What If The Queen Mary Hit Titanic's Iceberg?

Knowing the differences in design and technology between the two ships, I started to wonder if the Queen Mary would sink if she struck Titanic's iceberg in the same situation as that fateful night. It's easy to say that the Queen Mary being 20 years younger, could probably handle the situation better. But I often tried to visualize HOW the aftermath would unfold, following the collision. This video is just for entertainment, it in no way implies I know anything about ship engineering, and does NOT imply I am a Titanic or Queen Mary historian. I just have a curious mind.

NOTE: I am not an actual university-educated historian. "Alex the Historian" was a stage name created back in 2016 as a light-hearted reference to my Disneyland history content, and I never try to mislead people into thinking otherwise. The name has grown to become part of my channel, just like my hat has become part of my appearance. To change it now, so late in the game, would be detrimental to my channel.

#RMSTitanic #RMSQueenMary #OceanLiner

TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 The Question
0:40 How the Titanic Sank
1:42 Comparing Hulls
4:21 Comparing Evacuation Scenarios
5:52 Comparing Lifeboat Deployment
7:32 Comparing Watertight Compartments
8:23 Rundown of Queen Mary's Collision Scenario

CREDITS:
The Drone footage is provided by:
Aero Realm:

MUSIC:
"Arthur Vyncke - Sunny Winter Day" is under a Creative Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0) license.

"Scott Buckley - Horizons" is under a Creative Commons (CC BY 3.0) license.

---------------------------------

DISCLAIMER: I am not a University-educated historian, Alex the Historian was a nickname I got while working at Disneyland as a tour guide. After 5 years of using it as a stage name for my channel, it would be detrimental to the channel to suddenly change the name.

[cardiffdillon]

The Costa Concordia incident proved that large, state of the art passenger ships, built to the latest SOLAS standards, can still sink after striking a submerged object. They were just lucky that it didn't happen hundreds of miles from the nearest assistance.

[GRTMN]

Not to mention, that Titanic's crew was only aware around ... 40 or so minutes after the crash that the ship was doomed. On the other hand, the crew of the Queen would be almost immediately aware of the situation due to the intercom system, and wouldn't lose as much time as Titanic's crew.

[scottreich]

Without Titanic hitting the berg, I doubt that SOLAS Conventions would be enacted. The safety of life at sea conventions of 1914 were a direct result of Titanic's sinking. They, among other things, provided for enough lifeboats and 24 hour radio watches. QM's safety was greatly enhanced by improvements made after the loss of hull 401.

[TorontoJediMaster]

One thing to keep in mind about "Mauretania" vs "Titanic" was that "Mauretania" had been built with a loan from the Admiralty with the idea that she (and her sister-ship "Lusitania" could be converted into armed merchant cruisers in time of war. So, their construction was done with naval requirements in mind.

[CptRennett]

The funny this is that the lessons of the titanic were put into titanic’s still under construction sister, the Britannic. It was retrofitted with massive electric lifeboat davits. When the ship sank, even with a heavy list and only 55 minutes. Everyone got into a lifeboat and off the ship. That didn’t save all of them from the propeller unfortunately. And that was a retrofitted Titanic, so I think a ship entirely built with the titanic disaster in mind would have no problem ensuring the safety of its passengers.

[DEVILTAZ]

It was interesting seeing that the Queen Mary almost did sink in very heavy seas too. It needed to roll about another 3-4 degrees and it would have rolled over. It had the nickname 'The rolling Mary' as it was top heavy and was actually built higher than the original plans had allowed for. 2 people even died in accidents during the ships history on the seas due to it's rolling nature.

[ManWhoLovesTheMary]

I didn't know the literal extent of the Queen Mary's double-bottom hull, or the lifeboats' outer ribs. I had fragmented understandings about these features. I learn so much from you, Alex. I've loved the Queen Mary since late elementary school, and you know way more than I do.

[blast]

I stand in awe of the fact that this living legend still exists today. I mean you have to realize that this vessel is a little bit bigger than the Titanic but a direct cousin to her. I’m so happy to be able to see such a magnificent ship today.

[jetsons]

Another work of "Alex" art. Nothing like a good Queen Mary story to make a day. While at work today, at lunch, we watched your "Disneyland Railroad" series. Thanks for all your "HOURS" of hard work you do for us the viewer.

[TheTransatlanticExchange]

This was such a captivating video on the safety features of the wonderful RMS Queen Mary and how they would fare in a similar collision as Titanic. Despite over a dozen visits to her in Long Beach and building several models of her, you shared many details that were previously unknown. Most notably, it was interesting to learn that she too had longitudinal bulkheads like the Lusitania/Mauretania, had caps at the top of her watertight bulkheads to potentially confine flood water, and ribs on the lifeboats to allow them to pass over the riverheads in the event of a list during an evacuation. The question that next comes to mind is, how would a modern ocean liner like Queen Mary 2 handle such a collision? Of broader curiosity, how would a less robustly built standard cruise ship handle this? As for the RMS Queen Mary herself, please spread the word on her current plight as repairs are so urgently needed to save her for future generations. Many thanks for all your work in creating this video for us!

