| Author |
Message |
    
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 25621
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 12:12 am: | 
|
>>or there was something amiss with Cameron's davits that caused them to flex in a more obvious manner than the originals.<<
I think you'll find on close inspection that the movie davits were scaled down slightly from the originals. The plans they were built from came from Welin and if memory serves, Welin even went so far as to build the replicas.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Matthew Newman
Member
Username: matuatay
Post Number: 517
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 5:26 am: |
|
>>A wise man would equip themselves with a rubber tube and bottle, worn strapped to the leg under the trousers.<<
And still do to this day, but from what I've seen the bottle was lost somewhere in history and the tube now runs down the length of the leg and out the cuff. A few years ago I went to New Orleans to see what Mardi Gras was all about and was VERY surprised to see this was fairly common.
I suppose it's better than someone "whipping it out" and doing their business in front of God and everyone in broad daylight, but to a 18-year-old farmboy, "the tube" was quite a shocker.
<edit> Just occured to me that the bottle probably isn't as lost as I thought. It's probably better to keep a bottle for your tube handy if you're going to be in an enclosed space. I think the tube running out the pant cuff would work best in open, crowded areas.
Either way I'll stick with keeping my business between me and the loo.
Matt Newman
|
George L. Lorton
Member
Username: retro_geo
Post Number: 1619
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 6:57 am: |
|
quote:Either way I'll stick with keeping my business between me and the loo.
Hi Eric, Sounds like a good plan to me.
Rhythm here, rhythm there, rhythm floating everywhere. Awh get with it, red hot rhythm now!
|
Jason D. Tiller
Moderator
Username: jtiller
Post Number: 5148
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 3:24 pm: |
|
quote:Hi Eric, Sounds like a good plan to me.
Errr...that was Matthew.
"To be happy is to be contented in your own mind"...Harold Godfrey Lowe
43° 44' 01" N, 79° 24' 16"W
|
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 289
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 6:01 pm: |
|
We can read ad-nauseum all about the theory of how people will behave in a life-threatening situation but until it actually happens to you, you can only speculate. You don't even know how the the person closest to you would react. I mean of course - yourself. I hope none of you will ever find out.
As has rightly been pointed-out, it was very late in the game before the majority of people - crew and passengers alike realised the peril they were in. There were a great many intelligent people among the survivors. These would be the first to suspect all was not well. However I suspect we should consider the psyche of all of the passengers.. I say this because these were either brave people who had given up everything to leave their native lands for an unknown new life or were the descendents of those who had done so previously. These were not the comfortable, soft people of the present day - not even the rich ones! Additionally; many of the sea-farers who manned ships in these days also had had first hand experience of death and terror on the high seas. The lists of those lost at sea during the previous 50 years will bear witness to that. The problem with ships with a large crew is what to do with those who have no specific task during an emergency. Too many well-meaning, untrained people tend to get in the way. Another problem is too many people asking too many different questions at the same time and all demanding instant answers.
The people we're trying to psycho-analise were a breed apart - all of them.
The nearest thing to them today might be the illegal immigrants that are flooding across the borders of the more affluent, safer countries. I think principally of the Vietnamese boat people or the poor souls who brave the sea trip in unseaworthy boats from north and west Africa.
As for the life-boats; The types used on Titanic
probably had load restrictions during lowering, advised by the manufacturer. The same types were being used in the 1950 and there was a weight maximum on these of 4 tons with crew but not passengers.
If I remember, it was Mr. Lightholler who threw caution to the winds when loading some of the last boats. With a few exceptions - there was little reluctance to board at that time. |
Jim Kalafus
Member
Username: jak
Post Number: 5179
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 6:35 am: |
|
>The people we're trying to psycho-analise were a breed apart - all of them.
