Charles Pellegrino website


Mila

Member
Sep 28, 2016
1,097
78
123
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.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,527
1,811
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
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.
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.
1615926883279.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mila

Member
Sep 28, 2016
1,097
78
123
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.


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.
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
Mar 10, 2021
10
11
3
I own a copy of a very early (I bought it in 1989) of Pellegrino's Her name, Titanic. I don't think much of the book or his writing style but there are some interesting illustrations. But one of the most unusual tings about this book is that on the back cover the postscript refers to the Titanic as a 'Cunard' liner. That is obviously a printer error (at least I have assumed so) but I would like to know when that was corrected. There is no erratum acknowledged in the book; I checked.

If that error appeared only in a handful of early copies, does that make mine a collector's item? just asking.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Similar threads

Similar threads