Not to revisit an old argument, Jim, but Beauchamp, who was also in boiler room six tells a totally different story (which is why testimonial evidence is tricky.)In the engine room , the sequence of events were ; Stop..close all dampers in all stoke holds. Then impact, followed seconds later by catastrophic flooding of boiler room 6.
As I read Beauchamp's testimony he reports a thunderous crash, then the all stop order, then 5 minutes later the closing of the WTDs and finally flooding, which came mostly from beneath the floor.
Also, I can think of at least two people who were in the engine room after the impact who lived. They may not have been stationed there, but they were there. And Dillion was only in the engine room himself very briefly after the collision.
Your quoting of Dillion's testimony is certainly correct, however, reading further down in hist testimony, he also testifies to being nearly immediately sent with orders to open watertight doors. So the same critique applies--how exactly would he have perfect knowledge of the telegraph orders."3719. You just heard it ring. Then a few seconds after that you felt a slight shock?
3720. Was anything done to the engines? Did they stop or did they go on?
- They stopped.
3721. Was that immediately after you felt the shock or some little time after?
- About a minute and a half.
3722. Did they continue stopped or did they go on again after that?
- They went slow astern.
3723. How long were they stopped for before they began to go slow astern?
- About half a minute.
3724. For how long did they go slow astern?
- About two minutes.
3725. Two or three did you say?
- Two minutes.
3726. And then did they stop again?
3727. And did they go on again after that?
- They went ahead again.
3728. For how long?
- For about two minutes.
3729. Then did they stop the boat after that?
Furthermore, Dillion testifies to the following (which occurred after he assisted opening the doors)
So Dillion says the orders passed to the stokeholds--after he's left the engine room--are "keep the steam up." And this came after the order to "draw the fires."3755. Was an order given you with regard to the fires shortly after that?
3756. What order?
- "Keep steam up."
3757. How long was steam kept up? Can you say?
- I could not tell you how long it was kept up, but that was the order - "Keep steam up."
Incidentally, how would he know about the draw the fire orders at all, since he was in the engine room previously!
In any event, the relevant question is:
If Dillion is correct, and the engines were stopped for good when he says, what possible reason would there be to pass the orders "keep the steam up," which countermanded the original orders to draw the fires, other than actually steaming?
My understanding from lurking on this board was that Titanic did not actually need steam to run the electrical or the pumping system. So if this is true, at the very least you have to admit that asking for more steam after the Titanic has supposedly stopped for good seems kind of strange.
A couple of things here, as we've pointed out in the "grain of salt" thread, you really need to question witness recollection of time. Particularly when they are giving you exact times.Mr Harder, a passenger, told the US Inquiry that they were getting the boats ready at midnight. This confirms Lightollers story.
Now why on earth would they be getting boats ready while getting underway again?
Its much easier to judge time when people give you descriptions of what they are doing as time elapses. Incidentally, this is why I trust Beasley so much. Because instead of really giving us exact times, he tells us what he did, who he talked to, and what they talked about. That and it was written immediately after the wreck and not, say 25 years later.
So in this case, having not actually read his testimony, I wonder how certain Martin can be of the time. I also wonder what he means by, "getting ready." As Tad points out in Sam's latest anthology, the initial order to uncover the boats was precautionary. So if Martin is just talking about uncovering the boats, then I conceded 12:05 to be a perfect possible time. You do not, however, need to be stopped to merely uncover and provision the boats, do you?
And if 12:00 is an accurate time and Smith is uncovering the boats because he has concrete plans to lower them, then why does it take 25 (at the earliest possible time of 12:25) minutes for the actually loading process to begin?
I think Tad and David are on to something here. The officers did not know Titanic was fatally damaged possibly until the time the first boats get away. That makes it 45 minutes. During that time there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that points to the fact that in the first 20 or so minutes after the collision, it appeared as though the pumps were staying ahead of the flooding in key places.
If this is true, it is a perfectly reasonable assumption that Smith, possibly under the influence of Ismay, may have resumed steaming--slowly--most likely making for the closet port that could handle Titanic. In this case Halifax.
And as I've pointed out earlier there is a good deal of evidence that the ship did in fact resume making way--I say 10 minutes and you say 2.
In the above scenario, as David pointed out in his 2001 book, it might have been the case that Titanic was not fatally damaged, or could have floated much longer, but making way exacerbated the flooding/damage that suddenly the pumps were NOT keeping up with the flooding. Alternatively, the ship could have been doomed from the first, but it just wasn't realized until some point (around 12:20) after Titanic resumed her forward progress.
Incidentally, I just read part of David's 2001 book "Last Log of Titanic" a couple of weeks ago. When I read it, I was actually stunned how closely his theory (at the time) matched what Lightoller's granddaughter has recently claimed. Not that this proves anything, but it sure did give me goose bumps.
Did he? Reading Tad's portion of Sam's latest anthology sure made it seem, by using a plethora of eye witness statements, that he didn't. In fact, at one point--around midnight--Andrews is reported to have said to Smith something along the lines of "the first three are full," and this occurred below deck while Andrews and Smith were surveying the damage.So here we have a picture of a ship listing because she is catastrophically flooded in 5 compartments (Smith knew about this before midnight) yet we are being asked to believe she got underway again for 10 minutes? Really?
While not definitive, "the first 3," doesn't sound to me a whole lot like Smith knew about the extensive damage to all of the compartments. At least not the extent. It has been argued that damage in certain places was actually controlled, or reported to be controlled, by pumping. So if Smith knew about damage to 5 compartments, but thought that the damage in 2 of them was manageable (or even 1) he would still be operating on the assumption that Titanic would not founder.