Jack Thayer said - "One of the funnels seemed to be lifted off and fell towards me about 15 yards away, with a mass of sparks and steam coming out of it." He later said, "The second funnel, seemed to be lifted off, emitting a cloud of sparks."
Harold Bride said - "I felt I simply had to get away from the ship. She was a beautiful sight then. Smoke and sparks were rushing out of her funnel. There must have been an explosion, but we heard none. We only saw the big stream of sparks"
Was he referring to the second funnel? He said she was a beautiful sight. This implies the deck lights were still on when the sparks were emitting from the funnel. He saw smoke as well as sparks. Mr. Osman said - "After she got to a certain angle she exploded, broke in halves........you could see the explosions by the smoke coming right up the funnels." Does this mean Bride and Thayer were witnessing the moment she exploded and broke in two? Yet Bride did not hear any explosion. People who have been in the immediate area of bomb blasts say they never heard the explosion while others further away heard it. Perhaps Bride was too close to the ship and was absorbed by the explosion which according to August Weikman was so strong it killed a number of people and blew him some distance away by the force of the explosion. Perhaps this was the result of several funnels falling simultaneously into the water?
The perspective of each account is also a key issue. If the majority of witnesses were in lifeboats that were rowing towards the other ship off the port bow then their perspective of the funnels would certainly be very limited e.g.
I think this may have caused some confusion at the Inquiry. e.g.
Mr. Poingdestre - "The ship broke at the foremost funnel."
Mr. Ranger - Q - Can you say in relation to the fore funnel at what point the ship broke off? A - "About the second funnel from forward."
When the ship broke the stern keeled violently over to port.
Emily Ryerson said - "The two forward funnels seemed to lean and then she seemed to break in half as if cut with a knife." Ruth Becker also showed the two forward funnels tilting forward as she broke in two. Perhaps the break up was so destructive that it caused most of the funnels to fall almost simultaneously.
According the newspapers the following happened -
'Hugh Woolner says there were two explosions before the Titanic sank. To a friend he said. It was this second explosion that did the most damage. It blew away the funnels and tore a big hole in the steamer's side and caused the ship to rock as if she were an eggshell. The Titanic careened to one side and passengers making for the boats were spilled into the water.'
Sounds remarkably similar to Charles Joughin's account who said the passengers were thrown over the port side as the stern broke and keeled onto her port side. I guess it entirely depends on where each witness was and what their unique perspectives were and also what their state of mind was when they witnessed each event occur on the ship. e.g.
Mr. Pearcey was asked to describe how the ship sank. He said - "It upset me, and I could not exactly say." Sometimes graphic events are so terrible that the brain just blocks them out. Edith Russell was in a car crash before the Titanic sank, and she said the events of the car crash came flashing back with horrible clarity as she witnessed the Titanic sink. I understand veterans who saw tragic events during the wars will often refuse to discuss what happened. Not because they won't, but because they can't. Perhaps the final moments of the Titanic were so awful that survivors tried to block it out of their memory. I understand some of them never went to sea again, and others had their hair turn white owing to the shock of the event they had just witnessed.
Mr. Ismay was wise not to witness her go down.
"I did not wish to see her go down."
Q - You did not care to see her go down?
A - No. I am glad I did not.
.
