Has there been any big collisions with ice bergs after Titantic or during the Age of Sail? What happened? Especially during WW2, wasn't there a lot of naval moments in the Arctic?
closed as off-topic by Jos, justCal, Lars Bosteen, Semaphore♦ Jan 8 at 6:18
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is too basic; it can be definitively answered by a single link to the relevant topic on Wikipedia or another standard reference source. If you are instead questioning the correctness of a reference source, please edit the post to supply a link and explain what you find unclear, or why you believe it to be wrong or incomplete." – justCal, Lars Bosteen, Semaphore
No. The Titanic disaster is quite unique. Sailing through iceberg infested waters was rare during the age of sail, for several reasons:
- Mass passenger transport ships didn't exist. Ships carried some passengers, but weren't designed as passenger ships. Therefore the loss of life could be substantial, but nowhere near that of the Titanic.
- Why would someone take a dangerous non-profitable route to the Americas?
- Icebergs can sink relatively slow moving ships as well, but that risk is much smaller than a ship running at full speed under steam.
- Whalers cruised far to the north, but they were accustomed to the weather, dangers and the icebergs. If they sank, the loss of life wasn't as horrendous as when the Titanic went down. I am certain some whalers did sink after hitting an iceberg, but ships sink all the time. It's not something that would be remembered today.
Especially during WW2, wasn't there a lot of naval moments in the Arctic?
Yes, there was. Only icebergs were the least of their problems. Focke Wulf "Condors", U-Boats and German surface warships were a far greater threat, not to mention the appalling weather. The ships kept a very vigilant lookout for any danger. Icebergs being just one of them, and a minor one at that.