`:: I think that you are right to question the statement that in essence says: If the parts were close together, that show it probably didn't break up on the surface.     In fact, I think that that inference is faulty.    While I'm sure that ``miles apart`` can occur for surface breakups, that could be due to mile(s) deep water  as you noted, or to ships with more watertight compartmentalization where the two halves could float for a while.   I also question the ``similar surface breakups`` statement. It is unsourced.   I think that to be ``similar`` in the important areas, it would have to be a loaded laker in similar depth water that broke up on the surface.   Sounds unlikely.  I've read a lot of Great Lakes shipwreck books, and don't recall anything like that.           `