Who would you save


George Behe

Member
Dec 11, 1999
1,280
2
0
Hi, Nathan!

> Is there any other standard >that the darkness of a moonless night can compare >to?

Just for the sake of completeness, Captain Rostron said he was able to spot icebergs in the darkness at a range of 1 - 2 miles (which proved to be very helpful when it came time to steer the Carpathia around them.) :)

All my best,

George
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,620
424
283
Easley South Carolina
Hi Nathan, go into a room with the windows blacked out, turn off the lights, put on a blindfold, stick your head in a used coal sack. That should give you some idea of what it's like. After awhile though, if you're not dazzled by bright lights, your eyes do adjust and you can make things out, sometimes surprisingly well if you have starlight to work with.

I'm sure anyone close enough and in the right vantage point would be able to make out the break up well enough, and some appear to have done just that.

How would the Titanic looked? Like a blackened shape against the stars!

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
I

I. M. McVey

Guest
Hallo, all!

Just to put in another 2p (my, I am cheap tonight!), it really varies from look-out to look-out, as well. I have not found a night yet so dark I couldn't make out at least what was a few miles ahead of me, but this is a bit of a 'freakish' ability, and is a bit persnickity, as well. Whilst I can make out things on deck and out to sea on a moonless night under cloud cover, I often have to ask for help discerning a ship's sidelight colours, which makes folk amused, because I can keep my friends from tripping on deck, but as they gleefully ask me, why cannot I tell red from green on a dim light?

By the same token, I can see extremely far during daytime without glasses, where a colleague may have to use glasses to find the same contact. We humans are surprisingly variable in our eyesight abilities, even when the lot of us are 20/20.

Just some food for thought...

Ilya M
 
C

Christine Geyer

Guest
Dear all,

about the testimony regarding the breaking in two or going down in one I would imagine that it really depended on the position view that the witnesses had at that time. The lifeboats were widespread around the ship and even the distance must've been a point. We have seen that even very careful watchers like Lawrence Beesley, who had a very observant mind and paid attention to even the details, was fooled by his eyes.

Michael, thanks for the professional insight. And you pointed out one burning question. I mean how do we know if Smith was not called to the bridge ? Or order might have been given that in spite of their knowledge of already being in the icefield not to turn down speed ?

Lights gave testimony about his conversation with Cpt. Smith, while a female passenger swore that at the affecting time she saw the Captain at the dining table. And while one officer said that Smith had not been on the bridge at all during the night another said he saw him "frequently during the watch". Lot of contradictions here and one cannot fend of the feeling that the White Star Line tried hardly to cover up the real facts.

Thanks Ing for the tip, I'll jump into the archives right now before I only repeat things here. Georges book is the latest addition on my titanic-booklist now. Sounds interesting ! I hadn't known about that "unlost love"
happy.gif
between Fleet and Hichens, that was quite interesting as well !

Michael, I had another - maybe naive
proud.gif
- idea and question. Maybe you can answer this for me: They said in the icefield were small pieces of ice, growlers, and even bergs. All kind of sizes. I don't have a good imagination of the general noticeable "noise" of the engines while the ship was sailing. But since we know that she was already very far into the icefield, would it not have been audible when she hit those smaller pices of ice or growlers at the bow ?? Or would the general sounds of the ship drown those sounds out ?

Many regards
Christine
 
Nov 22, 2000
1,458
3
168
Michael, Sorry to appear frivolous but could you please tell me when I can take my head out of the coal sack - only you didn't mention it in your posting and it's awfully dark in here!
 
C

Christine Geyer

Guest
Geoff, I'd take it out very quickly, otherwise they're coming to crack it up in pieces and sell it sealed in small boxes for $19.99. What a waste of genius...

proud.gif
Christine
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,620
424
283
Easley South Carolina
Geoff, you can take your head out at any time.
wink.gif


Christine, if the Titanic clipped the odd fragment of field ice, I doubt it would have sounded like anything more then a bump against the hull. As it stands, I tend to doubt that the Titanic hit anything substantial enough to notice at all...until they hit the big one.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Sep 5, 2001
99
0
136
As a college student many of my regular studies have been suspended for a few days as a result of today's tragedy in New York.

Indeed, the world has changed today, much as it did in 1912.

Nathan Robison
 
B

Bill DeSena

Guest
Thomas Andrews, he designed the ship and would probably have been the most knowledgable about what type of damage caused her to sink.

Along with Murdoch, Captain Smith, because his actions and thoughts regarding the accident would be most helpful in coloring in the balnks about why certain things were or were not done after the collision.

Cheers
Bill
 

Charmaine Sia

Member
Nov 25, 2001
135
2
148
This post is probably really late in the coming, but this thought occurred to me while reading all this:

Even if somebody who died was saved, how much would it have helped? True, doubtless we want to know from themselves what happened, but we have all seen the numerous falsehoods that went into the testimonies, whether on purpose or truly by accident. How much of the truth would we actually know if those people were saved? In this thread I noticed that the assumption was made that they would tell the truth. However, another way of looking at this is that if every part of the truth that could have been told by the survivors was told, we might not even need to save those people. I feel that that is what was really needed.

I'm sorry for veering away from the main topic, however. I would choose Murdoch because of his important role in what happened at that moment when the Titanic hit, and exactly what his actions were.

Regards,
Charmaine
 
Dec 4, 2000
3,242
490
213
Fate has called upon me to "save" nine people. I do not know any of their names. You reach for the closest outstreched hand. That is all you can do. The rescuer is not free to choose the rescued.

But, if there is one person with whom I would like to have a private chat...I'll go with Charmaine in saying it would be Murdoch. He knows why the ship met the ice.

--David G. Brown
 
C

Colin John James

Guest
I would save the SAGE family from Peterborough.

For no other reason than to give their 9 children aged 4 to 20 a chance of life. Sadly all 11 perished, surely one of the most heartbreaking of all stories.
 
H

Holly Peterson

Guest
I would save the Goodwin children, Sidney, Harold, William, Jessie, Lillian, Charles. I feel so sad that their young lives ended so soon. I often wonder who they would have become and where their lives would have taken them.