1 Hour and 33 Minutes — A Time Difference Gone Wrong

Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
But let's talk about something that is relevant to the topic here.

As I have shown you ad nausea, the navigators used a time difference of 4 hours 55 minutes between GMT and New York Time.
Jim, you can try and pull the wool over the eyes of everyone else here, but the those times listed in Reed's Table of Distances had nothing to do with time that was kept in the cities it listed. Those times listed were merely differences in local mean time (LMT) from GMT for the specific arrival/departure points of the listed ports. The only value they had, if you can even call it that, is to determine the longitude of an arrival or departure point by a simple conversion of hours, minutes, and seconds of time into degrees, minutes and seconds of arc west or east of the prime meridian of Greenwich. For entry to the port of NY, the arrival point was the Ambrose Channel LV. In 1912 Ambrose was located at 73° 50’W, which is 73.83° west longitude. Divide that by 15° per hour and you get 4.92 hours of LMT behind GMT. That's where the 4 hours and 55 minutes listed in that table comes from. It has nothing to do with time in NY or any other place.

When Senator Smith asked Boxhall to give him the time in NY when the ship struck, Boxhall knew exactly what he was being asked for. In his reply he said 11:46 ship's time was 10:13 Washington time or NY time. In fact, there was no need for Boxhall or any other WSL officer to consult that table in Reed's. As a WSL officer Boxhall knew that the only time that mattered for navigation was GMT, and as far as logging arrival and departure times for ports on the east coast of North America, it was mean time for the 75th meridian of west longitude, precisely 5 hours 0 minutes behind GMT, that was logged when coming in or out of any east coast port in the US or Canada (IMM Rule 116). The same time that was carried in NY, Washington, Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia and other cities in the eastern time zone that was established as far back as November 1883. In fact, local mean time in New York City prior to the adoption of standard time zones by the railroads in 1883 was 4 hours 3 minutes and 58 seconds behind GMT. The 4h 55m difference listed in Reed's is next to meaningless, and you know it. You are simply pulling at straws trying to find a missing 5 minutes from what you are trying to sell here and what Titanic's officers testified to.

Furthermore, we know that IF the ship had carried a difference of 1h 33m from NY time, then it would be 3h 27m from GMT because as I've pointed out to you at nauseam, NY time in 1912, as it is today, differed from GMT by 5 hours. That 3h 27m difference from GMT is exactly the difference that was put in Rostron's message to Haddock late afternoon on April 15, along with the erronous distress position, and that was way before any inquiry was even thought about. There would be absolutely no reason in the world why anyone would be even thinking of NY time when that information was put together. The only thing that mattered at the time was the difference between ship's time and GMT, and my short 3 page article proves, without any assumptions about how things came about, that a difference of 3h 27m from GMT (1h 33m from NY) was directly tied to, if not the cause of, the erroneous distress position that Boxhall obtained.
 

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,061
590
143
England
Mount Temple's clocks were set during the forenoon according to Capt. Moore. (AI p.759). Anyway, when Mount Temple adjusted her clocks is irrelevant to this thread.
I was only trying to show that the time difference between MT and New York was unquestionably 1 hour and 46 minutes and by extension we could then use this to compare the timings of signals sent and received by MGY, which could be further used to support a 2 hour 2 minute time difference.

Apologies for trying to contribute.
 

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,061
590
143
England
Apologies for the last remark. I woke up like a bear with a sore head this morning and have since had time to reflect.
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
No apologies needed Rob. I was only trying to say is that when they adjusted their clocks on Mount Temple was not the important point. The important thing, as you say, is that we know Mount Temple's clocks were 1h 46m ahead of NY.
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
While I'm posting on this thread, let me correct a detail I wrote in post #22 above. Prior to November 17, 1883, local mean time in NY was running 4 hours 56 minutes and 2 seconds behind GMT. At 9:00am on that date, master clocks (such as the one kept by the Time Telegraph Co.) were stopped for 3 minutes and 58 seconds to make them 5 hours 0 minutes and 0 seconds behind GMT.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
4,941
605
183
Funchal. Madeira
But let's talk about something that is relevant to the topic here.

