Titanic-Californian Morse lamp communication

[Samuel Halpern]

John, you are quite right in your assessment of what was seen from the bridge of the Californian. Gibson's written account to Capt. Lord clearly shows that Titanic's upper decks had to be above the visual horizon for that detonator flash to be seen.

Regarding what was seen from Titanic, 4/O Boxhall, who looked at the ship through glasses, was quite specific that the ship was not a simple fishing or whaling vessel but a 4 masted steamer with two masthead lights. For something that appeared by the brightness of its lights to be only 5 miles away, lifeboat 8 was not able to make any headway having rowed toward that steamer until daybreak. She was a good 3 to 4 miles from where the Carpathia stopped when she turned around. [See Crawford's testimony]. Boat 8 was also one of the last of the boats to be picked up.

 

[RJ Emery]

John,

I'm not a great believer in the two mystery ship theory. What became of either of these ships? Did the rocket firing ship near the Californian sink also, or was it as you say, a whaling ship firing rockets? It also means that there is now three ships in the vicinity, all ignoring the Titanic's distress signals. It seems a bit improbable to me.

I think that the Californian saw the Titanic's distress signals, and possible the Titanic itself, head on, making it look like a smaller ship.

If there is to be a mystery ship, it is the one that Boxhall saw, and what Captain Smith saw (I seem to recall he suggested that the lifeboats row to this ship and return). It seems a bit to close to be the Californian, in my humble opinion. Grenade thrown...I'll duck for cover now!! ;-)

I believe it has now been fairly well established that the Titanic and Californian were actually at least 17 nautical miles and possibly as much as 23 nautical miles apart that night.

Both Captains estimated the distance to their respective mystery ships to be about five miles. I maintain that both were highly experienced mariners and could be relied upon to judge the distance to a nearby vessel. Captain Smith even ordered a lifeboat to row to the nearby ship. Could both Captains' margin of error be more than 300 percent at the same time? I very much doubt it. They saw what they saw, and I accept it as fact, subject to normal variance for an estimate of that type under those conditions.

One or more Titanic passengers in lifeboats reported the nearby mystery ship just steamed away. The reference for that I recall being in Walter Lord's ANTR, but I haven't yet found the page were it was written. The Californian was stationary all through the night, so in my judgment, it could not have been Titanic's mystery ship given all the motion reported.

Can't accept a four ship theory? It gets even more interesting with the inclusion of fishing and sealer vessels in the immediate area, none of which would have been Titanic's size and probably even smaller than the Californian.

As explained previously, none of the legitimate ships who were in a position to witness Titanic's rockets as distress signals took them to be that. (I leave open the possibility that Titanic's mystery ship was a rogue steamer.)

Other open questions: Once it was responding to Titanic's last reported position, what other vessels (excluding Mount Temple) did Captain Lord observe in the immediate vicinity w/wo glasses?

How could Titanic's last reported position be so wrong? Or could it have drifted to the position Ballard later marked in 1985? And was that position correct, given the finding in 2005 of two intact hull sections a mile or more from Ballard's determined position?

You needn't duck for cover. I am willing to discuss and debate all salient points with anyone who has an open mind about these matters. I know I don't have all the answers, but I seek the most plausible explanations for what might have and did occur that night.

 

[RJ Emery]

Samuel,

Regarding what was seen from Titanic, 4/O Boxhall, who looked at the ship through glasses, was quite specific that the ship was not a simple fishing or whaling vessel but a 4 masted steamer with two masthead lights.

That wasn't quite the case. Here are Boxhall's own words:

15400: Did you watch the lights of this steamer while you were sending the rockets up? Yes.

15401: Did they seem to be stationary? I was paying most of my attention to this steamer then, and she was approaching us; and then I saw her side lights. I saw her green light and the red. She was end on to us. Later I saw her red light. This is all with the aid of a pair of glasses up to now. Afterwards I saw the ship’s red light with my naked eye, and the two masthead lights. The only description of the ship that I could give is that she was, or I judged her to be [emphasis mine], a four-masted steamer.

Note also that in my mind his description rules out the Californian. The Californian was stopped, and while it was drifting, its motions would hardly match Boxhall's descriptions of the mystery ship, even if the Titanic herself was drifting, given the short amount of time involved. And given this distance involved, it is very doubtful anyone on board the Titanic was actually seeing the Californian. No, if anything, the comments here in my judgment reinforce the case for Titanic's own mystery ship.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Note also that in my mind his description rules out the Californian.<<

No it doesn't. The list of four masted merchent vessels absolutely known to be in the area and within visual range of the Titanic can be counted on one hand with four fingers to spare. The Californian was a four masted steamer and was known to be within visual range. Even the most determined of Captain Lord's champions don't bother denying it. They attempt to explain it away, but they don't deny it.

And far from refuting what Samuel said, the testimony you cited backs it up. Granted, Boxhall didn't use the term fishing or whaling vessel, but he wasn't addressing what his mystery ship was not. He was addressing what it was.

