No Excuse for Capt Lord's Inaction


Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Sam, you wrote:

"This was the approximate bearing of the steamer seen from Titanic, one half to two points on the port bow, presuming the Titanic was heading about north soon after the collision as stated by quartermaster Rowe."


Here's what Rowe stated:
" Q: Was your vessel's head swinging at the time you saw this light of this other vessel?
A: - I put it down that her stern was swinging.
Q 17670. Which way was her stern swinging? A: - Practically dead south, I believe, then.
17674. How was it bearing from you? A: - When I first saw it it was half a point on the port bow, and roughly about two points when I left the bridge".

According to you, Rowe left the bridge around 1-50 am. That being so, then according to Rowe, the vessel in sight was bearing between N by W and NNW at that time. Yet you believe the vessel seen from Californian was the Titanic and that Californian was bearing NW from the Titanic...that's 4 points not 2 points on the port bow.
Not only that, but if Titanic was swinging to starboard as Rowe said she was, then, from 11-45 pm (on Titanic) until just before the first rocket was fired (which according to your was 12-47 am) she would have been showing her green light in the direction of northwest, not her red one.
If we use unaltered time of Titanic, the equivalent times on the Californian would have been from 11-33 am until close to 12-35am. during that entire time, the nearby ship to Californian was showing a RED light, not a GREEN one. Here's what I mean. All times are Californian time.


Titanic swings.jpg


When assessing the above, keep in mind what Apprentice Gibson said :

"7424. When was it that you saw any ship's light round you first?
- About twenty minutes past twelve.
7425. What was the light that you saw?
- A white masthead light and a red sidelight.
 
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
A stopped ship is no different than a stopped iceberg under calm conditions. They are both stopped relative to the water they are floating on. If the water is moving, so too do the objects floating on it. It's elementary.

I thought lighter objects would travel faster on the surface due to their light weight and their lack of resistance against the current? e.g. Similar to aerodynamics as a small baseball will travel faster and further through the air than a large metallic object. Surely a small lifeboat bobbing on the water would drift faster with the current than a huge iceberg? The same would apply to the Titanic half sunk and drifting passed the huge iceberg which creates the impression she is slowly backing away from it as the current pushes her east.

The lifeboats bobbing on the water did not cover much ground as they tried to row towards the mystery ship (possibly the Californian) as they were rowing against the current. When Frank Prentice looked over the side of the stern he said the bodies and wreckage "all seemed to drift down that way" passed the stern in the direction of the current.

I believe Boxhall left the ship around 2am. He could not row far because he did not have many abled seamen to help with the rowing. Yet he estimated his boat was "about a half a mile away" when the ship went down and they were just "resting on the oars". He then began to light his green flares. Mr. Collins was washed off the boat deck. Just before the wave washed him off he witnessed Boxhall's green flare a considerable distance off the stern and he estimated the green light was "3 or 4 miles" away from the stern. This would mean the currents had taken Boxhall's boat a considerable distance away from the ship in a very short time.

Edith Rosenbaum was in lifeboat 11. Their boat would have been affected very much by the current pushing them east. Edith said when the ship was going down - "We were surprised that instead of sucking us in, the effect was to the contrary, it pushed us out and onward." I believe the current had greatly affected their distance from the ship, similar to Boxhall's boat.


Lifeboat 11. "It pushed us out and onward."

lifeboat11.png




The ice field was I understand a mixture of heavy and loose ice. My understanding is the small pieces of ice would have drifted more freely on the surface and overtaken the huge icebergs e.g.

ice-field.png


currentsdirection1.png


currentsdirection2.png


currentsdirection3.png



.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,387
673
188
South Wales UK
I am very grateful again to Sam for providing the main Foweraker map on here. It has some considerable significance as it is generally accepted it is the same as Captain Lord's own map handed into the British Inquiry, and which he kept a copy or draft of, which he later sent to Foweraker.