Jim, you can try and pull the wool over the eyes of everyone else here, but the those times listed in Reed's Table of Distances had nothing to do with time that was kept in the cities it listed. Those times listed were merely differences in local mean time (LMT) from GMT for the specific arrival/departure points of the listed ports. The only value they had, if you can even call it that, is to determine the longitude of an arrival or departure point by a simple conversion of hours, minutes, and seconds of time into degrees, minutes and seconds of arc west or east of the prime meridian of Greenwich. For entry to the port of NY, the arrival point was the Ambrose Channel LV. In 1912 Ambrose was located at 73° 50’W, which is 73.83° west longitude. Divide that by 15° per hour and you get 4.92 hours of LMT behind GMT. That's where the 4 hours and 55 minutes listed in that table comes from. It has nothing to do with time in NY or any other place.

When Senator Smith asked Boxhall to give him the time in NY when the ship struck, Boxhall knew exactly what he was being asked for. In his reply he said 11:46 ship's time was 10:13 Washington time or NY time. In fact, there was no need for Boxhall or any other WSL officer to consult that table in Reed's. As a WSL officer Boxhall knew that the only time that mattered for navigation was GMT, and as far as logging arrival and departure times for ports on the east coast of North America, it was mean time for the 75th meridian of west longitude, precisely 5 hours 0 minutes behind GMT, that was logged when coming in or out of any east coast port in the US or Canada (IMM Rule 116). The same time that was carried in NY, Washington, Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia and other cities in the eastern time zone that was established as far back as November 1883. In fact, local mean time in New York City prior to the adoption of standard time zones by the railroads in 1883 was 4 hours 3 minutes and 58 seconds behind GMT. The 4h 55m difference listed in Reed's is next to meaningless, and you know it. You are simply pulling at straws trying to find a missing 5 minutes from what you are trying to sell here and what Titanic's officers testified to.

Furthermore, we know that IF the ship had carried a difference of 1h 33m from NY time, then it would be 3h 27m from GMT because as I've pointed out to you at nauseam, NY time in 1912, as it is today, differed from GMT by 5 hours. That 3h 27m difference from GMT is exactly the difference that was put in Rostron's message to Haddock late afternoon on April 15, along with the erronous distress position, and that was way before any inquiry was even thought about. There would be absolutely no reason in the world why anyone would be even thinking of NY time when that information was put together. The only thing that mattered at the time was the difference between ship's time and GMT, and my short 3 page article proves, without any assumptions about how things came about, that a difference of 3h 27m from GMT (1h 33m from NY) was directly tied to, if not the cause of, the erroneous distress position that Boxhall obtained.
Pulling "wool" over eyes is only effective if the eyes know what they are looking at, Sam.
If you cast your mind back a few years, you will remember that you had no idea that such a time difference exited until I showed it to you.

There has never been any dispute concerning whether or not Boxhall used the correct run-time to calculate his CQD. He used the wrong speed as well.
You wrote: "Senator Smith asked Boxhall to give him the time in NY when the ship struck," No he did not! He asked: "give ship's time and give the New York time when this accident occurred." There is a subtle difference. Boxhall had the choice of two answers.
The 1 hour 33-minute response by Boxhall was in reply to a direct question. Rather than try to fit answers to your pre-conceive conclusion or jump to one, why not ask several questions.

Q1: It was a straightforward question. If there was no clock change, Boxhall should have answered: "There was a two hour and five minutes time between New York(Standard Time) and the noon position on the 14th." He did not answer in that way...why?
Q2: If there had been a partial clock change of 24 minutes, he should have answered "There was a 1 hour 38 minutes time between New York (Standard Time) and ship time" He did not answer in that way...why?
Q3. If he had been thinking in terms of geographical New York time, and the clocks had been partially set back by 24 minutes, then he would have said "There was a 1 hour 33 minutes difference between New York time and ship time." Was he thinking in geographical time?

He could, of course, had answered in the same way as did Captain Lord or his wireless man and indicated a choice of 1hour 33 minutes or 1 hour 38 minutes.

The end of the passage was the Ambrose Light vessel. Reported end of passage was in GMT, not EST. However, for obvious reasons, time of actual arrival, when finished with engines, was in EST.
When on that run in Anchor Line, we noted the time on the chronometer and retarded the ship's clocks by exactly 5 minutes when the Ambrose Light was abeam.

