Last Log of the Titanic

I definitely have to get this book as well. Thanks to David Brown for being able to post some stuff from his book.

Some of that information I didn't know, but don't tell that to Maureen or I won't get my piece of cheesecake.
happy.gif


Best regards,

Jason
 
To all -- I'm having the time of my life exchanging ideas with everyone. As a writer, some projects are just work like driving a cab or pearl diving in a local restaurant. The Last Log Of The Titanic, grabbed hold of me, my life and my computer for about four years. It is a welcome relief to see it so well received.

Answering Michael H. Standart--

You are right. It was cold enough to keep all but sleepless Eskimos inside that night, especially considering the wind created by the ship's forward motion.

Regarding how much the officers knew about their new ship -- not much. However, there was general knowledge of Olympic among the senior officers. They knew pretty much how it would handle under most conditions. Unfortunately, no one had any experience with close-quarters maneuvering in Titanic. Would a few days of practice have made a difference? We will never be able to know.

And, to Maureen Zottoli--

No one ever makes themselves a fool by asking questions. Fools are afraid to ask, so remain ignorant all their lives.

-- David G. Brown
 
David,

Forgive me, if I don't dig out my history books. But, I believe, the Titanic, as well as the Olympic, went thru sea trails for at least 8 hours. I would think they would've tried close cornering, aspecially, with the Olympic, as she was the first of the class. The Titanic, as you know, was almost virtually identical. I'm sorry, it would take some time for me to find out who was abroad for the sea trails.

Best Regards,
Gary

P.S. I will pick up the book.
 
Hi, David!

I've taken a quick look through my notes and have come up with several more accounts which bear on the 'ice on deck' scenario.

The first comes from one of Spencer Silverthorne's newspaper interviews (which, despite its source, is consistent with what Silverthorne said elsewhere.) Silverthorne felt the initial shock of collision and stepped outside the first class smoking room onto A deck to see what had happened; he saw the berg (the peak of which was about fifteen feet higher than the boat deck) passing aft beside the ship and scraping occasionally against its side as it did so.

Pierre Marachal (in his personal deposition which is on file at the PRO) saw small pieces of ice lying on the aft end of A deck outside the first class smoking room.

Elmer Taylor (in his privately published memoir) said that he walked all the way forward on the starboard side of B deck and found chunks of ice lying on the deck inside the railing; he took one ice fragment down to his stateroom and showed it to his wife, after which he went to the cabin of his friend Fletcher Williams and jokingly offered to put the ice fragment in Williams' highball.

(I've already mentioned QM Rowe's testimony that the face of the berg missed striking the aft docking bridge by mere feet.)

The ice fragments that were observed on A and B decks could not have fallen from the steam vent pipes on the ship's funnels. Although you might disagree with me, I still submit that the face of the berg was close enough to the Titanic's side that ice fragments were jarred loose from its upper regions and tumbled down onto the Titanic's upper decks (both fore and aft.)

By the way, David, the fact that I disagree with a few of your points is neither here nor there. I (like so many other people here) intend to purchase a copy of your book; it's clearly a good investment and will be a worthwhile addition to anyone's Titanic library.

All my best,

George
 
Responding to Gary Watson --

Olympic was put through the conventional round of sea trials. Titanic was given only enough trial to prove that the steering gear worked and that the propellers wouldn't fall off. Time was short, as was money, and coal. There seemed little need for extensive testing of what was (despite the publicity) essentially a duplicate of one already in service.

We may be putting too much emphasis on sea trials. Large ships in 1912 were not expected to do much maneuvering on their own. Tugs were always on hand to push and pull them around the harbors. Once at sea, steering a straight line is more important than fancy maneuvers.

In a hundred crossings, Murdoch might never have ordered a turn of more than a few degrees. So, even with thousands of hours of experience on the bridge he would still not have learned the close-quarters handling of Titanic.

Honestly, Murdoch performed well during his moment of trial. He tried to whip an 882.5 foot ship around danger like he was driving a modern jet ski...and he damned near succeeded.

-- David G. Brown
 
Dave,

I said it might be a while before I post, but I think I can add something to this discussion.