Not really. Titanic must be ruled out because of the time that elapsed before people could write things down, but if you take the time to read the wealth of first person accounts from the first 72 hours after the Empress of Ireland; Lusitania; Laconia; Arabic; Vestris; Morro Castle; Mohawk; Cocoanut Grove Fire; Winecoff Hotel Fire; Hartford Circus Tent Fire; Our Lady of the Angels Fire; Yarmouth Castle; Beverley Hills Supper Club Fire, and then compare them with the HUGE amount of 9/11 first person material from the first 72 hours after the disaster, you'll find that the thought processes and behavior patterns of those caught in disasters did not change at all between 1914 and 2001.
And I do not mean accounts found in anthologies, or books published decades later. I mean ONLY things set down within the first three days or so.
I'll expand on this later this morning.
Still, it's the life you chose, I suppose. Good luck to you, come what may.
|
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 290
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Jim,
I think you mis-understood my reasoning. I was pointing out that all we have to go on is the recorded reactions of individuals to a life-threatening situation. I have no reason to doubt the examples you quoted.
What we do not know as individuals is how we would react in exactly the same circumstances. It's a bit like the retort 'I know how you feel' when someone is going through the aftermath of a tragedy.
What I was trying (and obviously failed) to suggest was that the people of the 1912 era were very different in their attitudes to equals and those they deemed as 'superior' or 'inferior'.
I'm suggesting that the modern day, western individuals - descendents of Titanic survivors if you like, would probably react in a very different way today to the same set of circumstances. For instance almost all would be educated and have confidence in themselves. Most would think first then question a seemingly ridiculous action - such as allowing a half-filled boat to be lowered!
As a much older person, I have first hand experience of the Victorian attitudes to class and privilege which were prevalent in those days. In the UK, such attitudes lasted well into the 1950s. I remember American friends just after WW2 being amazed at how we all stood like sheep in a queue - we queued for everything.
The attitude to class and privilege in 1912 was made obvious by the various Inquisitors on both sides of the Atlantic. I think of the pre-occupation with whether certain political or wealthy individuals had been saved or where they were at a particular time during the sinking.
I dare to say that on the US side they were thinking of undue privileges of those with rank and wealth over the Steerage Class people while on the other side of the 'pond' they were concerned with rank, wealth and politics - not necessarily in that order. At least I hope I'm right otherwise the American Revolution was a waste of time! |
Martin Williams
Member
Username: martin_williams
Post Number: 672
Registered: 3-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 2:47 pm: |
|
'However, I suspect we should consider the psyche of all of the passengers. I say this because these were either brave people who had given up everything to leave their native lands for an unknown new life or were the descendents of those who had done so previously. These were not the comfortable, soft people of the present day - not even the rich ones!'
In a way, I know what you're saying, Jim. But I'm not sure that I'd agree with you. The majority of the first-class passengers, at least, were well-seasoned travellers who had crossed the Atlantic on numerous occasions. Just as the modern business executive thinks nothing of hopping onto a plane and jetting off to the other side of the world for a meeting, so the glitterati of the Edwardian Era took the five-day ocean crossing in their stride. For them, it was simply a way-of-life, a component part of their leisurely and cosmopolitan routine. Doubtless, too, the ever-increasing size and luxury of the liners upon which they sailed helped to allay any potential fears they may have entertained for their safety before the voyage - a natural tendency the publicists of the day did much to exploit. Possibly, in second-class and steerage, passengers were slightly less blasé - first-time fliers usually being more apprehensive than those for whom it is all simply a matter of course.