This is yet another of your "Eurika" moments, Sam. Another desperate attempt to "fit" the evidence to your idea that there was no clock change.
To do this, you have ignored swathes of sworn evidence by men who were there and whose jobs it was to navigate the ship. Men who were at the top of their careers and holding the highest available professional qualifications. In particular, Lightoller and Pitman. The first swore that the clocks had been altered before impact and the second said that when he was called he had a few minutes left before he was due on Watch which would not have been the case if the clocks had not been touched.

As for your article: You conclude with:

"The above shows very plainly that if Joseph Boxhall had not made a mistake in time, he would have obtained a distress location that is very close to the wreck site location instead of being 13 miles too far west."

How can that be, Sam? According to you, there was a south setting current running that night, Titanic turned north after impact. Additionally, she made almost 22.5 knots between 7-30 pm sights and the moment of impact, not 22 knots.
Not only that, according to you, Titanic made about 22.1 from Noon to the turn. That means she covered a distance of 5.833 hrs x 22.1 = 128.9 miles before she turned.
Correct me if I am wrong but it seems that your article states that if Boxhall had used the proper runtime, he would have placed Titanic right on the money and that he would have used a distance of 91.7 nautical miles from the 7-30 pm sights position. If we add that to the 128.9 miles to the turn we get a total of 128.9+91.7= 220.6 nautical miles. Since Titanic covered a total of 260 miles before impact, this leaves 260.0 minus 220.7= 39.4 miles covered in 1 hour 40 minutes. That means that Titanic averaged a speed of 23.7 knots from the turn to 7-30 pm sights. Really?
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
Haven't been to this site for quite a awhile, having better things to do. But I see the same fallacious arguments. Boxhall was asked to provide a very simple piece of information:

'Senator SMITH. Mr. Boxhall, you seem to be the one upon whom we must rely to give the difference between ship's time and New York time; or, rather, to give ship's time and give the New York time when this accident occurred.'

His response was:

'Mr. BOXHALL. At 11.46 p.m., ship's time, it was 10.13 Washington time, or New York time.'

Guess what, NY and Washington carried the same exact time, mean time for the 75th meridian of west longitude. Exactly 5 hours behind GMT, not 4h 55m. But you Jim are saying that NY time for navigators was 4h 55m. Not true. I'll let Mr. Pitman tell you what NY time meant to him:
'Mr. PITMAN. There is five hours difference between Greenwich time and New York time.'
There is no ambiguity here at all as to what New York time meant to these officers.

But this doesn't fit your story calling for a 1h 38m difference, so you try to come up with a clever explanation for Boxhall's response, which is that he was talking about the time difference listed in Reed's table which had nothing to do with the time kept in NY city and all other ports on the east coast of America.

You also said; "The end of the passage was the Ambrose Light vessel. Reported end of passage was in GMT, not EST."

Sorry once again. That was not the way they did it. It is obvious that you are unfamiliar with the IIM Co. rules then in effect which specifically stated: (IIM rule 116) 'Seventy-fifth meridian time must be used for time of arrival and departure from Sandy Hook Lightship, Five Fathom Bank Lightship, and other points of arrival and departure in the United States and Canada.' I have logs from Olympic that show exactly that for arrival at the Ambrose lightship.

Finally, your math at in the last paragraph you wrote was perfect except for one very important detail. The ship's distance over the surface of the earth was more like 258 nautical miles from noon. The 260 miles was the taffrail log reading which measures distance through the water, not distance made good. A more correct statement would be:
Since Titanic covered a total of about 258 miles before impact, this leaves about 37 miles covered in 1 hour 40 minutes for an average speed-made-good of 22.2 knots from the turn to 7-30 pm sights. The average speed made good from noon to the collision would be 258/11.67=22.1 knots, consistent with what she did over the previous 24.75 hours.

But the real point of the article is that Boxhall's 1h 33m difference that he came up with is clearly tied to the erroneous distress position he came up with. It is that simple. If you still feel the need to keep trashing it, then go right ahead.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rob Lawes

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
4,941
605
183
Funchal. Madeira
Haven't been to this site for quite awhile, having better things to do. But I see the same fallacious arguments. Boxhall was asked to provide a very simple piece of information:

'.
That dead horse of yours must be getting very short on flesh, Sam.

I must say, this is not one of the "better things" you have produced.

Despite your opinion, these men were not fools. Boxhall was answering questions in Washington he went there from New York, ergo his connection in time between the two cities.

