I do not see how two ships can alter their bearings when stopped Lord Mersey

[John Knight]

I have been away and when I got back thought that this thread would be huge lol.
However it seems like Paul has come up with some interesting points here that are proving difficult to answer. As I said before, keep it up Paul

 

[David Billnitzer]

Hi Paul:

As you attempt to solve the puzzle over Stone's description of his other steamer "altering" its bearing, will you also be attempting to answer Stone's own confusion over it? I refer to his inability to understand why the rockets also altered their bearings at the same time. The two phenomena go hand in hand, and are inseparable, if only because Stone himself linked the two happenings in his own mind, and raised it as something that confused *him.*

At that point, you are left with having to decide which of his descriptions carries more weight - bearings or rockets.

Dave Billnitzer

 

[Paul Slish]

Dear Paul Lee, You've asked a good question. One possible answer, and I emphasize possible, is that the steamer Stone and Gibson saw did steam away. It would have to travel several miles as you say to change its compass bearing from SSE to SW X 1/2W. Perhaps its stopped for a couple of hours. Then it turned to starboard and headed due south for a few miles so neither sidelight was seen. Then it angled off to the SW and was too far away for the green sidelight to be seen and eventually went over the horizon.

Dave Billnitzer is also correct that it is unlikely the rockets changed their bearing (assuming they came from the Titanic). So either the bearing did not change, or most if not all of the rockets were fired before the bearing change began. Stone could have made a mistake as to when the bearing change began and been correct that the nearby steamer changed its bearing from SSE to SW X 1/2W by the compass. It has never been proven absolutely that the ship first seen by Lord prior to 11:00 pm and that Stone observed from 12:10 am to 2:25 am was the Titanic.


Paul Slish

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Paul Slish. Sometimes one has to apply a good dose of logic to what someone claims to have happened. If there were a mystery ship that was to SSE and then steamed off only to disappear in the SW then it would have steamed away into the ice field which we know was running generally N to S. (I'm using magnetic bearings here.) No captain in his right mind would have done that especially having come up from the east and was forced to stop by that pack ice in the first place. Stone was quite clear about seeing the rockets always come from the direction to this steamer and that the bearing to the rockets was changing as the bearing to the steamer was changing.

The problem as I see it has to do with those compass bearings that Stone was quoting. It is assumed that he was always taking bearings to the steamer from the compass continuously. That may not have been the case. Notice that Stone mentioned seeing two lights in the sky to the SSW at 3:20 AM. Gibson talks about seeing 3 rockets at that time and calling Stone's attention to them. This was the same time that the Carpathia was coming up from the SE and firing rockets to let those from the Titanic know she was getting close. We know exactly the direction from where the Carpathia was coming from (heading N52W true). We know exactly the location of the wreck site. We know that the Carpathia came to a stop close to there by 4 AM when she sighted lifeboat No. 2. If those rockets seen by Stone and Gibson at 3:20 were to the SSW as Stone claimed they were, then the Californian had to be to the NNE of where the Carpathia was at that time while the Carpathia was still moving northwestward. Therefore the Californian would have had to be well to the east of the ice field which we know was not the case.

The problem was with Stone's observations, and the fact that the Californian's head was swinging around, which I believe was not always in the same direction all the time. The result was confusion as well as coming to wrong conclusions. If you took the relative bearing to an object and then added or subtracted that from the magnetic heading of the ship, you should get the magnetic bearing to the object. But if the ship was swinging between the time that the two observations were taken giving the appearance that the observed ship was steaming away because its relative bearings were changing fast, and if you did not bother to check ship's heading at that time, then your result for the magnetic bearing to the object will be in error.

 

[Paul Slish]

Thank you Sam Halpern for you very thoughtful response to my recent post.

1. The first point I would like to make is that I believe Stone was giving his bearings by the magnetic compass. Captain Lord stated the variation (declination) was 24 W and the deviation was 2 E for a net error of 22 W. Thus one would on the 360 degree scale always subtract 22 degrees from magnetic to obtain true. Due north on magnetic would thus be 22 W true or close to NNW. The total error is just under two points. So magnetic SW would be SSW true.

Now lets look at Stone's testimony.

"7820. And how were they bearing from you at this time? - S.S.E. by the standard compass"

So at the beginning of the watch Stone establishes that he took a bearing on the standard compass which was on the flying bridge.

I see no reason why he could not have continued to take bearings by the standard compass.

