Stanley Lord guilty as charged


Steven

Member
Sep 24, 2016
53
35
28
Stone held his own for the most part whilst on the stand - my own account signature here is a verbatim quote from his testimony - but let's face it, he was somewhat flailing and prevaricating when questioned on the nature and purpose of the rockets he was seeing, that much is evident in the transcript. There's much to criticize with regards to Mersey and his QC's conduct at times during that inquiry, but I think they were doing their job by trying to nail down Stone on the rockets issue, and furthermore I think Mersey's evident frustration with the prevaricating witness is justified and understandable, especially when Stone lets slip telling little answers like thus;

860. So throwing your mind back after that information then you thought they were distress signals?
- I thought they possibly might have been distress signals.


I maintain that once Stone saw multiple rockets being fired, regardless or not as to what he thought their purpose was, he damn well should have woke up his skipper, got him to the bridge, and let the Captain decide any course of action... that's just common sense, and not in hindsight either.

"A certain slackness" indeed...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
Why it is irrelevant, Julian?
here is Mr. Gibson’s testimony:

7626. And after her red light, disappeared could you still see her masthead light or her white light?
- Just a glare of it.

if the masthead light was bright to the very end, why suddenly Mr. Gibson started seeing only a glare of it? I know Sam explains the disappearance of the red light by stating that it got below the range of visibility for the Californian’s bridge. But what happened to the masthead light?
You have hit the nail on the head Alex. The navigation lights were all connected in a single waterproof circuit which, if Titanic was wired according to regulations, would operate from a switch board in the wheelhouse or bridge. It in turn would also be connected into the emergency circuits. Thus, if main power failed, there was still power to keep the nav lights lit. We know when the power failed:

"177. At that time were the lights still burning or had they gone out?
- No. As the stern stood up in the air so all the lights went out."


The foregoing is from the evidence of Lookout Archie Jewel.
There is also evidence elsewhere from a survivor who saw the coloured nav. light just above the surface. If I find it , I'll post.

It follows that if the red side light dipped below the horizon, the white mast head light which was about 75 feet above it, would still be burning brightly... even brighter than the red one.
Not only that, because Titanic was down by the head, there would have been a distinct, large, concentrated glow of illumination to the right of, and slightly above , the position where the red light was last seen. This was not the case with the vessel seen bt Gibson. In fact Gibson described his vessel as having a list in the opposite direction...a starboard list.
Be assured, it is impossible to determine a list at night at any distance on a ship showing a single coloured light unless the vessel in question is head on to you or you have other lights to the left or right of the coloured one.
Gibson initially described seeing a red light with a glow of white ones to the right of it.. For him to afterward get the illusion of a list, that whit "glow" would need to be seen above or below the red light. However, if the white glow was actually a little lower... say 10 feet lower than the red light, that when the other vessel turned away, the vertical separation would become more obvious and the illusion of a starboard list would be created...... Think about it. Meanwhile try and make sense of my dreadful sketch.
Turning tail.jpg
 
Last edited:

Georges G.

Member
Feb 26, 2017
638
110
53
8050. (Mr. Butler Aspinall.) Altering her bearings did not mean steaming away?
- I do not see how two ships can alter their bearings when stopped."


Being Stop through the water does not mean Stop over the ground. The distinction between the two is called the set & drift due to current, as there was no real wind. An ocean current is not a chronometer adjusted moving parking lot; it varies in force and direction. A vessel with a large windage surface area can drift slower than her opposite as the generated wind due to drift retain her back. Therefore, two different vessels 13-14 miles apart could certainly drift in slightly different speed and direction. The result would cause a difference in compass bearings particularly if they were taken at hour interval. In addition, a slight change of compass bearing could suggest that a vessel is steaming away in a parallel manner. Furthermore, just by not applying the proper Deviation to the compass bearings as Californian heading was constantly veering, could mislead a nonchalant observer to believe in an alteration in bearings.

