Collision Point a Reappraisal of Where Titanic Struck the Iceberg

Hi Captain Collins,


Thanks for responding. Well, starting with GRL and AGU I called, from my armchair, many places; Geosciences and Naval Offices, Marine Seismology Organizations and Marine Observatories etc. up and down the coast, and spoke with several people too. When describing your theory, I was met with laughter and what amounted to "well, THAT sounds pretty unlikely!" It was also suggested that, were such a scenario true, there would be very little Titanic left to see. No one was wiling to go on record so to speak as they were all unfamiliar with your book, although I was told that GRL is not responsible nor involved with how people interpret what they publish. Will you please explain your theory a little so it might be better understood by those here trying to grasp it rather than just listing the papers you cite in your book?

Best,
Eric
 
Hi there!

I am a professional Master Mariner among other things with over 55 years experience and have probably squeezed more salt water out of my socks than most herein have sailed over. Given that: I have carefully read Sam's articles and find them very well constructed,feasible and in most cases - technically correct. They make use of proper marine methods (I was brought up using the same ones that the principal characters in this tale were taught).

Of course! as a professional I would take issue with some of what Sam wrote. I presume that's what all this is about.

My main concerns are with lights and the directions, times and distances they are alleged to have been seen by various individuals.

Question:

If, Titanic's masthead lights could be seen when she was almost an hour away from the viewers in
'Californian' - why did the lookouts and OOW on Titanic not see those of 'Californian'? These men were, we are told 'on their toes' and the OOW also had glasses. Californian's masthead lights would be seen close to 17.5 miles away. If she was close enough to the sinking point for her side and stern lights to be seen then her mast lights (2) should have been seen at extreme range almost half an hour before the time of collision

I also observe:

'Californian; was alleged to be heading in a roughly ENE direction when Titanic's masthead light was first seen at maximum range of say 22 miles at 2253 Californian time (2241 Titanic), described as:

1: 'approaching from the east'
or
2: 'on the starboard quarter'.

If she was coming up from the east before 2300 then it would seem to 'Californian' she would be less than 2 points on the Starboard bow. This being so then by plotting Titanic's position at 2241 hrs, 22 miles east of her collision point then inscribing an arc of visibility of 22 miles to cut the reciprocal bearing angle of 22.5 degrees - would put Californian stopped about 9 miles to the NE of 'Titanic's final position. All of the foregoing points to 'Californian' having been 9 or 10 miles to the south of her planned course and having travelled at a speed nearer to 10 knots since Noon.


If 'Californian' was positioned to the NE then she would have to have been heading a good bit west of North to be seen approaching on the starboard quarter.

If 'Californian; was west of the Longitude of the collision sight then she would see 'Titanic's mast head lights 'coming from the east well after 2300 hrs. The further north she was, the greater would be the angle on the bow and 'approaching from the east' would no longer apply

The Apprentice on 'Californian' said the 'lights' disappeared in a SW direction when 'Californian' was heading in W'ly direction.

The problem with the foregoing is that it does not fit with a northerly heading when the Titanic sank. To make that work; 'Californian' has to have been to the north west of 'Titanic'.
But that doesn't work with the Apprentice's SW disappearing light.

An additional problem is the mystery light seen by not a few from the life boats. If it was a stern light then is was most definitely no more than 7 miles away. I suspect closer than that.
From a lifeboat Californian's stern light surely could not be seen at any greater distance away.

Another thought: when all the evidence we read of was printed - everyone thought Titanic had foundered to the SW of 'Californian'. Rockets were seen to the SSE so why were questions not asked about that and why - if everyone believed the CQD - did they decide Lord was at fault? Did they think there were two vessels in trouble that night? After all, the evidence seemed to show there was a 45 degree angle between the rockets and the CQD.
 
Back
Top