Seen the accident report. Doesn’t really match the wreckage, as others have noticed. The bow is buried deep into the sediment, estimated impact speed of 45 mph. More likely than not, the Fitzgerald hit bottom after going over large wave. The site is about 250-300 feet deep. Since the world now recognizes that rogue waves are real (more than 60 foot waves do occur), this explanation and not the “hatch cover failure” seems more credible.
Still hard to believe a modern giant can be lost on a lake, but superior is more like an ocean than a lake, and that wasn’t a simple storm.
I was under the impression that it was determined it broke in half when a large wave left it partially hanging in mid air.
1. The combination of high seas and loose/damaged hatch covers allowed water to infiltrate into the cargo hold over the course of the trip from Superior, WI. This is not in dispute, as the captain of the ship had reported this on the radio some hours before the ship sank.
2. The captain of the Edmund Fitzgerald -- along with the Arthur M. Anderson -- began their trip eastward across the lake on the normal direct route to Sault Ste. Marie, but altered course northward as the storm kicked up so the impact of the northwest winds would be diminished by the Ontario coastline.
3. As a result of taking this route, the two ships ended up approaching Sault Ste. Marie from the northwest. As they made their way toward Whitefish Point, the stretch of open water behind them increased -- and they bore the full brunt of the northwest winds kicking up the waves from that direction.
4. At some point a "rogue wave" approached from the rear and pitched both ships wildly. The Anderson was OK, but the ongoing water infiltration into the hold of the Fitzgerald had catastrophic consequences for that ship. The wave approached from the rear and lifted the stern of the ship first. The water in the hold effectively acted as a lubricant on the ore pellets and enabled them to move more easily than a dry cargo. As the stern lifted, the cargo slid forward in a sudden surge and plunged the bow of the ship into the water.
5. At this point the front-heavy ship was functioning physically like a dart, and drove straight down to the bottom of the lake in a matter of seconds.
6. Since the ship was more than 700 feet long and it sank in about 500 feet of water, the stern of the ship was still above the water surface when the bow hit the bottom. The ship probably broke in half in that position -- which explains why it is in two pieces on the bottom of the lake with the stern half upside-down.