Binoculars

Seumas

Seumas

Member
Its hard to say, I can only guess that last minute crew changes and demotions affected all the officers, not to mention the officer which was booted out of the vessel and left in ahurry, some thing had to give, in this case the Binoculars went missing and I suspect its not the only thing that went wrong.
Got any proof that it affected their work ?

I think you'll find there isn't any.

Remember Wilde was only to be on the Titanic for her first few voyages. After that he was getting his own command and Murdoch would be back as chief. It's a non story.
 
J

James B

Member
Got any proof that it affected their work ?

I think you'll find there isn't any.

Remember Wilde was only to be on the Titanic for her first few voyages. After that he was getting his own command and Murdoch would be back as chief. It's a non story.
I dont get the comment "do you have proof", the ones that have it are no longer with us so its all guesses and opinions.

The only fact is that an important tool for the look outs went missing and that the Titanic is in the bottom of the ocean, that means at least few things went wrong.
 
Seumas

Seumas

Member
I dont get the comment "do you have proof", the ones that have it are no longer with us so its all guesses and opinions.

The only fact is that an important tool for the look outs went missing and that the Titanic is in the bottom of the ocean, that means at least few things went wrong.
Actually, we do have proof of many things that happened such as the American and British enquiries (which you can read online for free), plus letters, diaries and memoires of survivors. Suggested reading would be "On Board RMS Titanic: Memories of a Maiden Voyage" by George Behe.

"I think this happened - therefore I did" is not proof as any professional historian will tell you.

So where is this proof that the officers were negligent in their duties because of a temporary change in personal that would end after just a few voyages ? Remember, you simply cannot just say "I think this happened" as proof.
 
Jim Currie

Jim Currie

Senior Member
Got any proof that it affected their work ?

I think you'll find there isn't any.

Remember Wilde was only to be on the Titanic for her first few voyages. After that he was getting his own command and Murdoch would be back as chief. It's a non story.
1620399314436

No need for binoculars. :cool:
 
J

James B

Member
"I think this happened - therefore I did" is not proof as any professional historian will tell you.

So where is this proof that the officers were negligent in their duties because of a temporary change in personal that would end after just a few voyages ? Remember, you simply cannot just say "I think this happened" as proof.

Actually, we do have proof of many things that happened such as the American and British enquiries (which you can read online for free), plus letters, diaries and memoires of survivors. Suggested reading would be "On Board RMS Titanic: Memories of a Maiden Voyage" by George Behe.

The passangers that were asleep in thier warm beds and suddenly found them selfs fighting for aplace in the life boats or worse were not in amental state to focus on anything but the basic instinct to survive.

I have read some of the tales of the passangers and crew, for example one said he saw the Captain on the bridge before the sinking, another saw him in the life boat and acrew member said he saw him walking in the street some where in the US (he was almost sent into amental hospital if I remember correctly).
"I think this happened - therefore I did" is not proof as any professional historian will tell you.

So where is this proof that the officers were negligent in their duties because of a temporary change in personal that would end after just a few voyages ? Remember, you simply cannot just say "I think this happened" as proof.
I dont deal with fictions only facts and the only fact is an equipment went missing so at least 2 officers didnt preform thier duties, the one that left and the one that took over.

And what about after depature from the shipyard, how come no one raised the subject?

How come anew set was not ordered in the next port of call?

  • For want of a nail, the horseshoe was lost. For want of a horseshoe, the steed was lost. For want of a steed, the message was not delivered. For want of an undelivered message, the war was lost."
To the Captain and officers of the Titanic defence one could claim that the regulations were slack back then.
No days you cant go to the toilet without achecklist.
 
Last edited:
Seumas

Seumas

Member
The passangers that were asleep in thier warm beds and suddenly found them selfs fighting for aplace in the life boats or worse were not in amental state to focus on anything but the basic instinct to survive.

I have read some of the tales of the passangers and crew, for example one said he saw the Captain on the bridge before the sinking, another saw him in the life boat and acrew member said he saw him walking in the street some where in the US (he was almost sent into amental hospital if I remember correctly).

I dont deal with fictions only facts and the only fact is an equipment went missing so at least 2 officers didnt preform thier duties, the one that left and the one that took over.
Read Thomas Krom's post above - equipment did not go missing.

James what books are you using as sources here ?

I fear that you may be using some outdated, below par material and this where you are going wrong. Pretty much everything you are posting flies in the face of the most up-to-date research.
 