While you're at it, note the this tidbit which is in his testimony from the start:

15392. And then you saw this light which you say looked like a masthead light?
- Yes, it was two masthead lights of a steamer.

Looks pretty specific to me. For anybody interested, Boxhall's full testimony and in context begins at http://www.titanicinquiry.org/BOTInq/BOTInq13Boxhall01.php

>>The Californian was stopped, and while it was drifting, its motions would hardly match Boxhall's descriptions of the mystery ship,<<

She was doing more then that. In addition to drifting, she was weathervaning around in the current. That would certainly produce the illusion of the vessel making way.

 

[RJ Emery]

Michael,

The list of four masted merchent vessels absolutely known to be in the area and within visual range of the Titanic can be counted on one hand with four fingers to spare.

What proof can you offer for the rather bold and unsupported statement above?

The Californian was a four masted steamer and was known to be within visual range.

Known by whom? The Californian was twenty miles away, too far to be seen. Boxhall claimed to have seen a red light without glasses. He would not have been able to see that light unaided from twenty miles distant. Captain Smith estimated the vessel to be about five miles away. How do you account for that disparity?

What proof can you offer that absolutely puts the Californian within visual range of the Titanic? And what is that distance between the two for which you can provide incontrovertible proof?

Boxhall did not know what he was seeing. He assumed it was a four masted steamer. It could have very well been something else. Remember also, he was a junior officer, and whatever his abilities then or later, he never made captain in his career.

I don't believe there is any other testimony or evidence that describes what the mystery vessel might have been or definitely was. If there is such testimony or evidence, kindly cite it.

In addition to drifting, [the Californian] was weathervaning around in the current. That would certainly produce the illusion of the vessel making way.

Yes, it would, if it was within visual range, which the Californian was not. Also, the Californian did not make a 360 degree turn or even a 180 degree turn in the time allotted for the illusion you cite.

Moreover, both the Californian and the Titanic were actively signaling via Morse lamp their respective mystery ships. If the Titanic and the Californian were within visual range of each other and were each other's mystery ship, their respective Morse lamps would have been seen and communication established. That did not happen for the abundantly obvious reason they were both too far apart and out of each other's visual range.

 

[Timothy Trower]

"If the Titanic and the Californian were within visual range of each other and were each other's mystery ship, their respective Morse lamps would have been seen and communication established."

Oh? How large of a range did the respective Morse lamps have? Please justify this assertion.

 

[RJ Emery]

Brigitta wrote:

I found it interesting that James Bisset [2nd officer on Carpathia] mentioned from his observation that night on the bridge wing that the night was cloudless, with all the stars shining brightly - "the peculiar atmospheric conditions of visibility intensified as we approached the icefield with the greenish beams of the Aurora Borealis shimmering and confusing the horizon ahead ahead of us ………." [interestingly -green flares had been fired from one of the lifeboats & Bisset recalled that the water had a sinister greenish crystal tinge that morning]

It [is] strange that no one has mentioned the Aurora Borealis.

Despite what Bisset may have written, was there an aurora visible the night the Titanic sank? I recall no other descriptions of same in what I have read thus far. For it to have lit the waters as quoted, the aurora should have been quite noticeable and to have been recorded by others.

1912 was also a year of sunspot minima. Aurora activity is generally associated with maxima, although one can occur virtually at any time or place. However, an aurora to reach that latitude during a minima is unusual.

 

[Dave Moran]

Well, actually I would suggest politely that the burden of proof falls on you, RJ.

Consider it this way — we know Californian was in the vicinity of the wreck. How far or near is, of course, open to debate, but we know she was close enough to reach the Carpathia within two hours of first moving, and that for some considerable percentage of that voyage she was moving first west through the ice, then south through clear water, then east through ice again. So, we know she was in proximity, yes ?

Now, for your theory to hold water you posit, I presume, another four masted steamer seen from Titanic by Boxhall which wasn’t Californian.

That would be fair enough except that no-one else saw this steamer - shall we call it X for nostalgia’s sake ? — nor did anyone from this steamer ever come forward and say “ Oh yeah, we saw rockets that night and we wondered what was going on…but we just went on our way once daybreak came and didn’t want to bother anyone…”.

It’s ..mmm…possible, but it remains for you in advancing your theory to prove that such a ship was there — history isn’t built out of “ might’ve beens “. I could argue that there might have been the German High Seas Fleet practicing maneuvers between the two ships, obscuring their view with coal-smoke, but were I to advance that theory it would be for me to provide the evidence.

Michael isn’t wrong, y’see — the Californian is the only ship we can say with any surety was there, that is established fact. They did, after all, see the rockets. You might have the opinion that there was another — but what evidence do you have ?

 

[Dave Gittins]

RJ, I suggest you get my book and study it. Without going into details, I show quite conclusively where Californian wasn't, namely at Lord's claimed position. Best of all, I do it from his own testimony.