Lord instructions were to advise him if any vessel would steam close by; not to take obsessed compass bearings every 3 minutes to ascertain so. You don’t even need to take relative or compass bearings of any sorts to determine if an approaching vessel will come close by while you are stop. You just need to open your eyes; if a masthead light is above and between the sidelights or if two masthead lights are above each other’s and between the sidelights, there is a pretty good chance that she will get close if she keeps steaming! So what were the reasons of taking compass bearings frenetically? They most probably not even took a single one; lucky they used a pelorus! They probably used the same eyesight manner. Just as not such a chronometer adjusted moving parking lot, the apparent anticlockwise movement of the vessel stopped to the SE°(t) could have slow down, even steadied giving the impression that the observed vessel was apparently moving away ... toward an arctic icefield in the middle of the night!

On the other hand, Stone could have mixed up his compass bearings between mystery ships X, Z or T or vice versa. But even after 108 years of enthusiast and professional archive and forensic researches along with overflowing books and internet web sites, no one even got close to find any single trace of these anonymous and unidentified mystery vessels that disappeared at dawn to never be seen again …
 

Attachments

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
Hello Georges.

You wrote:

". Therefore, two different vessels 13-14 miles apart could certainly drift in slightly different speed and direction. The result would cause a difference in compass bearings particularly if they were taken at hour interval"

Let's examine what you write... in plain language.
Set and drift are relative values.
All ships do not drift at the same speed in flat calm conditions..

It follows... by your own reckoning....that no matter the set of a nearby ship's lights, the Seamanship Instructions given in (2) Steering & Sailing Rules Prelims must apply. I quote:
" Risk of collision can, when circumstances permit, be ascertained by carefully watching the compass bearing of an (approaching) vessel. If the bearing does not appreciably change , such risk should be deemed to exist."
Because by your own reckoning a vessel can approach, even when stopped.
I am sure you have used a (gyro) compass to take a bearing. If so, you will know that you must take multiple bearings to be sure of any appreciable change.

If the magnetic bearing changes from SSE to SW in a short space of time, that has sod all to do with any ocean current... particularly when there is pack ice between the targets.

Oh! And don't forget Rule 27.

Here is the witness evidence regarding bearing ... read it again.

At 12:35 you whistled up the speaking tube and asked if the other steamer had moved. I replied ‘No’ and that she was on the same bearing
"after taking another bearing of her,
that she was slowly steering away towards the S.W.
- About twenty minutes past one the Second Officer remarked to me that she was slowly steaming away towards the south-west.
"Call the Captain and tell him that that ship has disappeared in the South-West; that we are heading West-South-West, and that she has fired altogether eight rockets."
"
The Second Officer was taking bearings of her all the time.

I don't know what kind of ship you ran, but the normal request of a Watch officer in my day was "So what's she bearing now?. The answer given would be jotted down below the previous answer to the same question. I bet Lord did exactly that...particularly if fatigue was effecting his memory.

Then you write:


"even after 108 years of enthusiast and professional archive and forensic researches along with overflowing books and internet web sites, no one even got close to find any single trace of these anonymous and unidentified mystery vessels that disappeared at dawn "

You must be some reader, Georges if you can confidently make such a sweeping statement.
 

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,082
486
93
South Wales UK
Hello Steven,

That was a very gracious and nice reply in the circumstances, for which many thanks.

Although the Mesaba message wasn't prefixed as a 'MSG', it was was prefixed as an 'Ice Report', and therefore came within 'Navigational' status messages, that according to Marconi rules were to be given preference over commercial messages paid for by passengers or paid for by those to passengers. It should have been obvious to Phillips that it was a message he ought to have prioritised and got taken up to the bridge immediately.

We can revisit others aspects another evening.

Hope you all are keeping safe and taking care in the current crisis.

Cheers,

Julian
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Mar 22, 2003
5,645
911
273
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Hope you all are keeping safe and taking care in the current crisis.
Good so far. It's like being on a vessel taking on water in all compartments with not enough pumping capacity and too few lifeboats. In this case they call them ventilators. The flooding in one compartment, called New York, is already putting a strain on the bulkheads. But our Captain says that he wants to resume the voyage at full speed ahead by Easter against the advice of the Chief Engineer.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: 1 user

