Detail about white stern light
- Thread starter Gene McCullough
- Start date
-
- Tags
- stern
Bill Sauder
Member
Hi Bob:
The whole issue of the stern light caught me by surprise last week as I was doing some work and realized I had no authoritative information on the configuration of the stern light.
I just did a cross-country move and most of my books are in storage, but I recall that, in 1910, the whole issue of running lights boils down to two categories:
"Primary Lights" (my term) which have explicit legal requirements for size, location, color, range of visibility, and even wick or filament size and orientation to the keel. Examples would be the side and foremast lights.
The other category would be "Secondary Lights" (again my term) that are far less defined, such as the ever-troublesome mainmast light, anchor light, and other portable lights. Some are mandatory, some are discretionary.
Since Cunard ships carried stern lights comparable to the forward-facing lights, I had gotten it into my head that WS would have a similar practice, and that the Cameron prop was just one of many shortcuts. Since the 401 foremast light has been recovered by RMST, and the stbd. 400 sidelight has been sold by Luxury Liner Row, my first reaction was it would have been similar to the existing WS lanterns.
Regardless of the latitude permitted by regulations at the time, what I needed was just a quick reference as to the physical configuration, so thanks again for the image.
Bill Sauder
The whole issue of the stern light caught me by surprise last week as I was doing some work and realized I had no authoritative information on the configuration of the stern light.
I just did a cross-country move and most of my books are in storage, but I recall that, in 1910, the whole issue of running lights boils down to two categories:
"Primary Lights" (my term) which have explicit legal requirements for size, location, color, range of visibility, and even wick or filament size and orientation to the keel. Examples would be the side and foremast lights.
The other category would be "Secondary Lights" (again my term) that are far less defined, such as the ever-troublesome mainmast light, anchor light, and other portable lights. Some are mandatory, some are discretionary.
Since Cunard ships carried stern lights comparable to the forward-facing lights, I had gotten it into my head that WS would have a similar practice, and that the Cameron prop was just one of many shortcuts. Since the 401 foremast light has been recovered by RMST, and the stbd. 400 sidelight has been sold by Luxury Liner Row, my first reaction was it would have been similar to the existing WS lanterns.
Regardless of the latitude permitted by regulations at the time, what I needed was just a quick reference as to the physical configuration, so thanks again for the image.
Bill Sauder
Jim Currie
Member
Bob, I think the light in Fr, Brown's pic is not the stern light.
As far as I can determine, it was mandatory to carry a stern light similar in design to the side lights. Many ships of Titanic's time carried two of each - an electric one and an oil one. What probably threw me was the reference to the stern rail as a mounting point. In fact, the early regulations stated: "Such lights should be carried as nearly as practicable on the same level as the sidelights" If Titanic's builders followed these guide-lines then the stern light should have been mounted on a bracket on the centre-line, on or above the Docking Bridge. The location shown on the picture would be a total waste of time. Indeed it looks like it might have been sited to illuminate something as there seems to be an identical one back-to-back with it.
As far as I can determine, it was mandatory to carry a stern light similar in design to the side lights. Many ships of Titanic's time carried two of each - an electric one and an oil one. What probably threw me was the reference to the stern rail as a mounting point. In fact, the early regulations stated: "Such lights should be carried as nearly as practicable on the same level as the sidelights" If Titanic's builders followed these guide-lines then the stern light should have been mounted on a bracket on the centre-line, on or above the Docking Bridge. The location shown on the picture would be a total waste of time. Indeed it looks like it might have been sited to illuminate something as there seems to be an identical one back-to-back with it.
Bill Sauder
Member
A navigating light at the level of the aft docking bridge would make sense. That was the location on the Queen Mary, and the officer stationed there could keep an eye on it. I just don't recall seeing anything on that back rail that fits the bill.
As for the need for general illumination off the ship's stern, the only thing I can think of that might need a light is to be sure the taffrail log wire doesn't foul in something, but again, if the log isn't mounted right at the ensign staff, the lamp isn't going to throw enough light to be useful.
As for the need for general illumination off the ship's stern, the only thing I can think of that might need a light is to be sure the taffrail log wire doesn't foul in something, but again, if the log isn't mounted right at the ensign staff, the lamp isn't going to throw enough light to be useful.
Samuel Halpern
Member
From "The Regulations For Preventing Collisions At Sea," as printed in Nicholls's Seamanship and Viva Voce Guide, 4th Edition, London, August 1910:
The picture Bob showed is Titanic's stern electric running light. I have a picture of Olympic's stern at her NY pier that shows the same thing in the same place. In the case of Olympic's stern, they also hung an oil lamp on the rail not far from the stern light. The oil lamp was not a navigation light, just an all around oil lamp that was hung out there while the ship was tied to the pier.
The picture Bob showed is Titanic's stern electric running light. I have a picture of Olympic's stern at her NY pier that shows the same thing in the same place. In the case of Olympic's stern, they also hung an oil lamp on the rail not far from the stern light. The oil lamp was not a navigation light, just an all around oil lamp that was hung out there while the ship was tied to the pier.
David G. Brown
RIP
It would seem that White Star went to almost no expense to meet the letter of the law.
-- David G. Brown
-- David G. Brown
Bob Read
Member
We can talk about what we speculate Titanic should have had but there just isn't any evidence for an electric stern lamp in any location other than the one in the photo. We've combed every Olympic class vessel photo for the minutest details and not once has something like what is being proposed has ever been seen. While this was not like the other navigational lights, it may have satisfied regulations, thus no other stern lamps.
Regards,
Bob Read
Regards,
Bob Read
Robert T. Paige
Member
Sorry about that, I got it wrong:
My Quote:
>>Was the "stern light" (just above Kate Winslet's head in the photo on the post) shown in "Titanic" added just for lighting effects rather than being historically correct or is this another light rather than the "stern light" in question ? I believe there is a comment to this effect on one of the DVD commentary tracks ?,
Actually, I believe the light to which I was referring would have been the light about midway up on the flagstaff rather than the stern light.
Bob Godfrey Quote:
>>She's a very conscientious passenger, who's observed that the ship appears to be going down by the head and is doing her best to redress the balance. In the picture below she's enlisted the help of another passenger, but clearly their efforts are to no avail.
<<
As you will notice from the photo, both passengers are pulling up on the railing, trying in vain to pull the Titanic up out of the sea.
Jim Currie Quote:
>>Additionally: who was standing on the iceberg shining the light on the lady in question?<<
Probably the same person who standing in a lifeboat...or another iceberg.. shining the light on the Titanic, with its shadow showing on the iceberg in "Titanic" (1953).
My Quote:
>>Was the "stern light" (just above Kate Winslet's head in the photo on the post) shown in "Titanic" added just for lighting effects rather than being historically correct or is this another light rather than the "stern light" in question ? I believe there is a comment to this effect on one of the DVD commentary tracks ?,
Actually, I believe the light to which I was referring would have been the light about midway up on the flagstaff rather than the stern light.
Bob Godfrey Quote:
>>She's a very conscientious passenger, who's observed that the ship appears to be going down by the head and is doing her best to redress the balance. In the picture below she's enlisted the help of another passenger, but clearly their efforts are to no avail.
<< As you will notice from the photo, both passengers are pulling up on the railing, trying in vain to pull the Titanic up out of the sea.
Jim Currie Quote:
>>Additionally: who was standing on the iceberg shining the light on the lady in question?<<
Probably the same person who standing in a lifeboat...or another iceberg.. shining the light on the Titanic, with its shadow showing on the iceberg in "Titanic" (1953).
Jim Currie
Member
Nice one Sam!
I wonder if the light you mention was to illuminate the area around the stern in port so that if the props were to be turned at night - people would be able to see that the area around them was clear of obstructions. In my day, we used to hang what was called a 'cluster' over the stern for that purpose. Probably 'posh' ships had permanent ones. The light shown could certainly not have met the criteria you quote from Nichols. I used and still have the next version of that.
By the way, does that one have the pages showing all the various rocket sequences? One of the earlier books has no less than 5 pages of rocket signals to be used at sea. No wonder these lads on Californian were confused!
Cheers!
Jim.
I wonder if the light you mention was to illuminate the area around the stern in port so that if the props were to be turned at night - people would be able to see that the area around them was clear of obstructions. In my day, we used to hang what was called a 'cluster' over the stern for that purpose. Probably 'posh' ships had permanent ones. The light shown could certainly not have met the criteria you quote from Nichols. I used and still have the next version of that.
By the way, does that one have the pages showing all the various rocket sequences? One of the earlier books has no less than 5 pages of rocket signals to be used at sea. No wonder these lads on Californian were confused!
Cheers!
Jim.
Similar threads