You observed:
"There is no ambiguity here at all as to what New York time meant to these officers." Boxhall was a member of that group
That being so: instead of answering:
"At 11.46 p.m., ship's time, it was 10.13 Washington time,"
Why didn't Boxhall answer:
"At 11.46 p.m., ship's time, it was 10:08 pm Washington time, or New York time.'?
Or your version of the truth: "9:44pm Washington time"?

Lightoller Gave time evidence first:
Day 1
"5.47 - 2.20 - 5.47 Greenwich mean time: 2.20 apparent time of ship"
A difference of 1 hour 33 minutes.
Day 2
A Day later. it was Pitman's turn. As you point out, he stated a 5-hour difference Between New York and Greenwich. He also said of the sinking time:
"It [New York Time ] is 12.47 Monday morning."
His sinking time was 2-20 am. That too is a difference of 1 hour 33 minutes.
Day 3
Boxhall indicated the exact same time difference evidence the following day.

You are right...no ambiguity. In fact, the only ambiguous observations came from Senator Burton
"The difference in solar time is 4 hours and 57 minutes, if you want to get that exactly."

The Patent Log reading was used by Navigators to determine a Dead Reckoning position. The log measured distance in a particular direction through the water in a given period of time. Supplying the direction steered enabled the Navigator to produce a DR. That DR, when compared with a fix, allowed the Navigator to determine what influenced his ship during the time it was on that course. This is what happened to Titanic that afternoon:
CMG.jpg

The reason was, as Boxhall and Captain Moore of the Mount temple explained:
"I have invariably found that the Gulf Stream is much stronger there than the Labrador stream is, as far south as that."
"I should imagine perhaps 11 1/2 knots. Of course, perhaps she would have a little of the Gulf Stream with her too, sir."

Other than by calculation between fixes, the only method of measuring distance was the distance indicated by the patent log. The speed of 22.5 knots you readily accept was obtained from a patent log reading divided by 2. Yet the speed obtained by patent log between Noon and 6 am you completely reject. You do so, simply because of the way the information was related by the witness.
You also wrote:

"Since Titanic covered a total of about 258 miles before impact, this leaves about 37 miles covered in 1 hour 40 minutes for an average speed-made-good of 22.2 knots from the turn to 7-30 pm sights."

That gem begs the question: If Titanic averaged 22.1 up to 7-30 pm sights, why on earth would Boxhall use 22 knots for his run-up to the distress position if, as he said he chose that speed of 22 knots due to the ideal prevailing conditions?

While you digest the foregoing, ask yourself the question:
Why did QM Rowe read the Patent Log "half a minute" after the iceberg had passed astern?
Before you answer, forget about him doing so to record the position of the iceberg or to save the log-line. That's nonsense. He would not have done any of these things without an order or unless the ship was slowing down rapidly. None of these reasons applied at that moment.
Also ask the questions: Did Rowe recover the Patent Log line after the ship stopped? If not, why not? Ater all, Californian lost her Patent Log because of stopping for ice. You can bet your boots, Groves sent the Standby-man to read the register at 10-30 pm. I wonder what it read.

I don't know how to explain this to you Sam. The IIM Rules regarding time of arrival were no different from any other Liner Company.
EST is purely land commercial time. It has absolutely nothing to do with how Titanic was navigated. It simply entailed adding an extra 5 minutes to the ship's clocks when close to land and was normally done when Ambrose was abeam. It was an extra 5 minutes that the ship did not run.
My use of Reeds was not a 'clever' ploy...I showed you yet another possibility for the 5-minute difference. The same Tables were in use during my time.

You wrote:

"But the real point of the article is that Boxhall's 1h 33m difference that he came up with is clearly tied to the erroneous distress position he came up with. It is that simple."

No it is not, Sam, the 1 hour 33-minute difference is simply another way of deducing a time difference.

Let's put our cards on the table, Sam. The only way your ideas on time work is by ignoring huge swaths of evidence. To agree with your theories, we have to :

1. Trash the evidence clearly indicating that Titanic slowed down between Noon and 7-30 pm sights.
2. Neglect to examine why both Pitman and Boxhall thought Titanic had turned late at 5-50 pm when at The Corner.
3. Neglect to ask the questions: If Pitman thought the ship had overrun The Corner by 50 minutes, did it or did it not influence his subsequent DR run up to 8pm? If it did, what would have been the outcome?
4. Completely ignore Captain Smith's distress position.
5. Fail to ask why Pitman stated that he was due on duty a few minutes after Boxhall called him.
6. Completely ignore the fact that of all Titanic's surviving officers, only Boxhall mentioned a speed greater than 21.5 knots.
7. Completely ignore the evidence of Baker Collins which indicated an impact time = 3-00am GMT.
8. Completely reject the evidence of Stewardess Annie Robinson which indicated a sinking time of 5-25 am GMT.