During Titanic's trials, she was put through a number of turning circles at varying speeds and engine configurations. In Wilding's words: "...in the first place of two circles which were made off Belfast Lough, one of them with both engines at full speed ahead, and the rudder put hard-a-starboard and the ship's head turning to port; and the other one with the helm put hard-a-port, the ship turning to starboard and the starboard engine reversed to full speed astern. Both of those curves were at speeds of between 18 and 20 knots. I have also got the results of circles made with the ship, steaming at different speeds, the engines being kept at the same speed going ahead and the helm put hard-a-starboard and the ship turning to port, the speeds being 11 knots, 19 1/2 knots, and 21 3/4 knots, and I have plotted the three different circles in comparison."

Wilding also mentioned that the engines were reversed to measure the stopping distance: "Both engines were running at about 60 revolutions, corresponding to a speed of about 18 knots. The helm was left amidships and both engines were reversed. The way was off the ship in about three minutes and 15 seconds from the order to reverse engines being given, and the distance run was just over 3,000 feet."

What is unsaid here (I would give just about anything to see the turning circle chart submitted to the Wreck Commissioner!) is the condition of the turbine throughout these trials. I suspect that the turbine was engaged only briefly (if at all) in the Lough and that the majority of these maneuvers were conducted with the recip engines only.

It seems to me that Titanic covered all the maneuvers her officers might use in an "in extremis" situation during her brief sea trials. This was also the second set of sea trials that Smith and Murdoch had conducted in Olympic-class ships. Titanic's maiden voyage was essentially the 10th voyage (re: round trip) for both men in an Olympic-class liner, and (correct me if I'm wrong here, Ing) the 8th for Wilde. I can't think of anyone more experienced or qualified to stand on Titanic's bridge.

And yet...they still navigated the ship to her doom. To me, that's the real lesson behind Titanic's story, one that is in danger of being repeated even today.

Parks
 
One more thought about builders' trials:

I am headed down to Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, MS during the first week of December to participate in the builders' trials for the new construction USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7). I'm the lead for the team that built the combat system being installed on board, so I need to be on hand as the commissioning crew exercises the system for the first time. The trials are scheduled for 5 days, which should be enough time to check all the various systems throughout the ship (one day is reserved as a make-up day). However, looking at the schedule, only one day is reserved for powerplant runs. All other tests will be suspended that day because electrical power may be unstable as they run the engines in varying configurations. So, basically, the Iwo is alloted about the same amount of time Titanic was for testing the maneuverability of the ship.

To me, the one day given to Titanic for her trials simply means that White Star waived the builders' demonstration of other systems (such as lighting, refrigeration, elevators, etc.), possibly because of Olympic's service record. Titanic's officers surveyed the navigation and safety equipment during the transit to Soton, in preparation for the BOT inspection.

Parks
 
Hi David, I suspect that even the sleepless Eskimos would have run for the warmth of the lounges and cabins that night.
happy.gif


I'm getting further on in the text, and it's giving me a lot of food for thought. I'm still sitting on the fence in regards the grounding, but my inclination is to go in favor of your arguement. What would be interesting would be if the next expidition(We know there will be another one eventually.) did some more sonar imaging to see if they could verify the presence of grounding damage once and for all. The RMS Titanic team which went down in '98 verified the presence of damage along the side by this means, but I wonder if there's equipment available which could "see" deeper into the mud.

It would be nice if an ROV could get into some of the damaged spaces for a good look, but considering the disarray of the interiors, this is probably wishful thinking.

I noticed the mention of a manhole cover into the voids being opened after the strike. You wouldn't happen to Know who ordered this would you? I would think that Cheif Bell would have had they say so in this, but I haven't seen a name mentioned yet. IMO, it would at first glance seem a foolhardy move if they had cause to beleive (and they did!) that there was damage to the bottom.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Thanks to Parks Stephenson for his input regarding sea trials of large ships. My experience with small passenger vessels is that sea trials are a luxury for those lucky guys in the big ships. My point in bringing up the lack of experience handling Olympic class ships was to illustrate how well Murdoch peformed under extreme conditions. We must never forget, however, that he never should have been trying to "port around" an iceberg in the first place.

