Reversing Engines, Unfair Criticism of Officer Murdoch


Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Seems a bit odd for Arun to ask to shut down a "pointless thread" he jumped on and drove forward...

Some of us know what Jim and Sam are sparring over...

The Moderators have shut down/locked virtually all discussion over The Californian, but The Californian is why I continue to pay my subs on here; and the Moderators's clear statement on all this would be welcome - indeed from PH himself, as I am paying for this site via my annual subs.

I know that the Moderators and PH don't accord with my view by inference. They might take the view that certain of us ought to be banned and our subs no longer wanted for dare to mention The Californian or matters pertaining to it. Or they might just to decide to ban Jim Currie in isolation, which personally, and as much as I vehemently disagree with him on some matters, I don't support.

Much of the stuff on this thread of recent has really been about which heading Titantic ended up - after hard a stern, hard a port, ring down telegraph to engine room, stop engines, boiler rooms then stop (feeding the boilers and shut the boiler dampers).

I have not the slightest doubt Boxhall was wrong, and Titanic ended up heading northwards. This is what it is all about. I have lots of questions that I have myself formed an opinion upon as to what Murdoch did before and just after the collision.

I am being quite frank here; I don't have an agenda, my 'not the slightest doubt' is open to persuasion, and I am open to other views and debate over all this. But if you come to this with an agenda over The Californian, then state it, then debate. Put your colours to your mast!
I agree wtiht you Julian and your sentiments. As you very well know, the Californian affair is one of my main interests. I pursue it, not to demonstrate my skills, or convey superiority, but in the hope that someday, I can use my skills and knowledge to clear a man's name. Also that he may be properly remembered in history as the master of the only other ship that actually attended the disaster scene and thereafter, searched the area before leaving it. If I can persuade you and others of this then my goal will be achieved. However, if you are right, I am only too willing to be proved so by constructive argument. supported by irrevocable evidence... most certainly not by the simple declarations of "I believe and "I am of the opinion of." The expression "brick wall" has been used. the two quoted expressions are the key stones of such a wall.

Keep safe everyone and keep everyone else safe in doing so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
I heard that The Queen Mary is the last one functioning Ocean Liner. I'd make my company, (not go for the Titanic, however, that seems to fail every time someone tries..) Maybe the R.M.S Bismark, with her White Star Line painted funnels. That would be moderately sized.

View attachment 49961
A wee story about the above ship, Cam
I was born about 2 miles from where that picture was taken...across the River Clyde at the mouth of the White Cart river. The River Clyde is very narrow aat that point so because of the length of the Queens, they were both launched into the mouth of The Cart... directly opposite. My Dad took me as a wee baby to see the launch and I was nearly washed out of my baby chair.
Many years later, as an Underwriter's Newbuilding Surveyor In the 1980s.I was witness to one of the last launches from that self-same launchway... Then, it was of the Rowan Drilling Company moblie Jack-up Drill Barge "Rowan Gorilla 4" I have a pic somewhere and will post it
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Arun Vajpey

Member
Apr 21, 2009
1,761
519
248
64
You have a very short memory, Arun...I do not. Allow me to remind you of the last bit of your post No.308
" I know that these points have been argued to the death and I doubt if there is any more point going on. I wish the mods would close this thread."
No Jim, I have an excellent memory. That is one of my strong points. I know I wished that the mods would close this thread but if you had thought about it a bit, you would have realised that my last post was a way of admonishing myself for wishing that in the first place while responding to Julian's statement.

Perhaps, I should have phrased it as "Who am I to have asked that the mods close this or any other thread?" which is what I meant. In any case, I am tired of this; feel free to pat yourself on the back if you wish and have a dram of Highland Park. I am out of this particular line of argument.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
No Jim, I have an excellent memory. That is one of my strong points. I know I wished that the mods would close this thread but if you had thought about it a bit, you would have realised that my last post was a way of admonishing myself for wishing that in the first place while responding to Julian's statement.