[andrewdias]

I mostly agree with this, but Titanic was going around 21 to 22 knots when she collided with the iceberg. Queen Mary was an even more massive ship that could easily reach 28 knots. Wouldn't this make a difference?

[tavi]

The thing people tend to forget when they compare more modern ships to Titanic is that Titanic herself influenced the design of these newer vessels. The Queen Mary was designed with Titanic's sinking in mind, with features to avoid the litany of problems that occurred that night. And, to the credit of the crew, Titanic remained afloat longer than even her designer predicted. It just wasn't long enough.

[WardenWolf]

The Queen Mary was simply a newer ship, built with the lessons learned from the Titanic disaster and the loss of Titanic's sister ship, the Britannic. She was far more resistant to damage.

[brober]

Another great vid Alex. Agree with all your conclusions.Worth a mention: Queen Mary sailing under 1914 SOLAS regulation required lifeboat drill on 1st day so pax would be familiar with their boat location and life preservers. Titanic never had a lifeboat drill as the Capt. cancelled it on 4th day out because it was Sunday.

[TheRelativy]

I would assume, that the damage to the ship is proportional. So Queen Mary being longer than Titanic, should get around 310 feet long breach. It can also be supported by the ship shape. Titanic damage is where ship is getting narrower toward the bow. Breach end where the hull is getting straight. So Queen mary would suffer floding in 8 compartments. The question is if the damage would be deep enough to breach oil tanks. Most likely not. But with 5 fully floded compartments her bow will dip below the waves and water start getting into the ship from the top, above the watertight compartments, and then ship is doomed anyway. It would most likely take much more time to sink.

[Nightfall]

Well thought out and well supported. Thank you, Alex, for another entertaining video.

[KTheFirst]

Queen Mary Sinking Scenario: Generally, I agree that QM would have had a much better chance at surviving a collision similar to Titanic's. However, I would like to bring forward that QM was both heavier and - all other factors being equal in the scenario - would have been going much faster than Titanic. That changes a lot of factors that can affect everything else, as the crew may have less time to react from seeing the berg, to the ship receiving more damage, to a number of other things that cannot be accounted for, and can affect the scenario further down the line.

So again: I agree that QM had all the advantages that Titanic lacked in construction and cultural experience (the QM's entire career was with Titanic in living memory for one thing, and Titanic was the cause of a lot of the changes that were incorporated into QM), and as British steamlines recruited officers from the Royal Naval Reserve, they would have had the training and discipline to deal with such a crisis. But when you have thousands of people crammed into what is in comparison a very small can on a very big ocean, it can easily turn into disaster even with the best of effort.

3:00 - 'Why didn't Titanic have a double hull?' Because the probability of the ship taking the sort of damage that would require it was very unlikely. Titanic was built with the most probable collision scenarios of ship disasters up to that point: Ramming something, being rammed, and running aground. All of which are more likely while close to shore and/or port, with rocks that may or may not be properly charted, and crowded shipping lanes, and are thus typically at half or slow speeds. A full speed side-swipe - while potentially possible - was as close as you can get to an Outside Context Problem while not relying on fantasy or sci-fi.
Furthermore, remember that Mauretania was built to near military spec, due to being largely funded by HM Government with the expectation of being used as an auxiliary cruiser in wartime. Hence the side compartments - She and Lusitania are (in the most strict definition) the largest Protected Cruisers in the world. Had Cunard been able to build them normally, the coal would have been stored more like Titanic.
QM's double hull/fuel bunker setup has more in common with Olympic's Post-War configuration, after she was converted to burning oil.

7:05 - Titanic did develop a list, though while it certainly affected boats on the starboard side, it wasn't as bad as you made it out to be. In comparison, Lusitania - Mauretania's sistership and in possession of the side-bunkers - leaned far enough over to genuinely make lowering boats impossible, and genuinely would have benefitted from those rails on the sides of the boats.

[beatmueller]

I had a namesake on the Titanic, and I have been intrigued by it since first reading Walter Lord's book, "A Night to Remember" back in the late 1950s.
But, despite the fact that you have no authoritative knowledge, I like your reasoning and your humility. I'm also impressed by the quality of the visual illustrations in the Video, Alex! Well done!! :)

[JaimeExploring]

Wow! That must have been the longest 45 seconds ever! before hitting the Iceberg! Thank You Alex for sharing both the Ships history.

[cunardkevin]

Thanks Alex for sharing a very good video!!! Enjoying your videos!