The significance of this map may be difficult to understand, as it is the 'best' evidence we have of how Captain Lord decided to portray things after Titanic sinking and all that ensued, so it must not be taken to indicate what he necessarily perceived things to be at the time when dawn broke on the 15th.

We know it is inaccurate because the Mount Temple is shown not in the ice, yet Captain Moore's position from a celestial observation would place him inside the western side of the ice field.

A few days after making this map, with his notes on the other side, as was handed into the British Inquiry (if we assume Foweraker's map is a copy of Captain Lord's map, which it is generally assumed/accepted it is), Captain Lord made a lot of outlandish statements to The Boston Press which are very hard to reconcile with someone giving a straight truthful statement of the facts. A lot of what he stated to The Boston Press was a total fabrication and a pack of lies.

We know quite clearly that Captain Lord also gave an altered position to that relayed to The Antillian and Titanic of the 3 ice bergs seen on the evening of the 14th in his Hydrographic report of the 23rd April, although it was just some 2 miles, but significant nevertheless, plus his delay in submitting the Hydrographic report, and his very partial reports to the Leyland Line agents in Boston via Marconi wireless before arriving in Boston.

And why did he not produce his notes and map to the USA Inquiry? Or for that matter the statements of 18th April 1912 of Stone and Gibson to either Inquiry?

Stewart said to Captain Lord (in effect) at around 4.30 to 5am on the morning of the 15th April 'Lets go down to this ship where Stone saw the rockets being fired from'. Captain Lord overrules him and decides instead to proceed on the Boston course, which by all the evidence is what happened for a short time in the then daylight.

Note also at the above time Stewart never makes any mention of seeing a huge ice flow between where he saw in daylight a yellow funneled steamer or where Stone's rockets had been seen, contrary to the Lord/Foweraker map.

All the clues are there, if you have eyes to see and ears to hear!

Cheers,

Julian
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
I thought lighter objects would travel faster on the surface due to their light weight and their lack of resistance against the current?
It has nothing to do with weight or resistance. Those elements affect how long it takes to accelerate or decelerate an object. Once stopped and floating, there is zero resistance because the object is not moving relative the the body of water its floating upon. However, Jim was correct in saying the a deep draft object may be affected differently than a lighter draft object due to a difference between current on the surface and a current at deeper levels. In the case of an iceberg, which is a very deep draft object, it's movement relative to the surface may be different from an object floating on the surface. It that case, a small wake could be expected around the berg as it moves relative to the water on the surface as it is being carried with the deeper current. That said, one must consider the expected differences in current speeds and directions at different depths. We're taking about perhaps a knot or thereabouts.

By the way, a if a lifeboat is making say 2 knots northward against a 1 knot southward current, its gain would be northward at 1 knot relative the earth's surface. Through the water, however, the boat is still making 2 knots.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
According to you, Rowe left the bridge around 1-50 am. That being so, then according to Rowe, the vessel in sight was bearing between N by W and NNW at that time. Yet you believe the vessel seen from Californian was the Titanic and that Californian was bearing NW from the Titanic...that's 4 points not 2 points on the port bow.
Like Californian's officers, bearings were given as compass bearing, not in true bearings. Titanic facing North by compass would NNW true. Two points off the port bow would be NNW by compass, or NW true.
I also don't believe the swinging of either vessel was constant. Any swinging caused by initial turning as a vessel was coming to a stop would soon be dampened out after the vessel was dead in the water. .
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
I thought lighter objects would travel faster on the surface due to their light weight and their lack of resistance against the current? e.g. Similar to aerodynamics as a small baseball will travel faster and further through the air than a large metallic object. Surely a small lifeboat bobbing on the water would drift faster with the current than a huge iceberg? The same would apply to the Titanic half sunk and drifting passed the huge iceberg which creates the impression she is slowly backing away from it as the current pushes her east.

