Stanley Lord guilty as charged


Mike Spooner

Member
Jan 31, 2018
823
117
53
Your calculation is based on standard barometric pressure, air temperature and a flat calm sea. The barometer was very high the temperature was almost at zero and there would have been a long, low swell in the area. These factors would when on the crest of a swell, increase the visibility range of lights.which means the range of visibility was greater than normal.
You also assume that Rostron was not on the raised platform at the rear of his bridge or that in fact, the lookouts spotted the green light first then Rostron and his men saw it subsequently because they knew exactly where to look for it.
I suggest you look at the numbers once again.
If we accept Rostron's given position at 00-40 am and an estimated average speed of 15 knots, then Carpathia covered a total of 30 miles in those 2 hours. However, she did not cover it in the intended direction of North 52 West, but made good a course of about North 45 West.
By calculation, Carpathia was 48.62 miles South East of the sinking Titanic when she turned. If she covered 30 miles toward the sinking vessel by 2-40 am then at that time, she had 18.62 miles still to run on a course of North West until she arrived beside Boxhall and his green lights.
If Rostron was up in the observation platform then his height of eye was at least 70 feet.
View attachment 45811
And if Boxhall was standing in the same position as was Lowe in boat 14 with arm raised, and the pyro-stick held as high as possible,then the center of the flare would have been about 12 feet above sea level. In such a case, the normal extreme range would have been about 15 miles. However, it was not a normal night. The barometer was extremely high and the temperature abnormally low. These would add at least a couple of miles onto the extreme sighting range. Then, of course, there is the possibility of a speed a little more than 15 knots helped by a push from the North Atlantic Current. One thing is for absolute sure...Carpathia was not influenced by a south setting current.
View attachment 45809
Great picture and photo, how did you Jim!
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,207
666
213
Funchal. Madeira
Jim, were some companies shall we say, more puritanical than others with regards to the crew having a drink ?

When my Grandad was with the BI in the fifties, he says they were allowed to drink watered down beer in the mess room, it was pretty weak stuff though. The officers and engineers on BI ships often ate in the saloon with the passengers and were allowed one glass of spirits at dinner.

The surviving crew of the Titanic were adamant at the enquiries that there was no drinking allowed at all on their late ship, whilst Captain Barr of the Mount Temple (a CP ship) testified at the enquiries that he had issued rum to his firemen to spur them on during their abortive rescue mission.
I can't speak for other Companies, Seamus, but the Friday Bond opening , the free tot of rum a week and the self-regulating system seem to have been the norm for other ranks on MN cargo vessels way back then.
However, I did serve on Anchor Line passenger vessels. There, the junior officers shared a table in the main dining saloon for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Alcohol was not served to them. The seniors each had a table with invited guest passengers. However Officers on daytime Watch were allowed to have a pint brought to them in their cabin by the Officer's steward... one pint...and as a relaxer at the end of a 4 hour stint on their feet on the bridge. You must remember that in those days, there was no air conditioning and an afternoon Watch on the bridge during Reed Sea passage was a real swelterer and there was no respite at night. Consequently, dehydration was a real problem. (not that booze was the answer but I'm sure that a nice long cool one went down a treat). I remember feeling so sorry for the poor bloody passengers way down on E deck at sea level... particularly in bad weather when they couldn't open a port to get a breath of cool,fresh air.
Officers did not openly imbibe but usually ordered a "docking-bottle" of spirit the day before arrival at a port in which they were to spend some time or from which they were going on leave.
Ooops! sorry for "swinging the lantern":cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,207
666
213
Funchal. Madeira
Sorry Jim I should of said. How did do you it! Ever thought becoming an artist!
Actually, painting and drawing was, for a very long time until the advent of the internet, my main hobby. This is one of may favourites... I did this many years ago. it is of my first 2 dogs, Rigel and Suki .
Rigel and Suki.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Mar 22, 2003
5,657
928
273
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Then, of course, there is the possibility of a speed a little more than 15 knots helped by a push from the North Atlantic Current.
If Carpathia was at the position Rostron thought she was when she turned around, then she would have been about 47 miles from the wreck site and about 3½ hours away at an overall average speed made good of about 13.5 knots. She would not have been helped by the NA current but rather hindered. At forced draft, she was realistically making about 15 knots through the water.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,207
666
213
Funchal. Madeira
If Carpathia was at the position Rostron thought she was when she turned around, then she would have been about 47 miles from the wreck site and about 3½ hours away at an overall average speed made good of about 13.5 knots. She would not have been helped by the NA current but rather hindered. At forced draft, she was realistically making about 15 knots through the water.
As I said, Sam,. the calculated distance from where Rostron turned was 48.6 miles.. that is by Mercator Sailing calculation.
When he turned and since he was heading N 52 W, he would have had the North Atlantic Current acting on his port bow. At that place, it usually sets about ENE at 1 knot or a little more. In fact, if you care to plot it, you will find that if Rostron average 15 knots from the turn, and made good NW True, he would have been set about 3 miles eastward and 3 miles to the north east i,e, the current was at that time, setting NE at about 1 knot at that place.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,086
490
93
South Wales UK
Hi Jim,

