Captain Rostron


William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
Moran Taing.

I certainly don't mind doing that but what I do mind is someone else repeatedly charging me with saying things I have categorically not said.

Those are actually pictures of the North British Railway Company's tiny paddle steamer Redgauntlet which was launched in 1895 and which was sold in 1919.

Indeed your top picture shows her as a Royal Navy coastal minesweeper during WW1. You can see the gear for sweeping mines at the stern.

It was a coastal steamer and never went to New Zealand.

Lloyds Register for 1887 and again in 1888 has no such ship by the name of "Red Gauntlet" registered. There are however entries such as "Red Rose" and "Red Jacket"
Man you jump from one disagreement to another.
You must love to argue.
Maybe my pictures are incorrect-- but after searching, they were the only ship pictures of the Red Gauntlet that I could locate.
The fact is that Rostron was the Second Mate on the Red Gauntlet and it did indeed roll over off the coast of New Zealand in 1877 and he was very fortunate to have survived.
Anything else you want to add?
 

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
Moran Taing.

I certainly don't mind doing that but what I do mind is someone else repeatedly charging me with saying things I have categorically not said.

Those are actually pictures of the North British Railway Company's tiny paddle steamer Redgauntlet which was launched in 1895 and which was sold in 1919.

Indeed your top picture shows her as a Royal Navy coastal minesweeper during WW1. You can see the gear for sweeping mines at the stern.

It was a coastal steamer and never went to New Zealand.

Lloyds Register for 1887 and again in 1888 has no such ship by the name of "Red Gauntlet" registered. There are however entries such as "Red Rose" and "Red Jacket"
Daniel Allen Butler's book-
The Other Side Of The Night- The Carpathia, The Californian and the night the Titanic was lost.
Page 28
"By 1887 he (Rostron) was serving as second mate aboard the barque Red Gauntlet. Rostron would later remember that while he was aboard her he had his closest brush with death at sea, when the Red Gauntlet toppled over on her beam ends ( literally lying on her side) during a storm off the south coast of New Zealand; the ship managed to recover and Rostron lived."
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
720
401
108
Glasgow, Scotland
Man you jump from one disagreement to another.
You must love to argue.
Maybe my pictures are incorrect-- but after searching, they were the only ship pictures of the Red Gauntlet that I could locate.
The fact is that Rostron was the Second Mate on the Red Gauntlet and it did indeed roll over off the coast of New Zealand in 1877 and he was very fortunate to have survived.
Anything else you want to add?
Please calm down. Thank you.

Not "maybe" the pictures are wrong- the pictures are definitely wrong beyond all doubt. The one in the pictures was built in 1895.

If there is no such vessel called "Red Gauntlet" listed in Lloyds Register for 1887 or 1888 then it did not exist. By law every ocean going British flagged ship had to be entered with Lloyd's.

The other possibility is that Rostron's memory got foggy and he got the name wrong.
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
720
401
108
Glasgow, Scotland
Daniel Allen Butler's book-
The Other Side Of The Night- The Carpathia, The Californian and the night the Titanic was lost.
Page 28
"By 1887 he (Rostron) was serving as second mate aboard the barque Red Gauntlet. Rostron would later remember that while he was aboard her he had his closest brush with death at sea, when the Red Gauntlet toppled over on her beam ends ( literally lying on her side) during a storm off the south coast of New Zealand; the ship managed to recover and Rostron lived."
You could have chosen a much better source.

Butler's reputation is very poor amongst his peers.
 

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
Please calm down. Thank you.

Not "maybe" the pictures are wrong- the pictures are definitely wrong beyond all doubt. The one in the pictures was built in 1895.

If there is no such vessel called "Red Gauntlet" listed in Lloyds Register for 1887 or 1888 then it did not exist. By law every ocean going British flagged ship had to be entered with Lloyd's.

The other possibility is that Rostron's memory got foggy and he got the name wrong.
You calm down.
Okay the pictures are wrong.. I made an error.
You ever made one?
I tend to doubt it.

Daniel Allen Butler's book-
The Other Side Of The Night- The Carpathia, The Californian and the Night the Titanic was lost.
Page 28
"By 1887 he (Rostron) was serving as second mate aboard the barque Red Gauntlet. Rostron would later remember that while he was aboard her he had his closest brush with death at sea, when the Red Gauntlet toppled over on her beam ends ( literally lying on her side) during a storm off the south coast of New Zealand; the ship managed to recover and Rostron lived."
 

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
Oh so now it's my sources....
Man you enjoy being condescending to people.
You are a funny guy.
Good Luck to you man.
I'd say we need to end this now.
Later!
 