J

James B

Member
James what books are you using as sources here ?

I fear that you may be using some outdated, Pretty much everything you are posting flies in the face of the most up-to-date research.
Its my Proffecian dear sir, I live in it, dont need to read about about how alook out should act but I do agree things were diffrent back then till the old traditions didnt match the speed of the Titanic and new regulations were written in blood so alot of things changed, shipping was never the same after that.

As far as the post which you mentioned, it raises more questions then answers.
I wouldnt dispute what Masters thought back then, thats asubject that should be asked by very old seamen with one foot in the grave, they will understand more or less what was the reason for not allowing the use of binoculars by the look outs.

One thing you can be sure of, anyone who would have given the Captains binoculars to the lookouts would have booted of the vessel. The fact that there were many other binoculars didnt mean that that anyone can use them. I Guess it was amatter of pride and tradition, mybe even unwritten policy.
 
Last edited:
Jim Currie

Jim Currie

Senior Member
Its my Proffecian dear sir, I live in it, dont need to read about about how alook out should act but I do agree things were diffrent back then till the old traditions didnt match the speed of the Titanic and new regulations were written in blood so alot of things changed, shipping was never the same after that.

As far as the post which you mentioned, it raises more questions then answers.
I wouldnt dispute what Masters thought back then, thats asubject that should be asked by very old seamen with one foot in the grave, they will understand more or less what was the reason for not allowing the use of binoculars by the look outs.

One thing you can be sure of, anyone who would have given the Captains binoculars to the lookouts would have booted of the vessel. The fact that there were many other binoculars didnt mean that that anyone can use them. I Guess it was amatter of pride and tradition, mybe even unwritten policy.
James, I am one of these very old captains you write about - hopefully with both feet still on the ground. I was trained and sailed with men who were actually serving at the time of the disaster. My "back then" lasted right up until I was into my 70s. and into this millennium.
I helped to develop what you take for granted nowadays but I can still use the old stuff if the satellites go down You don't need to be like me.. you just need common sense. You talk about modern practice and your experience. Tell me this:
If a lookout spots a target on the horizon, since he had nothing to do with it other than report it, what would be the purpose of him specifically identifying it for what it was if the bridge hadn't seen it at the same time? Or in most cases, they had since it had been picked up fifteen minutes earlier on the 40 mile range ring of the RADAR or there had been an audible warning sounded?
Here's another one for you:
If as you write "One thing you can be sure of, anyone who would have given the Captains binoculars to the lookouts would have booted of the vessel." why was there any captains serving on WL ships because WSl supplied binoculars for their lookouts.

Oh! and there was no panic at the lifeboats... in fact the very opposite. read the evidence and personal accounts.
 
Arun Vajpey

Arun Vajpey

Member
The only fact is an equipment went missing so at least 2 officers didnt preform thier duties, the one that left and the one that took over.

And what about after depature from the shipyard, how come no one raised the subject?

How come anew set was not ordered in the next port of call?
While I would hesitate to say that the officers in question did not perform their duties (mainly because I do not have first hand nautical experience other than as a passenger. If I had, I might have said differently), I think there might have been a certain degree of communication oversight between David Blair and Charles Lightoller.

The way I would look at the situation is this: The point is NOT whether Blair, Lightoller, Stanley Lord, Rostron or Clarke Gable considered a set of binoculars in the crow's nest were necessary or otherwise. Let us even momentarily leave aside the continued polarized views about binoculars' usefulness among contemporary ET members. The point IS that a set of binoculars were provided to the crew of the Titanic that was meant to be in the crow's nest and when the ship left Southampton, it was not there and did not appear at any stage later. When that was the case and if Second Officer Blair had responsibility for those binoculars, it would not for him to decide whether they would be useful or not. Likewise, it was not for Lightoller to decide that he did not have to bother asking his colleague about it, if he was supposed to be responsible for them as the new Second Officer. Please understand that I am talking about a theoretical situation and not claiming that Blair or Lightoller actually had such thoughts about binoculars. In reality, thongs probably happened rather quickly for both men so close to departure and in the midst of several other issues, the matter of binoculars might have simply been forgotten.

Since binoculars were provided specifically for the use of lookouts on the Titanic, their own views also matter. Fred Fleet asked Lightoller about the missing set and did not get a satisfactory answer. Later he testified that he thought they might have come in useful to the extent that the collision might have been avoided. Whether one agrees with Fleet or not, one has to accept that a lookout who wanted the set of binoculars that was meant to be in the crow's nest did not get them. Furthermore, it was not a situation where the lookout coming on duty had to chain the binoculars to his wrist or something. If another lookout felt that he did not need binoculars at any stage, he need not have used them.