Perhaps, I should have phrased it as "Who am I to have asked that the mods close this or any other thread?" which is what I meant. In any case, I am tired of this; feel free to pat yourself on the back if you wish and have a dram of Highland Park. I am out of this particular line of argument.
Bi
 

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
1,038
139
128
15
Maryland, USA
A wee story about the above ship, Cam
I was born about 2 miles from where that picture was taken...across the River Clyde at the mouth of the White Cart river. The River Clyde is very narrow aat that point so because of the length of the Queens, they were both launched into the mouth of The Cart... directly opposite. My Dad took me as a wee baby to see the launch and I was nearly washed out of my baby chair.
Many years later, as an Underwriter's Newbuilding Surveyor In the 1980s.I was witness to one of the last launches from that self-same launchway... Then, it was of the Rowan Drilling Company moblie Jack-up Drill Barge "Rowan Gorilla 4" I have a pic somewhere and will post it
That's amazing! Thank you so much for that story, Jim. You have some supreme bragging rights ;)
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
That's amazing! Thank you so much for that story, Jim. You have some supreme bragging rights ;)
When you continuously brag, Cameron, eventually those around you have heard all your brags and they no longer become something to brag about. I don't brag...I merely pass on information that others who were born after me might find to be of interest, amusing or educational. The last, sadly does not seem to work in some cases. However, in that case, I do not give a fish's flatulence. ;) ;) A loss for one is usually someone else's gain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
1,038
139
128
15
Maryland, USA
When you continuously brag, Cameron, eventually those around you have heard all your brags and they no longer become something to brag about. I don't brag...I merely pass on information that others who were born after me might find to be of interest, amusing or educational. The last, sadly does not seem to work in some cases. However, in that case, I do not give a fish's flatulence. ;) ;) A loss for one is usually someone else's gain.
Just Cam, if you wish. I get your meaning. I think its great you are willing to pass on info--I don't know anyone my age as interested in Titanic as I am. Wish that wasn't true, but anyway..

"Fish Flatulence" :p
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,087
1,402
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
For what its worth.

Forum threads seldom have to do with the thread title itself. This one has to do with what actions were taken, by who, and when at the time the iceberg was first sighted. If participants in those events were later criticised for their actions it is because of what some people claimed they heard and saw at the time. If you read the very first post, it is clear that this thread is not about Murdoch at all. It's about the claims made by several survivors who said they were there at the critical time.

The same holds true for most of those Californian threads. For the most part, they have nothing to do with Capt. Lord being blamed for what happened to Titanic or the loss of life that followed. They have to do with trying to find out what really happened that night, and why Californian stood still despite seeing rockets fired in the night.

As far as irrevocable evidence, the only irrevocable evidence that I know of is the wreck and it's location.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Mar 22, 2003
6,087
1,402
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
I am being quite frank here; I don't have an agenda, my 'not the slightest doubt' is open to persuasion, and I am open to other views and debate over all this. But if you come to this with an agenda over The Californian, then state it, then debate. Put your colours to your mast!
Julian, I believe that was clearly done in post #681 above. The problem is that once you have an agenda such as clearing someone's name, then you start looking for what you think had to have been, instead of what was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
1,038
139
128
15
Maryland, USA
Had Titanic been put Full Astern, after going Full Ahead, what would have been the effects on her structure? Besides the Bending and flexing Jim described.
 