AlexP

Member
May 23, 2019
430
19
18
Usa
Good so far. It's like being on a vessel taking on water in all compartments with not enough pumping capacity and too few lifeboats. In this case they call them ventilators. The flooding in one compartment, called New York, is already putting a strain on the bulkheads. But our Captain says that he wants to resume the voyage at full speed ahead by Easter against the advice of the Chief Engineer.
Well, the Captain sees the whole picture, while the Chief Engineer sees only a small part of it. The Captain probably believes that if he resumes the voyage this will help to save the ship herself. Besides it appears that his first mate, that officer from New York, agrees with him.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
Good so far. It's like being on a vessel taking on water in all compartments with not enough pumping capacity and too few lifeboats. In this case they call them ventilators. The flooding in one compartment, called New York, is already putting a strain on the bulkheads. But our Captain says that he wants to resume the voyage at full speed ahead by Easter against the advice of the Chief Engineer.
The way I see it, a loss of buoyancy effects every part of a ship but there is only one person who has compete picture of the overall effect of such a loss. If a ship was run by a debating society, it would never leave port.
 
Nov 14, 2005
886
317
133
Good so far. It's like being on a vessel taking on water in all compartments with not enough pumping capacity and too few lifeboats. In this case they call them ventilators. The flooding in one compartment, called New York, is already putting a strain on the bulkheads. But our Captain says that he wants to resume the voyage at full speed ahead by Easter against the advice of the Chief Engineer.
Yeah he should just use his Star Trek replicator to fix everything overnight. I know they have them. I saw them on tv.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Dec 29, 2000
6,152
194
223
Moderator's hat on:

Let's return to the subject, shall we?

Moderator's hat off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Julian Atkins

Member
Sep 23, 2017
1,082
486
93
South Wales UK
Mark, afterter 161 internet pages on the subject, is there anything really new to say?
Yes, because thanks to your new book, Sam, you have proved that Stone got quite mixed up that 'Middle Watch'. Why he did so is another matter. Quite frankly, poor old Stone is frankly 'all over the place' that night.

A large ship far off is mistaken for a small ship close by.

He gets all his bearings 'mucked up' as The Californian swings round, and thinks he sees his vessel under observation steam off to the SW, which would have been impossible, as it would have been going into the icefield in the dark and through it, and in reverse, rudder first!

The last rocket is fired, and he then waits 20 minutes to send Gibson down to Captain Lord!

Then 35 minutes later at 2.40am he does a speaking tube message to Captain Lord repeating a load of garbage of no relevance for the time.

Then from 3.20am onwards he misses the first of the 3 rockets from Carpathia seen by Gibson, and then describes them as coming from a bearing that the Carparthia was not on!

Then he fails to report these further rockets seen to Captain Lord at all, and instead waits till his report to Stewart at or after 4am.

This is the same Stone who later suffered a significant mental breakdown.

Cheers,

Julian
 

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Dec 29, 2000
6,152
194
223
Mark, afterter 161 internet pages on the subject, is there anything really new to say?
As you know, i'm just a spectator here; the subject is not one that I really care for. The question you ask, Sam, is one I've considered posing here in recent days, and is better answered by those involved in the discussion than by me.
 

Georges G.

Member
Feb 26, 2017
638
110
53
Hello Jim,

One day, I was apprentice pilot on board a double pilot class A vessel. We were pursuing a slower vessel ahead of us. The chief pilot told the second pilot who had the conduct that we were getting closer. The second argued that the distance by radar was constant. The chief pilot then said; «you don’t need the radar to know that we’re getting closer, the name and port of registry letters at her stern are getting larger and the smell is getting stinker!!!». More often than not, good eyesight and a big nose will save your journey better than all the EBL, VRM or azimuth circle gadgets …

1910 STEERING AND SAILING RULES
PRELIMINARY—RISK OF COLLISION.

Risk of collision can, when circumstances permit, be ascertained by carefully watching the compass bearing of an approaching vessel. If the bearing does not appreciably change, such risk should be deemed to exist.


Jim, you should have read the rules more circumspectly. The legislator didn’t recommend to «take multiple bearings» but rather by «carefully watching the compass bearing» of an approaching vessel; the compass bearing wordings being written in singular not in plural. In practice, when you sight a vessel seemingly approaching, you set the compass azimuth circle vanes on her and leave it where it is. After 2-3 minutes, you just look back through the sight vanes without touching anything. If the vessel is still appearing in line with the vanes, you better read your collision regulations as it doesn’t seem to be you’re hobby horse! Again, a risk of collision exists if «a» bearing «does» not appreciably change, not the «bearings» «do» not appreciably change.