Last edited:

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,588
1,364
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
I beg to differ. Rostron was anything but pompus and he was no fool.
The Cunard Line nicknamed him the Lighning Bug because he was a man of quick thinking and action.
This nickname Pre-dates the disaster.
Also, I own a Genuine letter signed by Rostron (1931) turning down a lucrative offer from the Pond Agency in NYC. This agency had many big stars and writers under contract to give public lectures for profit.
Here are some of the folks that pond had under contract, Henry Stanley, George Kennan, Bill Nye, James Whitcomb Riley, Thomas Nast, Mark Twain, Booker T. Washington, P.T. Barnum, George Washington Cable, Ellen Terry, Joseph Jefferson, and Henry Ward Beecher.
Rostron flat turned down James B Pond, Jr saying, "I am no speaker."
This reveals a lot about the man's character.
By 1931 Rostron had surely discussed the rescue numerous times and at length, and would have been quite comfortable speaking about it.
It is my personal belief that he turned down the offer from the Pond agency simply because he did NOT want to profit from the disaster.

One other thing for you folks who seem to have an axe to grind with Rostron,
fate nearly caused him to miss the Titanic tragedy entirely.
He nearly died at sea in 1887.
Before he became Captain Arthur H. Rostron, in 1887 Rostron was serving as second mate on board the steamer Red Gauntlet.
During a heavy storm and high seas the Red Gauntlet tipped over on her side off the coast of New Zealand.
Rostron said it was his closest near death experience.
Somehow, miraculously, the ship righted itself, and Rostron survived.
Can you imagine if he had perished how many lives that would have impacted on the night of April 15, 1912??View attachment 76774View attachment 76775
Differ-away, that's your prerogative.

However, if Rostron was the "electric spark" as described by Bisset, why did it take so long for him to get command - even of a lowly cargo vessel?
The man was an exaggerator of the first order.
In the book ''Titanic Hero – The Autobiography of Captain Rostron of the Carpathia'' Rostron described his first command as follows:
''My ship was the Brescia, the newest and best of the Cunard Fleet.''
With that observation, the man showed his prevalence for embelishment and exaggeration. In fact, when Rostron joined her, the SS Brescia was not the newest vessel. The newest vessel was the SS Pannonia. She was built in 1904, a year after Brescia which was built in 1903.. In truth, the SS Brescia was a four year- old cargo vessel when Rostron joined her . He did not get command of a passenger ship for another six years... at the beginning of 1911 and that was to the ageing 9 year old Pannonia. In facr, when th Titanic disaster took place, Rostron had less than 16 months under his belt as master of a passenger ship.

As for his "brush with death" What a load of old rubbish. Back in those days and for very many years after, such incidents were commonplace, I had a few myself during the 50s.
Rostron was the "efficient captain" who, on his very first trip in command, did not know he had lost both his bilge
keels. Really?

Aside from the foregoing, you one again perpetuate the myth that the man was greater than the sum of his parts.
 

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
This message has been reported.
Differ-away, that's your prerogative.

However, if Rostron was the "electric spark" as described by Bisset, why did it take so long for him to get command - even of a lowly cargo vessel?
The man was an exaggerator of the first order.
In the book ''Titanic Hero – The Autobiography of Captain Rostron of the Carpathia'' Rostron described his first command as follows:
''My ship was the Brescia, the newest and best of the Cunard Fleet.''
With that observation, the man showed his prevalence for embelishment and exaggeration. In fact, when Rostron joined her, the SS Brescia was not the newest vessel. The newest vessel was the SS Pannonia. She was built in 1904, a year after Brescia which was built in 1903.. In truth, the SS Brescia was a four year- old cargo vessel when Rostron joined her . He did not get command of a passenger ship for another six years... at the beginning of 1911 and that was to the ageing 9 year old Pannonia. In facr, when th Titanic disaster took place, Rostron had less than 16 months under his belt as master of a passenger ship.

As for his "brush with death" What a load of old rubbish. Back in those days and for very many years after, such incidents were commonplace, I had a few myself during the 50s.
Rostron was the "efficient captain" who, on his very first trip in command, did not know he had lost both his bilge
keels. Really?

Aside from the foregoing, you one again perpetuate the myth that the man was greater than the sum of his parts.
Yep It is my Prerogative.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
Neither one of us knew the man.
You obviously don't care for him.
I like the guy. He saved lives.

