Titanic Engine running time from Noon on April 14th.


Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
PS Forgot to answer:

"But if all calculations were done using GMT in the work books, then there is no way that clock adjustments to ship's time could have entered the equations unless the GMT time of the accident was incorrectly recorded."

Absolutely correct but was the GMT of impact incorrectly recorded? Put yourself in Boxhall's place.

To find the time of impact, he would look in Scrap Log on the Chart Room table or in the Movement Book kept by the QM. The times in there would be ship time and GMT. He could not ask anyone since at that time, everyone else would be running about like the proverbial blue-arsed fly!

He would need a start position.. his work book time for the 7-30pm sights. This would be in terms of GMT. Now ask yourself: what did he do next? Obviously he would use a common time base. Since he normally worked in GMT to avoid clock-change errors, he would use that basis. I believe that in the anxiety of the moment, he was caught by that which he was trying to avoid. Whatever the circumstances, Boxhall made two fundemental mistakes.
He used the wrong engine running time from 7-30pm sights and he guessed at the speed during that eunning time. Curiously enough, he made that guess despite telling his questioners that he expected to get a strong easterly set in that area.

Here is an equally plausible answer to the riddle of why the CQD position was so far-out.

When Boxhall went into the chart room to work out the CQD position, he already had the coordinates and GMT for the 7-30pm sights in his work book. He would look in the Movement Book and see the ship time of Impact and the equivalent time in GMT read from the chronometer. These would be enterd into the Scrap Log at the end of the Watch together with a note concerning any clock change made.
If the clock had already been set back 24 minutes before impact, the GMT noted in the Movement Book at time of impact would now be 3 hours 22 minutes fast of ship time instead of the 2 hours 58 minutes it was fast of GMT at Noon April 14 and at the time of 7-30pm sights.
If Boxhall did not know that the set back had already been made, and made allowances for it in his calculations, they would look like this:


GMT of Impact from Movement Book.....15d..03h..02m..00sec.*
Add 24 minutes clock set back..........................24m..00sec.
Corrected GMT of Impact per Boxhall....15d..03h..26m..00sec.
GMT of Noon 14th.............................14d..14h..58m..00sec.
Run; Noon 14 to Impact per Boxhall 12 hours 28 minutes
Run from Noon 14 per movement book 12 hours 04 minutes

The total distance from Noon 14 to Boxhall's CQD longitude is 271.3 miles. If we think like Boxhall and use 22 knots throughout, then Titanic covered 128.3 miles in the first 5 hours 50 minutes. This left 143 miles to steam from 5-50pm until the ship would reach Boxhall's 50-14'W DR longitude.
We know they had good sights at about 7-38pm. In that time, Titanic would have covered another 39.6 miles, leaving a net 103.4 miles to cover at 22 knots from 7-38pm.
At 22 knots, Titanic would cover that distance in 4 hours 42 minutes meaning that she would get to 50-14'W at about 20 minutes after midnight. Ok! the minutes don't match but then we are working with estimations and trying to match them to the factual position of the wreck site. I think it fair to say that Boxhall did not use a run time of 4 hours and 2 minutes from time of sights to impact site.
(7-38pm to 11-40pm)

One thing is for sure: When Pitman handed over to Boxhall at 8pm that night, he would have told him the ship's average speed. He would have got this from either the engine revs. or from patent log reading divided by run time. Usually you gave two speeds: a 4 hour average speed and a general average speed from Noon.

David:

Unless that chronometer was fake and they pulled the wool over the eyes of the British Museum, the time shown there must have been EST. I see no reason why they would not avail themselves of accurate time checks and such checks were common in the US at the time. here is an extraxt from The naval Observatory history:

"Time Signals Flashed
One of the most important functions of the Naval Observatory is found in the daily distribution of the correct time to every portion of the United States. This is effected by means of telegraphic signals, which are sent out from Washington at noon daily, except Sundays. The original object of this time service was to furnish mariners in the seaboard cities with the means of regulating their chronometers;"


Here's another 'clip' from Notes on Wireless Time (1912):

"In the meantime, the coast signal service of the United States Navy (through its present wireless telegraph station) is furnishing time signals daily, as well as hydrographic information, to all vessels with receiving apparatus that may be within range of one of these stations. The signals are sent from the Naval observatory, Washington, for the Atlantic Coast, between 11:55 a. m. and noon of the 75th meridian west of Greenwich."
The Greenwich system still depended on a dropping ball until the early 1920's

Jim C.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hello Doug!