The sinking time of 5-47 am GMT was arrived at by consultation between the three officers, Lightoller, Pitman and Boxhall.
Pitman supplied the ship time of 2-20 am. Boxhall assumed it was partly altered time and subtracted 1 hour 33 minutes from it to get the New York time of sinking. This became 00-47 am. Add 5 hours to that and you get 5-47 am GMT.

That takes care of the silly sinking time of 5-47 am GMT.

The observed sinking time of 2-20 am was April 14, unadjusted time. That being so, and since the difference between unadjusted ship time and GMT was 2 hours 58 minutes... the true GMT for observed time of sinking would have been 5-18 am and the true EST would have been 00-18 am.
Annie Robinson had fully altered time on her watch when Titanic sank. She recorded that as 1-40 am. At that time, her watch would have been 1hour 15 minutes FAST of EST. This means the observed time of sinking, according to Annie, was 00-25 am EST and the GMT was 5-25 am.
Young Collins had fully adjusted time. Consequently, his clock was also 1 hour 15 minutes Fast of EST at the time of impact. Since his clock read 11-15 pm at the time of impact .then time of impact was 10 pm EST...3-00am GMT.
If the 7-30 pm sights were taken at say 10-33 pm, GMT, then the runtime between sights and impact was 4 hours 27 minutes, not 4 hours 05 minutes as it should have been had there been no clock alteration.

Work it out for yourself.,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steven Christian
Nov 14, 2005
662
249
113
"The observed sinking time of 2-20 am was April 14". I liked reading this post but must admit I couldn't keep all the numbers and time zones straight in my head. I'm guessing the April 14 date was just a typo or am I missing something. But I have a question about time zones during the sinking. Was Cape Race the same time as New York or different? Thanks...SC
 
Nov 14, 2005
662
249
113
Well I poked around on the net and found that in 1912 Cape Race was 1 1/2 hours ahead of New York and supposedly had its own unique time zone. I could see where things would get very confusing back then.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
4,941
605
183
Funchal. Madeira
Hello Steven!

Glad to shed a little light.

I too have read about the difference between time keep in Newfoundland. However, you must keep in mind that the NF Operators, like those on ships, would be working in EST.

Here's a wee sketch which may help to clarify the situation a little better
Clocks.jpg