As to the aurora, Lawrence Beesley testified to it. I should think it would have provided little light, though I've only seen the aurora australis in quite a low latitude.

Finally, don't trust Bisset too far. His book were extensively ghost-written, years after the events.

 

[Timothy Trower]

I would follow Dave's excellent suggestion with the further thought that Paul Lee's eBook also -- and compellingly -- shows from Captain Lord's own testimony where he wasn't. And backs that up with testimony from others who saw the Californian as early as 6:00 a.m.

By the way -- still waiting for a response on the range of the Morse lamps of both ships.

 

[John Flood]

"Moreover, both the Californian and the Titanic were actively signaling via Morse lamp their respective mystery ships."

My gut feeling here is that the Californian and the Titanic were trying to signal each other, but at a very extreme range, where communication would be very difficult. I don't think they were trying to communicate with closer ships, as then contact through the morse lamps could have been easily made, if the distance was only 5 miles (well, I assume, contact could be made over a distance of 5 miles, I'm no expert ;-) ).

I've no problem with a mystery ship, only a few miles from Titanic, as observed by Titanic witnesses, such as Boxhall and Smith. They were experienced mariners, and I don't think you would get to be captain of the largest ship afloat, by estimating the distance of a nearby ship, as being close enough to row to, instead of 10-20 miles. If these guys say a ship is close enough to row to in a lifeboat, or only a few miles away, I'll not argue with that.

Where I have a bit of a problem is with the possibility of a second mystery ship, near the Californian.I am a bit more wary of evidence coming from the Californian. They were firmly in CYA mode by April 15th.

It also means that two ships disappeared into the night, without ever uttering a word about what they saw. Twice as unlikely, as with just the one ship.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>What proof can you offer for the rather bold and unsupported statement above?<<

The Inquiries themselves, particularly the BOT transcripts which effectively eliminated any other possibility. It wasn't as if they didn't look at for the asserted "mystery ship" at the time. They did. They found nothing.

>>Yes, it would, if it was within visual range, which the Californian was not.<<

Oh yes it was. See the link I provided below and actually read the material there. The evidence is provided to back it up.

>>Also, the Californian did not make a 360 degree turn or even a 180 degree turn in the time allotted for the illusion you cite.<<

Actually, she did come around 180° that night. Again, even Captain Lord's staunchist champions don't deny that.

There are a few crucial facts which you appear to be missing: Ship movements are recorded, both within ships logs and also within port records which document points of origin as well as the final port of call for a particular voyage. Because of this, if somebody tries to pull a fast one in the logs, there's a way of catching it simply by crunching the numbers.

The Californian's presence is an absolutely well known, non-debatable, and thoroughly documented fact. even Captain Lord doesn't deny it, asserting instead that he was too far away. This may be a waste of time since you seem hellbent on cherry picking evidence and research which supports your views and ignoring any which disconfirms your stand, but you would do well to read the material at Californian's Position as this comes from an experinced navigator who has tried harder the anybody on either side to be objective.

The presence of a "mystery steamer" however tempting it may be is not a well attested and thoroughly documented fact. It's specualtion. There might have been one there but the supporting evidence for it was extremely poor then and hasn't improved since.

>>Moreover, both the Californian and the Titanic were actively signaling via Morse lamp their respective mystery ships. If the Titanic and the Californian were within visual range of each other and were each other's mystery ship, their respective Morse lamps would have been seen and communication established. That did not happen for the abundantly obvious reason they were both too far apart and out of each other's visual range.<<

It didn't happen because the Morse Lamps of the day weren't all that powerful to begin with. 100 watts at most. Even with lenses to enhance the light, 100 watts is a mighty faint light to see at 10 to 12 miles.

>>Well, actually I would suggest politely that the burden of proof falls on you, RJ.<<

Quite right. It does fall on him. RJ, if you wish to prove the existance of the "mystery ship" please provide hard evidence to back it up. So far, for all the noise and fury, you haven't done anything of the kind beyond offering opinions which even you admitted were speculation.

>>It also means that two ships disappeared into the night, without ever uttering a word about what they saw. Twice as unlikely, as with just the one ship.<<

Way more then unlikely. People talk, especially sailors. Californian had it's Ernest Gill. Where's the "mystery ship's" Ernest Gill?

 

[Samuel Halpern]

I believe it has now been fairly well established that the Titanic and Californian were actually at least 17 nautical miles and possibly as much as 23 nautical miles apart that night.

Really? Established by whom? What is your basis for these distances that you give?

 

[James Smith]

Remember also, he was a junior officer, and whatever his abilities then or later, he never made captain in his career.

Unless I'm much mistaken, all of Titanic's officers--Boxhall included--held their Extra Masters' certifications.

--Jim

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

According to Boxhall's biography, you're correct, James. Boxhall received his Master and Extra-Master's certification in September 1907. While he never made captain, he was the first and later chief officer of several Cunard-White Star ships.