In 1891 a report was published by an ASCE committee to investigate the cause of the Johnstown flood of 1889. They concluded that changes made to the dam by the South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club did not cause the disaster because the embankment would have been overflowed and breached if the changes were not made. We dispute that conclusion based on hydraulic analyses of the dam as originally built, estimates of the time of concentration and time to peak for the South Fork drainage basin, and reported conditions at the dam and in the watershed. We present a LiDAR-based volume of Lake Conemaugh at the time of dam failure (1.455 × 10(7) m(3)) and hydrographs of flood discharge and lake stage decline. Our analytical approach incorporates the complex shape of this dam breach. More than 65 min would have been needed to drain most of the lake, not the 45 min cited by most sources. Peak flood discharges were likely in the range 7200 to 8970 m(3) s(-1). The original dam design, with a crest ∼0.9 m higher and the added capacity of an auxiliary spillway and five discharge pipes, had a discharge capacity at overtopping more than twice that of the reconstructed dam. A properly rebuilt dam would not have overtopped and would likely have survived the runoff event, thereby saving thousands of lives. We believe the ASCE report represented state-of-the-art for 1891. However, the report contains discrepancies and lapses in key observations, and relied on excessive reservoir inflow estimates. The confidence they expressed that dam failure was inevitable was inconsistent with information available to the committee. Hydrodynamic erosion was a likely culprit in the 1862 dam failure that seriously damaged the embankment. The Club's substandard repair of this earlier breach sowed the seeds of its eventual destruction.
Keywords: Earth sciences; Hydrology.