Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
RMS Titanic in detail
Collision / Sinking Theories
Events During Sinking and Subsequent Forensics
A New Theory in Topeka
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Cal Haines, post: 218093, member: 136875"] I'll try to dash off a quick response before I have to run... Re my fireman friend, he said there was just no way for one man to draw the fires from three furnaces in fifteen minutes. That's what Beauchamp says happened. BTW, Beauchamp thinks it took the watertight doors 5 minutes to close--so much for his time estimates. Beauchamp also says that the water was just on the stokehold plates by the time he finished, yet Barrett and Hendrickson have the boiler room completely flooded soon after the collision. Barrett describes a huge rush of water, so great the he and Hesketh literally ran for their lives. Did this rush of water somehow stop long enough for Beauchamp and his brave mates to pull the fires, the resume in time to flood the boiler room prior to Barrett's and Hendrickson's arrival? [i]I don't think so.[/i] People usually lie for a reason. I can think of no reason for Barrett to tell a lie that puts him in a bad light, specifically, that he abandoned his post if he had not. He could have easily bent the truth about why he fled, he could have said the he went aft with the engineer to help check the damage, etc., but he did not. At least three places he admits to things that could have been seen as cowardly: abandoning BR#6 when it floods, abandoning BR#5 when the water rushes in, going to the boats because he is tired and cold. He just strikes me as very, very honest. Now, Barrett testified that he [u]AND ONE OF THE SAINTED ENGINEERS[/u] ([i]you know, the ones that died at their posts to try and buy the ship a few more minutes of life[/i]) had fled from danger. This had to be very embarrassing to White Star in particular and the British shipping industry in general. Enter Beauchamp. I think he is one of the men who helped draw the fires in BR#5. Bend his testimony a bit so it sounds as if he did it in BR#6 and White Star can save some face: [i]see, even though the Chiefs took off, the Indians stayed around and took care of business...[/i] Beauchamp has a motive to lie, Barrett does not. re Yuri's concerns about Barrett: Barrett stopped in BR#5 because, a) he had escaped the immediate danger, b) the watertight doors were closed by then, the only way out is up. I don't think he ran because he was scared silly. I think he did what any of us would do under the circumstances. The question is, why didn't Beauchamp see the water rushing in and run as well. My bet is that he was the first one up the ladder. Barrett does not see the stokers on E deck because: a) they had a head start (they didn't stop to look in bunkers or talk to engineers), and b) they kept on going. I know if I thought the ship was sinking, I wouldn't stop until I was on deck. By the way, the ladder didn't stop on E-deck, it continued on up a couple of decks. Oh, there [i]were[/i] stokers milling about in E-deck. That's where Barrett goes to get the men to fetch lanterns and later to draw the fires in BR#5. Barrett stayed in BR#5 after the other stokers were sent up because he was asked (or ordered) to do so by the engineers. This tells me he was a reliable hand: the engineers wouldn't keep a coward or a fool to help out. And don't confuse the orderly evacuation of the stokers from BR#5 with what happened in BR#6. In #5, extra hands were brought down and the fires were drawn. When they were done, they were sent up and Barrett was kept behind to help. Over the years I've read through lots of court transcripts in auto accident cases. I've been through Barrett's testimony a number of time and has a ring of truth to it; Beauchamp's does not. (Note that the BOT went with Barrett's version of events in BR#6; perhaps Beauchamp was not a very credible witness in person either.) Barrett has no reason to lie and say he ran when he didn't or that BR#6 was flooded when it wasn't, quite the opposite, he could have put himself in a better light by a fib here or there. But there is NO WAY Barrett and Beauchamp are describing the same boiler room #6, one of the is either badly mistaken or lying. Beauchamp has a reason to lie: to protect White Star's b***. Therefore, Beauchamp is the liar. Cal [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
In which year did the Titanic sail?
Post reply
Forums
RMS Titanic in detail
Collision / Sinking Theories
Events During Sinking and Subsequent Forensics
A New Theory in Topeka
Join us! Membership of Encyclopedia Titanica is free and gives you lots more Titanic info, and with a low annual subscription gain full access without any adverts.
Join Encyclopedia Titanica
Top