Then, as Jim Kalafus has out-lined above, we must remember that our whole conception of the Titanic disaster is unavoidably conditioned by our knowledge of what the eventual out-come will be. Namely, a horrifying and protracted death in the pitch dark and freezing cold for the fifteen hundred poor souls not fortunate enough to make it into the boats. Deprive yourself of the benefit of hindsight and then ask yourself why so many aboard showed an initial reluctance to take part in the evacuation. The lights were burning...the sea was dead-calm...the band was playing...the officers and crew were assuring everybody that this was simply a precautionary measure. The notion of drifting around in mid-Atlantic in the middle of the night in a frail open boat is not one I would have found terribly appealing. To say nothing of the sixty-foot-plus drop to the water below. Presented with an apparently viable alternative, I imagine I would have preferred to stick to the big ship. And, even when the gravity of the situation became more obvious, still they dallied - as Walter Lord so neatly summarised it in A Night to Remember, the millionaires and socialites gathered by the side of Lifeboat No. 4 were 'men and women more accustomed to giving orders than taking them'. Yet they prevaricated for an hour or more whilst the other boats departed and the Titanic settled ever lower at the bow. I don't think they would have been quite so docile had they entertained any real sense of urgency. The only reason Ida and Jean Hippach made it into that boat at all was because they happened to find themselves in the vicinity during the loading process. They'd spent the greater part of the evening, simply ambling around aimlessly, just as various other first-class women did, almost until the very last moment, and despite every opportunity to leave sooner - Jane Hoyt, René Harris, Maybelle Thorne and Caroline Brown are names which spring to mind. Even after the departure of Collapsibe D, it is not inconceivable that Anne Isham and Edith Evans were telling themselves that they could always 'get the next one'. |
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 292
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 9:24 pm: |
|
I understand clearly what you are saying Martin and I must say, I think that to a certain extent you are confirming my beliefs.
Perhaps there is something in the fact that those who had the biggest bank books and/or could shout the loudest got the best seats (and boat places for themselves or those close to them). There is a list of survivors and boat allocations somewhere on this site. From it, it seems that the boats were mainly filled with 1st and 2nd class passengers and crew. The highest density of 3rd class passengers were in the starboard, aft boats. This surely says something about rank and privilege if nothing else. That would most certainly not happen in this day and age.
The relatively few who dallied and prevaricated by the boats is again a classic example of the era. These people were doing as you say - while another 1500 or so who were just as aware of the impending doom did little or nothing - just accepted the inevitability of it all - much as they had always accepted that they were lesser beings to the group round the boat.
The pathetic retreat to the stern in the final moments also states volumes about the inequality of the situation.
I am reminded of the portrayal of those who perished in the holocaust. It is inconceivable that the descendents of those people would allow themselves to be herded in such a way nowadays.
Incidentally; didn't a band play for them as well? |
George L. Lorton
Member
Username: retro_geo
Post Number: 1622
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 4:21 am: |
|
quote:Errr...that was Matthew.
Why Jason, so it was. Sorry Matthew!
Hello Jim C.
quote:There is a list of survivors and boat allocations somewhere on this site. From it, it seems that the boats were mainly filled with 1st and 2nd class passengers and crew. The highest density of 3rd class passengers were in the starboard, aft boats. This surely says something about rank and privilege if nothing else. That would most certainly not happen in this day and age.
You have a point. I'd hope a situation along these lines wouldn't happen that way with the poor getting the short end of the stick but never say never. Folks get short changed everyday! Not to such an extent as this but it still happens I'm afraid to say.
Rhythm here, rhythm there, rhythm floating everywhere. Awh get with it, red hot rhythm now!
|
Jim Kalafus
Member
Username: jak
Post Number: 5180
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 4:09 pm: |
|
>the millionaires and socialites gathered by the side of Lifeboat No. 4 were 'men and women more accustomed to giving orders than taking them'. Yet they prevaricated for an hour or more whilst the other boats departed and the Titanic settled ever lower at the bow.
That wasn't complacency. THAT was a prime example of something better understood now, than in 1912, which is that in life-and-death situations people tend to seek order, and WILL follow direction, even if the direction seems inappropriate.
These were passengers who assembled relatively early at boat #4. For a variety of reasons, #4 could not be lowered immediately. As you'll recall, the assembled were ordered from the boat deck to the promenade deck and back again, and if Walter Lord is to be believed in his interpretation, were then "put on hold" while aft boats were lowered. Yet, even as the danger that they were in became apparent, the majority of those who waited at #4 did not disperse to seek escape in other lifeboats.
This has nothing to do with class, breeding, or nationality. It is how people of all stripes tend to react in threatening situations. And I know this, because in scores of disasters, ranging in time from long before the Titanic until the present, one finds parallel examples of this behavior asserting itself.
If you think that people nowadays would react to boats being lowered half full, or some of the other bizarre orders that killed people aboard the Titanic differently than their 1912 counterparts, one need only look at 9/11 to show how erroneous that assumption is. The South tower was well on its way to being evacuated after the first tower was attacked when a voice (never publically identified) came over the general Public Address system and told people to return to their offices. And, hundreds if not thousands who had already reached street level, turned back and went to the elevators. Likewise, hundreds who were on the upper floors waiting for elevators reversed their direction of travel and began heading further UP into the building. Now, in densely-overbuilt NYC, particularly the boroughs where wood frame construction is the norm, everyone is aware of the fact that A) when a wood frame house burns the FD evacuates a substantial part of the block because B) a burning frame house has the potential to take out an entire neighborhood if something goes wrong during the firefighting efforts. Fires jump building to building. It's just a fact of life here. BUT, people who were fully aware of that particular rule of fire danger, had seen, first hand, that thirteen stories of the building less than 300 feet away from them were burning fiercely. They reached the ground and were steps away from safety, yet turned back on the "say so" of an anonymous but official voice (preserved on tape) who told them to go back into the building. Many turned a deaf ear and kept going... but the majority disregarded their firsthand knowledge that something mostrously dangerous was going on less than 300 feet from their desks, and aborted their evacuation. And we all know what happened next.
If anything good comes out of that disaster, I think the best thing will be the death of the myth about how people will reflexively panic in life-or-death situations. On a grand scale we were shown, in real time, how the majority of people behaved in a calm and considerate manner. BUT we were ALSO shown that people will blindly obey bad orders if they come from an "Official" source. In hindsight, the death toll would have been at least 1200 people fewer if that voice had said "Move at a steady pace, and exit thru the Concourse and not the lobbies." And that's fairly chilling.
Still, it's the life you chose, I suppose. Good luck to you, come what may.
|
George L. Lorton
Member
Username: retro_geo
Post Number: 1624
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 5:42 pm: |
|
quote:one need only look at 9/11 to show how erroneous that assumption is. The South tower was well on its way to being evacuated after the first tower was attacked when a voice (never publically identified) came over the general Public Address system and told people to return to their offices. And, hundreds if not thousands who had already reached street level, turned back and went to the elevators. Likewise, hundreds who were on the upper floors waiting for elevators reversed their direction of travel and began heading further UP into the building.
That is sadly all too True! I remember the first reports about this incident on the news from interviews with survivors.
Rhythm here, rhythm there, rhythm floating everywhere. Awh get with it, red hot rhythm now!
|
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 294
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 5:51 pm: |
|
Jim,
I hear (and heed) what you say. I can only relate from experience of being born when common people in the UK were subservient and fatalistic and from being on the receiving end(in the marine environment) of abuse from people who were not 'who they thought they were'. Or who 'knew better than me'.
You are correct in that the the majority will as it were; follow blindly but is 'blidly' the correct word? While there are increasing numbers who do not accept the 'mushroom pricipal' - most of us are now constantly bombarded in the work place and on commercial ships and aircraft with training films which remind us not to panic, but to stay calm and follow the instructions of 'well trained staff'.
Subscribing to the mushroom principal acting without question is very undesirable (except if you're a marine). However, there are times when questions waste valuable time; then 'sheep' are the most desirable group.
You seem to portray the people in your 911 example as 'blidly' obeying. Is that really true? I wonder! Were they not just too well trained? I may be off base but would there have been an emergency procedure laid-down for these enormous buildings?
If so, was everyone in the buildings advised of this or even practiced in it? Perhaps, like many other establishments, there might have been instructions to go to a certain area in the event of fire. Listen for a particular announcement etc. The last thing anyone in charge of such a situation wants is for an individual or group to make an arbitrary decision. It was terrible that all these people lost their lives for whatever reason.
You say: "I think the best thing will be the death about the myth about how people will reflexively panic in life or death situations".
I have to say that history does not support that.
In the UK alone there are numerous examples of great loss of life when individuals and groups panicked. These took place in cinemas, theatres and sports stadiums. The same happened all over the world. In my own home town, several hundred children were suffocated in a false cinema fire because of panic.
If anything is to be learned from your example from the tragedy of 9/11, it is perhaps that there can be too much mass training- that the wrong kind of training can dumb-down intelligence and allow the strong to influence the weak majority. This happens every day in jury-rooms! |
George L. Lorton
Member
Username: retro_geo
Post Number: 1625
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 6:12 pm: |
|
quote:If anything is to be learned from your example from the tragedy of 9/11, it is perhaps that there can be too much mass training- that the wrong kind of training can dumb-down intelligence and allow the strong to influence the weak majority.
Hello Jim C.
True enough! You have to watch out for misinformation. It can lead you down the bridal path to oblivion but when you don't know what else to do in that kind of situation it tough to not listen to the authoritative voice telling you a way to save yourself even if it's the wrong way.
Rhythm here, rhythm there, rhythm floating everywhere. Awh get with it, red hot rhythm now!
|
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 25687
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2009 - 4:32 am: |
|
>>You seem to portray the people in your 911 example as 'blidly' obeying. Is that really true? I wonder!<<
I don't know how well any of these people were trained however, I'll be so bold as to point out that what Jim Kalafus is describing is behaviour which was actually observed in a number of crisis situations. Titanic included. It's not a hypothetical. It happened. The real issue from a historical perspective is not just the what, but the why.
That people will tend to panic in a life threatening situation is also observed behaviour, but the case can be made that all it takes to put the brakes on that is somebody taking charge.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Jim Kalafus
Member
Username: jak
Post Number: 5182
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2009 - 6:21 am: |
|
>You seem to portray the people in your 911 example as 'blidly' obeying. Is that really true? I wonder! Were they not just too well trained? I may be off base but would there have been an emergency procedure laid-down for these enormous buildings?
Actually, the sad thing that was NOT played up in the flood of post-Titanic-like drivel that came after 9/11, was that althought the PORT AUTHORITY staff in the buildings was given extensive training after the 1993 bombing, (and 10,000 pound decorative planters put into place around the perimeter of the property to prevent a truck full of explosives from getting too close) very little was done to train the 220,000 people who worked in the buildings about effective evacuation and emergency procedures.
Some companies DID have emergency drills, ranging from amazingly effective to amazingly ineffective. The best "teachers" new employees had, in most cases, were employees who had survived the evacuation fiasco back in 1993. From them, "Newbies" learned to take off the dress shoes and put on the sneakers or walking shoes before beginning the potential 110 story walk down. Knew to remove ties, ditch jackets, and grab a bottled water. All of which came in handy.
BUT, hit or miss is not the best way of doing things. Nearly a HUNDRED survivors later testified that they had no idea where the fire stairs were! 50% of 1600 polled after the disaster did not know where the stairs to the roof had been, and whether or not one was SUPPOSED to head upward or downward.
Which brings us to the remarkable evacuation of Morgan Stanley. English born Vietnam vet Rick Rescorla was the "security executive" at M.S., and after the 1993 bombing he became a martinet about the need for efficient training. Morgan Stanley was the only company in either tower tha took safety training to the extent that Rescorla ordered it. Despite the "corporate mentality" he conducted frequent, and disruptive, fire drills in which the entire M.S. staff had to evacuate, top floor first, down to the bottom floor last, in order, and then walk clear down to the 44th floor sky lobby. EVERYONE knew what to do, and how to maintain a fast but not panicked or dangerous pace. His motto: Proper prior planning and preparation prevents piss-poor performance. Drills were timed. EVERYONE knew the routine, even if they secretly thought it was a pain in the ass. Subsequently, 2687 M.S. employees were quickly evacuated. THEY did not heed the "Go back to your office" announcement. Eight opted to remain behind with a senior Vice President (the markets open at 9AM NY Time!) and Rescorla and four of his officers died when they went back up into the building for them!