You should also have read the evidence more carefully. Stone said;

7824. Did you continue to keep this vessel under observation?
- The whole time.
7825. Was there any reason for that?
- None whatever except that it was another ship, stopped in ice the same as ourselves.
7826. It interested you?
- Yes.


Was there any reason for that … None whatever! What was the point of taking compulsive bearings of a vessel 13-14 miles away dead stopped in the water and surrounded by ice?

7940. 7941. The mystery steamer first bore to the SSE° and her bearing altered toward the S° and toward the W°. Underway apparently.
7949. That the mystery steamer was disappearing in the SW°


Stone wished so desperately to get rid of the steamer that was firing distress rockets and above all, avoid the presence of terrifying Lord on the upper bridge that he found a way to make the steamer disappearing away. If Boxhall was able to make a 15½ miles error on his CQD position over a 4 hours run, Stone was certainly able to compare a true bearing with a compass bearing; ending in a 2 points discrepancy between them due to a miscalculated variation of 2 points. However, his wishes to make the steamer under observation firing distress rockets to disappear for good came to an end when he put his foot in his mouth by stating;

7922. Well, anything else?
- But that I could not understand why if the rockets came from a steamer beyond this one, when the steamer altered her bearing the rockets should also alter their bearings.
7926. That, you felt confident, came from the vessel that was showing you these navigation lights?
- I am sure of it.
7927. That you were sure of?
- Yes.
7928. And you had further confirmation in the fact as you have told my Lord, that when the navigation lights altered their bearing, the rockets altered their bearings in a corresponding manner?
- Yes.
7929. That would tell you as a sailor that it was almost certain that those rockets were being fired from that steamer which was showing you those navigation lights?
- Almost certain, yes.


We will forget about that one!

8066. Then you turned round?
- We slowly swung to port the other way, swinging through to southward.


As for the mystery steamer X or Z, even Stone was dreaming to bring them to light but like hundreds disappointed others over hundreds of years, they never found them as they simply did not exist. Hurry up Jim to become Titanic Hall of Fame Enthusiast’s by proving without the shadow of a doubt that the mystery ships ever existed since as all of us, the chronometer is ticking rather fast on GMT…

8091. I daresay you have been asking everywhere for this steamer?
- There was no one to ask; no one to give us information about it.
8092. Have you been trying to find out?
- Only by watching the newspapers.
8093. Have you found it?
- No.
 
Last edited:

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
Yes, because thanks to your new book, Sam, you have proved that Stone got quite mixed up that 'Middle Watch'. Why he did so is another matter. Quite frankly, poor old Stone is frankly 'all over the place' that night.

A large ship far off is mistaken for a small ship close by.

He gets all his bearings 'mucked up' as The Californian swings round, and thinks he sees his vessel under observation steam off to the SW, which would have been impossible, as it would have been going into the icefield in the dark and through it, and in reverse, rudder first!

The last rocket is fired, and he then waits 20 minutes to send Gibson down to Captain Lord!

Then 35 minutes later at 2.40am he does a speaking tube message to Captain Lord repeating a load of garbage of no relevance for the time.

Then from 3.20am onwards he misses the first of the 3 rockets from Carpathia seen by Gibson, and then describes them as coming from a bearing that the Carparthia was not on!

Then he fails to report these further rockets seen to Captain Lord at all, and instead waits till his report to Stewart at or after 4am.

This is the same Stone who later suffered a significant mental breakdown.

Cheers,

Julian
I have to say it Julian..No matter how often nonsense is written or spoken about, it is still nonsense.

Three (3) separate witnesses whose trade it was to go down to the sea in ships, (unlike most of the contributors to this site) described seeing a smallish vessel between 4 and 6 miles away. On such a night as it was, there was no possibility that the ability to estimate distance... particularly with the aid of binoculars,..was 200% in error. That is totally absurd. Not simply my personal opinion... ask someone who does it for a living. If the stars could be seen "right down to the horizon", then that was the horizon. It was, and still is the natural sight-guage for a mariner.

