Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="T Maltin, post: 404121, member: 166865"] Thanks Mila, please would you post another link to those Weather articles, so I and others here can read them. Of course Californian and the iceberg were too close to Titanic for miraging effects to be noticeable at those short distances, but there is plenty of evidence that there was a miraging strip right around the horizon, which looked like a haze on the horizon, despite the clear air and high pressure. This had the effect of appearing to raise the horizon behind Titanic and Californian, making them appear nearer to each other than the 10 miles or so that they were really apart. It also caused problems with Fleet and Lee identifying the fatal iceberg in time, as the raised horizon *behind* the iceberg had the effect of reducing the berg’s apparent angular size - thus making it seen moments later than it would otherwise have been. The thermal inversion at Titanic’s crash site also magnified the rockets when they were low down, in the cold air nearest the sea surface. This is why Titanic’s rockets appeared to rise not very high (as they appeared to small to be seen when in the warmer air higher up). All this is explained neatly in my short article on this topic, which I wrote with our mutual friend and leading mirage expert, Professor Andrew T Young. Our article is here: [URL="https://timmaltin.com/2016/04/10/the-hidden-cause-of-the-titanic-disaster/"]The hidden cause of the Titanic disaster[/URL] Are you saying that you disagree with the findings in this article? If so, which bits and why? The article is not long and is very clear, so I would be greatful for a brief critique of it from you. Thank you - and I love your photographs of mirages, which are spectacular. All the best and thank you, Tim [/QUOTE]

Verification: I which year did the Titanic sail?

Top Bottom