Still, it's the life you chose, I suppose. Good luck to you, come what may.
|
Jim Kalafus
Member
Username: jak
Post Number: 5183
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2009 - 7:08 am: |
|
>You say: "I think the best thing will be the death about the myth about how people will reflexively panic in life or death situations".
I have to say that history does not support that.
In the UK alone there are numerous examples of great loss of life when individuals and groups panicked. These took place in cinemas, theatres and sports stadiums. The same happened all over the world. In my own home town, several hundred children were suffocated in a false cinema fire because of panic.
Actually, history DOES support the premise, if you take the time to research what actually happened. There ARE panics, but they are incredibly rare and tend to come at the very end of events, where there are no other options.
(And you have to discount the sporting events. Ibrox, in Glasgow, was not panic per se, but a massive fall, and the crush disaster of the late 1980s was not a panic, either)
People who die in disasters, or who escape at the last moment more often than not are tarred with the statemtn "They lost their heads. If they had kept calm, everyone would have got out." But, in the VAST majority of cases, if you take the time to read up on what happened, you see that the story is a bit more...sophisticated...than that.
Take the Iroquois Theatre Fire of 1903, for instance. (The one in which the Hippach children died) In that case, the ground floor level evacuated successfully. But 601 people were killed in the upper two levels, with about 40 jumping from the building and the rest being crushed in a "panic" on the stairs. "If they had kept their heads..."
Well...not quite.
The electricity failed more or less in conjunction with the fire's entrance into the auditorium. People who headed to the fire exits, in complete darkness and with smoke beginning to accumulate, discovered that the exits were kept shut with a latch that required three separate steps to open it. If you had never SEEN a "bascule latch" before, you'd assume the door was locked.
Turning to the stairs. If you were in the cheapest seats (upper level) once you saw the fire doors did not open, you would descend the grand staircase oinly to discover A LOCKED GATE to keep people from upgrading seats under the cover of darkness. No one came to unlock the gate. People trapped at the gate attempted to climb the stairs, were met by at least two hundred people who did not know the stairs were gated and who were trying to get down the stairs. Then, everyone fell, and piled up at the gate. People lowest in the mound actually had their skulls explode under the weight of what was above them.
People in the grander second level faced two hazards. Three separate marble staircases converged at one central point. There was no gate, but perhaps 600 people trying to exit a fiercely burning fire,in darkness and a cloud of smoke, down converging staircases, attempting to fit thru one doorway and then down a final grand flight of stairs GUARANTEED that someone would fall. The human avalanche that resulted blocked the stairs and, again, resulted in a pile from which almost no one could be saved.
Before the stairs became blocked, another death trap asserted itself. People who made the upper level of the complex lobby hurried down a long, very obvious, elaborate hallway. At the end of it was a door in the outer wall of the the theatre. Several hundred ran into this hall, and when they "opened" the door they found a wall behind it! The far end of the corridor looked "wrong" and so a false door had been placed there for visual reasons. Those at the back of the crowd turned and escaped, but the bottleneck was slow in breaking up and nearly 100 died of smoke inhalation in that hallway!
And what one hears is "They should have kept their heads."
If one does primary research on most of the disasters in which "panic" is blamed for the fatalities, one sees the same pattern repeat itself. In the VAST majority of cases in which panic breaks out, it is because external factors have eliminated virtually every other option. But that tends to get lost in the retelling, and what is passed down as a verdict is the typical "If they had kept their heads, everyone would have lived"
Weird thing about panic, too, is that a social order of sorts survives in it. If one studies the death lists from some of the better known "panics" (like the Cocoanut Grove) an interesting pattern developes. If a couple did not die together, and one survived, in the overwhelming majority of the cases it was the wife, or female "date" who escaped. Likewise, in rout situations in which children are involved, it is common to find cases where one or both parents died but the children lived, and rare to find the reverse.
Still, it's the life you chose, I suppose. Good luck to you, come what may.
|
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 295
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2009 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Again, I hear what you say Jim.
