Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 9, 1997
22
0
211
This subject has been beaten to death. For those who want to read the best for and against Captain Lord there are 2 books. A Titanic Myth and The Ship That Stood Still. I highly recommend both books.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
829
563
Easley South Carolina
Add to that Padfield's Titanic and Californian, and Malony's A Ship accused.

For the actual unfiltered testimony, see the inquiries at The Titanic Inquiry Project and make your own conclusions.

For websites, go to Dave Billnitzer's Titanic and Californain Mainpage, George Behe's George Behe's Titanic Tidbits and Dave Gittin's All At Sea With Dave Gittins

Sources pro and con for everyone. Have fun.
 
J

Jake Angus

Guest
Even if the Californian had rec'd the first SOS, would she have made it to the disaster site in time to save anybody? The was solid ice around her and the chances of damaging her hull or rudder would have been very high indeed.

Add to that, even the lifeboats that went back to retrieve passengers in the water were unable to pick up but a few survivors in the freezing water.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Mar 16, 2000
5,055
337
433
Jake, I've covered that on my site, mentioned above.

There's not only the matter of how fast Californian could have got to the scene. The big problem is the cutoff point imposed by hypothermia. I personally think they might have saved a few hundred but Michael Standard would probably say I'm too optimistic and he may be right. It would have been hell with the lid off.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
829
563
Easley South Carolina
>>I personally think they might have saved a few hundred but Michael Standard would probably say I'm too optimistic and he may be right.<<

Actually Dave, I think you've made that point in a roundabout way yourself on your own website when you said "Conclusions. By prompt action, good seamanship and good luck, Californian could have saved several hundred people, perhaps 400 or so. Certainly no more, and some experienced seamen would argue for fewer."

I would tend to think that this many could have been pulled out in ideal conditions. Unfortunately, as we know all too well, the sea has a nasty habit of throwing people a few curveballs when the excrement hits the windmill. To say that it would have been Hell with the lid off is...in my opinion...an understatement.

Jake, you may find it useful to check out Dave's website in the links above. You may also want to check out The Californian Incident, A Reality Check which was written by Tracy Smith, Captain Erik Wood and myself. We don't pretend that it's perfect, but we tried our best...as Dave has on his website...to inject a dose of reality into the debate.
 
J

Jake Angus

Guest
Yep, I lean towards nobody being saved (ie plucked from the 28f. water) by the Californian under the conditions of that night.

Hey, this is my second post. How do I CREATE a thread?

Thanks!
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
829
563
Easley South Carolina
In each folder, if you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see a feature which says "Start a New Thread." Click on that and fill in the blanks. It's really not difficult. However, befor starting a new thread, you may want to snoop around to see if the same topic has been covered sometime within recent memory.

(Suggestion: Please, don't start anything involving ship-switch theories, replica Titanics or that bloody mummy. They've been done to death!)
 
Mar 18, 2000
1,384
21
313
So, "No Pope" or the man entombed in the ship is okay, Michael?

happy.gif
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
829
563
Easley South Carolina
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rigel and NO POPE??? Shipyeard workers entombed on the hull??? Somebody shoot me please! Quicker that way and I might come to enjoy the smell of burning gunpowder!

(Ohh...allright...bring on the cat. I rather like the little darlings!)
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Feb 9, 1999
5,343
67
398
Righteo - what say we ease this one around and bring it back on topic? Once Rigel the Wonderdog gets into the act, this could go on interminably...
 
A

Amy Jordan

Guest
Hi all,
I am currently taking a class on Titanic at Maine Maritime Academy and had a quick question for you Titanic buffs. First, I’ve been doing some reading into the inquiry of the Californian and I have one simple question. Why were their engines all stopped?
I’ve been reading Padfields’s The Titanic and the Californian, and it states that the engines were all stop at 2230 the night that the Titanic sunk. Also in David Browns book it states that same. I would assume because of the ice. Maybe? If so why all stop?
Any help is welcome thanks!
 
Oct 17, 2002
86
1
158
Basically, there decided that they would not risk running through the ice in the middle of the night. In fact, they sent there infamous "Stopped in Ice message" to the Titanic earlier in the night. This was the same message that prompted the Titanics wireless operators to respond with "Shut Up, Shut Up, I am working Cape Race". Survivor testimony stated that by time dawn broke they saw numerous icebergs, "growlers", and expansive field ice. The Californian was being cautious, with good reason.

Respectfully,
Andrew
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Mar 16, 2000
5,055
337
433
Funny how we refer to 'engines' when Californian had only one engine. Strange custom. What Captain Lord did was to stop his engine but keep steam up in case he had to move. He didn't want to be a sitting duck if another ship came along. Lord knew he was in small ice and for all he knew there might be big bergs that he couldn't see, so, as Andrew said, he did the wise thing.
 

Lee Gilliland

Member
Feb 14, 2003
511
9
183
It was not just the ice per se, was it? The fact that making your way through pack ice is enormously more difficult without a good light to see the channels was another reason, if you follow Walter Lord's speculation in TNLO.
 
Oct 17, 2002
86
1
158
Lord's speculation, correct me if Im wrong please, is that Capt. Lord was, more or less, afraid of his own shadow.

Andrew
 

Lee Gilliland

Member
Feb 14, 2003
511
9
183
I would rather say extremely conscientious towards his employer's needs. He too no avoidable risks, which included steaming into unknown ice fields.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,649
829
563
Easley South Carolina
>>Lord's speculation, correct me if Im wrong please, is that Capt. Lord was, more or less, afraid of his own shadow. <<

Don't confuse prudence for fear. While one may properly hold the man to account for the mistakes that occured that night...and debate endlessly ad nauseum exactly what those mistakes were...stopping for the night rather then chance a risky and dangerous transit through an icefield of unknown extent and density wasn't one of them.

Titanic gambled on the icefield.

Look what it got them.

Californian didn't even come close to having the same sort of watertight protection that the Titanic or any other liner had, and one hole anywhere would have been enough to put the ship on the bottom. Captain Lord knew this and was very wise not to take the chance.
 
Oct 17, 2002
86
1
158
Michael,

I am not disagreeing with that statement. I am simply stating the impression I got from reading Walter Lord's TNLO. He attempts to influence the reader by pointing to the facts as though Captain Lord was afraid almost of navigating this part of the ocean. This was in response to Lee's statement concerning the same text.

Respectfully,

Andrew
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads