When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I believe he hit bottom, and cracked the hull. Some lifelines snapped, that's an indication that the hull did a twisting motion. Then later on, they got hit with a huge wave from behind, and he just dived to the bottom.
There also was a hatchway that broke loose. In conjunction with the cracked hull, and the hatchway gone, he was taking on water.
I believe he hit bottom, and cracked the hull. Some lifelines snapped, that's an indication that the hull did a twisting motion. Then later on, they got hit with a huge wave from behind, and he just dived to the bottom.
There also was a hatchway that broke loose. In conjunction with the cracked hull, and the hatchway gone, he was taking on water.
The Canadian chart in the vicinity of Caribou Island was later found to be in error.
Fitz bottomed out on a shoal near Caribou Island that was listed on the chart as being deeper than it was.
This caused the hull to "hog" and to knock one or two (can't remember which) fence rail down. The hull soon broke in two and the Fitz sank in a few seconds.
I don't recall reading anything that said a hatchway broke loose.
In ROV surveys, the hatches that can be seen on the forward section are all dogged down. The after section is upside down.
I think the hatchway breaking loose, was a theory, that I bought into, and tend to believe. It wasn't the primary culprit in the sinking.
Yes on the chart being in error.
Even after the investigation, there still were/are ideas floating around. You asked mine, so I gave it.
Fact remains, 29 good men died that night, and I think only they know what happened.
It had to be terrifying.
I've been in big seas myself, it can be interesting. Luckily no serious injuries or loss of life, in my case.
I think the hatchway breaking loose, was a theory, that I bought into, and tend to believe. It wasn't the primary culprit in the sinking.
Yes on the chart being in error.
Even after the investigation, there still were/are ideas floating around. You asked mine, so I gave it.
Fact remains, 29 good men died that night, and I think only they know what happened.
It had to be terrifying.
I've been in big seas myself, it can be interesting. Luckily no serious injuries or loss of life, in my case.
2/2004: Took a Panama Canal Cruise, Miami to San Diego. The seas were calm until the ship passed Cuba and entered the Caribbean Sea.
WHAM! The seas were so rough that most people on the 100,000+ ton cruise ship, despite the stabilizers, were sick as dogs. And this went on for several days.
Meanwhile, I sat out on the balcony with my binoculars, oblivious of the crashing and heaving seas.
Captain walked out on the starboard bridge wing, turned around and spotted me sitting there and asked 'what in the world are you doing?'
I said 'this is my first cruise and I'm going to enjoy every minute of it, weather be damned!'
LOL!!! I always found if I could get some fresh air, it made me feel better.
Man, I've been seasick maybe three times, it's not a good feeling. Thing is, 40' seas on a 7000 ton vessel, there really isn't much of a place to go outside! LOL
Gordon Lightfoot did her name justice as she was a beautiful majestic creature of the lakes.
IMHO, I'd say she was too heavily loaded and ill prepared for the building sea state. I've seen scallopers off the Maine coast fish till they were far too heavy to sustain a heavy sea state. A heavy boat plus high seas never ends well.