I suppose it depends on your definition of 'panic'. The dictionary defines it as 'sudden and infectious fear'. The word 'fear' says it all. People react to life-threatening danger in many different ways but I would suggest the predominant instinct is to get as far away from harm as quickly as possible. Fear instantly changes the individual. In many cases this includes tramping,climbing over or shoving aside those who impede individual passage.
Unfortunately, historians and others zero-in on either the heroic or despicable actions of individuals and virtually ignore the silent majority.
I have quite a few personal experiences of 'panic'. Two non marine ones stand out.
I was in the 'The Old High Steet' cinema in Paisley many years ago when a guy in the front seat (pits) went up in a bright blue flame - combustibles ignited in his coat pocket.
All the people there that night must have been reading from the wrong book because believe me, there was panic with a capital 'P'. As a single group, the entire audience stood up and started climbing over the back of seats, trying to put space between them an the human torch. There was no orderly filing out toward the exits.
It is by shear luck that I sit here to-day.
I was also present at the Clarkston disaster in 1971 ( I lived right next to it and was one of the helpers). There was extreme individual and collective panic at that time as well. I knew most of those who died and those who survived. It was the main topic of conversation for the following three months.
There was a gas explosion in the basement of a baker's shop which was one of a row backing onto the railway station. Both sides of the street were crowed with shoppers and several double deck buses were passing at the time. I had reported a smell of gas the night before when I met my son at the nearby Boy Scout Hall so it had been accumulating for at least 20 odd hours.
When it happened, people were stunned then started running in all directions. Some of course stopped to help the injured, others just ran.
The young girl next door to me worked in one of the shops. She was almost half a mile away before she realised where she was.
My Grandfather and father were at Ibrox that day and the picture they painted was one of a mixture of sheer panic and heroism.
You say panic comes at the end and your right. But it does come sooner or later as 'a sudden and infectious fear' unless that is; you are conditioned to accept your fate. Even then, panic will probably be the last vibrant memory of life.
Panic can come, first as a reaction to the unknown or finally as you point out, when there is no option- when it it dawns on the individual or the group that unless they can change the situation immediately they are going to be hurt or die.
My original suggestion was that many of the less affluent people on Titanic died because they were conditioned by birth to accept the inevitable. They had no knowledge of the sea or what horrors awaited them. Fortunately most of us today have no knowledge of how our lives will end. Otherwise panic attacks might be the flavour of the day.
As for the parent-child survival. I suggest that is not common throughout the world. Sadly, there are places where children are considered expendable and the survival of the female adult is paramount. Females can re-produce! |
Monica Hall
Member
Username: monica
Post Number: 1509
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2009 - 8:40 pm: |
|
I've been in several bomb 'situations' - both threats / evacuations and actual explosions. In the 1970s in London, I began to wonder if IRA had something personal against me. Two evacuations were in pubs with predominantly young single people present. When asked to leave immediately, without possessions, everybody did the same thing - collected their possessions + drink and then walked out. I suppose most of us thought it was a false alarm. A large iron post box exploded shortly after I'd walked past it, and shrapnel whined through the air, but amazingly nobody was badly hurt. Everyone just checked each other and then carried on hastily to work - it was at 8.30 am. In a hotel bar, when a bomb went off in the lobby, nearly everyone tried to help or get themselves out of the way of the injured / rescue services. In these instances, I was always in the company of the predominantly young - as I was myself. We seemed to have little imagination, and to believe ourselves invincible, because I recall very little panic despite the fact that there was nobody 'trained' around.
In contrast, when in a shopping centre much later with two small sons and a bomb alert came over the PA, I felt dreadful symptoms of panic, and I think most parents there did. I fought it down for their sakes, but did I ever hyperventilate.
I can't offer any insight as a result of this really, except a couple of small observations. One is that people can quite easily become habituated to potential danger, and panic far less easily, even if the danger is very real. The second is that the young are rather blase for a variety of reasons. And thirdly, that the presence of children is a most powerful trigger for panic - not helpful, I agree.
