Quote:
Originally Posted by pythos
Looking very carefully at those pics it is very clear these are not the same sails. Look at the 86 pic. There is a chunk missing from the fore, top of the sail. But the most stand out thing is, in the 68 picture there is no sign of the sail. Where in the 86 pic the sail is very visible, and should have appeared in the 68 shot. Also, what happened to all of the periscope parts visible in the 68 shots. There is no sign of any debris of these parts in the 86.
|
Actually it is very clear that they are the same sails. The pictures where taken from different angles. As for the periscope being visible in the 86 shot, look at the bottom of the sail in that picture, it's there.
Quote:
|
Also the pics of the stern, those dive planes are not in an exaggerated position. If they were blowing tanks trying to escape an uncontrollable dive, would they have a serious angle to them? And why did the sail rip off? Most U-boats and other WWII subs maintain their conning towers, and they just rot off over time. Why would a much more advanced sail rip off, yet maintain its dive planes.
|
If it was a unrecoverable jam dive that caused them to exceed crush depth, the stern planes could have returned to closer to 0 degrees upon hitting the ocean floor. As for the sail ripping off, buy a bottle of champagne and leave just the cork in it, now shake it up. It's the same concept, when the hull crushed all that air inside popped the sail off like a cork out the bottle. Most U-boats and other WWII subs were sunk in combat, thus water floods in and there's no pressure buildup.
Quote:
|
Mid section photos are really what is needed. Not bow or Stearn, but the section that would most likely be get obliterated by a torpedo, or perhaps a critically failed reactor..
|
Quote:
|
Also why has she not been recovered like the Kursk? I forgot what depth the Kursk was at. It may have been shallow.
|
It was quite a bit shallower in fact.
Quote:
|
Why are there no pictures that can form a mosaic of the Scorp's wreck, like National Geographic had of the Titanic when they first found her.
|
1. National Security 2. While no less tragic, the Titanic incident got a lot more press coverage and was quite a bit more popular. 3. National Geographic was taking the pictures not Uncle Sam.
Quote:
|
It shown the telescoping of the stern. Problem I have is, the telescoping shoved parts into the reactor compartment. Why did this not explode (I'm talking about the steam generator being exposed to the cold water, like a boiler. Or could this be what caused the hull to break in to and tear the sail off?
|
Straight from the paper itself...
Quote:
|
The operations compartment below the sail obliterated upon reaching collapse depth which is why the sail was detached and now lies separated in the debris field.
|