| Author |
Message |
    
Neraida Smith
Unregistered
Posted From: 212.85.1.1
| | Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 10:21 am: | 
|
I've been set some questions by my tutor- can anyone help anwser them?
1) What is the exact date the titanic sank?
2)What was the name of the captain in charge of the titanic?
3)Which company was in charge of the titanic?
and, last but not least, 4) how many people died as a result of the titanic? |
Jason D. Tiller
Moderator
Username: jtiller
Post Number: 2867
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 6:26 pm: |
|
Hello Neraida,
"1) What is the exact date the titanic sank?"
April 15, 1912
"2)What was the name of the captain in charge of the titanic?"
Captain Edward John Smith
"3)Which company was in charge of the titanic?"
White Star Line
"and, last but not least, 4) how many people died as a result of the titanic?"
Approximately, 1,496 lives were lost.
"To be happy is to be contented in your own mind"...Harold Godfrey Lowe
|
money
Unregistered
Posted From: 170.211.98.205
| | Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 8:23 pm: |
|
titanic is the most instesting the that i like to study about. |
SURPRISE
Unregistered
Posted From: 203.88.239.105
| | Posted on Sunday, April 17, 2005 - 2:32 am: |
|
I think that Bruce Ismay is responsible for the sinking of the Titanic beceause he told the captain to speed up and to take her to full speed, so the captain did and they couldn't slow down fast enough when the ice burg was sighted, so the hit it at full speed and died. thats my theory anyway. |
Jeremy Lee
Member
Username: achynes
Post Number: 1345
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 17, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Lots of other factors, my friend. |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 11729
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 3:10 am: |
|
SURPRISE, I'm afraid you're theory presents a very misleading picture of what actually happened that night. I won't go so far as to say that Ismay's presence wasn't something of a factor, but I don't think he was horsewhipping the captain to go at high speed. The reality is that there was nothing all that unusual about the manner in which the ship was navigated, and that included working up to her expected service speed over the course of the voyage to get the engines "Run In" if you will. Time was money and the ship, like any other liner of the day, was expected to keep to the schedule and arrive On Time.
You may wish to read through the Collisions/Sinking Theories folder to see some of the discussions we've had on this. The factors leading up to the accident itself are a lot more complex then some of the simplistic notions put out by the popular histories. Absent Bruce Ismay's presence, I suspect the Titanic and the berg would still have had their tragic encounter.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Jonathan Granato
Member
Username: jake_angus
Post Number: 128
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:50 am: |
|
To add to Michael's post. It's like saying terrorists were responsible for the attacks in 2001; they weren't. Failure of security at airports and failure of intelligence-gathering was responsible.
The Titanic's navigation was 'business as usual', just as on 11 September 2001, box cutters passing security was 'business as usual.'
Until a ship's watch sighted something ahead it was against policy to reduce power. When a hinderance to safe navigation was discovered, then it was up to the OOW to either slow down or continue at speed. |
Yuri Singleton
Member
Username: yuris
Post Number: 413
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 6:46 pm: |
|
Forgive my interruption here, but terrorists were 100% responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Respectfully
NC USA
|
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 11748
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 7:03 pm: |
|
>>Forgive my interruption here, but terrorists were 100% responsible for the 9/11 attacks.<<
Quite right. They were. That's not to say that there weren't other dynamics at work as there were, but *please* everybody, this is not the place to slug this one out.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
geo
Unregistered
Posted From: 212.85.1.201
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 9:08 am: |
|
hey dudes dis sit eis really good |
Raelene Heath
Member
Username: jaillet
Post Number: 1
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 11:47 am: |
|
Hi I'm trying to trace my family tree. My great grandfather was Henri Jaillet [pastry chef].I am looking for any information on him that will help. In particular where he was born and his wifes name. Also where he was working and living before taking the posting on the Titanic.Thanks Raelene |
Bob Godfrey
Member
Username: bobgod1
Post Number: 2105
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 4:02 pm: |
|
Hallo, Raelene. According to Henri's biographical entry on this site, he was married to Margaret and their two children were Henri and Frederick. Margaret's mother Sarah Hutton also lived with the family. The address which Henri gave when he signed on for the voyage was 4, Queens Park Terrace, London. But the US Senate Inquiry had another address listed - Jamison Street, Notting Hill Gate, London. Before Titanic, Henri worked aboard another ill-fated liner, the Lusitania. He was born in France, at Lyon.
If you look in the archived sections of the guestbook (top of this page) and find the posts for 14 December 2004, there is an inquiry from another great grand-daughter, Sarah Jane Stockton.
. |
Bob Godfrey
Member
Username: bobgod1
Post Number: 2106
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 4:10 pm: |
|
Incidentally, Raelene, you might get more responses if you post in the Crew Research section of the forum, which as a member you are able to do. The Guestbook is intended for non-members, and not all of the regulars keep an eye on this part of the site. |
michèle depontaillier
Unregistered
Posted From: 83.198.239.110
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
Mon grand oncle était sur le titanic Guillaume demessmacker Merci de me faire connaitre auprès de ses petits enfants |
Jennifer
Unregistered
Posted From: 69.151.99.2
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 9:45 pm: |
|
My first grader is interested in finding out how big the iceburg was that the Titanic hit but I can't find the info anywhere. Can you guys help? |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 11779
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 2:55 am: |
|
Jennifer, unfortunately, there's no way to know just how big the iceberg really was. It was large enough that the exposed portion reached up to the level of the Boat Deck, and large enough so that a run in with the beast was enough to sink the ship. I've seen figures of between 250,000 to 500,000 tonnes for it's mass being quoted, but this is entirely speculative.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Dave Gittins
Member
Username: gittins
Post Number: 2170
Registered: 4-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 11:04 am: |
|
Jennifer, a good estimate for the height is about 70 feet above the water. I did a back of envelope calculation that showed it may have weighed about 100,000 tons. Researcher Roy Mengot, using more advance methods, made it as low as 75,000 tons. These figures are at about the bottom of the normal range for bergs in the area, which range up to only around 300,000 tons, because they are at least one year old and are far from their parent glaciers. It was quite big enough to do the job. |
Ferdinand Dervishi
Unregistered
Posted From: 217.24.240.107
| | Posted on Friday, April 22, 2005 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Hi! My name is Ferdinand Dervishi. I am an journalist in Albania. I am trying to find that was or not an albanian passenger in Titanic. In 1912 Albania was under Turkey. Was not an nation. His name is Kovi Ilo (or Jakov Llui). Hi was alive untill 1949 and died in Vithkuqi (Korca) place after mising two legs. Have you any information? |
Bob Godfrey
Member
Username: bobgod1
Post Number: 2124
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
|
Hallo, Ferdinand. Neither of those names (or anything like them) appears in the passenger lists. There were a number of passengers who came from the Balkans region, but none that I know of from the area that is now Albania. There have always been far more claims of this kind than there were people actually on the ship. |
stacey
Unregistered
Posted From: 216.174.135.2
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 8:44 pm: |
|
I think what happened was so sad |