The lifeboats bobbing on the water did not cover much ground as they tried to row towards the mystery ship (possibly the Californian) as they were rowing against the current. When Frank Prentice looked over the side of the stern he said the bodies and wreckage "all seemed to drift down that way" passed the stern in the direction of the current.

I believe Boxhall left the ship around 2am. He could not row far because he did not have many abled seamen to help with the rowing. Yet he estimated his boat was "about a half a mile away" when the ship went down and they were just "resting on the oars". He then began to light his green flares. Mr. Collins was washed off the boat deck. Just before the wave washed him off he witnessed Boxhall's green flare a considerable distance off the stern and he estimated the green light was "3 or 4 miles" away from the stern. This would mean the currents had taken Boxhall's boat a considerable distance away from the ship in a very short time.

Edith Rosenbaum was in lifeboat 11. Their boat would have been affected very much by the current pushing them east. Edith said when the ship was going down - "We were surprised that instead of sucking us in, the effect was to the contrary, it pushed us out and onward." I believe the current had greatly affected their distance from the ship, similar to Boxhall's boat.


Lifeboat 11. "It pushed us out and onward."

View attachment 42884



The ice field was I understand a mixture of heavy and loose ice. My understanding is the small pieces of ice would have drifted more freely on the surface and overtaken the huge icebergs e.g.

View attachment 42883

View attachment 42880

View attachment 42881

View attachment 42882


.
Here is some ice information for you, Aaron. it can be found at https://msi.nga.mil/msisitecontent/staticfiles/nav_pubs/apn/chapt-34.pdf

"3307. Drift of Sea Ice Although surface currents have some affect upon the drift of pack ice, the principal factor is wind. Due to Coriolis force, ice does not drift in the direction of the wind, but varies from approximately 18° to as much as 90° from this direction, depending upon the force of the surface wind and the ice thickness".

On the same sight, you will find a lot more.

Who told you Titanic was facing North?
Not even those who conducted the Inquiry were so certain as to how the ship was heading when she stopped. When specifically questioned on the subject, QM Hichens, who was steering the ship, categorically stated that he received a single helm order to avoid the berg and the ship only turned 2 points.
Both Boxhall and Pitman thought the ship was heading in the same way as she was before she hit the iceberg.
Pitman:
15227. Can you tell us whether the "Titanic's" head was going round at all under her helm when you left the ship, or after the collision?
- She remained stationary from the time I left the ship till she disappeared.
15228. No altering her heading?
- No."

Then there is the star witness...First Class passenger major Peuchen. he left Titanic in boat N0.6 which was located on the port side. here's what he had to say:
"After the collision it seemed to me not immediately, but after a short space of time it sounded as though we were reversing.....
we started right off from the port side of the boat directly straight off from her about amidship, on the port side, right directly north, I think it would be, because the northern lights appeared where this light we had been looking at in that direction appeared shortly afterwards.

Peuchen was sitting facing the stern of boat 6 and looking in the direction of the sinking Titanic.
If he left directly from the port side and saw the northern lights before Titanic sank, then Titanic was heading East and the northern lights were to the south of boat 6. Either that, or, Titanic was heading about West and the Northern Lights were to the north of boat 6. You choose.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Captain Lord stated that Californian remained at 42° 05'N, 50° 07'W from 10:21pm on the night of April 14th until 5:15am April 15th when he moved his engines for a short time. At 6:00am he pushed slowly through an icefield for half an hour to 6:30am before steaming south, meeting up with Mount Temple at 7:30am. He then goes on for about another half hour when turns northeastward toward Carpathia. He then reaches Carpathia at 8:30am. Lord also calculated that the floating wreckage from Titanic was in 41° 33'N, 50° 01'W at 11:20am based on his noontime location taken from a noon sighting of the sun.