But I do think most people know perfectly well that panic is never helpful for a group as a whole, and that the presence of trained people to organise a situation will reinforce that knowledge and help immensely. At least while it appears there is a chance of survival. |
Jim Currie
Member
Username: sailorjim
Post Number: 296
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, February 28, 2009 - 12:22 pm: |
|
I agree entirely with you Monica. As I said to Jim; the dictionary definition is probably the most apt.
I too have been in bomb situations but with people trained to react in a particular way in a situation where bombs were expected.
My experience is that those at or near the point of danger tend to be stunned and don't have time to panic. When they get over the initial shock, they usually react positively. However, the further away from the epicentre - the greater the chance of mass panic.
As a very young person, I was standing next to a 40 gallon drum of petrol when it exploded. I was 10 years old. There were no adults present - just our cricket team of lads the same age. Fortunately for me, two lads didn't run - all the rest did. Never-the -less, I spent almost a year in hospital after it.
The pub example you gave is interesting. I presume it was in a small space with lots of young, vibrant people - friends, colleagues and glasses of whatever. There was no actual 'incident' hence the immediate reaction of no panic but ordered evacuation. The hotel example illustrates what I was saying.
I still say everyone would panic if Godzilla was tramping down the high street. Don't know about the Goodies' giant rabbit though!
Cheers!
Jim. |
Jeff Brebner
Member
Username: wheeds
Post Number: 51
Registered: 4-2008
| | Posted on Monday, March 2, 2009 - 5:47 pm: |
|
I worked on an offshore oil rig in the Aleutians in the early 80's. We had drills all the time. Fire, lifeboat, h2s... We all knew what to do and what the various alarms meant. One day we had a real fire. Nothing serious - a small fire in a locker that was quickly put out - but it's a whole different experience when they say on the PA, "This is NOT a drill!" One of my co-workers was so paniced that I had to grab him by his collar and steer him to our station, and he'd done these drills 100 times more often than I. You just never know how you'll react. |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 25767
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 3, 2009 - 3:00 am: |
|
>>You just never know how you'll react.<<
Some people don't do well under duress of any kind. To a point, it's understandable because it's one thing to go through some drills and quite another to find yourself dealing with the real thing and realizing "Damn! This could really kill me!"
Fortunately, nobody on my first ship came unglued when we had the real thing happen down in Four Main Machinary Room. Not in my repair locker anyway. We had drilled on a nearly constant basis so that we knew what we were doing. Even knowing that things were out of control, we knew we had the training and the resources to get it all under control and that, in my opinion, made a major difference.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Trista Holland
Member
Username: lawren
Post Number: 5
Registered: 3-2009
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 2:31 pm: |
|
I would panic. I have a 1yr old and a 6yr old that would have been coming with me. I would shove and kick till I got in a boat, even being in 3rd class. |
FÉLIX
Member
Username: f_lix
Post Number: 4
Registered: 8-2009
| | Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 2:37 am: |
|
PLEASE,I KNOW THAT WHAT I AM GOING TO SAY IS NOT RELATED TO THE TOPIC, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION.
AT FIRST MANY FIRST AND SECOND CLASS PASSENGERS DIDNT BELIEVE THAT THE SHIP WAS ACTUALLY SINKING AND THOUGHT THAT IT WASN´T A GOOD IDEA TO ABANDON THE WARM AND WELL LIT TITANIC, BUT LATER THEY REALIZED THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE SITUATION AND PANIC BROKE OUT. WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN? WHEN DID THE MOOD ON BOARD CHANGE?
[Moderator's Note: This message was originally posted to the "Did Coal Contribute To Titanic's Port List?" thread, to which it is completely unrelated, and has been moved to this thread addressing a related subject. MAB] |
Mark Baber
Moderator
Username: mab
Post Number: 3578
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 3:43 am: |
|
1. Please note what I told you here about using all capitals.
2. Also note what I wrote here about using only a first name. Please modify your registration accordingly or contact a moderator.
3. Please don't plop messages down indiscriminately into threads you know they don't relate to. If you can't find an appropriate thread, contact a moderator for assistance.
MAB
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OceanicSteamNavigationCo/
http://www.greatships.net/
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page
