (and even curl, but this is a different story). Naturally, the Titanic broke because its aft end almost completely emerged from the water, and the bending moment became such that the hull simply could not stand it.
Surely, if you put almost any modern ship longer than 100 m in similar conditions, it will crack no worse than the "Titanic". But such a situation can occur in the modern world without any collisions with icebergs.
In the practice of shipbuilding in the USSR, there was a good tone rule, supported by the requirements of the USSR Maritime Register: to avoid intersecting butt joints of hull structures located in the same plane.
According to the Rules of the Russian Register, the distance d must be at least 200 mm. Applies to welded joints
This is due to the fact that, while engineers at the strength calculations, the characteristics of welded joints (now the main joints in shipbuilding, your cap) are the same as for the base metal, in practice this is not quite so: a violation of the welding technology can lead to the formation of concentration stress, increased brittleness of the material, lack of penetration ("voids") inside the seam, etc. However, modern world shipbuilding, in particular, Asian shipbuilding, has moved away from the “Soviet” traditions. This, can lead to sad consequences.
The design has all the joints in the same plane. The same technology was built MOL COMFORT
MOL COMFORT after a crash
From myself I can say that in Russia these traditions, although they are respected by engineering personnel, are not welcomed by "effective managers", because the technologically "Asian" version is many times simpler and, as a result, cheaper.
I happened to work at the Samsung Heavy Industries shipyard (one of the world leaders in the shipbuilding industry), and there every project is done according to this scheme. Even ships of the same project as the broken MOL COMFORT are built in the same way as he.
Of course, in the event of any catastrophe, one can talk for a long time about violations of the rules of operation, improper loading, etc., but even from the point of view of the fundamentals of philosophy, which so often in vain the young engineers neglect, the “Soviet” option has advantages in terms of strength characteristics.
Part Three: so that you do not crush the piano
In marine practice, there is such a thing as “straightening a vessel” (in various variations). Roughly speaking, when a ship gets a hole and part of the compartments begins to fill with water, in order to avoid getting the ship too much roll or trim, the captain may decide to intentionally fill this or that compartment with water, which of course will speed up the process of diving the ship, but will avoid very large angles. Remember how people fell, slid, and what happened on the Titanic when the feed rose too much from the water?
Frame from c / f "Titanic"
Moreover, if the captain fails to take corrective measures in time, the vessel can simply roll over, and then hardly anyone will be saved. There is an expression among naval engineers: "the vessel must sink without turning over."
Part Four: Dramatic
As you all remember, in our film, the character of the now defiant Leonardo froze and drowned. Could today the situation be different if he could not get into the raft or the boat? The answer is hardly. Today, passenger ships should have hydrothermal suits in an amount of at least 3 for each boat, and heat protection equipment (a warm bag to keep warm after you are taken out of the water) provided for each person painted in the boat. In rafts, by the way, there are also stored heat-protective equipment, sufficient to accommodate 10% of people on a raft. That is, everything is tied to boats and rafts. Leo had no chance then or now, and his only option was a raft or a dinghy.
But Leo settled himself as a sailor on a freighter - he would definitely have a personal hydrothermal suit designed for him, in which you can hang out in icy water a little longer (up to 1 hour) and survive quite well. Again, cargo ships are much safer in this regard.
What is the result?
The sea is an element that is extremely unfriendly to humans, and navigation, respectively, is a very dangerous occupation. So it was at the dawn of shipping. So it was a hundred years ago. So it remains now. Far from shipping, a person might think that with modern technologies and the development of communications and other progress, people at sea are not in danger, but this is far from being the case. Much depends on the case, and engineering thought here is not able to foresee all possible scenarios of events. Yes, and it is not necessary - there are optimal solutions, economically viable, which the designers of vessels, rescue equipment and supplies adhere to, finding a money / security compromise. This situation takes place in the field of transport as a whole: no one designs airplanes that are able to “safely” fall from 20,000 meters, no one builds ships that will withstand a collision with the pier at full speed, no one will give each of the 5000 passengers a personal wetsuit, etc. Hence the quite acceptable and often used term in marine engineering is “good marine practice”, a certain mixture of traditions that did not lead to tragic consequences, with conclusions drawn after tragedies and problems, such a generalized experience. After all, shipbuilding is one of the most traditional branches of heavy industry.
What, after all, did people do after the death of the Titanic? Learned from mistakes. There is no guarantee that in a week, as a result of the tragedy with another cruise liner, it will not be revealed that we have not foreseen any mistakes. And there is no guarantee that we have learned quite well from the mistakes of the Titanic.
Thanks for attention.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/391567/
All Articles