Foweraker shows a south setting current of about a knot carrying the wreckage away from a point where Californian met Carpathia at 8:30am. He therefore placed Carpathia at 41° 36'N at 8:30am. Notice that he started Californian at 6:00am from a point 42° 02'N, 50° 07'W, 3 miles south of Lord's overnight position, even marking the chart with word DRIFT between the two locations. He shows Californian at about 42° 00'N, 50° 10'W when she clears the ice. Then he shows Californian reaching 41° 46'N, 50° 11'W, 2 miles due east of the SOS position, at 7:30am, with Mount Temple about 2 miles due south of the SOS position at that same time. He also shows Lord's small pink funneled steamer about 3 miles west of Mount Temple also at that time. In another chart, Foweraker identified that vessel as Almerian. By the way, the distance after clearing the ice to Californian's 7:30am position shown is 14 miles, consistent with Californian making just over 13 knots in one hour, as Lord claimed, plus 1 knot of south setting current after clearing the ice about 6:30am.

By the way, Foweraker placed the spot where Titanic struck the iceberg at 11:40pm at 41° 39'N, 50° 01'W, 3 miles due north of where he placed the wreckage at 8:30am. Give him some credit, he was only about 6 miles away and to the SW from the actual wreck site.

Now the next leg, from 7:30am to when Foweraker shows Californian turn toward Carpathia, is a distance of 10 miles, and the distance to where he shows Carpathia is about 4 miles due east of that. The total distance from 7:30am to reaching Carpathia at 8:30am as shown is abut 14 miles, and again consistent with Californian making just over 13 knots in one hour with just a little help from the current, including going at full speed through the ice to reach Carpathia as Lord had claimed he did.

To make everything fit neatly, however, Foweraker ignored evidence from Captain Lord that Californian had to steer northeastward across the ice to get to Carpathia. (Rostron said she was coming up from WSW true.) Foweraker shows her going due east. He also proposed a very slow south-setting current that took Californian as well as Titanic's wreckage 3 miles southward during the overnight hours. Foweraker also ignored evidence about the position of Mount Temple which showed she was on a line of longitude of 50° 09'W at around 7am, and that Mount Temple was about the same distance from Californian as she was from Carpathia at around 6:00am that morning.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Like Californian's officers, bearings were given as compass bearing, not in true bearings. Titanic facing North by compass would NNW true. Two points off the port bow would be NNW by compass, or NW true.
I also don't believe the swinging of either vessel was constant. Any swinging caused by initial turning as a vessel was coming to a stop would soon be dampened out after the vessel was dead in the water. .
As I wrote to Aaron: 3rd office Pitman very clearly stated that the ship was stationary throughout the time she was sinking. QM Hichens was specifically asked if he received more than one helm order during the iceberg avoidance maneuver...he emphatically stated that he did not.
As you well know, the second...reverse helm order was given long after it could have been of any use as an avoiding action of any kind and when the ship's headway was rapidly diminishing. You are the expert...explain how a hard left turn at 22 knots can be checked and the turn reversed when the ship's speed is rapidly dropping off due to an emergency turn, drag from contact with the berg and rapidly reducing engine speed.
You state "Any swinging caused by initial turning as a vessel was coming to a stop would soon be dampened out after the vessel was dead in the water." For a start off, we are not discussing an "initial swing". That being the case, what would the damping effect be in the scenario I have just described to you?
While you are working that lot out, perhaps you might explain how it was that Pitman, in boat 9 located close to the ship's starboard quarter throughout the sinking process, managed to see a single, bright white light which he assumed was the stern light of a ship?
Or what about the red side light seen by AB William Lucas who left in the port side collapsible? He saw that one in the direction of Titanic's starboard beam after she sank. Surely these lights could not have been on the Californian? Certainly not the red one which was on a vessel no further away than about 8 miles and in completely the wrong direction...no matter how Titanic was heading.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,387
673
188
South Wales UK
Hi Jim,

Sam has provided the main Foweraker map, which is a very significant piece of evidence for various reasons.

You will have read Sam's analysis of same, and my own thoughts above.

I can expect it might take you awhile to assimilate all the above, so I do not expect an immediate reply, but I do hope you will comment in due course when you have had time to consider all the above.