Stone did not get "all his bearings mucked" up. He did not enumerate any bearings... simply that they changed and the direction in which they changed.
In fact, he and Gibson perfectly described a ship turning in a tight circle to the southward... away from them...continuing around to meet the ice....slowly traversing a short area of ice, then picking up speed and departing in the direction of SW Even "Blind Pew" could see that very clearly.
One point which a professional would instantly pick up on, was that in time =-honoured fashion, Stone continued to observe that vessel over the top of the compass using his binoculars as it grew smaller and finally disappeared.
That lad did it by The Book... not Sam's Book.

As for the reversing through an icefield nonsense. Surely Sam did not infer that?

Clear your thoughts.. Think what Lord's first actions were at Day light....
Engine FULL AHEAD. That would most certainly not have,been directly toward the pack ice. If you were in his place and had been told that earlier in the morning, a ship to the south of you had trans-navigated an ice field...what direction would you head in? Particularly if you could already see a ship to the south, heading west?

There is one thing about this that separates the men from the boys. (actually there are many such things).

At no time did Stone or Gibson state categorically that they took bearings of the rockets themselves. They referred constantly to the bearing of the nearby ship. The one time, Stone was fed the evidence . I quote from George's last post"
"
7922. Well, anything else?

- But that I could not understand why if the rockets came from a steamer beyond this one, when the steamer altered her bearing the rockets should also alter their bearings.
7926. That, you felt confident, came from the vessel that was showing you these navigation lights?
"
Hello Jim,

One day, I was apprentice pilot on board a double pilot class A vessel. We were pursuing a slower vessel ahead of us. The chief pilot told the second pilot who had the conduct that we were getting closer. The second argued that the distance by radar was constant. The chief pilot then said; «you don’t need the radar to know that we’re getting closer, the name and port of registry letters at her stern are getting larger and the smell is getting stinker!!!». More often than not, good eyesight and a big nose will save your journey better than all the EBL, VRM or azimuth circle gadgets …

1910 STEERING AND SAILING RULES
PRELIMINARY—RISK OF COLLISION.

Risk of collision can, when circumstances permit, be ascertained by carefully watching the compass bearing of an approaching vessel. If the bearing does not appreciably change, such risk should be deemed to exist.


Jim, you should have read the rules more circumspectly. The legislator didn’t recommend to «take multiple bearings» but rather by «carefully watching the compass bearing» of an approaching vessel; the compass bearing wordings being written in singular not in plural. In practice, when you sight a vessel seemingly approaching, you set the compass azimuth circle vanes on her and leave it where it is. After 2-3 minutes, you just look back through the sight vanes without touching anything. If the vessel is still appearing in line with the vanes, you better read your collision regulations as it doesn’t seem to be you’re hobby horse! Again, a risk of collision exists if «a» bearing «does» not appreciably change, not the «bearings» «do» not appreciably change.

You should also have read the evidence more carefully. Stone said;

7824. Did you continue to keep this vessel under observation?
- The whole time.
7825. Was there any reason for that?
- None whatever except that it was another ship, stopped in ice the same as ourselves.
7826. It interested you?
- Yes.


Was there any reason for that … None whatever! What was the point of taking compulsive bearings of a vessel 13-14 miles away dead stopped in the water and surrounded by ice?

7940. 7941. The mystery steamer first bore to the SSE° and her bearing altered toward the S° and toward the W°. Underway apparently.
7949. That the mystery steamer was disappearing in the SW°


Stone wished so desperately to get rid of the steamer that was firing distress rockets and above all, avoid the presence of terrifying Lord on the upper bridge that he found a way to make the steamer disappearing away. If Boxhall was able to make a 15½ miles error on his CQD position over a 4 hours run, Stone was certainly able to compare a true bearing with a compass bearing; ending in a 2 points discrepancy between them due to a miscalculated variation of 2 points. However, his wishes to make the steamer under observation firing distress rockets to disappear for good came to an end when he put his foot in his mouth by stating;

7922. Well, anything else?
- But that I could not understand why if the rockets came from a steamer beyond this one, when the steamer altered her bearing the rockets should also alter their bearings.
7926. That, you felt confident, came from the vessel that was showing you these navigation lights?
- I am sure of it.
7927. That you were sure of?
- Yes.
7928. And you had further confirmation in the fact as you have told my Lord, that when the navigation lights altered their bearing, the rockets altered their bearings in a corresponding manner?
- Yes.
7929. That would tell you as a sailor that it was almost certain that those rockets were being fired from that steamer which was showing you those navigation lights?
- Almost certain, yes.