The problem most non-mariners have, is getting their heads around the GMT bit.
Pitman, Boxhall Lowe and Moody all worked in GMT. In fact, Lowe had GMT on his watch. I would not be surprised to learn that the other three also carried GMT timepieces.
When Boxhall worked his distress position, he would have started with the equivalent GMT for 7-35 pm ship time. He would have used that time in conjunction with the GMT recorded as the time of impact then added an extra half or three-quarters of a mile for after the time of impact. Thus, he would have used a runtime multiplied by 22 knots to get a distance steamed between 7-35 pm and impact and then added the last wee bit to arrive at a final position for which aspiring rescue vessels would head. Are you with me?
However, Boxhall was off the bridge when impact took place. Unfortunately, that was the time when his assistant, 6th Officer Moody was to make the first part of the clock adjustment, so Boxhall could not have known if that adjustment had been made before impact. OK?
To compound the problem. The Standby QM Olliver was also off the bridge at the time of impact. Normally, he would have been there to immediately record the times of events in ship and GM times. As it was, the records were brought up to date retrospectively. It follows that the vital information needed by Boxhall to complete his distress position calculation may have been a bit out. Still on board?
My guess is that Boxhall knew that Moody had to make that clock adjustment but thought he had not accounted for it due to the confusion at the time. He may even have asked Pitman if the adjustment had been made. Since Pitman did not have time to make the final adjustment, he would have correctly replied in the negative. This being so, Boxhall added another 24 minutes to the recorded GMT of impact and came up with something like 03-24 GMT. This would have given him a runtime which was 24 minutes too long. He compounded the felony by using a speed which was half a knot too slow. The rest is, as we say, History.
Incidentally, at no time, would the difference of 1 hour 33 minutes figure in his work.
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
Incidentally, at no time, would the difference of 1 hour 33 minutes figure in his work.
But it did. You act like you know everything, or rather would like everyone else to believe you know everything. But the proof that 1 hour 33 minutes did figure into his work comes not at the inquiries, but the information put into Rostron's message to Haddock on the afternoon of Monday, 15 April. In that message Rostron said:
"Titanic foundered about 2.20 a. m., 5.47 G. M. T., in 41.46 north. 50.14 west."
New York time had nothing to do with this. As you said yourself, Pitman, Boxhall, Lowe and Moody all worked in GMT. The difference between 5:47 GMT and 2:20 ship's time is 3 hours 27 minutes. In New York, Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, ..., it would be 12:47am, exactly 5 hours behind GMT.
Now Boxhall said he used 11:46pm ship's time for the collision in his CQD work up. Add 3 hours 27 minutes to that and you get 3:13am GMT. In New York, or Washington, or Baltimore, or any other east coast city in America, it would be 10:13pm, exactly 5 hours behind GMT, or 1 hour 33 minutes behind ship's time of 11:46pm, exactly what Boxhall had testified to.
Yet at noon, when ship's time was 12:00 noon, it was 2:58pm GMT, a difference of 2 hours and 58 minutes between GMT and ship's time.
Do the simple math. At the time of collision Boxhall was working with a difference of 3 hours 27 minutes between ship's time and GMT. At noon that difference was 2 hours and 58 minutes. The difference between the differences is 29 minutes, 14' of arc in longitude. Add to that the fact that Boxhall used 11:46, not 11:40 that we get from Hichens, Rowe, Haines and others, and the time difference is 29+6=35 minutes, or 12.8 miles at 22 knots, the overrun in Boxhall's erroneous CQD position.
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
By the way, Collins was not carrying fully adjusted time on that clock by his bed, and he himself admitted that he wasn't sure the time was correct. But one who was carrying fully adjusted time nearby was Edwina Troutt who wrote, "at 10:55 I heard the ship make a stumbling noise, enough to wake me.” Do the math: 10:55 + 0:47 = 11:42. And there were others.
 
Last edited:
Nov 14, 2005
662
249
113
Hello Steven!

Glad to shed a little light.

I too have read about the difference between time keep in Newfoundland. However, you must keep in mind that the NF Operators, like those on ships, would be working in EST.

Here's a wee sketch which may help to clarify the situation a little better
View attachment 40910
The problem most non-mariners have, is getting their heads around the GMT bit.
Pitman, Boxhall Lowe and Moody all worked in GMT. In fact, Lowe had GMT on his watch. I would not be surprised to learn that the other three also carried GMT timepieces.
When Boxhall worked his distress position, he would have started with the equivalent GMT for 7-35 pm ship time. He would have used that time in conjunction with the GMT recorded as the time of impact then added an extra half or three-quarters of a mile for after the time of impact. Thus, he would have used a runtime multiplied by 22 knots to get a distance steamed between 7-35 pm and impact and then added the last wee bit to arrive at a final position for which aspiring rescue vessels would head. Are you with me?
However, Boxhall was off the bridge when impact took place. Unfortunately, that was the time when his assistant, 6th Officer Moody was to make the first part of the clock adjustment, so Boxhall could not have known if that adjustment had been made before impact. OK?
To compound the problem. The Standby QM Olliver was also off the bridge at the time of impact. Normally, he would have been there to immediately record the times of events in ship and GM times. As it was, the records were brought up to date retrospectively. It follows that the vital information needed by Boxhall to complete his distress position calculation may have been a bit out. Still on board?
My guess is that Boxhall knew that Moody had to make that clock adjustment but thought he had not accounted for it due to the confusion at the time. He may even have asked Pitman if the adjustment had been made. Since Pitman did not have time to make the final adjustment, he would have correctly replied in the negative. This being so, Boxhall added another 24 minutes to the recorded GMT of impact and came up with something like 03-24 GMT. This would have given him a runtime which was 24 minutes too long. He compounded the felony by using a speed which was half a knot too slow. The rest is, as we say, History.
Incidentally, at no time, would the difference of 1 hour 33 minutes figure in his work.
Ok Thanks. That makes it much more clear. When I flew a lot I was up on GMT. Filing flight plans...ect. we used GMT. But its like they say...use it or lose it.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
4,941
605
183
Funchal. Madeira
But it did. You act like you know everything, or rather would like everyone else to believe you know everything. But the proof that 1 hour 33 minutes did figure into his work comes not at the inquiries, but the information put into Rostron's message to Haddock on the afternoon of Monday, 15 April. In that message Rostron said:
"Titanic foundered about 2.20 a. m., 5.47 G. M. T., in 41.46 north. 50.14 west."
New York time had nothing to do with this. As you said yourself, Pitman, Boxhall, Lowe and Moody all worked in GMT. The difference between 5:47 GMT and 2:20 ship's time is 3 hours 27 minutes. In New York, Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, ..., it would be 12:47am, exactly 5 hours behind GMT.
Now Boxhall said he used 11:46pm ship's time for the collision in his CQD work up. Add 3 hours 27 minutes to that and you get 3:13am GMT. In New York, or Washington, or Baltimore, or any other east coast city in America, it would be 10:13pm, exactly 5 hours behind GMT, or 1 hour 33 minutes behind ship's time of 11:46pm, exactly what Boxhall had testified to.
Yet at noon, when ship's time was 12:00 noon, it was 2:58pm GMT, a difference of 2 hours and 58 minutes between GMT and ship's time.
Do the simple math. At the time of collision Boxhall was working with a difference of 3 hours 27 minutes between ship's time and GMT. At noon that difference was 2 hours and 58 minutes. The difference between the differences is 29 minutes, 14' of arc in longitude. Add to that the fact that Boxhall used 11:46, not 11:40 that we get from Hichens, Rowe, Haines and others, and the time difference is 29+6=35 minutes, or 12.8 miles at 22 knots, the overrun in Boxhall's erroneous CQD position.
How does one "act" like they know everything, Sam?
For your information, I do not act or think that I know everything. I consider all possibilities available to me, compare them with the contents of my memory banks, season them with a little common sense and serve them up for you and anyone else who is interested to hopefully make constructive, not destructive comment. Talking of which:
Are we talking on the same wavelength?
I distinctly remember suggesting to you the reason why Boxhall used a difference of 1 hour 33 minutes. In case, you missed it: it was to make a time comparison, he would not have used that value in his navigation work. He had no reason to use that number other than to answer the questions of some land person.

You once again avoid answering straight questions, Sam but use selective evidence and send up a barrage-balloon of numbers.
For example:
Sure! Boxhall said he used 11-46 pm in his calculations. He also said he used 11-43 pm for the time of the collision. The truth is that he did not know the exact times for anything since any wheelhouse records he may have used must have been made in retrospect.
For your information and that of others, the normal procedure for a trained navigator to follow in the circumstances confronting Boxhall was as follows:

1. If possible, use the time and coordinates for a previously known correct position as a starting point.
2. Ascertain the course or courses from the previously known position.
3. Determine an average speed on the known course or courses.
4 . Ascertain the time when the engines were stopped.
Using 1 to 4, determine the coordinates for 4.
From 4, allow an over-run distance to obtain,
5. A distress position target for potential rescue vessels to head for.

1 was the 7-35 pm sights position.
2. was 266 True.
3. was 22 knots.
4. was the moment of impact.
5. was the coordinates for 4 + an estimate of about 0.7 miles.

If, in fact, No.4 was 11-40 pm then, then No. 5 was, in reality, 11-46 pm... six minutes being the time during which the engines were manoeuvered before they finally stopped forever.

As for the Edwina Troutt letter. Here is the exact quote from Paul Lee's site:

"We went to bed about 10,30 and at 10,55 [sic] I heard the ship make a stumbling noise, enough to wake me (I was sound asleep)."

Sic
is a Latin term meaning “thus.” It is used to indicate that something incorrectly written is intentionally being left as it was in the original. Obviously, Paul or whoever transcribed the evidence didn't buy the 10-50 pm nonsense.
Edwina could have done exactly the same thing you did. She knew she had fully set back her watch or clock so simply subtracted 47 minutes from the well-publicised impact time of 11-40 pm.