As to the manhole story...on one level it was included as a homage to Walter Lord. A long time ago, that section of "A Night To Remember" fired my imagination. Eventually, I used it as he topic for my first paper in my first college journalism class. In a way, my career started with that open manhole preserved in Walter Lord's prose and made real in my imagination.

As far as examining the actual bottom of the ship where I believe the fatal damage occurred--good luck getting there. I believe you would have to tunnel beneath a rusting, unstable wreck at the bottom of the ocean to actually look at the outside of the bottom of the ship.

-- David G. Brown
 
Hello David,

Ahhhhhh...tunneling beneath a large rusting wreck is not my idea of a good way to live a long life and die of natural causes. I hope one day(Soon!), somebody will develop some sonar imaging equipment that will be up to the task. Rather safer that way, and nobody would feel a need to risk an expensive ROV on an interior survey which would almost certainly fail.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
Dave,

Despite our previous discussions on the subject, I have yet to hear your entire argument on the grounding. Not to worry...I'm getting there, slowly but surely. :-)

I only mention this as a prelude to what I wanted to say here...I really think that fibre optic technology is our best means of penetrating the hull. If a fibre optic probe could be developed that could snake into existing openings in the hull, we might be able to see into the exposed opening outside BR #5, maybe even all the way down to the bilges. Who knows? Anyone care to invent such a device?

Parks
 
Every THS member learns that a Commutator (which is also the name of the THS quarterly journal) is a device that measures the list of a ship. How many of us have not dreamed of being on "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire" and have Regis say, "OK, Mike, you have no lifeline's left, but now, for a million dollars: "What is the name of the device that measures the list on a ship? a) gyroscope; b) leveler; c) commutator; d) listograph."

And now you come along, Dave, with one little paragraph that forced me to open my dictionary and may even force me to open my mind.

On page 115 you say that "a clinometer is a small instrument that measures the amount of list ("lean") on a ship." Then later on in the same paragraph you note that Quartermaster Hitchens testified that Captain Smith "came back to the wheelhouse and looked at the commutator in front of the compass, which is a little instrument like a clock to tell you how the ship is listing."

So they must be synonyms, correct? Especially since you used them in the same context. When all else fails, check Webster's.
CLINOMETER -- any of various instruments for measuring angles of elevation or inclination.
COMMUTATOR -- an apparatus for reversing electrical currents.

Good God, Dave, what have you done? This is akin to telling Virginia there is no Santa Claus. Do I have to go back and change all my old Titanic magazines to CLINOMETER? Please explain. Maybe Michael Standart or Captain Eric can shed some light.

Confused and Concerned in California
 
Dear Confused and Concerned, stand back from the ledge...you have every reason to live!

You're right on all counts. The word "commutator" has dual meaning. You would find a commutator in Titanic's wheelhouse and one inside the alternator in the Marconi Silent Room. The first one would give you the angle of list; the other, a tap for AC power.

A clinometer is similar to a commutator and is what is normally found aboard ship these days.

So please don't go changing your old THS issues. :-)

Parks
 
Thanks, Parks. I'm calmer now. Let me make sure I totally understand, though. Was the term "commutator" correct in 1912 and is no longer used, except by the THS, and the electricians? Is "clinometer" the current term to use? I understand they are synonymous, but am looking more for a historical timeline now. What would seamen today call the instrument used to measure list? And finally, what is the difference, in any, between the two?

Landlubber near Long Beach
 
Thanks, Parks. I'm calmer now. Let me make sure I totally understand, though. Was the term "commutator" correct in 1912 and is no longer used, except by the THS, and the electricians? Is "clinometer" the current term to use? I understand they are synonymous, but am looking more for a historical timeline now. What would seamen today call the instrument used to measure list? And finally, what is the difference, in any, between the two?

Landlubber near Long Beach
 

Similar threads

J
New Titanic book
Replies
7
Views
2K
Phillip Gowan
Phillip Gowan
Back
Top