I like all this Carpathia stuff!

Would you concede that Rostron mucked up his quoted "2.40 am" sighting of the first green flare as being impossible, and that Dave Gittins' theory that Rostron was then 2 hours 40 minutes into the rescue run, and misinterpreted this as 2.40am is a very likely explanation?

This would also explain the timing of Cottam sending out a message from Carpathia, picked up by the Caronia and Durrant on The Mount Temple of a warning that Carpathia was firing rockets.

I didn't know the Carpathia had an elevated platform above and behind the bridge; and if it did, there is no evidence it was used that night.

Cheers,

Julian
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,086
490
93
South Wales UK
Something quite interesting happened in The Grenfell Tower Inquiry this morning as a result of 'with it' Counsel and Solicitors taking a belated proactive stance for their clients and witnesses in Phase 2 - either their witnesses would refuse to answer questions that might self incriminate them in respect of potential criminal proceedings, or alternatively an undertaking was sought from the Attorney General that any evidence they gave that was self incriminating would not be used in any future criminal proceedings (this also extends to quasi criminal proceedings of the Health and Safety Executive that could result in criminal type convictions).

The law has pretty much remained unchanged on all this for Inquiries in the UK for over a 100 years, and certainly was unchanged at the time of the Titanic British Inquiry in 1912.

I was immediately reminded of the very difficult position Captain Lord was placed in at the British Inquiry, and the failure to be warned of all this, and Stone, (so far as we know - though it just possible Robertson Dunlop did ask Captain Lord beforehand whether he wished to avail himself of not self incriminating himself - though there is no evidence of this). Captain Lord could have been subject to criminal sanctions in subsequent proceedings.

It is a most interesting legal conundrum... The Board of Trade officials advised (variously) (immediately after the British Inquiry Report was published) Sydney Buxton President for The Board of Trade (Cabinet Minister) not to institute further proceedings against Captain Lord because 'he had suffered enough' though more telling he had not been warned by Lord Mersey of his right not to answer questions that might be self incriminating.

I cannot find anything in The Grenfell Tower Inquiry proceedings where the Chairman has warned witnesses not to self incriminate themselves and to avail themselves of this legal privilege - the omission from the Chair is exactly the same as Lord Mersey's silence on the matter in 1912.

Curious?

Cheers,

Julian
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,102
621
143
England
Hi Julian.

Your last post got me thinking and I looked up the inquiry report for the loss of the Herald of Free Enterprise. It came to mind because, on this occasion, as a result of a Coroner's inquest subsequent to the Wreck Commissioners investigation, legal charges of Manslaughter by gross negligence were brought against several individuals.

The Wreck Commissioners report has this to say on statutory offences. (I raised a small smile at the fact one of the lawyers is called Mr Stone!!)

22. Was a statutory offence Committed?

22.1 Mr. Stone, who appeared on behalf of the Department, said, on instructions, that it is not the intention of the Department to prosecute anyone responsible for the fact that the HERALD
went to sea with her bow doors open. There is implicit in that statement the suggestion that a statutory offence may have been committed. Mr. Steel who appeared on behalf of the Secretary of State, submitted that if a Ro-Ro ferry goes to sea with its bow doors open, that
is not an offence under the Merchant Shipping Act 1979 or under the Merchant Shipping (Load Lines) Act 1967 or any other statute. Mr. Stone invited the Court to express its opinion as to whether that view is valid.

22.2 Neither the Master nor the Owners of the HERALD have been prosecuted. The offence which the Department has in mind has not been formulated.