Cheers,

Julian
 
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Regarding the Titanic drifting with the current and swinging. Just to clarify, is it true that the Titanic would slowly swing and stop in the direction of the moving current? Would all ships in the vicinity point in the same direction with the current?

The stern is facing the opposite direction. Coincidence or did the current swing both sections in that direction?



wreckdirection.png




Also if the bow had broken off and dove forwards (a considerable distance forward) in a straight line before it struck the sea bed, and the stern had remained afloat and drifted with the current towards the south east. Then is it possible to plot the exact position where she broke in two? e.g.



The bow moves forward and the stern is carried by the currents towards the south east before it sinks.


currentbow.png


Is it possible to measure the distance of the stern from the position where she broke and calculate how fast the current was moving in the minutes or seconds that she remained afloat after breaking? Also would the speed in which the stern had rotated create an idea as to the speed in which her broadside was pushed around the opposite way before sinking?



.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
'
Captain Lord stated that Californian remained at 42° 05'N, 50° 07'W from 10:21pm on the night of April 14th until 5:15am April 15th when he moved his engines for a short time. At 6:00am he pushed slowly through an icefield for half an hour to 6:30am before steaming south, meeting up with Mount Temple at 7:30am. He then goes on for about another half hour when turns northeastward toward Carpathia. He then reaches Carpathia at 8:30am. Lord also calculated that the floating wreckage from Titanic was in 41° 33'N, 50° 01'W at 11:20am based on his noontime location taken from a noon sighting of the sun.

Foweraker shows a south setting current of about a knot carrying the wreckage away from a point where Californian met Carpathia at 8:30am. He therefore placed Carpathia at 41° 36'N at 8:30am. Notice that he started Californian at 6:00am from a point 42° 02'N, 50° 07'W, 3 miles south of Lord's overnight position, even marking the chart with word DRIFT between the two locations. He shows Californian at about 42° 00'N, 50° 10'W when she clears the ice. Then he shows Californian reaching 41° 46'N, 50° 11'W, 2 miles due east of the SOS position, at 7:30am, with Mount Temple about 2 miles due south of the SOS position at that same time. He also shows Lord's small pink funneled steamer about 3 miles west of Mount Temple also at that time. In another chart, Foweraker identified that vessel as Almerian. By the way, the distance after clearing the ice to Californian's 7:30am position shown is 14 miles, consistent with Californian making just over 13 knots in one hour, as Lord claimed, plus 1 knot of south setting current after clearing the ice about 6:30am.

By the way, Foweraker placed the spot where Titanic struck the iceberg at 11:40pm at 41° 39'N, 50° 01'W, 3 miles due north of where he placed the wreckage at 8:30am. Give him some credit, he was only about 6 miles away and to the SW from the actual wreck site.

Now the next leg, from 7:30am to when Foweraker shows Californian turn toward Carpathia, is a distance of 10 miles, and the distance to where he shows Carpathia is about 4 miles due east of that. The total distance from 7:30am to reaching Carpathia at 8:30am as shown is abut 14 miles, and again consistent with Californian making just over 13 knots in one hour with just a little help from the current, including going at full speed through the ice to reach Carpathia as Lord had claimed he did.

To make everything fit neatly, however, Foweraker ignored evidence from Captain Lord that Californian had to steer northeastward across the ice to get to Carpathia. (Rostron said she was coming up from WSW true.) Foweraker shows her going due east. He also proposed a very slow south-setting current that took Californian as well as Titanic's wreckage 3 miles southward during the overnight hours. Foweraker also ignored evidence about the position of Mount Temple which showed she was on a line of longitude of 50° 09'W at around 7am, and that Mount Temple was about the same distance from Californian as she was from Carpathia at around 6:00am that morning.

