Jim, as I've already told you I believe you. Your explanation of the swinging appears to be much more plausible than "airs and calms" Samuel allege.If there had been any edy current, this would have distorted the rate and direction of swing...it did not.
However, you correctly said that the rate of the swinging caused by the Californian's created currents should have been constant.
Let's see if it was constant.
In his affidavit Mr. Stone said that the Californian was heading E.N.E at 12:08 a.m. and W.N.W. at 4 a.m.
It means that for around 4 hours the Californian rotated for 225 degrees, with the speed around .9 degree per minute.
At 3:20 a.m. the Californian was heading West. So from 3:20 a.m. to 4 a.m. the Californian rotated for 22.5 with the speed around .56 degree per minute.
At 1:50 a.m. the Californian was heading W.S.W. So from 12:08 a.m. to 1:50 a.m. the Californian rotated for 180 degrees with the speed around 1.76 degree per minute.
Then there's the testimony of the Captain Lord
6709. Then you stopped and reversed engines, and what did you do then?
- I turned round and headed E.N.E. by the compass. I twisted her head to E.N.E.
6710. Where had you been heading before?
- S. 89, W. true.
6711. You turned to E.N.E. by the compass?
- Yes, by the compass.
Then Mr. Groves testified that at the time he first noticed the steamer (around 1 hour after the Californian was stopped and heading E.N.E. ) the Californian was heading N.E.
Could you please explain how come that the Californian turned from E.N.E. to N.E. and then to E.N.E. again and how you could explain that from 12:08 a.m. to 4 a.m. her swinging rate was anything but constant.
I am more than ready to accept your explanation of the swinging if you could explain the issues I pointed out.
I think it is an interesting challenge for you because you were the Marine accident investigator.