Accordingly neither the Master nor the Owners have been heard “in their own defence”, save for some general submissions by Mr. Clarke on behalf of the Owners. Accordingly it would be quite unacceptable for this Court to express the view that a statutory offence was committed. The Court is able to deal
with this question on this occasion because it is clearly of opinion that no statutory offence has been committed.

There are however, four main reasons why it is undesirable that such a
question should be raised before a Court of Formal Investigation in the future.

(1) It is not the function of this Court to answer hypothetical questions.

(2) It is not the function of this Court to express its opinion upon a question of construction of a statute, which does not arise in the course of the Investigation.

(3) If this Court were to express its opinion upon the construction of a statute that view would not be binding upon a Magistrate’s Court.

(4) Finally, it might be inferred from a refusal by this Court to answer the question that a statutory offence had in fact been committed.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,086
490
93
South Wales UK
Hi Rob,

Many thanks for your considered reply.

Back in 1912, there were various offences that Captain Lord could have been potentially 'tried' with ie put on trial in a Criminal Court or quasi Criminal Court. Some of this is quite complicated and convoluted as to what the British Inquiry could have gone on to 'judge' as was discussed between the Attorney General Sir Rufus Isaacs, and Lord Mersey during the hearing; it is quite complicated.

It would appear that as a Wreck Commisioner's Court, as originally constituted, Lord Mersey could make findings against Captain Lord. This was not done by Lord Mersey. It would appear he could have done so, had the correct procedure been adopted at the time when Captain Lord gave his testimony, and then the debacle of the amendment to Question 24 pretty ruled out anything further being decided against him in the British Inquiry. These are legal niceties that are not easily understood.

However, that did not rule out further proceedings with criminal sanction under the Merchant Shipping Act, including imprisonment and hard labour.

It potentially could have happened.

It was in the mind of Sydney Buxton, President of The Board of Trade, as he circulated a 'memo' to this effect immediately after The British Inquiry report was published.

However, wiser counsels subsequently prevailed.

All fascinating stuff!

You could take a view, as others have done, that the British Inquiry deliberately fudged it's own proceedings over The Californian; and the amendment of Question 24 was a clever device. It was initially disastrous for Captain Lord, but you could construct an argument that it ultimately protected Captain Lord from further prosecution, and him potentially ending up in prison.

Lots was happening in 1912, and one can see undercurrents of saving the face and reputation of the British Merchant Navy. And perhaps Sir Rufus Isaacs quickly wanting to draw a veil over the whole matter deliberately so far as The Californian was concerned, and his own deliberate mistakes that resulted in no further proceedings... Lawyers can be very clever sometimes!

Cheers,

Julian
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,207
666
213
Funchal. Madeira
Hi Jim,

I like all this Carpathia stuff!

Would you concede that Rostron mucked up his quoted "2.40 am" sighting of the first green flare as being impossible, and that Dave Gittins' theory that Rostron was then 2 hours 40 minutes into the rescue run, and misinterpreted this as 2.40am is a very likely explanation?

This would also explain the timing of Cottam sending out a message from Carpathia, picked up by the Caronia and Durrant on The Mount Temple of a warning that Carpathia was firing rockets.

I didn't know the Carpathia had an elevated platform above and behind the bridge; and if it did, there is no evidence it was used that night.

Cheers,

Julian
Hello Julian, forgive my tardiness in answering the above. Lots on my mind at the moment.

Anyway... I find the evidence of the Mount Temple and that of the Carpathia to be rather "murky" to say the least.

As to the sighting of Boxhall's flares at 2-40 am?... I say that it was perfectly feasible! Here is why.

If Carpathia's position at 12-45 am on the morning of April 15 was approximately correct. then, by calculation, at that moment she had 46.43 miles to steam to be over the wreck.
If Titanic sank more or less straight down, then Boxhall and the survivors were very close to that position when she did.
We have no idea what speed Carpathia was making. What we do know is that Rostron expected to cover a distance of 58 miles in a straight line in about 3 hours 50 minutes - to 4-30 am. Which means he expected Carpathia to steam at an average speed of about 15 knots. This suggests that by 2-40 pm, Carpathia would have been about 16.5 miles away from Boxhall in boat 2 at that time.
As shown in an earlier mock-up by me, the center of a green flare (the brightest part) held aloft by a man standing on the stern platform of a lifeboat could easily be as much as 12+ feet above sea level. This means that the brightest part of it would have an extreme horizon range of 4 miles. The "loom" would have been visible much farther on such a dark, clear, early morning as it was at the time.

