Comments on: Titanic Personal Injury Case: Titanic Found to Be Largest Product Defect Case in History

By: vikasharma

vikasharma — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:26:35 +0000

i studied on internet ,that there is little bit mistake of the carpentar who rivetted the bolts of the front edges, there is the major default of the captain of the TITANIC ,who was present on that day, when he bloody knew that the weather is cold , where he cann’t identify the shape and size of the far object i.e. Iceburg then why did he permited to the coordinatoq to run the ship at that much fast speed.

By: Springfield VA Larry

Springfield VA Larry — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:17:04 +0000

As the above poster already stated, the actual material of the ship is essentially meaningless Wouldn’t the very fact that the damage to the ship and subsequent sinking were proven to be caused by an iceberg (which could have penetrated just about any building material that was available during this era) pretty much deny any legitimacy of an argument like this? This is pretty ridiculous….. Thanks

By: Patty C

Patty C — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:30:48 +0000

Another, unrelated, ‘riveting’ r/i/l comes to us from the Big Dig in Boston where a female passenger was killed after 12 tons of cement ceiling panels fell on the car her husband was driving inside the I-90 connector tunnel.

http://www.designnews.com/article/ca6374287.html

…“It’s not one thing. It’s usually many, many things that go wrong together,” he says.

Litman notes the five elementary phases of any massive construction undertaking: The concept, initial design, specified structure, or what it was supposed to be, the as-built structure, or what it actually wound up being, and finally maintenance and inspection of the structure as it is used…”

By: mespo727272

mespo727272 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:48:41 +0000

Niblet:

Seems a little exaggerated given that many ships have survived close encounters with icebergs and were much less prepared than Titanic. But maybe that is so. However, risks that can be guarded against should always be guarded against.

By: niblet

niblet — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:24:02 +0000

Like a more informed person wrote when this story first came out:

The ship hit the iceberg with the equivalent energy of a Saturn moon rocket going 18,000 MPH flying into a granite mountain.

It wouldn’t have mattered if the rivets were made of titanium. Good Lord, some people need to do some basic research.

By: mespo727272

mespo727272 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:58:35 +0000

JT:

I am not so sure the statute of limitations (s/l) has run. As was stated: “The company knowingly purchased weaker rivets, but I think they did it not knowing they would be purchasing something substandard enough that when they hit an iceberg their ship would sink,” said co-author Jennifer Hooper McCarty.” I suspect it was known then that icebergs patrolled the North Atlantic in the spring of 1912,and what the company knew or didn’t know is certainly something worthy of pursuit. If the claim is fraud, I wonder if the discovery rule might apply to commence the running of the s/l now. Since White Star is out of business, it’s moot of course, but, who knows maybe there are some corporate assets still “floating” out there.