There was a variety of time pieces recovered from bodies.
To understand what might have been showing on any of these at the time of sinking, we have to first look at what effect a retardation of time pieces might show at the moment they were submerged.. set the scene as it were.

At Noon on April 14, all of Titanic's clocks and those of most of her passengers and crew would show 14 days, 12 hours, 00 minutes 00 seconds.
The equivalent EST would have been 14 days, 09 hours, 58 minutes 00 seconds.
The equivalent GMT would have been 14 days, 02 hours 58 minutes 00? seconds.
In other words; at Noon, Titanic's clocks were 2 hours 58 minutes SLOW of GMT and 2 hours 02 minutes FAST of EST.

The plan was to retard the ships clocks a full 47 minutes during the night so that at Noon on April 15,the ship's clocks would be 3 hours 45 minutes SLOW of GMT and 1 hour 15 minutes FAST of EST.
For the crew, this change would be made in two parts. At Midnight on April 14, the Watchkeeper' clocks would be retarded 24 minutes. Then, Titanic's clocks would be 3 hours 22 minutes SLOW of GMT and 1 hour 38 minutes FAST of EST.

If, as seems the case, Titanic did have one of her two chronometers set to EST and the one exhibited at the British Science Museum is genuine, then the time of sinking was almost sure to have been 15 days, 00 hours, 39 minutes Eastern Standard Time. (forget about the seconds)

It follows that at the time of sinking:

A partially retarded clock would show 15 days, 02 hours 17 minutes.
A fully retarded clock would have been retarded a further 23 minutes and show 15 days, 01 hour, 44 minutes.
An unchanged clock would show 15 days, 02 hours 41 minutes.

All these times only hold good for time-pieces which were submerged at exactly the same moment and were synchonised with the ship's chronometers. People in the Water before the bridge submerged would have earlier times and those after the final plunge would have a few minutes later. There would, of course be anomolies where personal watches were of high or poor quality etc.

Those having unaltered time would, in the main, be passengers.
Those with partially adjusted time would be those going on Watch at Midnight April 14.
Those with Fully retarded time-pieces would be passengers and mainly those crew members who went off duty before Midnight April 14 and were not due back on duty before 6am on April 15. Such crew members would be Deck and Catering Staff Day workers.

How does the foregoing match with reports of time pieces?

Full set-back

Steward Sidney Sedunary.....15d-01h-50min. Dayworker.
Passenger John Chapman..... .15d-01h-45min.
Steward Thomas Mullin..........15d-01h-39min. (re-creation shows this time)
Stewardess Annie Robinson....15d-01h-40min.
Passenger Malcolm Johanssen.15d-01h-37min.

Partially set-back:

Pitman 3rd Officer...15d-02h-20m.
"Gerald Ross (an electrician on the Mackay Bennett) said: 'Practically all the other watches on bodies we recovered had stopped at 2:10.'
Wallace Hartley band leader....15d-02h-20min.

Unaltered time-pieces:

Mr Mauritz Nils Martin í…dahl: Watch stopped at 15d-02h-34min.

I'm sure others on this site can quote more examples.

Jim C.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Re my post #75

Attachment 488 did not show;

Here it is now:

img006.jpg

Here's 489 as well:

Suggested movement for 14.JPG

Jim C

img006.jpg


Suggested movement for 14.JPG
 

Doug Criner

Member
Dec 2, 2009
447
68
133
USA
Re: the chronometer recovered from the wreck

Is it conceivable that the conservators that restored the chronometer somehow reassembled it showing a different time? Presumably, they took photos of it before restoration that could dispel any such concern. The two second hands are missing, possibly broken off due to corrosion while submerged. Perhaps the minute or hour hands were broken too, and the conservators didn't know exactly where they belonged on the clock face? The minute and hour hands, along with their concentric drive shafts, seem to be in almost like-new condition - even though I assume that the hands were brass while the shaft appears to be of a less noble metal, such as iron. Strange.

