A

#### Alicia Coors

**Guest**

Dave Gittins suggests that Boxhall misread his Traverse Tables while crunching the numbers, and therefore the CQD position is suspect. I think there is a far simpler explanation.

The word "current" is not found in Duke's article at all; Dave mentions it exactly once (in the context of the 1990-92 computation, not his own).

A reasonable person would dispute the contention that Titanic drifted ~13 nm. from her presumed position at the moment of collision to the wreck site. If the distance/time equation is solved for ~13/~2, the current would have to be around 6 knots(!) This is unlikely the case. An explanation for the 13 miles must lie elsewhere.

Since Boxhall's computation apparently works if the current is ignored, I believe that the drift should be applied over the

__total__time between the evening shoot and the sinking (an interval of 6h39m) giving an average velocity of a little less than 2kt.

Applied to the time between the celestial shoot and the collision, a drift of 8.5 nm at this rate would have occurred; from collision to wreck site, the remaining distance of 4.5nm would be traversed.

Titanic encountered her fate at 41Â°44'N 50Â°W.