Carpathia had a normal enclosed bridge similar to the Titanic. It was about 65 feet above the sea, The eyes of an average height observer standing on it would have been about 70 feet above the sea. However, the eyes of an average man standing on the Upper bridge platform of Carpathia would be about 80 feet above sea level. This would mean that his horizon was 10.3 miles away. Here is a little bit of fun I had with her when alongside at new York
01_rms_carpathia.jpg

Carpathia's bridge cab was about 70 feet above sea level as were the lite Xs you see on the wharf roof.

Both of these maximum visibility ranges...of the green flares and of the observer on Carpathia... are based on normal conditions of refraction (barometer of 999.0 mb and Air Temp of 10 C). However, there was no wind and the barometer was very high and the temperature, very low. Meteorology for Seamen tells us
Looming 2020-02-06 001.jpg

Consequently, there is no reason not to believe that someone on Rostron's upper bridge saw that very bright green magnesium flare at such an extreme range of well over 14.3 miles.( Flare plus Carpathia ranges) Certainly, in this case, over 16 miles.
Incidentally, it would be ridiculous for Rostron not to have positioned himself at the highest point on his ship where he could see at maximum range, yet be available for consultation with any member of his crew...in particular his W/O.

We know from the PV of Mount Temple that Rostron was already firing signals at 3-11 am. He would begin firing the moment he was sure they would be visible to an observer at the extreme range of the signal. We also know from the evidence of Stone and Gibson that was close to 30 miles.
Consequently, Rostron would assume that his signals would be seen when his ship was within 30 miles of the sinking Titanic (which he believed was 58 miles away at the start of his run.) Consequently 2 hours into the run. at about 2-45 am, Rostron would think that he still had 28 miles to run. Logically, there would be no point in firing before that time.

As for the sighting of the green light?

Rostron would consult a book to find the then current White Star Night Signals. He would find :
1. A Green pyrotechnic light followed quickly by a rocket throwing two Green stars, the rocket being followed by another Green pyrotechnic light.
Off Browhead, off the Old Head of Kinsale, and off Queenstown Harbour, in the county of Cork.
2. Two Green pyrotechnic lights exhibited simultaneously. Anywhere within British jurisdiction and on the high seas.

He would also know that Roman Candles could rise to as much as 150 feet above the sea which was over 200 feet above the sea if fired from the bridge of a ship like Titanic. His own ship was supplied with such signals. Consequently he would be justified in thinking that Titanic was still afloat.

There is much more to question. For instance:

Mount Temple' s Operator heard the amended distress call at 10 25 pm EST... 3-25 am GMT. Yet, he did not hear any communication between Carpathia and Titanic for another 10 minutes... at 10-35 pm E$T 3-35 am GMT/ Considering that Carpathia was less than 50 miles south of the sinking ship.., and Carpathia's Operator was listening for a call from another ship... how on earth was not he blasted out of his chair by Titanic's call for help for at least 20 minutes before they first exchanged signals?
Come to think of it... how was it so difficult for the Operator on Titanic to read the Operator on MT when the latter was a mere 78 or so miles to the westward?


As you say : "I like all this Carpathia stuff"
;)
















What you should all be asking is: "why. if Carpathia was so close to the sinking Titanic. her W Operator did not have his ears blasted off by the latter's call for help? and why it was 10 minutes after the corrected distres p
 

AlexP

Member
May 23, 2019
456
21
18
Usa
However, there was no wind and the barometer was very high and the temperature, very low. Meteorology for Seamen tells us
looming-2020-02-06-001-jpg.jpg

Consequently, there is no reason not to believe that someone on Rostron's upper bridge saw that very bright green magnesium flare at such an extreme range of well over 14.3 miles.( Flare plus Carpathia ranges) Certainly, in this case, over 16 miles.
Well, Jim, than the alleged looming worked only one way, because nobody from 700+ survivors saw either Carpathia’s rockets or Carpathia’s company signals or Carpathia’s navigational lights for another 20 minutes or so. Not to say that under looming conditions the people from the Californian should have been able to see the green flares too.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,086
490
93
South Wales UK
Hi Jim,

Yes, it is interesting stuff about the Carpathia.

I don't have the plans for the Carpathia. I have never seen mention before of Carpathia having an upper bridge platform. Bissett and Rostron never mentioned it, and described being on the bridge on the rescue run, not an upper platform above the bridge.

