Search titles only
Search titles only
Search titles only
Search titles only
Install the app
New media comments
Reply to thread
RMS Titanic in detail
Ships that may have stood still
Navigational Inconsistencies of the SS Californian
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
[QUOTE="Jim Currie, post: 26789, member: 144215"] Thank you for that Paul - tells me a great deal and confirms to me that the bridge practices they followed at that time were almost exactly the same as I did as a humble junior 40 years later. It more or less confirmed my own imagined scene of what went on that night on the Bridge of Californian at 8 pm on the 14th.April,1912. I've never heard that interview. Sam, As usual, I may have given you the wrong impression. When I used the expression 'patently untrue' I did not mean that such a letter was never written. What I did mean was that the information that Lord was conveying in it was patently untrue and totally irrelevant as far as proof of position relative to Titanic's CQD was concerned. Taking your transcript of Lord's letter: "Apl 14th 6.30 pM I sent my position to the "Antillian" & "Titanic", " Untrue! that position was not transmitted until 7-25pm that night and it was a DR position for 6-30pm relative to the position of the bergs to the south of him. Stewart did not work his Polaris until an hour later. I suggest to you that either Evans sent the letter 3 in error or that the operator on Antillian read it in error. Morse '3' is sent thus ...--. three dots followed by a 2 dashes. Five is ..... five dots. The equipment used by Evans made a series of 'clicks'. Such signals were highly prone to misinterpretation. It was not easy to differentiate between dashes and dots. The transcripts of radio messages of the day are full of such errors. It wasn't until the musical tones were used that the likelihood of misinterpretation was greatly reduced. Indeed, operators became so good at their job, they could recognise individuals by their 'style'. Ask any old hand. There is another more probable possibility - and you alluded to it yourself when you wrote: 'the letter written in Lord's own handwriting. (It's about as bad as mine.)' Consider this: [ATTACH=full]46117[/ATTACH] Note the addition of the sign above and to the right of the last numeral indicating minutes of arc. If this was written too close to the last numeral 3 or 5 there could easily have been an error in Evans' translation. This message was from Master to Master so Evans made an official printed copy in his own hand - the one Lord read from? "this gives me 17 miles away, and you will see it was sent some hours before the disaster" Untrue! How could Californian be 17 miles away from Titanic or Titanic's CQD position at either 6-30pm or 7-30pm that night? For this argument, it does not matter whether we discuss a 6-30pm or a 7-30pm position for Californian. It is patently wrong to link those two times and that position with a 17 mile distance between Californian and Titanic. I suggest to you if Lord was calm and rational when he wrote that letter, he would have been perfectly aware of the fact that the position he quoted in it for Californian's at 7-25 that night was no where near Titanic's CQD - certainly not 17 miles. That's why I suggest he wrote it without thinking clearly - possibly in his anxiety to clear his name. I would go further and suggest that this letter- except for the discrepancy in the otherwise constant latitude - is, because of it's obvious inaccuracies, of little use whatsoever in determining the course Californian was making good at that time. "First, not every word or message exchanged between ships were copied in the PVs that were kept." I know this Sam and Evans said so in his evidence. Since we are using retrospective evidence - not something I'm normally inclined to do - what about this quote from Paul's last post? "Q215. The head of the ship was — those alterations of course were - Lord: Oh, it’s ridiculous. There’s no question about [it]. Everything was going along, spick and span. The logbook was filled out correctly. And we — I laid the course and she made the course. Q216. North 61 West magnetic? Lord: Was that it? Sam, from this, it seems to me that the only corrections that would have been made to the course would have been adjustments for changes in deviation and variation as the westerly longitude increased. I understand from your previous posts that a compass error was derived from a sun sight some time around 5pm. Stewart would also check the error again some time during his watch. Both Stewart and Lord clearly state that they were heading 'about west'. Everything except that one latitude suggests it. Again I say: there was no reason for Lord to head south of due west. In fact there was every reason for him to head north of west. Also; what possible reason would Stewart have in lying about his Polaris sight if he knew that Lord had given Evans an earlier position which contradicted it? We're talking 2 minutes here - hardly a 'saving' margin! I still haven't had a plausible explanation from anyone as to why Lord would alter toward the reported ice rather than away from it? I quote from your article Sam: "What is interesting about that particular value of latitude is a statement that Stanley Lord wrote in his 1959 affidavit: “At 7.30 p.m. the Chief Officer, Mr. G. F. Stewart, reported to me a latitude by Pole Star of 42Â° 5 Â½ ’ N.” Was it a simple oversight error in the sight reduction process that lead to the wrong conclusion as to where they stopped for the night? Unfortunately, we may never really know" You obviously do not understand the psyche of a professional navigator. Such a suggestion is beyond understanding. You just don't forget 'dip' or the errors of your sextant or the errors you automatically apply every day of every week of every year of your working life. Sure, the explanation you give is mathematically correct but it is not one that I or any other of my generation could even remotely recognise as a reasonable description of how a senior officer of Stewart's calibre would carry out his work. What I do note is that Lord states that Stewart worked his latitude to half a minute of arc. That's what I would have expected. "In all likelihood, Californian was set further southward by a strong Labrador current" Where's the pointers to this? Not withstanding the Caronia ; between 12 and 14th April, no less than 9 vessels reported that particular pack ice between 41-40N and to at least 42-00N. The day before, 13th., the Helig Olav encountered three large bergs near where Californian sighted them. She encountered the pack ice as far south as 40-30N before continuing west ward. SS Corsican did much the same thing. Lord stated that the pack ice he encounterd stretched north and south as far as he could see. That was more than 24 later. 14 hours after that, he passed through the looser pack ice to the southward. Mount Temple passed 10 miles to the south of the pack ice on the evening of 14th. My point is this: Barr confirmed that vessels were reporting this pack ice as early as April 12. If there was a 'strong' south setting current effecting the bulk of the ice - 1 knot as you suggest - then the bulk of it would have been well south of 41N by the time Mount Temple got there and she would have to have gone even further south. Additionally, if it was 60 or 70 miles long and trending North-South, it would have been well south of where Californian came to a halt by late on the 14th. Everyone takes this current thing for granted. 'The Labrador Current brings down ice therefore the ice ahead of Californian was brought down by the Labrador Current.' It certainly began that way but much further north than 42N. It is strange that if there was indeed such a strong current flowing - why wasn't there numerous reports about it from all the ship's in the area? After all, such a current would greatly effect the course of a slow cargo ship. The truth is; current does not have as much effect on pack ice as does wind - exactly the same as with floating debris. I leave this subject 'on ice' with the master of the Mount Temple: "I immediately steered down to pass 50Âº west in 41Âº 15' north, sir - that is, I was giving the ice 10 miles - and I came down and saw no ice whatever." [/QUOTE]
I which year did the Titanic sail?