Years ago at a Titanic conference in Toledo, Ohio I published a paper saying just about the same thing as B-rad -- that the captain's CQD coordinates are essentially "true midnight" when April 14th day/date would have changed to April 15th. The captain obviously wanted to use wireless to get potential rescue ships heading his way. The only set of coordinates he had to hand was the ship's predicted midnight position, so it appears he used it. If so, this puts
Captain Smith 'way ahead of his time in understanding how to use wireless communications. Getting ships moving in his general direction was of utmost importance. Later, Titanic could issue a revised and more accurate set of coordinates to guide rescue ships to the scene.
Boxhall's so-called "more accurate" set of coordinates is not what he or history has claimed. He said he worked it up from scratch, but simple observation shows that was a lie. All the Fourth Officer did was to move the midnight coordinates on the ship's reciprocal course by 20 minutes.
I've discussed this in many different threads over the years. And, I've pointed out that a DR track starting at "The Corner (42 North; 47 West) on a course of 266 true at 22 knots provides some interesting insights into
Captain Smith's intentions. To wit: A line from Smith's CQD position through
Boxhall's crosses the 266 course at 41 51 N; 49 48 W. That just happens to be the predicted DR locaton of Titanic at 11:30 in unaltered April 14th time. The direction of the line between CQD coordinates is 255 steaming west, or 075 in the reciprocal direction backwards. The difference between 266, the original course, and 255 is 11 degrees or as close to one compass point (a point equals 11.25 degrees) as could be read on Titanic's compasses.
Bluntly, the numbers indicate Captain Smith actually turned south, away from the ice field at 11:30 unaltered time April 14th or 11:06 on crew clocks. Note this coincides perfectly with IMM/White Star rules requiring half-hourly compass checks. On a cold night a captain might be forgiven for combining a check with a course change instead of sending an officer and QM to the windy standard platform twice in rapid succession.
So, everything works if the starting point is 42 N; 47 W. It is highly doubtful Titanic went "dead nuts" through that point. Unfortunately, however, we can't work up the coordinates when the ship turned "The Corner" or where it made that turn simply because the one key fact needed was conveniently forgotten that night. I find it extremely strange that none of the surviving officers -- especially Boxhall -- were able to provide the coordinates of the turn. Without those coordinates all of the educated guesses about speed, distance, and course prior to making "The Corner" are quite meaningless because they lie on an endless line with no cross reference to properly fix Titanic's location. Now, before fangs and teeth come at me, let me reiterate that the starting point of 42 N; 47 W is a bogus as well. The difference is that it works both on paper and within the context of what the officers said took place on the bridge prior to the accident.
We know that Lowe did not complete working out what are commonly referred to as "7:30 stars." He left the task for Boxhall. Perforce, this means the 8:00 p.m. ship's position required by IMM/WSL rules was a "best guess" based on whatever dead reckoning was being kept. Once Captain Smith came on duty Boxhall's little free time was taken up by helping the Captain plot ice. To my eye, the evidence indicates "7:30 stars" were put off in favor of learning as much as possible about the ice.
The apparent 11 degree turn is also curious. It would only take the ship some 4 miles south for each hour of steaming. That hardly seems enough to avoid an ice field. It would be explainable, however, if Smith believed his ship had steamed well south of "The Corner" as some officers alluded to. If so, a small change might have been used to keep safe distance from the ice while not letting it get out of sight over the horizon. Unless someone can ring him up on his mobile, we'll never know.
-- David G. Brown
I've included a report I had written a long while back, and haven't read until now, and is not edited, but still relates what it needs to.