According to Groves,
Californian had Carpathia abeam to port at or near to 7-45 am and the ship continued on her course for a little time until she turned hard left and headed straight for the Carpathia.
This substantiates the statement made by Captain Rostron who said:
"The first time that I saw the 'Californian' was at about eight o'clock on the morning of 15th April. She was then about five to six miles distant, bearing W.S.W. true, and steaming towards the 'Carpathia.

You quoted a position of 41-15 North- 50-20'West for Carpathia on April, 15. That had to have been her Noon position for that day, because Rostron stated: "I returned to New York at 8.50, I think it was, when I put on full speed to come back".
Full speed would have been 14 knots. Rostron followed the ice edge all the way round. The distance between the position you quoted and the wreck site is 42 nautical miles. I have extended the Fowraker Map and incorporated the foregoing evidence into it. The result suggests that Carpathia steamed south down the edge of the ice barrier...down the margin of the loose ice then turned west at about 41-15'North, 50-20'West.
if she did not do that, then she did not make her full speed of 14 knots between the wreck site and the position you quoted. Have a look.
Anallysis of the map..jpg
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Aaron, the break point on the surface of the earth is generally taken to be over the center of the boiler field. The boilers would have sunk at a relatively rapid rate and would not be affected much by currents during their path to the bottom of the sea. Not enough time to be scattered very far.
upload_2018-11-22_11-34-58.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Regarding the Titanic drifting with the current and swinging. Just to clarify, is it true that the Titanic would slowly swing and stop in the direction of the moving current? Would all ships in the vicinity point in the same direction with the current?

The stern is facing the opposite direction. Coincidence or did the current swing both sections in that direction?



View attachment 42885



Also if the bow had broken off and dove forwards (a considerable distance forward) in a straight line before it struck the sea bed, and the stern had remained afloat and drifted with the current towards the south east. Then is it possible to plot the exact position where she broke in two? e.g.



The bow moves forward and the stern is carried by the currents towards the south east before it sinks.


View attachment 42886

Is it possible to measure the distance of the stern from the position where she broke and calculate how fast the current was moving in the minutes or seconds that she remained afloat after breaking? Also would the speed in which the stern had rotated create an idea as to the speed in which her broadside was pushed around the opposite way before sinking?



.
Normally, a stopped ship, when swinging, will swing around the pivot point which, in such a case would be about midship. When she swings, a small "push" current is created on the bow and another push current is created at the stern. This is caused by the displaces water, filling in the hole left where the bow and stern once were. If the ship is swinging right, the push current is on the left-hand side of the bow and on the right-hand side of the stern.
A ship with superstructure arranged equally each side of her pivot point will keep swinging slowly until an external force such as wind alters the situation. The push current at each end is equal if the underwater parts at each end are equal as in a lifeboat. In a ship, the push is greater at the stern since more water is displaced at that end. However, this occurs only in still water and makes no allowance for the superstructure which may act as a dampening system.
When you add-in a current acting at right angles to the fore and aft line, the situation becomes complicated because now, a point of lateral resistance is set up. The water acts as a "buffer" impeding the down-current movement of the ship. If this PLR does not coincide with the pivot point then the ship will adopt a neutral position and stop swinging. It will not stop swinging with the current on either bow but will usually adopt a cross-current attitude and then all movement is drift in the direction of the flow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,387
673
188
South Wales UK
I have extended the Fowraker Map

Hi Jim,

That is a good start in considering the main Foweraker map, and very pleased you have looked at it.

No one, apart from perhaps Foweraker, suggests the map is accurate, as clearly it is not.

This may be a bit 'nuanced' but it is based or copied from what Captain Lord was asked to hand in to the British Inquiry because he was quoting from it whilst giving his evidence, and what Captain Lord sent to Foweraker in some apparently significant correspondence between the 2 individuals during the period after Captain Lord was dismissed/forced to resign from Leyland Line, and before he was later offered a job by Latta..

What is significant about the map is what it shows of Captain Lord's portrayal of things during this period, as opposed to what we can now piece together from far more sources than Foweraker had in 1912/3. (The actual relevant period is the later part of 1912).