Aside from the foregoing, you once again perpetuate the myth that the man was lesser than the sum of his actions.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,588
1,364
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Eyewitnesses say that the seas were beginning to get a bit rough about the time that Carpathia arrived. Do you think these folks could have lasted until afternoon? Perhaps some, but I think many would have died. Those boats with water in them, collapsable B, etc...
Can we all agree that it is a good thing that Rostron and the Carpathia were there when they were?
You and your cohorts completely miss the point...Rostron, by his actions, turned that rescue mission into a competition to see who would get there first. All the ships responding to the SOS had wireless, so ask yourself: why was Rostron keeping radio silence?
The truth that you and your pals are studiously ignoring, is that if Rostron hadn't been such a poor navigator, he would never have got there and if someone else hadn't had the idea of green flares he would have ended up where everyone else did... at the wrong place. HE GOT THERE BY LUCK - NOT SKILL.
Additionally; how much praise did Rostron afford his own crew at both Inquiries? I'll tell you NONE! His evidence was filled with personal pronouns me, me, me...I, I, I
As for your ideas on life boat survival. You should try it some time.
If you "think" concerning a subject, then you must surely base your thoughts on a modicum of knowledge of that subject. However the results of your "thoughts" illustrate a profound lack of knowledge of the subject "Survival at Sea" All sizes and shapes of humans have survived miraculous journeys in open boats in all parts of the world.
Oh! and a sea anchor is simply a canvas cone-shaped bag with a hole in the end at the end of a painter about three or four lengths of the boat. It never touched the sea bed. If it did, it would be as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
If you don't want an argument then don't post bland statements disguised as fact.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,588
1,364
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Yep It is my Prerogative.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
Neither one of us knew the man.
You obviously don't care for him.
I like the guy. He saved lives.

Aside from the foregoing, you once again perpetuate the myth that the man was lesser than the sum of his actions.
If it is a myth or myths... then prove it by reference to fact. That is what I have done.
 

James B

Member
May 3, 2021
102
14
53
Earth
Yep It is my Prerogative.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
Neither one of us knew the man.
You obviously don't care for him.
I like the guy. He saved lives.
Thats the bottom line. The rest is irrelevent and even if it was again an again I ask how come he managed to reach the Titanic and save people? How he didnt lose any ship? No one is that lucky, not in those days when seamanship and skills really mattered.

As far as the comunication claims thats what I read:
, Cottam testified that while Carpathia sped to Titanic's position, he was kept busy relaying messages from other ships in the area that Phillips was having difficulty hearing because of noise from the sinking ship. He also delivered updates to the bridge.[7]

Final calls and sinkingEdit

Around 1:45 a.m., Cottam received Titanic's final intelligible message: "Come as quickly as possible, old man, the engine room is filling up to the boilers."[12] He replied that "all our boats were ready and we were coming as hard as we could come"[5] but received no further response. The British Wreck Commissioner's inquiry found that other ships in the area continued to hear broken or unintelligible CQD and SOS calls from Titanic after the last message Cottam received, but all signals cut off abruptly at 2:17 a.m., three minutes before Titanic disappeared under the water.[12] Despite receiving no reply, Cottam continued to update Titanic on Carpathia's progress, instructing Phillips to look for their signal rockets.[2][a]
 
Last edited:

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
If it is a myth or myths... then prove it by reference to fact. That is what I have done.
Gladly,

I think it is fair to say that you don't care for Rostron. That's fine. Who am I to tell you who to respect or who to care about.
Your asseration that it took him a long time to get a command and a lowley one at that is actually the standard M.O. of the Cunard Line... they were slow about most things including rising rank, and they focused on slow and steady in their trans-Atlantic crossings-- they were an extremely conservative line.
So lets be fair to Rostron and keep that in perspective.
Um, excuse me, I don't have any cohorts... I don't know anybody on this page or thread.
As for arguments... bring it.
As for never having survived in a lifeboat-- sorry I haven't, and sorry that you had to.
I have gone through plenty of other things,though, I can assure you.
Sorry I don't have your knowledge of seamanship, I'm a historian.
I do respect and admire your knowledge though, that's why I am on here,
to learn from others.
I find it quite laughable that when you do make a mistake on here, there are a few people who can't wait to pounce and shame you for your blunder.
Thankfully I have thick skin, and for the most part, could give 2-Sh*ts what people think of me.
Lastly, and in closing, wether it be skill, luck, the divine hand of God or whatever else.
The point that you seem to be missing is that Rostron did get there and did rescue 706 people.
They thought he was a great man and a great Captain and in the big scheme of things isn't that what matters.
Not what you think or I think.
We weren't there.
Cheers Mate!
 
