Titanic's Rockets Timeline

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Has it been THAT long since we wrote that article? Time flies.<<

We started this project in the late spring of 2001 and got it published just befor the 9-11 attacks. Lots of water under the bridge since then.

>>And I'm still of the opinion that the Californian's lack of proper response hinges largely on Stone's failure to properly convey what he saw that night.<<

Which stooge dod we compare this guy with? Larry? Curly Joe?

Tracy, you've probably done more follow up research on some of these guys then any of us. Is there anything in his subsequent career that stands out which might help understand his character?

 

[Paul Lee]

Apparently, if Stone's son told him anything else about his time on the Californian after meeting Leslie Reade in the 1960s, he took it with him to the grave. Stone's son died about ten years ago and his Herbert's grandson doesn't know anything more than what has been published already.

 

[Paul Slish]

The full text of John Stone's letter was not printed in "The Ship That Stood Still." Does anyone know it whereabouts? It would be interesting to see that letter posted. Leslie Reade said it contained details about Herbert Stone's subsequent career.

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Would More Rockets Have Helped? I think so considering that only 8 were fired in period of about an hour (12:45-1:45 AM) which comes out to a rocket being fired every 7.5 minutes (8/60=7.5). not that this happened to be the case as we don't know exactly when each rocket was fired and 12:45-1:45 was simply my estimate based on Stone's & Gibsons testimony.

Paul Slish

I look forward to reading your upcoming article.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>I think so considering that only 8 were fired in period of about an hour <<

Actually, that may not be accurate. That's what Stone and Gibson reported seeing, but nobody on Titanic kept an exact count, and the two guys on the Californian aren't exactly steller examples of reliability. I'd treat any numbers as suspect.

 

[Paul Lee]

A copy is in the Lord-Macquitty Collection at the National Maritime Museum

Paul

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Michael

Well just as some people have used Titanic's Wreck as an Anchoring spot to represent her position the entire time she was sinking, I thought I'd use 8 as it was the most accepted number on the subject, to be fair however lets say 8 is the minimum number. the auctual number of rockets fired will never be known. estimates vary 8 to 13. 8 technically making a rocket being fired every 7.5 minutes. 9 being every 6.6 minutes, 10 being every 6 minutes, 11 being every 5.4 minutes, 12 being every 5 minutes, 13 being every 4.6 minutes. these may all seem like very short times, but when your out in the cold 4.6 to 7.5 minutes can seem like a long time.

I cant remember the exact number of rockets carried by Titanic, but it was either 30 or 32. 30 being equal to a rocket every 2 minutes, 32 being every 1.8 minutes. whether or not it this would have signalled distress to Stone we'll never know, but I would think the chances of that happening would be better.

As for the reliability of Stone and Gibson. well to some degree I would think there would certainly be some things where their memory was playing tricks on them while they were testifying at British Inquiry, I suppose this would only be natural though as some time had passed between that night and their testifying at the British Inquiry. and some better examples of witnesses were not Stellar examples of reliability would be Groves and Ernest Gill.

 

[Dave Gittins]

There were 36 socket signals, plus 12 green rockets that could have been used at a pinch. There was not much excuse for not firing them enthusiastically. It was no time for economy!

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>whether or not it this would have signalled distress to Stone we'll never know,<<

You're probably right. He didn't seem to get it when he saw the ones that he did and I have to wonder what he was thinking or even if he was thinking. Nearly all of the witnesses were problematic for one reason or another, but I have to agree that Gill takes the cake. About all his testimony "proved" was that something happened and the crew was aware of it.

 

[Dave Gittins]

I wish Groves had written a statement for Captain Lord, like Gibson and Stone. His evidence was given after so much of the story was common knowledge.

A notable instance is his time when he saw a ship turn and stop. If we could trust his 11-40pm. we'd have the answer to the vexed question of Titanic's clock setting. If only!

There's also the question of how much Stone, Stewart and Lord were in cahoots. Both Stewart and Stone were evidently prepared to go along with Lord's Boston fictions. I'm not too confident in the whole Californian crowd.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Both Stewart and Stone were evidently prepared to go along with Lord's Boston fictions.<<

Of course they were. They had nothing to gain be being completely candid and everything to lose. Stewart may not have been on watch, but by taking part in the Cover Your Aft operation, he could be nailed for subourning purjury, falsifying official statements or whatever they preferred to call it.

As the guy on watch, Stone's motivations should be fairly obvious.

 

[Bill Wormstedt]

Minor correction to Jesse's numbers above - estimates vary from SEVEN to 13. Quartermaster Rowe, in letters to the THS in 1963, was very specific that only 7 rockets were fired.

Was QM Rowe correct? Don't know. Boxhall claimed to have fired at least one rocket before Rowe came forward. Still, the low end for extimates must be 7.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

"He [Stone] didn't seem to get it when he saw the ones that he did and I have to wonder what he was thinking or even if he was thinking. "

Oh, he got it all right. The intervals were short enough that he knew what he saw meant distress. He admitted to that in testimony.

8035. (The Commissioner.) Now do think about what you are saying. You have just told me that what you saw from that steamer was exactly what you had been taught to understand were signals of distress. You told me so? - Yes.

The interval between rockets was not the confusing part. The apparent change of bearings was, as was the lack of concern expressed by Lord when he first called down on the speaking tube. But the latter point may have been Stone's own fault depending on just what he actually told Lord he saw in the first place. (See Gibson's letter to Lord on Apr 18.)

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Bill: QM Bright estimated a half dozen. That makes the low end 6. But it doesn't matter since nobody really kept a count. The only thing we know is the 8 were seen from the Californian whenever they bothered to look over the weather cloth.

Dave, you wrote, "A notable instance is his time when he saw a ship turn and stop. If we could trust his 11-40pm. we'd have the answer to the vexed question of Titanic's clock setting. If only!"

Stone also made reference to "one bell" as the time that Groves told him that he noticed that the steamer had stopped. This is when he took over watch from Groves a little after midnight. On the Californian this "one bell" warning was at 20 minutes before they struck 8 bells for the change of watch. So I don't think it had anything to do with what Groves later on learned.

A better time sync would be the 2:05 am time that the lights of the steamer disappeared from view which was taken off the wheelhouse clock by Gibson as he went below to wake up Lord. The lights on the Titanic went out suddenly just as she started to break in two just minutes before the stern went under.

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Bill

Some Estimates are as low as 6 (Refer British & American Inquiry), and yes even seven. seeing how Stone saw 8, and reported the 5 Gibson, and they both saw the last 3 I decided a minimum of 8 sounded best.

I have rechecked all my sources and it turns out there was 36 Socket Signals as Dave Gittins said in a previous post. for those wondering that equals a Socket Signal being fired every 1.6 Minutes.

As for the 12 Green Rockets, Weren't they Suppose to the White Star Company Signals?