The chronometer's dial reads "R.W. Ray & Co., 17 South Castle, Liverpool". J.W. Ray built sextants and chronometers. According to TITANIC The Ship Magnicant, Vol. 1, p. 511, "Evidence from the chronometers of other White Star Line ships of the pre-First World War era indicate that the manufacturer of Titanic's chronometer was likely J. Sewill of Liverpool." It now seems that assumption was incorrect. I suppose that it is possible that each of the two chronometers were by different manufacturers.

But back to the fish fry. I would have expected that both chronometers would have been set to GMT. The only reason I can think of for setting one to New York time would be for ease in checking the New York time, sort of like a wall of clocks in the lobby of international hotels showing the time in major cities around the world. But the night before Titancic came within a day of approaching New York, the ship's time would have been set to New York, so after that point there would be no need to consult a chronometer set to New York time - it would be displayed throughout the ship. And before that point in time, I think anyone just casually wondering what time it was in New York (or Greenwich, for that matter) would be discouraged from touching a chronometer. The chronometers should have been used for navigation only, and there would have been no reason to know New York time for navigational purposes.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,486
1,755
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Ouch!!! Got to keep you honest. Under the assumptions stated, a fully retarded clock would show 1:54, not 1:44, and that changes a few things.

Times that I dug up include:

On stopped watches claimed by survivors:
2:20 R. Daniel
2:22 A. Gracie
2:21 F. Prentice
2:22 J. Thayer
1:50 A. Weikman

Reported from someone's time piece seen in a lifeboat:
2:30 R. Lee & L. Beesley from unnamed person's watch in boat 13
2:20 M. Thayer from unnamed passenger in boat 4
2:20 H. Pitman from his watch in boat 5
2:20 D. Minihan from unnamed man's watch in boat 15
1:40 A. Robinson 'altered time' from her watch in boat 11

On recovered pocket watches of victims:
1:37 on body #37 M. Johnson
2:16 on body #41 E. Stone
2:19 on body #142 C. Asplund
3:21 on body #155 J. Gill
2:25 on body #166 A. Partner
2:25 on body #224 W. Hartley
1:27 on body #225 J. March
3:07 on body #287 R. Norman

What we find, as expected, most in the 2:20-ish range, give or take 5 min. If 2:20 was unadjusted time then most of these fall neatly into place. Fully retarded time would be 1:33. The times on Johnson's, Robinson's and March's watches would show fully adjusted times. Gill's time was 1 hour ahead for some reason. Norman's time was either fully adjusted ahead instead of back, or he forgot to set his timepiece to April 14 time and was still carrying April 13 time.


There is no good reason for passengers, victualling staff or day workers to carry partially adjusted time on their timepieces. There were NO reports of any clocks being put back, and I would think that most passengers, victually staff or day workers either carried unadjusted time, or set their timepieces back by the expected amount before retiring for the night. I know of one passenger, Marie Jerwan, who went to check on the correct time in the lounge so she could put her watch back by 50 minutes before retiring. That was at 10:30. (By the way, she said the ship collided at 11:45.)

I tend to agree with David about the two chronometers being set to GMT. When a noon signal was sent by telegraph to ports on the east coast, chronometers would read close 5:00 on their clock faces. No big deal about the hour hand. The chronometer in the museum photo was manufactured by J W Ray & Co., the same people who built the engine order telegraphs. I was under the impression the chronometers in the chartroom of these ships were supplied by J. Sewill of Liverpool.

Another thing to think about is the assumption made here that the time on the recovered timepiece would immediately stop when the bridge went under.

Enough for one day.
 