Of young Collins, you wrote:
"Collins was not carrying fully adjusted time on that clock by his bed, and he himself admitted that he wasn't sure the time was correct."
Are we discussing the same Collins? Here is the relevant extract from his evidence:
I fell asleep, and was sound asleep, and exactly at a quarter past 11 I was wakened up. I had a clock by me, by my bed, and my clock was five minutes fast, and it was exactly a quarter past 11 when the ship struck the iceberg, and it wakened me."
Your "Ah but" lifebelt comes from:
"the clock was 20 minutes pass 11, and the accident took place at a quarter past 11, if my clock was right. I could not exactly say."

In fact, you are engaging in logical symantics. You are implying that the "if my clock was right" qualification used by Collins referred to the time shown rather than the accuracy of the time-piece.
In fact, young Collins very clearly tells you and everyone else that his clock showed exactly 11-20 pm and that it was exactly 5 minutes fast but that he could not guarantee the finite accuracy of the mechanism i.e., its accuracy to the last second of time.
This is where your forensic analysis fails, Sam.
For instance, if you knew for certain that Collins was a Day Worker and that Day Workers set their watches back by the full amount in order to be sure they did not lose or gain sleep and did not turn up for work too early or too late, then you would not be arguing this point with me.

Once again you are selective with the evidence you will accept. You prefer passenger evidence regarding time changes rather than the evidence of those to whom time changes mattered the most...the crew. Even then, you are selective with passenger evidence. You dismiss the evidence of passenger Col. Archie Gracie who swore:
"I was awakened in my stateroom at 12 o'clock. The time, 12 o'clock, was noted on my watch, which was on my dresser, which I looked at promptly when I got up. At the same time, almost instantly, I heard the blowing off of steam, and the ship's machinery seemed to stop."

Again I ask Sam: why don't you answer the outstanding questions regarding officer evidence between Noon April 14 and the moment of impact - evidence which at face value shows that Titanic slowed down between noon and when the weather fell flat calm?
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
Obviously, Paul or whoever transcribed the evidence didn't buy the 10-50 pm nonsense.
They didn't buy the 10:55 because this was clearly an outlier in collision time. The transcriber of the letter didn't understand, or didn't connect with, the concept of Winnie putting her watch back before retiring. But she was not the only one who did. You claim that Collins put his clock back the full adjustment amount, yet Steward Alfred Pugh, a 3rd class steward, wrote to his father that the ship struck at 11pm and sank about 1.30. I'll let you do the math.
And then there was .... Why bother with other accounts such as these? As you said above 'You prefer passenger evidence regarding time changes rather than the evidence of those to whom time changes mattered the most...the crew.' Yet when a watch-keeping crew member who was on duty at the time of the accident said that the right time without putting the clock back was 11:40, the only thing you can say about that is to ask why would he say that?
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
4,941
605
183
Funchal. Madeira
Got to give you 10/10 for trying, Sam. '

The glaring difference between the evidence of Pugh and Collins is that the former did not qualify his time evidence whereas the latter was very specific.

As for the evidence of Boatswain's Mate, Albert Haines... How do you know that when he stated "The right time, without putting the clock back, was 20 minutes to 12." he was referring to a partial clock change and not the full Clock Change?
Think about it...
Pitman was due to make the full clock change when he went on Watch at Midnight. When Boxhall called him about 20 minutes after impact he was within a few minutes of going on Watch and "putting the clocks fully back".
11-40 pm was 20 minutes to Midnight.
How would you have explained the complicated clock change to Senator Smith... that there was 2 11-40 pms and two Midnights... without confusing the poor man any more than he already was?
How do you explain away the evidence of Lookout Hogg:
"I waked up, at 20 minutes to 12, with the confusion in the forecastle. I rushed up on the deck, and I saw there was not much confusion on deck, and I went below again, with some of my shipmates. I asked the time, then, of my mate Evans, and he said, "It is a quarter to 12. We will get dressed and get ready to go on the lookout."
Just to complicate your answer; how do you explain the fact that Hogg and his mate Evans, relieved Fleet and Lee in the Crow's nest at 12 o' clock "in the fullness of time" and Fleet left the Nest 20 minutes after impact?
 
Mar 22, 2003
5,355
737
273
Chicago, IL, USA
All these selective arguments were brought up in previous threads. I stand by my article. The 1h 33m difference was directly tied to the erroneous distress position calculated by 4/O Boxhall. The numbers don't lie.