We will forget about that one!

8066. Then you turned round?
- We slowly swung to port the other way, swinging through to southward.


As for the mystery steamer X or Z, even Stone was dreaming to bring them to light but like hundreds disappointed others over hundreds of years, they never found them as they simply did not exist. Hurry up Jim to become Titanic Hall of Fame Enthusiast’s by proving without the shadow of a doubt that the mystery ships ever existed since as all of us, the chronometer is ticking rather fast on GMT…

8091. I daresay you have been asking everywhere for this steamer?
- There was no one to ask; no one to give us information about it.
8092. Have you been trying to find out?
- Only by watching the newspapers.
8093. Have you found it?
- No.
You leave the pelorus pointing in one direction.... really? On a Magnetic compass.....really? On any compass for that matter really?

So when the "Old Man" calls up and asks you the rate and magnitude of change of the vessel he can see out of his stateroom window what answer do you give him? "Oh! Sorry sir, I'll just go and check, sir,?.
Or like any competent officer would you be able to answer; " I have been watching him carefully sir and the bearing has changed 4 degrees to the left during the past 5 minutes. if he keeps in that direction, he will pass clear of us."

Be very careful when interpreting turning direction evidence from pre 1936 days. Some men describe a turn as the direction of swing of the stern... some of the bow and others according to tiller application.

So you agree with me, these seasoned sailors on the Californian were quite capable of determining whether or not a ship was getting nearer or farther away. Why then could they not distinguish the difference between 5 miles away and 13 miles away?

Think for yourself, man. 13 miles away on a bearing of SE does not fit any part of the plot that evening.
If Titanic stopped 13 miles away from any ship on a bearing of NW from her, it's not rocket science to plot her course for the previous hour when you know her course and speed before she hit the iceberg. This is the kind of nonsense you are encouraging.

If Titanic's single white masthead light was visible to Californian stopped 13 miles north west of Titanic's iceberg, then those on Californian were seeing it 20 miles away. Not only that, but Titanic had exactly 9 miles to run and the time on board Titanic would have been 11-16 pm Without any playing with clocks, The equivalent time on Californian would have been 4 minutes after 11 pm. Even at extreme range of 17 (which is absurd), her green side light would just be visible on the horizon.
If this is the kind of nonsense you subscribe to then it's your reputation that's on the line.

Oh! And I now know the identity of the vessel which ignored Titanic and and another which was seen by the Carpathia.
In total, there were at least 8 vessels within 60 miles of the sinking Titanic Of this, i have the written proof. You will just have to wait until my new book comes out... if I live that long.
At least one real (albeit political) marine expert has concluded that there was at least on other vessel in the area not counting the ones we know about.
 

Georges G.

Member
Feb 26, 2017
638
110
53
So when the "Old Man" calls up and asks you the rate and magnitude of change of the vessel he can see out of his stateroom window what answer do you give him? "Oh! Sorry sir, I'll just go and check, sir,?.
Or like any competent officer would you be able to answer; " I have been watching him carefully sir and the bearing has changed 4 degrees to the left during the past 5 minutes. if he keeps in that direction, he will pass clear of us."
I think that is something you would be naturally skilled to ask or answer for;

«Euh mate, what is the rate and magnitude of change of the iceberg I see dead ahead out from my forward stateroom window?»

«Well I have been watching him carefully sir and the bearing has changed 4 degrees to the left during the past 5 minutes. If he keeps in that direction, he will pass clear of us!»

«Thank you mate, thence keep course and speed but let me know if the berg is getting any closer as I will have a little nap in the meantime»

«Aye aye sir, we’ll do!»