Mar 18, 2008
2,652
1,153
248
Germany
I find it very unlikely that the chronometer was "manipulated" by the conservators. As with the salvaged personal watches, they were fully preserved and the hands (if there were any) were left in the position. At last this was the practise in the conservation lab in France. I think I saw somewhere an image of it before restauration, but can not remember where.

By the way, didn't the clock in the Straus Cabin (C-55) show 2:20?
 
Mar 18, 2008
2,652
1,153
248
Germany
Re my post #75

Here's 489 as well:

View attachment 496

Jim C

Jim, I think you are making a little to much assumptions here. Boats A & D could not have been in that position you placed them, also Lowe took first D in tow and then rescued the people from boat A (and both while he was on his way to Carpathia).
I see that you have in your post No. 75 a few more things which are not quite right. (Will write when more time.)
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hello lads!

My how a new discovery gets the grey-matter working! Mine was obviously experiencing a 'virus'. Thanks for the correction Sam!

If you read carefully what I wrote, you will note that I did make allowances for discrepancies etc. I specifically wrote:

"All these times only hold good for time-pieces which were submerged at exactly the same moment and were synchonised with the ship's chronometers.".

As for your exampes:

You wrote:

"There is no good reason for passengers, victualling staff or day workers to carry partially adjusted time on their timepieces.

There certainly is no obvious reason in the case for day workers and passengers but there would be for 12 to 4am puplic room and night watch stewards. There is evidence of such stewards waiting to go on duty when impact took place and they would most certainly not be waiting any more than 15 minutes to do so. So what time would they have? And what clocks would those already on duty be 'watching' to see if their reliefs were on time?

As for passengers and victualling staff on day work:

It would be an arbitrary decision on the part of passengers but the latter would have made a full 47 minute set-back before turning-in.
This means that if impact took place at or about 11-40pm unaltered time, day-workers would have ( 11-40pm minus 47 minutes )10-53pm on their personal time pieces.
If however the clocks showing 11-40pm at time of impact had already been set-back 24 minutes at time of impact, then time pieces which had been set back the full 47 minutes would show( 11-40pm minus 23 minutes ) 11-17pm.

To check for evidence of day-worker time evidence, I refer you to the evidence given by Assistant First Class Cook John Collins to Senator Bourne on Day 7 of the US Senate Inquiry.
Collins was very specific about times on his personal clock.; even correcting time for clock error.
He was awakened by the impact at 11-20pm by his bedside clock. However, he told his questioner that his clock was 5 minutes fast therefore the true time on his fully set-back clock was 11-15pm.
I chose Collins particularly because he was a 'first-tripper'. As such, he would have wished to make absolutely sure that he did not blot his 'copy-book' on his first ship my sleeping-in or arriving late for work.

If Collins was wakened by the impact at 11-15pm on a fully retarded clock and the ship time of impact was 11-40pm then we have to add 47 minutes to Collins's time to get the April 14.. unadjusted..time of impact. This gives a time of 2 minutes past Midnight April 14 for the moment of impact

As you say, there are many questions unanswered. Two of these immediately come to mind.

I think of Algernon Barkworth and those purported to be waiting up for a clock change:
I can easily understand passengers waiting up an extra 25 minutes to check their watches; but over 3/4 of an hour? Very strange indeed!

Then there's the evidence of Colonel Gracie: He stated that he was awakened by the impact at 12 o'clock yet also states that by the same time-piece, the ship went down at 02-22am. Also very strange indeed.
I understand that he changed his evidence at a later date. Even more strange!

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the main point here is the time showing on that recovered chronometer.

The chronometers were the best protected time recorders on board that ship. Every other time-keeping device was of varying quality and accuracy and if stopped, did so at vaying times depending on immersion in the sea.
If we readily use the evidence of all these other time-keeping devices to prove our various points, then we must, in all honesty use the evidence provided by this particular chronometer.
It has been suggested that it might have been tampered-with. If so, why would they chose a particular setting which could only have one reference to the accident.. nomatter how vague?

The following cannot be disputed.

If the time of Titanic sinking was 15d 02h 20min and the recovered chronometer had been set to GMT it would have showed 05-18am when it stopped. One set to EST would show 00-18pm.