Last edited:

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Julian, I believe that was clearly done in post #681 above. The problem is that once you have an agenda such as clearing someone's name, then you start looking for what you think had to have been, instead of what was.
That may be your method. Sam, but it is not mine. Allow me to explain my interest in the SS California, which began before you and I started crossing
swords. Thereafter, I will illustrate my methodology

Until I joined this site and long after I had left the marine world. I had never heard of the Californian, nor had I watched any of the movies about Titanic. I am not a movie or TV buff. However, after reading the transcribed evidence, I read the Final Reports of both Inquiries. I could not believe what I was reading. I had never before read such a blatant distortion and manipulation of evidence. Then it was, that my interest became focused. I delved deep into the case, treating it as I would have done with other cases in the past. i.e without prejudice.
My method was, and still is as follows:
Read the case completely and carefully. If you understand what you are reading and compare it with established fact, you will very quickly detect faults and inconsistencies. Look for motive. Do not speculate. Read it again and again, carefully gathering all the available, relative evidence, Then sift through all of it very carefully over and over, collecting and noting all corroborative evidence. Do not ignore contrary evidence.
You only have enough to clear someone's name if on balancing the evidence available, the balance of every bit of the available evidence weighs in favour of the accused. I believe that n the case of the Californian, it most certainly does.
Only those who had a self- interest in defending the Captain of the Californian back in 1912 would have had a motive for supporting him other than simply telling the truth as they remembered it. There were no such persons in the crew of the Californian. The idea postulated on these and other pages that the motivation for lying was to remain in employment or that any Captain terrorised his officers into lying illustrates a lack of understanding of the mind of a mariner
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
For what its worth.

Forum threads seldom have to do with the thread title itself. This one has to do with what actions were taken, by who, and when at the time the iceberg was first sighted. If participants in those events were later criticised for their actions it is because of what some people claimed they heard and saw at the time. If you read the very first post, it is clear that this thread is not about Murdoch at all. It's about the claims made by several survivors who said they were there at the critical time.

The same holds true for most of those Californian threads. For the most part, they have nothing to do with Capt. Lord being blamed for what happened to Titanic or the loss of life that followed. They have to do with trying to find out what really happened that night, and why Californian stood still despite seeing rockets fired in the night.

As far as irrevocable evidence, the only irrevocable evidence that I know of is the wreck and it's location.
Perhaps you should consult the thread-starter?
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,087
1,402
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Read the case completely and carefully. If you understand what you are reading and compare it with established fact, you will very quickly detect faults and inconsistencies. Look for motive. Do not speculate. Read it again and again, carefully gathering all the available, relative evidence, Then sift through all of it very carefully over and over, collecting and noting all corroborative evidence. Do not ignore contrary evidence.
Motive is known only by the one who was motivated. One can only speculate on someone else's motives. Look at the actions taken. That is usually easier to sort out when all the evidence and analysis is considered. In the case of Californian, the actions or inactions that were taken are very clear. Unfortunately, it's the actions or inactions taken that lead to the speculation that falls out.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,779
970
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Motivation is but one clue looked-for by an investigator. By far the most important part of the work is to collect as much evidence as possible which is directly or even remotely connected to the case.
Speculation regarding the motive or motives of an individual witness and consequential results thereof is only necessary if the investigator is metaphorically working in the dark or half light and working to wards a light he or she has left in the window before starting out on the investigation . In most cases such speculation has its roots in a pre-conceived judgement. We have seen and can read the outcome of that method when we read the judgement of Lord Mersey at No.5 in his Final report.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,229
621
188
South Wales UK
I think that's a bit 'naff', Jim.

I've mentioned before on another thread your alias on another site some years ago supporting a new online book by someone else apparently!

Anyway, back to the thread.

Cam, I would highly recommend you buy off Amazon Sam's book 'Strangers on the horizon'. Page 114 and the proceeding chapter is all you could ever want over all this. That chapter is so significant and a masterpiece, and so is the next chapter!

(As a counter balance, 'B-rad' - Brad Payne on here has a paper that is well worth studying on all this).

There is not much about those involved speaking about such matters recorded. You ought to be able to find Boxhall's 1962 BBC radio interview. Sadly, I still do not have the recordings of the taped interviews with Captain Lord made in 1961, though the transcripts have been available for quite a few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Similar threads

Similar threads