I'd like to thank the list for its reception to Ken's report and answer a few questions that have been raised by the article:
Tarn writes:
"This is what we have needed for years - concise and open details on what was seen inside the Titanic wreck. I have never understood why past Titanic expeditions kept their findings secret; or shared such findings only within a small inner circle of 'important people'. Ken's report is a refreshing break from the 'secrecy' tradition."
The secrecy log jamb of course was really broken by Jim Cameron himself. This was the first time an expedition leader took the input of a Titanic “expert” seriously, invited him onboard for first hand observations, and then let him share his findings with out a Byzantine labyrinth of agreements, provisos, and blackouts. This absolutely cannot be understated.
"The port side Verandah Cafe. Ken alluded it was a target, but didn’t mention if they explored it after all. Its open to the sea, and looks very accessible"
Ken mentions that most of Promenade deck is crushed flat in this area now, so there are no more large internal spaces to explore.
"Can this data be used to properly map out the interior of the wreck?"
Not only is it possible, its probably being done as we speak. The questions that must be asked is, if released publicly, “Will it be used in ways that are to the detriment of the wreck?”
"Does RMSTI retain a 'visual' copyright on the wreck?"
Short answer: No. That comes from a former lawyer for RMSTI whom I met on the 2000 expedition. RMSTI tried to copyright all images of the wreck on the same legal basis that you can’t go to Disneyland, take a photo of the Castle and sell postcards from your photograh … the very image of THAT particular castle is copy written. The argument was defeated in court, however, on the position that the Titanic’s image is public domain property in a “public space”, hence neither the image nor the access is under the control of a private party.
George Behe:
".. more meaningful info about the wreck has been (and will soon be) made available to researchers than has been made available by most of the post-Ballard expeditions combined."
I certainly hope so. We’ve all been waiting since 1986 for a good second look at the Titanic and this may be the opportunity. Something I will say about Jim Cameron is that he has a real interest in Titanic, as Titanic — not as a stepping stone to something else. I think that there is a possibility of a booklet of some kind put out with the highest fact-to-fluff ratio seen to this point. The stars may finally be in alignment for this one.
Dan Cherry:
"I just finished reading Ken's report on the wreck expedition. Wow! Thank you to Ken, Parks, Eric, Bill, and everyone involved in making the article available for public scrutiny as well as their generosity in making this report possible. I haven't looked forward to reading about the Titanic this much since the 1986 expedition."
Thanks Dan for your kind words. My contribution was the least since it basically entailed technical review of a well-researched manuscript. Two or three read-thru’s and I’m done. Ken’s effort of course speaks for itself, especially the nice job he did on photo-enhancing the images used so that they “read” well on the net. That took days. But I did want to call your attention to the largely invisible work that Eric did proofing the manuscript through its MANY incarnations and the manual corrections added by Parks Stevenson with each revision.
Bill Sauder