But why, in any case, did Titanic Carry 2 chronometers?
It has been suggested she did so in case one broke-down. I quote from "Michael, Brother of Jerry" by Jack London:

" 'But if you only have two chronometers, how can you tell which has gone wrong?' Captain Doane would demand."

Perhaps Titanic's second chronometer was set to EST so that if the first one went kaput on the way across the pond, the second would continue to give good service until it could be checked in New York and the other one put ashore there for repair or renewal? Now that would make good sense.

Jim C.
 

Doug Criner

Member
Dec 2, 2009
447
68
133
USA
Perhaps Titanic's second chronometer was set to EST so that if the first one went kaput on the way across the pond, the second would continue to give good service until it could be checked in New York and the other one put ashore there for repair or renewal? Now that would make good sense.
If either chronometer conked out (quit running), the other could be relied upon - whether it was set to GMT or New York time, right? (GMT = New York + 5 hours.) Likewise, a chronometer set to either GMT or New York time could be checked just as easily when reaching New York.

Addressing the question posed by Jack London's character: If the two chronometers began deviating, then the ship would know there was a problem (which they wouldn't if they carried but one chronometer), and proceed with extra caution. In the case of the westbound Titanic, when the ship reached within range of time signals broadcast by the U.S. Navy, the correct time could be established. Until they got within range of time signals, they could dead reckon for longitude and use the sun and Polaris to fix the latitude. Without time signals, the ship perhaps could resolve celestial sights for each of the two times - and bracket the fix or, by comparison to the DR position, identify which clock is in error. Q.E.D.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hello Ioannis!

You wrote:

Boats A & D could not have been in that position you placed them, also Lowe took first D in tow and then rescued the people from boat A (and both while he was on his way to Carpathia)."!

I don't understand. 'A' was washed of the bridge and in a sinking condition so would remain close to where the bridge once was. 'D' was off the port side at first then joined 14, 10, 12 and another at the aft end port side, near to the majority of people in the water and wreckage.

You are right about the towing sequence. Got a bit mixed-up there (that virus again). Arthur Bright said Lowe towed 'D' to where 'A' was and Lowe said the same thing.
In my sketch, I show where 'A' must have been relative to boat 14 and 'D' if Titanic had gone down while heading west. Here's a modification of that sketch showing dotted relative positions for Titanic:

Lug sailing limits.jpg

Obviously we can't know the exact relative positions of all the players.

My point is that if Titanic was heading North when she sank and there was a north wind blowing as well as a south-setting current; all floating things would have moved in the same direction under the influence of the wind and current. High profile things would have moved faster than those with low profiles after the wind began blowing. It follows that things to the south of other things would have remained south of them. In that case, boat 14 would have had to sail north to reach anything to the north of her. Collapsible 'A' would most certainly be to the north of lifeboat 14 if Titanic had sank while heading north. However, since Lowe and his flotilla moved closer to the people and wreckage, 'A' would have been west and slightly south of 14 had Titanic gone down heading west.

Jim C.

Lug sailing limits.jpg
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hello Doug!

People sailed the world long before the invention of a chronometer. The advent just made navigation more accurate and provided a solution to the longitude problem. The problem here is what was showing on the dial of the recovered chronometer. I' m pretty sure it was pre-set at EST. Here's why.

Before the advent of wireless time signals... before 1905 in the US and before 1920 in the UK, ship's set their chronometers to local meantime at each port of departure. Most ports had a time ball which was dropped at an exact moment. Some did it at local Noon... 12 o'clock, others at 1pm. Perhaps the fact that one of Titanic's chronometers seems to be set to EST was a throw-back from the very recent 'old days'? After all, Titanic was built to run between two ports of origin.. Southampton and New York. At each of these ports, there was an efficient means of checking chronometers. New York was the most accurate.

Incidentally, EST was based on longitude of 75 degrees west which is 5 hours SLOW of GMT . New York time was based on longitude of 73 degrees, 45 minutes West. which is 4 hours 55 minutes SLOW of GMT.

