Cam Houseman
Member
I think its not a coincidence that the lights on the horizon disappeared exactly at 2:20
Charles Pellegrino website
- Thread starter Mila
- Start date
Samuel Halpern
Member
When Stone testified about that, the details of what happened to Titanic had already been made public. Besides, 2:20 Titanic time was not 2:20 Carpathia time, but such small details were not at all of interest to the wreck commission.
Samuel Halpern
Member
The entire changing bearings story first started after the red sidelight had disappeared, at least according to Gibson. That was about the time that the famous 'her lights look queer' statement came out. Do you think Stone was first going to report to Lord that the steamer he was watching looks like it may be in real trouble after already watching 7 of his 8 rockets go up for almost an hour and not insisting Lord come topside to see for himself? Up until that time there was no mention of bearing changes. Then, as the lights started to take on a strange appearance, the steamer suddenly decides to sail off to the SW. Hmmm?
Sam, below is a quote from Dr. Lee website
“Comment: SWxW is 236o15' (or S 56.25 W), and SW 1/2 W is roughly S 50 W.
At 1.50, according to Stone, the Californian was heading WSW, and the other steamer was about SWxW, which would put it 11.25 degrees off the port bow, or 1 point. Gibson saw the last rocket fired when the ship was one point on the port bow, about 10 minutes earlier. Although Gibson only made note of bearings relative to the Californian's beam and head, this correspondence between the two is striking.“
So as you see Gibson indirectly confirms Stone‘s testimony in regards to the bearings. Besides, as I said many times before Carpathia’s rockets and Carpathia herself were seen in the same general direction, in which the Titanic went to according to Stone. If Stone lied, why did not he send the Titanic eastward not westward, where Carpathia was later seen? So, I do believe that Stone was telling the truth and thar there is a good possibility that Titanic and Californian were drifting in different sets of currents. This possibility explains many things that is hard to impossible to explain otherwise.
Samuel Halpern
Member
If you believe all of Stone's compass bearings, then you need to explain how a compass bearing could change from SSE to SWxW (that's 7 points - nearly 80°) can take place over approximately one hour of time for vessels about 8 to 10 miles apart, or whatever distances you like? Draw out the simple diagram and then figure out the strengths of currents needed to match the appearances. Then I might become a believer in what you are saying.
I do not believe all Stone’s compass bearings. in fact, he himself testified that the bearings he provided were only approximate. I do believe, however, that the Titanic could have moved some 40 degrees of her initial position in regards to the Californian. Stone said that the steamer he was watching started changing her bearing after she fired the first rocket. So it was more than an hour before she sank. Besides we do not know if he noticed the changes in the bearing right away. So let us make it one and a half hours. Assuming that the initial distance between the two one and a half hours before the sinking was 8 miles, the Titanic and Californian should have drifted some 5.5 miles in different directions for around 1.5 hours to make these 40 degrees of the separation, and it is possible. At some point during that drift (at around 1:35 Titanic’s time) they were at they closest approach, and then they were drifting away from each other.
Samuel Halpern
Member
OK, you believe some but not all, I get that. But let's look at what he wrote to Lord on Apr 18th, while Californian was still at sea:
8 minutes past 12, and took over the Watch from the Third Officer, Mr. Groves, who also pointed out ice and steamer and said our head was E.N.E. and we were swinging. On looking at the compass I saw this was correct and observed the other steamer S.S.E dead abeam...
At 12.35 you [Lord] whistled up the speaking tube and asked if the other steamer had moved. I replied ‘No’ and that she was on the same bearing...
At about 12.45, I observed a flash of light in the sky just above that steamer. Shortly after I observed another ...
at 1.50 were heading about W.S.W. and the other steamer bearing S. W. x W.
At 2.00 a.m. the vessel was steaming away fast and only just her stern light was visible and bearing S.W. ½ W.
about 3.20 when we thought we observed two faint lights in the sky about S.S.W. and a little distance apart.
He did testify that she started to change her bearings after he saw the 2nd flash, but lets assume she started to change bearings at the time of the first flash, at 12:45. By 1:50, 1 hour and 5 minutes later, he writes that the change in bearings was 7 points, and 10 minutes later, he puts it back a bit to 6.5 points. But you, who keeps accusing me of making up evidence, say that is not so. You say the change in bearings was only about 40°, less than 4 points, and you made up a time interval of 1.5 hours trying to keep things believable. Oh, in case you haven't worked it out, your closest approach is 7.5 miles from your starting 8, a mere change of only 0.5 mile which is almost insignificant as far as relative brightness of lights is concerned. I'm sure you can work that little detail out.
I worked it out alright. However, I was talking about 8 miles distance at 12:45 or so. Remember, that for the first hour the steamers could have been approaching each other without noticeable change in the bearings. After all Boxhall testified that the lights of the steamer he was watching were getting brighter and more apparent. So, at they closest approach they could have been 1.5 NM closer to each other, maybe more.
Sam, that is why I told you over and over again that there are way too many unknowns to quantify the unusual drift. My only goal was to prove that generally speaking it was possible, possible in the accordance with the oceanographic situation in the area of the disaster. Besides, I did not invent these 4 points. Stewart saw Carpathia southward, so I approximated the number of points the Titanic and Californian could have drifted.
In my research I responded two questions:
1. Is the changing in bearings supported by the testimonies of the eyewitnesses from both Titanic and Californian?
My response was “yes”.
2. Generally speaking, was it possible that in the area of the disaster the Titanic and Californian were first approaching and then leaving each other?
My response was “yes”.
Mr. Titanic
Member
Very interesting discussion above - no intention to derail it, but to address Arun's query - authors do not write blurbs or design book covers, especially for big publishing houses such as McGraw-Hill. That minor error is the publisher, not Pellegrino. Additionally, I have known editors who change spellings of names without knowing the history. For example, Lord Pirrie to Lord Pierre. These are trivial, pointless errors that some Titaniacs scour entire volumes to discover and bemoan, missing many major big-picture conclusions and discoveries reported in the work, over something that isn't even the author's fault. It's embarrassing.
