That's a pair of compounded far-fetched what-if's which defy common
sense. I'm not into endless streams of what-if's, they can go anywhere
as has been the case for 92 years so far in the case of the loss of
the Titanic and "prove" nothing. We're into an engineering screwup
here, not what-if's.
You stated "there was nothing wrong with its (Titanic's)design and
construction." My position is that the Titanic apparently did have a
major design flaw which led directly to it's loss, it's rudder was
undersized.
Titanic's sister ship, Olympic, was essentiaaly the same ship. A few feet
shorter and less luxurious, but the same basic design. Olympic went into
service first, and much of her crew was transferred to Titanic because of their
experience.
No complaints of a grossly undersized rudder.
See above link. Argue with them.
Other ships of that era with properly designed rudders would have
turned away from the berg and missed it with room to spare.
Perhaps if the rudder had been larger, the Titanic might have turned away
quicker and missed the berg. But that's really irrelevant.
The ship was clearly
going too fast for conditions.
There's no "might have beens" about it. Unless you can explain why a
larger rudder wouldn't have turned the Titanic quicker so that it
missed the berg.
73 de Jim, N2EY