Naval History Forums

I know Bob Ballard and other researchers have started doing research & studies on the mircoorganisms that were discovered in the finding of the Titanic.
These mircoorganism are slowly eating the ship and eventually the structual integrity will cause the ships to collapse or fall apart.

Does anyone know if they have done similar research on the Bismarck? Is so are there any indications of the in how long do researchers believe the ship will stay intact?

I know of no research specifically on Bismark , but you are looking at a wreck there with large areas of heavy plating , let alone the extensive armour , the subdivision , etc . Looking at the salvaged U S N " Monitor " of 1860 gives you some indicators as to how long the heavier bits will last - tens of thousands of years ? and as you can see from the many debris photos of Bismark posted here in the forum , even light structure is showing little deterioration .

Titanic was built in a different metalurgical era , and we know the material used was not the best available , but was the most economic consistent with the ship's role and anticipated life of the hull . Also in her case , the strength was designed down to an adequate standard , not beefed up to the maximum .

In automobile terms , you are comparing the sunken durability of a luxury coach against a main battle tank .

hammy wrote:I know of no research specifically on Bismark , but you are looking at a wreck there with large areas of heavy plating , let alone the extensive armour , the subdivision , etc . Looking at the salvaged U S N " Monitor " of 1860 gives you some indicators as to how long the heavier bits will last - tens of thousands of years ? and as you can see from the many debris photos of Bismark posted here in the forum , even light structure is showing little deterioration .

Titanic was built in a different metalurgical era , and we know the material used was not the best available , but was the most economic consistent with the ship's role and anticipated life of the hull . Also in her case , the strength was designed down to an adequate standard , not beefed up to the maximum .

In automobile terms , you are comparing the sunken durability of a luxury coach against a main battle tank .

I don't disagree with you at all. The comparison of the two types is pretty dramatic. From what I have read, NOAA believies in the current environment the Titanic will stay close to its current condition for another 50 years. With the Bismarck being a battleship it easy to guess that is will be at least another 200 years before he falls apart. Though this is open to debate since little research has been done on the microbes that eating these ships.

Titanic is made of a low quality steel with a high content of iron, thus all of the brown-rust stalactites on the wreck. The Bismarck is a high carbon steel. Due to the purer and homogenous state it will last much much longer, because of the low iron content. I see Bismarck lasting longer than any nation currently standing.

As the two wrecks are in different parts of the ocean, at different depths, latitude and presumably a temperature difference in the water, the parasitic microbes living on the wrecks I assume will be different between the two sites. It would be interesting to see whether this would influence the rate of degradation - would it be faster say in warmer waters?

I dont know much about deep ocean conditions , but it is going to be very chill down there on both these wreck sites , and totally black-dark . I wonder if conditions will be so very different at the two sites .
You can compare with shallower tropical wreck degredation because we have the Truk lagoon sites and Ironbottom sound in the Solomons where we know the wrecks are contemporary .
Interesting thing to study .
Theres a thesis or two in there for someone .

The James Cameron show Expedition Bismarck mentions they were doing some tests on the microbes on the Bismarck but other then some brief explanation about what rustcicles they don't have much information on it.

The show is posted on U Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dTFi_xZkn8

Presumably we are still awaaiting the results of the tests and their publication - assuming that they did find anything that would be of interest to a mass audience.

Another factor would be that the paint and other anti-corrosion measures taken for a warship in 1940 would be far superior to a luxury liner of 1912.

This will always be a key point, as Bismarck and its contemporaries during the twentieth century were constructed as fighting ships, whereas Titanic wasn't really designed to go about ramming icebergs.

Could Bismarck hit an iceberg like that and survive? I am thinking yes...

An interesting question for Bill Jurens I think......

If it was indeed like that experianced by the Titanic I expect so. Even if the hull were breached wouldn't it just be the parts outboard of the TDS?

Yes, the iceberg would mostly like flood the torpedo bulges, the ship would get a list, thats about it

Expeditions to the Bismarck easily show the large wholes in the sides caused by torpedos, and the torpedo bulckheads are still intact. So I would except the same results with an iceberg.

It is possible that in the event of a similar collision, Bismarck may not have suffered serious flooding at all. For one, Bismarck's hull was largely welded, while that of Titanic was riveted. The damage which doomed the Titanic was a few pokes and jabs and some 300 feet of creased plates, sheered rivets and opened seams in the hull plating. If the welds held on the Bismarck, there may have been comparatively little flooding. Even if they did not hold, and seams opened in the outer plating, extensive flooding would probably not have occurred as Bismarck possessed a double hull which Titanic did not. The double hull consisted of inner and outer plating with an air space between them; even with the outer hull breached in the same fashion as Titanic, the inner hull would have prevented flooding of the affected compartments, except for the first two in the bow which were singled hulled).

Brunnel's fantastic ship, Great Eastern, had been built with a double hull, and on one trip to New York, she struck an uncharted rock which ripped the outer hull plating for a third of her length, yet the inner hull plating held and the ship was able to make New York on her own power.