Last edited:

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
720
401
108
Glasgow, Scotland
Gladly,

I think it is fair to say that you don't care for Rostron. That's fine. Who am I to tell you who to respect or who to care about.
Your asseration that it took him a long time to get a command and a lowley one at that is actually the standard M.O. of the Cunard Line... they were slow about most things including rising rank, and they focused on slow and steady in their trans-Atlantic crossings-- they were an extremely conservative line.
So lets be fair to Rostron and keep that in perspective.
Um, excuse me, I don't have any cohorts... I don't know anybody on this page or thread.
As for arguments... bring it.
As for never having survived in a lifeboat-- sorry I haven't, and sorry that you had to.
I have gone through plenty of other things,though, I can assure you.
Sorry I don't have you knowledge of seamanship, I'm a historian.
I do respect and admire your knowledge though, that's why I am on here,
to learn from others.
I find it quite laughable that when you do make a mistake on here, there are a few people who can't wait to pounce and shame you for your blunder.
Thankfully I have thick skin, and for the most part, could give 2-Sh*ts what people think of me.
Lastly, and in closing, wether it be skill, luck, the divine hand of God or whatever else.
The point that you seem to be missing is that Rostron did get there and did rescue 706 people.
They thought he was a great man and a great Captain and in the big scheme of things isn't that what matters.
Not what you think or I think.
We weren't there.
Cheers Mate!
You know, if a bloke in the street spoke to my grandfather (who is about the same age as Jim) like you just did to Jim I would not be happy to say the least.

Apologise right now.
 

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
You know, if a bloke in the street spoke to my grandfather (who is about the same age as Jim) like you just did to Jim I would not be happy to say the least.

Apologise right now.
I don't know the man or his age.
I wasn't disrespectful to him.
I gave my side of the discussion.
Go pound sand.
 

James B

Member
May 3, 2021
102
14
53
Earth
You know, if a bloke in the street spoke to my grandfather (who is about the same age as Jim) like you just did to Jim I would not be happy to say the least.

Apologise right now.
Jim wrote worst things about me, I assure you that I didnt respond in the same manner even when I didnt know how old he was. Shame on all of us that we are focusing on nonsense and cant debate like civilaized men.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
Jim wrote worst things about me, I assure you that I didnt respond in the same manner even when I didnt know how old he was. Shame on all of us that we are focusing on nonsense and cant debate like civilaized men.
I'm all for civility.
And a lively discussion.
I'm more than ready to move on.
Every time I try to, somebody starts it up again....
Bye Boys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

James B

Member
May 3, 2021
102
14
53
Earth
I'm all for civility.
And a lively discussion.
I'm more than ready to move on.
Every time I try to, somebody starts it up again....
Bye Boys.
I wonder if in 1912 they were having in the pubs such debates? If chairs were flying, drunk men fighting...ahh noting like the good old days.

Have anice weekend, that goes for you too old gezzer ;).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

William Oakes

Member
Mar 6, 2020
243
107
88
I wonder if in 1912 they were having in the pubs such debates? If chairs were flying, drunk men fighting...ahh noting like the good old days.

Have anice weekend, that goes for you too old gezzer ;).
James,
You too!
Have a nice weekend.
Thanks for being cool and a good sport!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,588
1,364
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Gladly,

I think it is fair to say that you don't care for Rostron. That's fine. Who am I to tell you who to respect or who to care about.
Your asseration that it took him a long time to get a command and a lowley one at that is actually the standard M.O. of the Cunard Line... they were slow about most things including rising rank, and they focused on slow and steady in their trans-Atlantic crossings-- they were an extremely conservative line.
So lets be fair to Rostron and keep that in perspective.
Um, excuse me, I don't have any cohorts... I don't know anybody on this page or thread.
As for arguments... bring it.
As for never having survived in a lifeboat-- sorry I haven't, and sorry that you had to.
I have gone through plenty of other things,though, I can assure you.
Sorry I don't have your knowledge of seamanship, I'm a historian.
I do respect and admire your knowledge though, that's why I am on here,
to learn from others.
I find it quite laughable that when you do make a mistake on here, there are a few people who can't wait to pounce and shame you for your blunder.
Thankfully I have thick skin, and for the most part, could give 2-Sh*ts what people think of me.
Lastly, and in closing, wether it be skill, luck, the divine hand of God or whatever else.
The point that you seem to be missing is that Rostron did get there and did rescue 706 people.
They thought he was a great man and a great Captain and in the big scheme of things isn't that what matters.
Not what you think or I think.
We weren't there.
Cheers Mate!
Allow me to answer you in simple terms.

1. I neither like or dislike Rostron.
2. in my time, I have reviewed evidence on men like Rostron. I did so because those, such as the Underwriter at Lloyds, trusted me to investigate "without prejudice " and that statement is what someone like me finished up with before signing my report.
If I had been alive at the time of the Titanic disaster and had been commissioned with the investigation into it, I would have found as I write here.

Allow me to caution you and others who label themselves "historians".
It is one thing to study an historical event... it is another - an entirely different ball game - to pontificate upon it based on limited knowledge of the basic principles of the subject..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Similar threads

Similar threads