Is that the way it was teach to you at the nautical college where Boxhall and Stone graduated from? I my time Jim, I never had to answer such a silly question as we were specifically trained and trusted to avoid collisions, without having the Old Man spying or micromanaging through his porthole, cup of lime tea at hand. :)
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
I think that is something you would be naturally skilled to ask or answer for;

«Euh mate, what is the rate and magnitude of change of the iceberg I see dead ahead out from my forward stateroom window?»

«Well I have been watching him carefully sir and the bearing has changed 4 degrees to the left during the past 5 minutes. If he keeps in that direction, he will pass clear of us!»

«Thank you mate, thence keep course and speed but let me know if the berg is getting any closer as I will have a little nap in the meantime»

«Aye aye sir, we’ll do!»

Is that the way it was teach to you at the nautical college where Boxhall and Stone graduated from? I my time Jim, I never had to answer such a silly question as we were specifically trained and trusted to avoid collisions, without having the Old Man spying or micromanaging through his porthole, cup of lime tea at hand. :)
You do not do sarcasm well. Georges. as a Marine Accident Investigator for Lloyds and US Underwriters, I recognise your answer and have seen it many times during the years 1974 to 1999. (you can check that up with Lloyds Underwriters if you want).
Confidence is admirable... overconfidence can, and very often does, result in disaster. The following has always been the case...smarty-pants electronic "slaves" or old fashioned codgers like me who had to work at it it... holds good to this very day,:
"Maritime accidents can be caused by a range of complex factors, including (but not limited to):
  • equipment malfunctions
  • extreme weather conditions
  • human error (i.e. the negligence, recklessness or inexperience of a captain, crew or passengers)
  • intoxication of a vessel's operator(s)
Human error plays a role in roughly 70 percent of all offshore accidents.
 

Georges G.

Member
Feb 26, 2017
638
110
53
You do not do sarcasm well
Thank you Jim !

25 years without practicing navigation «can, and very often does, result in» being mixed up with compass bearings! You missed the chance to navigate an integrated navigation bridge where you don’t even have to stand as the function keys and trackballs are enclosed in a password ergonomic pre-adjusted chesterfield arm chair.

Nowadays I would tend to say that over 90% of maritime accidents are due to human error, if not 99%. Years ago you could evoke adverse weather conditions but not anymore. With shore base weather routeing system using advanced forecasting models from top weather analysts, the vessel’s route is real time corrected to avoid low pressure systems or icebergs. Vessels are designed, constructed, managed, operated, plan loaded, maintained and conducted by and under humans’ regulations.

From my own experience, maritime accidents are at this era mainly attributed by economic pressure, fatigue, boredness, depression due criminalizing of the profession, reduced crewing thence poor maintenance, express port outturns without shore leave, disputable competencies, oversized vessels that gives no choice but to rely on electronics, inadequate bridge and instruments ergonomics, worldwide traffic outburst and the trendy poor bridge management.

I didn’t go from confidence to overconfidence, but rather to hyperalertness as I went through all breakdowns or wrongly executed maneuver you can dream of. I even had an engine failure while proceeding outbound on a vessel larger than Titanic with a journalist who was making an article for the harbor marketing! You never know when the flying-fish is going to jump on your face! But luckily, I never been black listed from Lloyd’s …
:)
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,196
663
213
Funchal. Madeira
I didn't know you hadn't practiced navigation for 25 years.

PS You should try loosing all power on a 6 leg self=propelled Semi Sub platform... no tugs .....about 2 miles north of Bollflessa leaving Bergen Fjiord and a 2 knot current running south outside the entrance...
By the way, I was using and surveying vessels with chart-less systems , integrated GPS units, two kinds of sonar and sub sea inspection ROVs right up until 2004 when I retired. Does that count for semi-modern?
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2003
5,645
911
273
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
As you know, i'm just a spectator here; the subject is not one that I really care for. The question you ask, Sam, is one I've considered posing here in recent days, and is better answered by those involved in the discussion than by me.
Well, I guess there is nothing really new to be said within the scope of the topic, but in these bleak times, one has to have something diversionary to occupy one's time and take the mind off of what's happening elsewhere around the planet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Similar threads