May 3, 2005
2,599
289
278
I may sound like a Lordite, but I interpret Mersey's statement as "as many , if not all,. could have been saved" as meaning " if only Californian had responded to Titanic's distress calls and if only Californian was involved ". , would this have been possible ?
You also have the problem of taking care of the survivors ( all 2000 +) and feeding them, etc. .....it was still some distance back to New York.
Several days and nights ?
 
Last edited:
B

Bob_Read

Guest
Californian wouldn’t have sailed to New York with that many . They would have been transferred. It has also been determined that it would have been unlikely for Californian to have reached Titanic in time to do much more than pick up survivors from the sea after Titanic sank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
720
401
108
Glasgow, Scotland
I bet you’d sacrifice humans for animals.

Would I sacrifice the regulars of Encyclopedia Titanica in return for Scotland winning the FIFA World Cup ? ......... in a heartbeat.

Would I sacrifice my beloved black cat Mr Arnold in return for the same ? ........ I guess I'd take up golf instead of football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Scott Mills

Member
Jul 10, 2008
670
90
133
43
Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
Titanic's crew might have fully loaded the boats in confidence that the steamer standing off would calm people and prevent a rush at the gangways. Boats of the steamer standing off would be used to rescue people from the gangways. Boats would offload people and then pull back for more. When Titanic sinks, the boats would still stand off to avoid being swamped, but not carrying passengers they would move in sooner and more aggressively to save those in the water. The rescuing steamer herself would very slowly steam into the mass in the water and halt with nets rigged, which would predominantly save strong and fit young men.

I guess the real question is how well that would have worked keeping in mind that, in the final analysis, Titanic was not able to launch all the boats she did have. Certainly there would not have been time for Titanic's boats to ferry passengers, unload them, row back to Titanic, be winched back up, and then reloaded and re-launched.

It's neither here nor there, but I always wince when people talk about Titanic not having enough lifeboats for everyone as well, because assuming they did, again Titanic did not have time to load and launch all the boats she did have.

In any case, I suppose there must have been rope ladders on board, which people could have climbed down; however, the distance between the boat deck and the water was 100 feet. It would take a pretty brave person to sally down a 100 foot rope ladder into an open boat in the middle of the North Atlantic on such a freezing cold night. Certainly I am assuming something like this may have been attempted had help arrived, maybe from the gangways rather than the boat deck, but organizing that would really have been an incredible undertaking.

What I have always wondered, perhaps because I am not a mariner myself, is how close would a rescue ship be willing to get to Titanic under the circumstances of her foundering? Would it be close enough to rig lines between the two vessels so that passengers could be transferred across them? Would there been a greater likelihood of such an attempt had rescue arrived say an hour into the sinking?

In the end though, what we can be certain of is that more people would have survived. Would everyone have been rescued in a worst case scenario where a ship arrived just in time to see Titanic go down? No; however, the rescue ship would have used her own boats to attempt to pull people out of the freezing water or thrown rope ladders over the sides so that swimmers who were strong enough could have climbed aboard. In either case many of those who found themselves in the water would have still died from exposure, but many more people would have been saved.

At the end of the day, after Titanic had made way again and finally come to a halt, and Titanic's condition became absolutely fatal, I do not think there was ever any chance that everyone (who had not already lost their life) could have been saved. Just a chance that more people could have been.
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
720
401
108
Glasgow, Scotland
In any case, I suppose there must have been rope ladders on board, which people could have climbed down; however, the distance between the boat deck and the water was 100 feet. It would take a pretty brave person to sally down a 100 foot rope ladder into an open boat in the middle of the North Atlantic on such a freezing cold night. Certainly I am assuming something like this may have been attempted had help arrived, maybe from the gangways rather than the boat deck, but organizing that would really have been an incredible undertaking.

I'm positive that at least one of the surviving deck crew testified to having been was sent by Bo'sun Nicholl's to fetch a rope ladder (or as he called it, a "Jacob's Ladder").

I do wonder if they had managed to rig rope ladders at the aft gangways and got boats alongside, could the crew have persuaded enough Third Class women to climb down briskly into the boats with the clock ticking against them ? It was hard enough getting some first class women to just step into them from the boat deck.

Could they keep order and prevent a rush of men in the narrow corridors ?

And also what would be done with babies and small children ? Baskets and slings surely would have had to be improvised.

You should seek help.