The latter time difference was used by navigators and was a point within sight of Sandy Hook at the entrance to New York Harbour. British and most other Navigators did not work in ship time but in hours, minutes and seconds relative to a chosen prime meridian. Thus they were concerned with the change of longitude from that meridian rather than a change of ship's aparent time. The British Nautical Almanac times were all in GMT so they needed to convert to that base to work cellestial observations.

Significantly; when Lightoller and Boxhall were questioned as to the time difference between ship and New York. both indicated that ship time was 1 hour and 33 minutes FAST of New York time. But was that New York time or EST?

At Noon on April 14, ship time was 2 hours 02 minutes FAST of EST. If Lightoller and Boxhall meant ship time was 1 hour 33 minutes FAST of EST then the ship's clocks had been retarded 29 minutes and the run time from Noon to impact was (2 hours 2 minutes minus 1 hour 33 minutes) 12 hours 9 minutes. But we understand that the clocks were to be set back 24 minutes for the first part of the total planned clock alteration of 47 minutes. So where did the extra 5 minutes come from?
Fairly obvious! The ship's officers were talking about the difference between ship time and New York time... not EST.

If the recovered chronomer was set to New York time then ship time when it stopped was 00-39 +1 hr. 33 min. = 15d-01h-12m.
However if it was set to EST, the equivalent ship time was 00-39 + 1h 38m = 15d-02h-17m.
According to Pitman, the ship disappeared 3 minutes later at 02-20am by his watch. Surely all this is not a mere coincidence?

What is certain, is the fact that her wireless operators were working on EST and had been doing so after the ship passed a certain westerly longitude on the voyage from Queenstown.

Jim C.

PS: If I'm right, then the corrected CQD was sent at 10-25pm EST + 1 hr. 38 m. = 3 minutes past midnight ship time..23 minutes after impact. It will be remembered that the Junior Wireless Operator said that Captain Smith had given the first CQD to be sent at or about midnight when he, the junior, was in the process of relieving the senior Operator Phillips. Boxhall's corrected CQD was sent minutes after that!

Additionally, this timing fits neatly with Boxhall's movements.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,486
1,755
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
>>The ship's officers were talking about the difference between ship time and New York time... not EST.<<

Not true. Boxhall was quite clear in saying "At 11.46 p.m., ship's time, it was 10.13 Washington time, or New York time." He was talking about EST which was the time used in both those places in 1912. The origin of that time difference goes back to the foundering time reported by Rostron in a wireless message to Haddock sent at 4pm EST on Apr 15 when in that message he said the time of foundering was 2.20 ship's time, 5.47 GMT. And that came about by someone using the local mean time of Carpathia's position for 7.30 GMT on Apr 15, "Lat. 41.15 north, long. 51.45 west," that Rostron sent to Haddock just 45 minutes earlier. LMT for long. 51.45 west is precisely 1 h 33 m 0s ahead of EST (which is set for long. 75.00 west), and 3 h 27 m 0 s behing GMT. Someone blew it.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,591
1,367
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Hello Sam!

Got a bit delayed on this one.

Your argument about the 1 hour 33 minute ship time difference holds good if both Boxhall and Lightoller were totally unaware of the difference between ship time and New York time at the time of the accident. Is this credible?
It is all very well if we confine things to the evidence of Boxhall. But Boxhall got quite a few things wrong that night. However, it does not detract from what I have outlined regarding New York time and EST. The first converts to a longitude on the water. The second does not.
How do you think a professional sea-farer in 1912 being quizzed by a land-lubber might explain the niceties of cellestial navigation and the use of longitude time v. arbitrary time zones?
In any case it just does not make sense for either Lightoller or Boxhall to quote a 1 hour 33 minute time difference between New York and ship time when it should have been 2 hours 2 minutes on an unchanged clock. These men were questioned separately but both most certainly knew that the time difference at April 14 Noon between EST and ship time was 2 hours 02 minutes. Why should they change it to something else?

Captain Lord of Californian gave a time difference of 1 hour 50 minutes between New York and ship time but significantly, his Wireless Operator Evans gave a difference of 1 hour 55 minutes.