"7937. During that time were you talking this matter over with Gibson? - No. I was watching the steamer by the compass with my binoculars"

"7968. Did you really think so? - I did. The only confirmation I had of it was the bearings of the compass. Two ships remaining stationary could not possibly alter their bearings"

Stone again makes mention of the "bearings of the compass."

"8042. What do you mean by saying that you did not see them coming in quick succession one after another? - I said that the ship was altering her bearing from the time she showed her first rocket; she commenced altering her bearing by the compass."

Again he states "she commenced altering her bearing by the compass."

"8045. Was she moving? - She started to move as soon as I saw the first rocket. She was stationary up to that time. She was stationary by our compass, at least so far as I could tell"

Again he makes reference to his observing movement of the other ship "by our compass."

So it seems quite logical to me that Stone was taking bearings by the magnetic compass throughout the watch. The direction the Californian was heading at any given moment was irrelevant to a bearing taken on a magnetic compass.

Gibson also confirms repeated bearings being taken by Stone.

"7741. Could you see whether she was steaming away? - No. The Second Officer was taking bearings of her all the time."

Stone gave practically all his bearings with reference to compass points. He did not to any extent give bearings relative to the Californian itself in his testimony as Gibson did. How would Gibson know that Stone "was taking bearings of her all the time"? He would definitely know it if he observed Stone taking them by the standard compass on the bridge.

He certainly would not have known it if Stone took relative bearings mentally and said nothing. It is possible as you say that Stone took relative bearings and mentally converted them to magnetic and then spoke out loud to Gibson.

But the sheer number of references to the compass and bearings in Stone's testimony leads me to believe that he took many compass bearings during the watch. He may not have taken any relative bearings at all.

2. The issue you raised about Stone insisting that the rockets altered their bearing as the other ship altered its bearing is significant. I will deal with that in another post because it will take a while. I did not want you to think I am ignoring it.

3. The magnitude of the bearing change observed by Stone was significant.

"7940. You say you saw the steamer altering her bearing with regard to you? - She bore first S.S.E. and she was altering her bearing towards the south towards west."

"7971. Did you make any report to the Captain about this disappearance? - When I sent Gibson down at two o'clock I told him she was disappearing in the S.W."

"7976. I beg your pardon. Twenty minutes later you reported to the Captain. How? - About 2.40 by means of the whistle tube. I blew down again to, the Master; he came and answered it, and asked what it was. I told him the ship from the direction of which we had seen the rockets coming had disappeared, bearing S.W. to half W. the last I had seen of the light."

A change in bearing from SSE to SW X 1/2 W is six and a half points. This is a bearing change of about 73 degrees which is considerable. I do not see how a first mate could make a compass bearing error of 73 degrees especially on such a calm night.

I read your bio and I see you are a systems engineer and former yachtsman. We share much in common. I have been a computer programmer, systems analyst, and database administrator for many years. I did study land surveying in college. In 1975 I worked on a surveying crew for the US Forest Service on the Fremont National Forest in Oregon. We were running surveys for the construction of logging roads. The precision of an engineer's transit was not needed for these roads. We used a surveyor's staff compass. It is exceedingly difficult for me to believe that a first mate could make an error as huge as 70+ degrees on a magnetic compass. I have taken many bearings myself and our compass was accurate to within 1/2 degree or 1/720 of the circle.

4. Different Captains have different attitudes toward risk. It is not impossible that the Captain of the nearby steamer (if it was not the Titanic) having been stopped over an hour decided he could begin to head toward the south along the eastern edge of the ice field. SW magnetic for Stone was SSW true. We do not know the exact orientation of the icefield. SSW true may not have required the other ship to steam into the icefield. I agree with you it is unlikely a ship would try to steam through the icefield in the dark.

Neither 3rd Officer Groves nor Captain Lord believed that the Californian should not be moved at all to answer a ship in distress.

Groves

"8382. At the time you left the bridge was it a clear night? - Quite clear.

8383. Was it so clear that your captain could have picked his way, even through that ice-field to the ship which you saw? - He could have picked his way through there, but it certainly would not have been a particularly safe proceeding. There is no doubt he could have done it."

Lord

"7406. (Mr. Dunlop.) Assuming that she sank somewhere between 2 and 3, could you, in fact, if you had known at 1.15 a.m. in the morning that the "Titanic" was in distress to the southward and westward of you, have reached her before, say, 3 a.m.? - No, most certainly not.

7407. Could you have navigated with any degree of safety to your vessel at night through the ice that you, in fact, encountered? - It would have been most dangerous.

The Commissioner: Am I to understand that this is what you mean to say, that if he had known that the vessel was the "Titanic" he would have made no attempt whatever to reach it?

7408. (Mr. Dunlop.) No, my Lord. I do not suggest that. (To the Witness.) What would you have done? No doubt you would have made an attempt? - Most certainly I would have made every effort to go down to her.

7409. Would the attempt from what you now know in fact have succeeded? - I do not think we would have got there before the "Carpathia" did, if we would have got there as soon."

So both Lord and Groves believed the attempt could have been made even though it would have been dangerous. Lord even believed it was possible to get to the westward through the icefield.

So I do not believe it was impossible for the Captain of a nearby ship to steam SSW true along the eastern edge of the icefield. Neither one of us was alive to observe the conditions of that night.

5. We do not know the exact longitude of the Californian. It was a DR position and probably pretty close. Let's look at exactly what Stone said in regard to the 3 rockets seen at 3:20 am and afterwards.

"8008. What did you do? - At about 3.20, just before half-past three, as near as I can approximate, Gibson reported to me he had seen a white light in the sky to the southward of us, just about on the port beam. We were heading about west at the time. I crossed over to the port wing of the bridge and watched its direction with my binoculars. Shortly after, I saw a white light in the sky right dead on the beam.

8009. (The Commissioner.) How far away? - At a very great distance I should judge.

8010. What do you mean by a very great distance? -Such a distance that if it had been much further I should have seen no light at all, merely a faint flash."

Stone says the rockets were "to the southward." The Californian was heading "about west." The rockets were right on the port beam. Magnetic south would be SSE true. Since the rockets were so far away that Stone could barely observe them, they had to be quite a few miles off. A bearing of SSE true to the Carpathia does not seem impossible to me. Gibson described the rocket

"7596. Could you see when you saw this flash at all how far away you thought it was? - It was right on the horizon."

These rockets were a very great distance away right on the horizon. Again SSE to the Carpathia does not seem to be impossible to me.

Well I'm not quite old enough to be retired, so that is all I have time for tonight. I hope to continue in the next day or two.

Again thank you for your thoughtful and polite response, and I expect we will have more enjoyable interactions. I just wished I had signed up for this ET site sooner.
Best Wishes, Paul Slish

 

[Paul Slish]

The Carpathia's course and bearing from the Californian.

In the US Inquiry Captain Rostron testified he set a course of N 52 W true and believed he was 58 miles from the SOS position of 41 46 N 50 14W. Of course Rostron had to do A DR calculation from his last celestial fix. But for the sake of a working hypothesis let's assume his DR position at 12:35 am was close. 12:35 am is when he was notified by the radio operator and his officers.

Plane trigonometry calculations would mean that the Carpathia was 45.7 miles east of the Titanic and 35.7 miles south of it. A bearing of N 52 W would be 58 miles from the Titanic. Thus the starting position of Carpathia was 41 10 18 N,
49 13 W. Spherical trigonometry puts the direct line distance at 58.1 miles so the 0.1 mile difference between plane and spherical trigonometry is not significant.

Rostron turned the Carpathia around at 12:35 am. His time was 1 hr 50 min ahead of New York. Californian's time was also 1 hr 50 min ahead of New York (Lord US). So the times are about the same.

At 3:20 am Stone and Gibson observed a rocket about south (magnetic) which would be SSE (true).

12:35 am to 3:20 am is 2 hr 45 min. I'm going to assume Carpathia made 14 knots, which means she covered 38.5 miles on a course of N 52 W (true). Trigonometry calculations would place her at about
41 32 N, 49 53 30 W at 3:20 am.

Captain Lord's DR position was 42 05 N, 50 07 W. Chief Officer Stewart took a north star observation at 7:30 pm and obtained 42 05 N. The encyclopedia says a competent navigator can get his latitude to within 1.5 mile accuracy with a Polaris sight. It was a calm and clear night so Stewart should have gotten a good sight. To be conservative let's say he was off a mile and the actual latitude was 42 04 N. We'll take 50 07 W as the longitude accepting Captain Lord's calculation. From 10:21 pm to 3:20 am we'll allow two miles of southern drift and one minute longitude of western drift (based upon the direction it was believed the Titanic drifted, we'll assume Californian did likewise).

So at 3:20 am we will use as our working hypothesis that the Californian had a position of 42 02 N, 50 08 W.

Again Stone said the first rocket was about south. Assuming this is magnetic that would make the direction of the rocket about SSE true.

Trigonometry calculations show that the bearing from 42 02 N, 50 08 W to 41 32 N, 49 53 30 W (Carpathia's calculated 3:20 am position)
is S 20 E. Thus the bearing of the Carpathia from the Californian would be S 20 E true at 3:20 am. SSE true would be S 22.5 E. These agree very closely. Thus Stone's observation that the rocket was about south magnetic, (SSE or S 22.5 E true) is right where we would expect the Carpathia to be at 3:20 am. The distance between the two ships at that time would be 31.87 miles.

We will assume that Stone's eyes were 44 feet above the horizon (39 feet to bridge deck plus 5 feet to his eyes). This would put his visible horizon at about 7.75 miles. A rocket that went up 600 feet into the air would have a visible horizon of 28.66 miles. So the total distance Stone could see a rocket right on the horizon would be 36.41 miles. Since both Gibson and Stone observed the rocket as faint and just a little above the horizon a distance of 31.87 miles seems reasonable.

It is admitted the positions are not precise, but we have gone with a working hypothesis that they were all within a couple of miles of being correct. We also don't know the exact height of the Carpathia's socket distress signal, but 600 feet is a reasonable assumption.

In conclusion the Californian observing a rocket SSE true just above the horizon at 3:20 am is right where we would expect the Carpathia to bear at that time and a distance of 31 to 32 miles is reasonable.

As a postscript we would expect the Carpathia 40 minutes later at 4:00 am to be at the position of Boxhall's lifeboat. Those calculations will be for another time.

Paul Slish

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Paul

You May want to refer to these books:

Harrison, Leslie. A Titanic Myth: The Californian Incident

Molony, Senan. A Ship Accused. The Case of the S.S. Californian: Re-Examined

Padfield, Peter. The Titanic and the Californian

Bristow, D.E. (Diana E.). Titanic: Sinking the Myths

Collins, Captain L. Marmaduke. The Sinking of the Titanic, An Ice Pilotí¯Â¿Â½s Perspective

and the following article:

Carrothers, John C. Lord of the Californian, United States Naval Institute Proceedings. No. 781, vol. 94, No. 3. United States Naval Institute Proceedings. March, 1968 (also reprinted in Oceanus Magazine, issue #28)

these I consider these to be very reliable sources, of course take in mind though that nothing can beat the British Iquiry(PRO) and Senate Investigation(CIS)

While the Californian was swinging, she was swinging very slowly (Refer to Groves BOT Testimony)

and Stone was taking bearings most of the time (Gibson BOT)

and almost all the the people I've seen comment on this w/ experience at sea, most of them have said:

That while ship may appear to change her bearings if she is swinging, that these changes should be minor, and anything else is obviously a moving ship

(while thats obviously not any of there exact words, it conveys the same message, Refer to Padfield and Harrison)

 

[Tad G. Fitch]

Paul,
Another excellent book to refer to is Leslie Reade's "The Ship That Stood Still." It is a little harder to find, but well worth the effort and price for it.

If you have not already done so, I would also recommend Dave Billnitzer's website, which offers a comprehensive look at this subject:

Titanic & Californian Main Page

And also George Behe's website, which has several fascinating segments on it that touch on this topic, and Leslie Harrison's notorious twisting or omitting of the facts in his books and writings relating to this case:

George Behe's Titanic Tidbits

Hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Tad

 

[Dave Gittins]

Being totally immodest, I suggest a look at my own Titanic: Monument and Warning, in which I have tried to be fair to Captain Lord. I even reject some of the evidence Dave Billnitzer and Leslie Reade presented against him. On the other hand, I've noticed holes in Lord's story that have been overlooked all these years. My summing up might come as a surprise to some.

 

[Tad G. Fitch]

Having not seen your book personally yet (it's definitely on my "to buy" list), I have heard good things about it from others, so I don't think that you're being immodest at all by bringing it up, haha!

Hope you have a nice weekend,
Tad

 

[Dave Gittins]

The weekend is half gone here. It's Sunday morning and I'm just going to dash off and see Oriana arrive a Port Adelaide. A week or so ago it was QE2. Next week it's Saga Rose. It makes a change from smelly sheep transports and floating carparks!

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Yes. Don't Forget Gittins Book. While I don't Agree w/ all of his conclusions, his experience makes it worth reading.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Hi Paul: Looks like we do have much in common. Unfortunately I don't have much time to address all the points you raised, but I do agree with many of them, and those that I do not agree with have more to do with the assumptions you are making. You said "The issue you raised about Stone insisting that the rockets altered their bearing as the other ship altered its bearing is significant. I will deal with that in another post because it will take a while." I certainly look forward to hearing from you on this point.

In considering those rockets, keep in mind that the distance from the Titanic wreck site to the reported stopped location of the Californian was under 23 nautical miles. Socket signals exploding at 600 ft should be visible as far as 36 miles. Even if they only went up to 400 ft, they would be seen at a distance of 31 miles. There is no way that the Californian could not have seen the distress signals from the Titanic even assuming it was at the location where Capt. Lord thought he was. Now, as you have pointed out, Stone said the bearings of the ship he was observing started to change after the 1st rocket went up. He also admitted that the bearings of these signals were changing with the bearings of the ship.

7922. Well, anything else? - But that I could not understand why if the rockets came from a steamer beyond this one, when the steamer altered her bearing the rockets should also alter their bearings.
7923. That pointed to this, that the rockets did come from this steamer? - It does, although I saw no actual evidence of their being fired from the deck of the steamer except in one case.
7924. (Mr. Butler Aspinall.) Which is the one case? - One rocket that I saw that appeared to be much brighter than the others.
7925. Was that one of the five or one of the three? - One of the three.
7926. That, you felt confident, came from the vessel that was showing you these navigation lights? - I am sure of it.
7927. That you were sure of? - Yes.

The "one of the three" he was referring to was one of the last three rockets seen.

I am sure you and I will have many more interesting and pleasurable discussions on this and other topics. I do look forward to reading your detailed explanation on this issue. Take care.

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

Paul

While Samuel says the Titanic were seperated by less than 23 miles, conservative estimates range from 19 to 26 miles.

and the reason these rockets appeared to come from a ship beyond the 1 they were watching? the ship californian was watching 5 to 10 miles away. Titanic in my view was 19 to 26 miles away, far beyond the visual range for californian.

take note that the ship stone, gibson, and lord saw was a tramp steamer, not a liner. if titanic was only 5 to 10 miles off it would be obvious the people aboard californian that they were watchin a large liner and not a tramp steamer.

 

[Paul Slish]

Greetings Jesse, Sam, Dave, and Tad,

I have been reading the ET website for over a year but only signed up in January 2006 to be able to post. I wanted to do a lot of reading before posting anything.

I first read of the Californian and the Titanic about 40 years ago when I was reading an introductory book about radio. It told how the Californian radio operator was asleep and didn't get the SOS signal. From that day on I thought that was an interesting story to follow up on. In 1970 I read Walter Lord's, "A Night to Remember" and like many of you have been hooked on Titanic ever since. In particular, I'm interested in the Californian and the Titanic. No matter what anyone's position on this issue, you have to admit it has to be one of the most fascinating sea stories of all time.

In 1992, I read of the Reappraisal in the newspaper. I found Padfield's "The Titanic and the Californian" in the library and read it three times. I don't have my own copy of that book and it is very expensive to get used.

In 1993, I bought a copy of "The Ship That Stood Still" First American Edition. I've read that probably five times and it is still in pretty good shape.

In 2003, I really started searching the internet on the Californian and the Titanic and found the Titanic Book Site in Florida. I purchased "A Ship Accused" and have read that at least five times. It is getting worn out.

I've also been reading the British and US Inquiry transcripts for over two years and hope to eventually read them completely. I've had to have gone through the Californian witnesses at least ten times.

I've never been able to get Harrison's books or Carrother's "Lord of the Californian." If any of you know how to get Carrother's article please let me know.

I've read all of Dave Gittins' website and was just looking at his advertisment for his book. Dave by the way, your website has some very useful and interesting information.

I worked on timber crews and then a surveying crew for the US Forest Service in California and Oregon in my younger days (mid 1970's). We used a surveyor's staff compass (magnetic) extensively, and I personally took hundreds of bearings so I'm quite familiar with compasses. I have never been a seaman, and I really enjoy reading the accounts of the professional mariners, active or retired, who contribute to these discussions.

So now you have my background and know of my interest in the Californian and the Titanic and I will contribute to the discussions. I will do my best to always be polite because no matter what our position or opinion on various aspects of the subject, I believe every person should be treated with dignity.

Paul Slish