His wee eyes would melt your heart of stone Bob if you met the old chap. ;)

What would you have said to the women getting into the boats with those three (?) lucky dogs that escaped the ship I wonder ? :D
 
May 3, 2005
2,599
289
278
Californian wouldn’t have sailed to New York with that many . They would have been transferred. It has also been determined that it would have been unlikely for Californian to have reached Titanic in time to do much more than pick up survivors from the sea after Titanic sank.
My point was just that even if Californian had responded immediately they alone should not blamed for all the deaths ?
Certainly ("IMHO") Carpathia should be commended for all those that were saved ?
 

Kas01

Member
May 24, 2018
175
50
73
25
Would I sacrifice the regulars of Encyclopedia Titanica in return for Scotland winning the FIFA World Cup ? ......... in a heartbeat.

While we're dreaming, I want a yacht and a harem of Russian Instagram models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
B

Bob_Read

Guest
This is the subject of endless debate but what I fault the Californian for is not even attempting to respond.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
May 3, 2005
2,599
289
278
Agreed that this is the subject of endless debate and that Californian could be faulted for not even attempting to respond.
My question was just how many more could have been saved if Californian had responded at once ?
Of course this could be another case for endless debate and speculation ?

Probably this is not a place for off topic or flippant remarks........but.....
One good thing has come out for me on these forums.
I have learned the simple equation for estimating the distance to the horizon. :)
I never learned that in my short two years sea duty.
I wish I had known that in my visual sightings and checking the ranges on the radar. :-(

Also as to a question about the Crow's nest and lookouts . :
Was the main reason was that they were trained just to be on constant lookout duty while those on the bridge would be engaged in many other details.
It might be just an optical illusion on the photographs, but there does not seem to be very much difference in height bridge vs Crow's nest.
But could even a short distance more from the crow's could be a crucial factor ?
 
Last edited:
B

Bob_Read

Guest
Robert: The Marine Accident Investigation Branch re-examined the Californian incident in 1992 and this was their conclusion: “In 1992, the UK Government's Marine Accident Investigation Branch re-examined the case and while condemning the inaction of the Californian, also concluded that due to the limited time available, "the effect of Californian taking proper action would have been no more than to place on her the task actually carried out by Carpathia, that is the rescue of those who escaped... [no] reasonably probable action by Captain Lord could have led to a different outcome of the tragedy."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,580
1,356
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
When considering the pros and cons of a rescue attempt, you must all keep to the facts and resist the temptation to speculate. Here are some of them.
1: A Lifeboat lantern was filled with colsa oil which burns with a dull light of low luminosity. It was the practice to light these and suspend them from the underside of the Coxwain's thwart. They were not designed as aids to rescue but for boat personnel illumination. Consequently if they were not attached to the top of an oar or spar, they were useless for anything else.
2: If we are to believe the evidence of Stewardess Annie Robinson and Cook, Collins, Titanic took exactly 2 hours and 25 minutes to sink.
3: Titanic hit the iceberg in total darkness and finally sank in total darkness.
4: The only thing that allowed any kind of successful rescue ( and even that took place in daylight) was Boxhall's green flares.
5: The position of the sinking was inaccurate. Consider how long it took to find the wreck, even when the finders had some very sophisticated electronics to help them.
6: The revised distress position was not transmitted for at the very least, 25 minutes after hitting the berg. Sam Halpern and others would have us believe it took as much as 45 minutes after the event. If so, then that would leave a rescue vessel much less than 1 hour 40 minutes to reach the sinking Titanic.
7: Unless a rescue vessel had accurate distress coordinates and clear water between her and her destination, she would have taken much longer to reach it.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,580
1,356
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Robert: The Marine Accident Investigation Branch re-examined the Californian incident in 1992 and this was their conclusion: “In 1992, the UK Government's Marine Accident Investigation Branch re-examined the case and while condemning the inaction of the Californian, also concluded that due to the limited time available, "the effect of Californian taking proper action would have been no more than to place on her the task actually carried out by Carpathia, that is the rescue of those who escaped... [no] reasonably probable action by Captain Lord could have led to a different outcome of the tragedy."
In fact. the MAIB had 2 attempts at this. Greater effort was employed in the second. but an amount of important evidence was completely ignored and it was written with a political tongue -in-cheek. The only excuse was that the Branch was in its infancy. I can tell you this with confidence since I have worked with them on several occasions in the past.
 
B

Bob_Read

Guest
Yeah, yeah, Jim. I know you are the only one who has figured out the real story of the Californian. No need to get that going again.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,580
1,356
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
I was reply in to Robert...a different "Bob" all together. However...what a strange retort.

How on earth do you know anything, let alone the answer to the Californian question when all you do is repeat the findings of others?
Instead of making "smart" observations, why don't you log onto the Californian site and let us all have the benefit of your superior knowledge regarding the subject?