I am not qualified to comment on the workings of the Marconi sets, except generally, and in respect of the testimonies etc.

I think Sam covers the timings on the Carpathia quite specifically and in detail in a section in his new book.

I did a bit of research on the Marconi sets today to deal with something else (what is left on Titanic to recover) so I am more up to speed on all this today.

Neither Durrant or Cottam mention Titanic's messages coming in like a blast or bang or very loud via the clockwork magnetic detector to their headsets. Evans in the USA says Titanic's reply to him at 11pm to stop transmitting "came in with a bang".

The Carpathia had an older Marconi set than The Californian; however this would appear to affect only the transmission of messages - assuming Cottam had it all set up correctly anyway. The Californian had a relatively new installation, limited only by a 60 volt ship's supply to the DC motor for the AC generator.

(The Californian's Marconi set seems to have worked very well if you examine message records).

All the Marconi sets would have had a standard clockwork magnetic detector for receiving messages, limited, I presume, only by the quality of the antennae.

On a quite separate matter of Groves visiting Evans at 12.15am and picking up and listening to the headset, my understanding today is that if the receiver was in working mode, there would have been a background 'hiss' or electrical noise all the time.

Evans and Groves are quite clear that Groves switched the light on.

Groves could see the clockwork magnetic detector. He ought to have noticed that the 2 ebonite discs were not rotating (one had a white handle for manual winding - presumably whilst the clockwork was wound up if it had run down during a message), and if the key for winding acted directly, it would also slowly be turning.

Therefore, it seems to me both that Groves had never listened to the headset before, as he failed to take note of the lack of background noise in the headset, and he had no knowledge as to how the clockwork magnetic detector worked at all.

One can extrapolate all sorts of things from the above.

On another matter, I was surprised how complicated the Marconi transmitter side of things was to set up and to get it to work, though I suppose with a bit of practice the settings would all be found out and then repeated (or left as before).

Cheers,

Julian
 

AlexP

Member
May 23, 2019
456
21
18
Usa
Mount Temple' s Operator heard the amended distress call at 10 25 pm EST... 3-25 am GMT. Yet, he did not hear any communication between Carpathia and Titanic for another 10 minutes.
I din’t understand, what you meant, Jim. It appears he did not hear any communications between the two of them because there were none. It appears that he heard the very first communication between the Titanic and the Carpathia:

9459. What was it you heard then?
- I have got down here, "'Titanic' still calling C.Q.D. is answered by the 'Carpathia' and says 'struck iceberg come to our assistance.' Sends the position."

9460. Does that mean that you could overhear the "Carpathia" answering the "Titanic"?
- Yes.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,207
666
213
Funchal. Madeira
Well, Jim, than the alleged looming worked only one way, because nobody from 700+ survivors saw either Carpathia’s rockets or Carpathia’s company signals or Carpathia’s navigational lights for another 20 minutes or so. Not to say that under looming conditions the people from the Californian should have been able to see the green flares too.
Not really, Alex.

The evidence suggest that abnormal refraction was causing lights to be seen about 14.7% farther away than normal.
If the Height of Eye on Californian was say 50 feet and the height of the green flare was 12 feet, then under normal conditions the separation distance between Boxhall and Californian would have been about 12.1 miles and the green light would have been seen on the horizon. If, as calculated, the abnormal refraction caused a 14.7 % increase in range, then those on Californian would have seen Boxhall's green light at 13.9 miles away. However, the evidence suggests that the physical separation distance between Boxhall and the Californian was about 22 miles which means that those on Californian's bridge would never have seen the green flares.
 

AlexP

Member
May 23, 2019
456
21
18
Usa
Not really, Alex.

The evidence suggest that abnormal refraction was causing lights to be seen about 14.7% farther away than normal.
If the Height of Eye on Californian was say 50 feet and the height of the green flare was 12 feet, then under normal conditions the separation distance between Boxhall and Californian would have been about 12.1 miles and the green light would have been seen on the horizon. If, as calculated, the abnormal refraction caused a 14.7 % increase in range, then those on Californian would have seen Boxhall's green light at 13.9 miles away. However, the evidence suggests that the physical separation distance between Boxhall and the Californian was about 22 miles which means that those on Californian's bridge would never have seen the green flares.
Jim, what evidence?
Mila often films mirages of miraged ships that are located more than 20 - 25 miles away.
 

Similar threads