If we use the same criteria, and there had not been a clock alteration before impact then Titanic's captain (if he had survived) would have given a time difference of 2 hours 2 minutes and his wireless operator would have given a difference of 2 hours 7 minutes.
On the other hand, if there had been a 24 minute time change on Titanic, the answers would have been 1 hour 33 minutes and 1 hour 38 minutes respectively.

As for times on Carpathia:

"Mr. ROSTRON.
The New York time at 12:35 was 10:45 p. m. Sunday night."


That's a difference of 1 hour 40 minutes. We can make a rough check on his figures.

Running back from his 12-35 DR position when he turned to an approximate Noon on April 14 would give him a time difference from EST of 1 hour 32 minutes and from New York Time of 1 hour 27 minutes. If Rostron had not made an allowance for the Gulf Stream and made good a speed of 14 knots over the previous 12 hours then the ship's clocks would be partially advanced 11 or 12 minutes at midnight, April 14. This would then increase the difference between ship and EST or NY time to 1 hour 44 minutes and 1 hour 39 minutes respectively.
If anything: Rostron's quoted time difference seems to be using a GMT - New York time difference of 4 hours 55 minutes and not 5 hours.


Continuing with Carpathia as an example.....

Bearing in mind that Cunard and White Star ships often quoted signals in GMT as well as ship time..how do you explain the following?:

Day 18..US Senate Inquiry: evidence from Process Verbal of the Wireles Operator of RMS Olympic:

"This message was relayed through the Olympic from the Carpathia, and is as follows:

Carpathia. Cunard New York and Liverpool:
Titanic struck iceberg Monday. 3 a. m., 41.16 north,. 50.14 west. Carpathia picked up many passengers in boats. Will wire further particulars later. Proceeding back to New York.

ROSTRON."


Apart from the glaring error in the CQD position latitude; the time of 3am is surely an equivalent GMT?

If Titanic hit the iceberg at 15d 03h 00min. GMT and there was no clock change then, using an unaltered 2 hours 58 minutes Noon 14 time difference from GMT; she hit it at 15d 00h 02min ship time.
If however, there had been a 24 minute clock change then she hit it at 11-38pm ship time.

Captain Haddock of RMS Olympic expressed the following opinion:

From Day 18 of the US Inquiry:

" Yes. At least, I understood the accident was somewhere about midnight of the 14th or 15th."

Rostron gave the GMT of sinking as 15d 05h 47m meaning that Titanic was afloat for either 2 hours 18 minutes or 2 hours and 47 minutes after impact. However the evidence suggest it was 2 hours and 40 minutes. In Boxhall's case, it was 2 hours 34 minutes.

There is another consideration regarding Rostron's 3 am GMT time of impact and that is the time between impact and the transmission of the corrected CQD position.

The CQD was received at 10-25 EST. The eqivalent GMT was 15d 03h 25min. If impact was, as reported by Rostron, 15d 03h 00m, then it was transmitted 25 minutes after impact.. not the popular 45 minutes after impact as would have been the case if impact had taken place at 11-40 pm ship time
(15d 02h 38m GMT) on an unaltered clock.

"And that came about by someone using the local mean time of Carpathia's position for 7.30 GMT on Apr 15 "Lat. 41.15 north, long. 51.45 west,"

How can you possibly know that? Who would that 'someone' be? More to the point: do you really believe that an experienced navigator would think along such lines?

7-30 GMT? I presume that is pm. If so then Carpathia cleared the south end of the ice almost 6 hours earlier at about 1-30pm GMT... near to Noon ship time. In fact, her ship diff EST would have been almost exactly 1 hour 40 minutes at Noon that day and there would have been no clock change made from the previous midnight.
Sam, the only source of such detailed information available to Rostron was the surviving officers.. Boxhall, Lightoller, Pitman and Lowe. These four would have been very closely questioned. It would not have been left to guess work by any of Carpathia's officers.

You still have not addressed the problem about the recovered chronometer.

Jim C.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads