Sam,
"On the night of April 14/15, we know that relative wind conditions where Californian had stopped were described as "light airs and calms." Those light airs are what caused Californian to swing around the way it did, otherwise, it would have stayed pointing more or less in an eastward direction after coming to its initial stop, south setting current or no current. The evidence given by QM Rowe suggests that Titanic's bow was also swinging but very slowly through north which implies that it too was subjected to some very light realtive airs and calms."
Obviously you have never been on a ship adrift in light airs. Or been on ship or boat moored or at anchor in light airs sans current. Let me tell you what really happens... you 'hang' then swing one way or another in a totally unpredictable way. In my last job as Harbour Master, we had a marina section with berths for private yachts and two very large buoyed areas of 'dead water' for visiting yachts. Our harbour was extremely sheltered so we had many days with flat calm and light airs, particularly when dawn and high or low water coincided because we had about 10 minutes of slack tide at that time. Because if the unpredictable behaviour of a vessel in light airs, we had to make sure that vessels moored to buoys had enough room to swing in opposite directions to each other because that's exactly what they might just do in light airs. Obviously we had to regulate vessel length using these buoys. I do know a bit about light airs.
Californian did not swing right because of the light airs, she did so because her master was a very good seaman. He applied right full rudder and went full astern on his single screw. Classic! Californian's bow would start to swing to the right very quickly under the influence of the rudder. It would then be put amidship and the stern would cant very rapidly to the left due to the transverse thrust of the propeller. In such a situation and in flat calm conditions with no current, the bow would have kept swinging to the right, through North, East then South and would have continued to do so at ever decreasing speed unless there had been a current running from the north. If such a current had been running then as soon as Californian's bow passed through North and she presented her port bow to the current, her rate of swing would have increased even faster. She would swing through East but as her bow did so, her stern would come up into the current. The current would then be greatest on the stern area and her bow swing would be checked and then would swing back toward the east. Thereafter, she would see-saw beam onto the current as she was carried southward. Her bow would never point west.
We have a saying in Scotland Sam. I suspect you have it in your part of the world too. "Never try to teach your Grannie how to suck eggs"
As for De Coverly and the Labrador Current. He performed a lazy man's analysis.
What pointers to it did he use? The presense of ice so far south? The falling water temperature?
Ice is transported by wind as well as currents. Like the debris you mentioned, different kinds of ice are effected in different ways by each. Different types of ice are transported at different speeds by the same transporting force. Normally pack ice was never seen so far south of the Grand Banks or so far away from it's birth place near to land. How did it end-up where it did? (Boxhall actually remarked on this)
De Coverly forgot that pack ice seldom, if ever co-exists with ice bergs in the open ocean. This is principally because pack ice and shallow draft floes are more effected by wind than by current whereas, bergs with big sail areas and deep drafts have the best of both worlds. He and everyone else should be asking the question: how did these so different types of sea ice get mixed-in together?
Then there's your favourite; the falling water temperature after Longitude 49W. A sure-fire indicator that the ships had come under the influence of a cold, south-setting current? There's an excuse for you but not De Coverly. He forgot what he was taught as a cadet.
Let me quote to you from the British sailor's " Met Bible".. Meteorology for Seamen by Commander C. R. Burgess, O.B.E., RN. FR.Met.S. and published by Brown Son & Ferguson:
" Since the temperature at which the sea freezes is about 28½°F., a temperature of 34°F. should for safety be regarded as not more than 150 miles from the ice edge, or 100 miles if there is a persistent wind blowing off the ice. Except when the wind has been blowing toward the ice edge for a day or longer, a sea temperature of 31° should usually be assumed to indicate that the nearest ice is not more than 50 miles away”
But let's keep the pretense up.
If such a current had been there, Titanic would have been set southward by it for a couple of hours before impact.
Your previous work accounts for that but it depends on Titanic making good a track rather than a course of 266 True as described by Boxhall. That is a fundimental mistake.
Modern power-driven ship's with the latest steering equipment do not follow exactly along a pre-determined course line. Even in the post WW2 years it was impossible to follow a course line exactly.
Apart from the problems that most certainly would be encountered with steering error, the change in magnetic variation of about 2/3 a degree between when Titanic turned The Corner and the time of impact would ensure she would make a course less than the steered 266 True reported by Boxhall. It might look good on paper but reality is a different kettle of fish all together.
If you care to have another look at the DR CQD worked by Captain Smith; apart from it being about 20+ miles too far ahead, it is exactly on the pre-determined course line between The Corner and the Ambrose Light vessel. In the evidence, you will find that Pitman declared the 7-30 pm fix to be 'right on the line'. It seems that Captain Smith also thought his ship was right on the line
It boils down to theory versus reality.
According to Boxhall, Titanic was 2.5 miles southwest of The Corner when she turned onto a course of 266 True at 5-50pm that evening. In theory if she rigidly steamed along that 266 True rail-track on the water then in theory she would reach a point on that track after a certain time steaming. If however, in theory she steamed through a 1 knot south setting current for the last 2 hours of her journey then in theory she would be 2 miles south of that 266 True rail track at the end of those two hours.
However In reality, Titanic could not steam down any intended fixed track. In reality, she could not steer the correct direction that would ensure that she did.
In theory, with perfect steering she would probably have made good a track of about 265.3 degrees True, not 266 dgrees True and would have impacted the iceberg at a position about 2.64 miles north of the wreck site.
In reality, she most likely made good a course of less than 265 True and hit the icberg a little under a mile north and east of the wreck site.
I guess what I'm saying to you is that all the work you, Capt De Coverley and others have done to justify the presence of a south-setting current used theory which in practice seldom if ever occurs
As for the effect of wind and current on the position of wreckage and SAR pratice: I know a thing about that too.
However, you know a thing about sail-boats. You will also know that a shallow draft, high sided open boat or the same boat with a large windage due to being full of people will be very much influenced by the wind, even a light wind. If such a boat is helpless in a wind, she will broach-to and pick up speed down-wind very quickly.
5th Officer Lowe sailed his lifeboat smartly at about 4 to 6 knots. How much wind do you think would be needed to propel such a boat at that speed?
Wind and weather apart, there's the original position of the wreckage and boats to consider and the fact that most of these boats did not remain in the same place from sinking time to rescue time. As Rostron described: they were all over the place within a range of 4 to 5 miles. He steamed among them and recovered them one by one. As he did so, many bits and pieces of jestsam were chucked out of the boats. Lifejackets were removed and discarded. Planks fell from boats as they were drained etc. He did not come up to the main wreckage until he recovered that last boat at about 7-45am that morning. Where di he go or what did he do between then and when Californian came up to him?
The evidence of Major Peuchin who was in boat 4 with Hichens is very enlightening. He mentions and describes wind drift but does not mention current. He also states that he saw two distinct islands of main wreckage including the barber's pole but this was some time after Carpathia left Californian..
Where was that relative to Californian who was steaming southward after Carpathia left?
There is no way that theoretical steering, courses made good, winds and currents can acount for what really happend to the wreckage and bodies from Titanic in the hours immediately following the sinking.
In any case, this is about the exact time of sinking. I'll deal with that next.
Jim C.
