Posted by Michael Fikes on November 07, 1999 at 01:35:52:
In Reply to: Re: Sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald posted by Paul Armagost (had Realative on board) on May 09, 1999 at 11:05:07:
:
: :
: : Hello all,
: : I am doing a research report on the Edmund Fitzgerald, and i will be trying to compare and contrast, or
: : analyze the different theories for her sinking. I am wondering if anyone could point me to some
: : resources on this subject, and varying theories, either book or internet. Any help would be appreciated.
: : Thanks a lot,
: : P.S. Also, please reply by email if you could, that would be appreciated, thanks
: : Sincerely,
: : Ted
: : I think the ship did break deep, and started to take water. I also believe that there were record seas coming over the bow.I also thing that the leaking hatch cover played a role. The sinking of a ship that big, that fast had to be a combination of things. If you look at a picture of the bow section of the ship as she rests now, notice how the solid steel sun visor over the forward looking windows of the wheelhouse is bent straight down. Only an immense level of down force could have done that. Possibly one great grandmother of a wave, or the ship would have to have become inverted as it was sinking, or twisting as it was sinking perhaps. Either way it would have had to break into peices near the surface or shortly after it submurged. Aside from all else a ship of that size will not sink in less than five minutes unless something catastrophic happens like a keel break , or a massive hull rupture. Also the odds of a ship carrying 26,000 tons of iron ore tactonite pellets capsizing is veary slim. the ship could not have been mor bottom heavy than she was.
As for resources contact the n.t.s.b. and the
u.s.c.g on line. the are alot of edmund fitzgerald web sites with links to these organizations on them. Michael Fikes.