Cheers,

Julian
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Could not agree more, Julian.

As far as I am concerned, it confirms the following:
A: The ice barrier was not running NW to SE. Otherwise, Carpathia could not have avoided steaming through it after she left the scene of the disaster.
B: There was no south-setting current, otherwise, Carpathia would only have covered a distance of 31.5 miles between 9am and Noon that day.
C: If Carpathia was at 41-33'North at 9am as suggested by Lord's evidence, then Californian made a speed of 23 knots from 7-30 am until 8 am.

The map shows Fowraker's interpretation of Lord's going south 10 miles and making a wide, circular sweep east, northeast, north and westward back to where the wreckage was. That is rediculous because Californian was underway at full speed from 9 am until 11-20 am. During that time, she would have created a track which was about 28 miles long...10 miles dues south, then 18 miles in a wide curve back to the start.

It also shows the wreckage located about 3.5 miles east of the hard edge of the ice barrier, not right up against it as it should have been if Californian left it at 50-01'West.

Great fun!
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Great fun!
Yes, that I could agree with.

The original Foweraker chart that was published in Nautical Magazine in his 'Miscarriage of Justice' article was a lot simpler than the one that I posted above. Foweraker took some artistic license when he created that one. He was a renowned artist by the way. The one in Nautical Magazine had simple lines and included locations for mystery ships X and Z and the yellow funneled boat seen in the morning. It was a far more simpler sketch which probably was like the one Lord himself put together. The ice field was a thin ribbon 2 to 3 miles wide running north to south with a slight turn to the NW on top and slight turn to the SE on the bottom. He placed Z in the area labeled LOOSE ICE & BERGS about 5 miles to the NW of where he placed Titanic for 11:40pm.The yellow funneled steamer was place about 8 miles south of Californian's 10.21pm position. Vessel X was shown about 5 miles SE of Californian's 10.21pm position for 11:40pm and then about 9 to 10 miles SW of Californian's 10.21pm position for 2.40am, on the other side of the ice field. The pink funneled steamer he labeled as Almerian, due west of the CQD position for 7.30am. The Nautical Magazine sketch was something like the one below which I just roughly sketched:
upload_2018-11-23_13-52-33.png
 

Mila

Member
Sep 28, 2016
1,097
78
123
Could not agree more, Julian.

As far as I am concerned, it confirms the following:
A: The ice barrier was not running NW to SE. Otherwise, Carpathia could not have avoided steaming through it after she left the scene of the disaster.
B: There was no south-setting current, otherwise, Carpathia would only have covered a distance of 31.5 miles between 9am and Noon that day.
C: If Carpathia was at 41-33'North at 9am as suggested by Lord's evidence, then Californian made a speed of 23 knots from 7-30 am until 8 am.

The map shows Fowraker's interpretation of Lord's going south 10 miles and making a wide, circular sweep east, northeast, north and westward back to where the wreckage was. That is rediculous because Californian was underway at full speed from 9 am until 11-20 am. During that time, she would have created a track which was about 28 miles long...10 miles dues south, then 18 miles in a wide curve back to the start.

It also shows the wreckage located about 3.5 miles east of the hard edge of the ice barrier, not right up against it as it should have been if Californian left it at 50-01'West.

Great fun!
Hi Jim,

There is absolutely no way to tell what the currents were doing.
All ships involved could have been affected by different currents especially Carpathia during April 14. At that time she was outside cold-water tongue.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,481
1,745
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Starting from an estimated position of the wreckage for 11:20am and working the drift of current backward toward the wreck site for about 2½ hours, we find that the wreckage at the time Carpathia departed would be close to 41° 37’ N, 50° 00’ W. After leaving the scene of the wreckage, Carpathia briefly headed southward for a couple of miles and then southeastward to parallel the eastern edge of the pack ice. Eventually they would turn southward and then southwestward to get around the southern extent of the pack before heading due west. In that wireless message to Haddock, Rostron said that the pack ice extended as far south as 41° 16’ N, and that bergs and floe ice could be expected as far eastward as 49° 30’ W.