What I am saying is that just because several people, including Captains argued that a set if binoculars would not have made a difference or whatever, there was no reason to remove a set that was specifically provided to be used in the crow's nest. Those who did not feel that they would be helpful simply did not have to use it.
 
Keith Baxter

Keith Baxter

Member
... Naked eyes for scanning and initial sighting; binoculars for identification/confirmation only. In fact, that is how most people use their binoculars; look at the point of interest or potential interest first with their eyes and then use their binoculars.
I think most people would probably understand that. I know when a plane is headed towards me (on a flight-radar website), it makes more sense to spot it first before then using binoculars to get a closer look. Just using binoculars to randomly look in the general direction and hoping to see it will almost certainly result in completely missing it.
 
Last edited:
J

James B

Member
James, I am one of these very old captains you write about - hopefully with both feet still on the ground.
May you live till 120.
I helped to develop what you take for granted nowadays but I can still use the old stuff if the satellites go down You don't need to be like me.. you just need common sense.
My father was a Captain with similar seatime like you, got alot of old school atitude from him so Iam not exactly apaper seaman if you know what I mean.
You talk about modern practice and your experience. Tell me this:
If a lookout spots a target on the horizon, since he had nothing to do with it other than report it, what would be the purpose of him specifically identifying it for what it was if the bridge hadn't seen it at the same time? Or in most cases, they had since it had been picked up fifteen minutes earlier on the 40 mile range ring of the RADAR or there had been an audible warning sounded?
I always told my look outs, dont report what we see, look for what we dont see, especially while navigating in
Malacca strait where small unlit fast boats cross the bow (can only see the shadow and their wake), in any case I never tell them the crew not to report or get angry about it even when they report astar on the horizon as avessel. I hope this answers your question.
Here's another one for you:
If as you write "One thing you can be sure of, anyone who would have given the Captains binoculars to the lookouts would have booted of the vessel." why was there any captains serving on WL ships because WSl supplied binoculars for their lookouts.
Sorry, I dont understand your question.
Oh! and there was no panic at the lifeboats... in fact the very opposite. read the evidence and personal accounts.
In the begining the 1st class passangers were sure its just adrill, the life boats were still on board, no special event occured at the time and except the ships command no one was sure what happened.

When things went south it was adiffrent story, I can only imagine the 3rd class passangers which were left on board, Iam sure they were terrified when they found out they were about to go down with the vessel, there are alot of stories of those who survived, the only thing I understood was confusion and alot of suger coated tales to justify how they survived, the dead, may the rip, didnt tell any tales.
 
Seumas

Seumas

Member
James you didn't answer my earlier question about what sources you are using for your information ?

There are a lot of very basic factual mistakes in your posts which other posters keep pointing out to you (but which you aren't acknowledging), finding out what erroneous sources you are using can help us put you straight on what to avoid and forget.
 
J

James B

Member
What I am saying is that just because several people, including Captains argued that a set if binoculars would not have made a difference or whatever, there was no reason to remove a set that was specifically provided to be used in the crow's nest. Those who did not feel that they would be helpful simply did not have to use it.
Like I wrote before, the thinking old practices of sea men who sailed on sailing ships were outdated the moment they steped on board the Titanic, the simple reason was that back then acommon speed of avessel was 10-12 knots during ocean crossings, you had time to act in ample time more or less (ships still collided and accidents happened), at 20 plus knots without proper means they had no chance, the only way I could think off is if one of the lookouts had binoculars and used then from time to time mybe they would have noticed it earlier and mybe it would have bought Murdoch alittle more time to avoid the Iceberg.
 
Seumas

Seumas

Member
Like I wrote before, the thinking old practices of sea men who sailed on sailing ships were outdated the moment they steped on board the Titanic, the simple reason was that back then acommon speed of avessel was 10-12 knots during ocean crossings, you had time to act in ample time more or less (ships still collided and accidents happened), at 20 plus knots without proper means they had no chance, the only way I could think off is if one of the lookouts had binoculars and used then from time to time mybe they would have noticed it earlier and mybe it would have bought Murdoch alittle more time to avoid the Iceberg.
Every word of that is absolute rubbish.
 
Top