From the derived location of the wreckage for 9am, Carpathia would have had to go 20 miles to the south in latitude to reach the southern extent of the ice. Notice that this distance happens to match the “20 miles of field ice with bergs amongst” mentioned by Captain Rostron in his wireless message to Cunard’s New York office. But the pack ice was trended southeastward from the area of wreckage as far as the eye could see according to Rostron. That means Carpathia had to first go southeastward before she could turn southwestward and then westward. Eventually, Carpathia was able to get around the ice to reach a latitude of 41°15’N, one mile south of the southernmost point of the heavy pack. At 2:30pm NYT, a little over 7½ hours after departing the wreckage, Carpathia was reported at 41° 15’ N, 51° 45’ W, where she was put on a course of 267° True direct for the Nantucket Shoals light vessel. We know this from another message from Rostron to Hddock: "Captain Olympic: 7.30 G.M.T. [2:30pm NYT] Lat. 41.15 north, long. 51.45 west. Am steering south 87 west, true. Returning to New York with Titanic’s passengers. Rostron." In addition to this, we have the position, 41° 15’ N, 50° 20’ W, given to IMM’s vice president Franklin by the Cunard Line. This position is exactly 64 nautical miles due east of the 2:30pm NYT position for Carpathia sent in the message from Rostron to Haddock. At her normal fullahead speed of 14 knots, Carpathia would have covered that distance in 4 hours 35 minutes. That means that Carpathia would have passed 41° 15’ N, 50° 20’ W at 9:55am NYT, about three hours after Carpathia departed the area of wreckage. On Carpathia, it would have been less than half an hour before local apparent noon which came at 10:22am NYT on that date and location.

The departure course for Carpathia begins at the derived location of the wreckage for 6:55am NYT at 41° 37’ N, 50° 00’ W. It then follows a path down along the eastern edge of the pack ice southeastward, then south and around southwestward, and then westward to 41° 15’ N, 50° 20’ W, the location given to IMM’s Philip Franklin, for 9:55am NYT. The distance along the route shown to that point is 42 nautical miles, a distance that Carpathia would have traveled in 3 hours at 14 knots, Carpathia’s normal full-ahead service speed. From there, Carpathia would head due west (270° True) for another 64 nautical miles reaching 41° 15’ N, 51° 45’ W at 2:30pm NYT, where a slight course change to 267° True would put her on a direct heading for the Nantucket Shoals light vessel.

According to James Bisset, Carpathia did not reach open water until sometime after they took sights of the sun at local apparent noon where they would have obtained their precise latitude. At local apparent noon April 15, 1912, Carpathia would have been crossing 50° 28’ W longitude at 10:22am NYT, about 3½ hours after departing the wreckage. According to Captain Rostron, Carpathia was traveling about 4 hours, a distance of 56 miles at 14 knots, before reaching open water. This means that they did not reach completely open water until passing longitude 50° 40’ W in latitude 41° 15’ N. According to a Hydrographic office report submitted by Californian’s Captain Lord, Californian did not reach completely open water after resuming her voyage to Boston until she reached longitude 50° 42’ W in latitude 41° 33’ N. Clearly, the sea was spotted with lots of icebergs and patches of ice floes over a very large area extending well to the west of that major field of pack ice that we have been so involved with.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,585
1,361
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hi Jim,

There is absolutely no way to tell what the currents were doing.
All ships involved could have been affected by different currents especially Carpathia during April 14. At that time she was outside cold-water tongue.

Hello Mila,

There is most certainly a way of knowing if there were currents in the area and the Carpathia is the best example of this.

If she had encountered a south setting current on her way to the rescue, she would have been set south and a little west by it and arrived at the eastern hard edge of the ice barrier, well to the south of where she met with Boxhall in boat 2. Instead, she was set to the east-noreastward.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads