Masthead Lights
- Thread starter Logan Geen
- Start date
-
- Tags
- lighting
Harland Duzen
Member
Actually that photo was taken in the Solent, off Southampton by Beken of Cowes, but still, nice Photo! I got one of her in Queenstown that I still need to frame.
Back to Topic!
Aaron_2016
Guest
Gibson was also asked if he had seen more than one light.
Q - Could you see more than one white light?
A - I saw a glare of lights on her after deck.
Q - You mean the port-hole lights?
A - A glare of white lights on her after deck.
Q - I do not think you quite answered the question I was putting to you. Did you or did you not see any second white steamer lights?
A - Not distinctly, sir.
Q - Do you mean you are not sure whether you could see it or not?
A - No.
Q - Not sure?
A - No.
If the Titanic was facing them almost head on then the lights across her promenade decks would merge into a bright glare of light which may have been mistaken for a second masthead light.
However if there was strong refraction that night, then it could explain the appearance of a second masthead light as the refraction elevated the horizon and the single light and reflected it onto the false horizon created by the refraction which created the illusion there were two masthead lights.
I observed a ship that was 20 miles away by radar, I could see it with the naked eye and it appeared to be only 4 or 5 miles away. The refraction had elevated the horizon and reflected the lights onto the false one below which made it appear as a bright glare shining on a calm sea, yet it was still 20 miles away. It was a trick of the eye created by the refraction.
.
Aaron, there was no super refraction at the time and the place of the disaster
Reconstructing the prevailing meteorological and optical environment during the time of the Titanic disaster
So back to my question about Groves testimony. Could have he mistaken the mast head light's reflection with the second masthead light?
Reconstructing the prevailing meteorological and optical environment during the time of the Titanic disaster
So back to my question about Groves testimony. Could have he mistaken the mast head light's reflection with the second masthead light?
Aaron_2016
Guest
There had to be because the SS Marengo recorded great fraction on the horizon on the night of April 14th - 15th and they were south west of the icefield. It was seen by them at 8pm and 12 midnight and they also noted in their log how unusually clear and bright the stars were. The survivors and the crew of the Californian saw the brightness of the stars and how they never saw a night like that before. Another ship passed over the area and saw "sea mirrors" on the horizon. They recorded a sudden temperature drop and rise as they passed over the region of the ice, and the brightness of the stars would have illuminated the area bright enough to cast the refraction. Although the lights of the Titanic is all the illumination the Californian needed to see the affects of the refraction because the vessel I saw was surrounded in total darkness and the refraction had reflected her lights onto a false horizon below which created the illusion the ship was much closer and masked her true appearance.
.
.
Ioannis Georgiou
Member
I like the logic behind it. Other ships notice the fraction and enter it into the log but on Titanic and Californian must have been complete fools to have no idea what was going on. 
Aaron_2016
Guest
As Pitman said - "We had something else to think of besides log books, sir." Or as Captain Lord said - "It was a very deceiving night."
The haze ahead of the Titanic was likely affected by the refraction which elevated and masked its true appearance, so that it appeared as a peculiar haze on the horizon. There was also a haze in the water around the ship which several survivors noticed. e.g. Jack Thayer - "It had become very much colder. It was a brilliant, starry night. There was no moon and I have never seen the stars shine brighter. They appeared to stand right out of the sky, sparkling like cut diamonds. A very light haze, hardly noticeable, hung low over the water." I believe the proximity of the ice around them and the difference in temperature underneath them (owing to the Labrador current) caused the icy horizon to become an elevated haze. The Titanic was much more south easterly than many people realized which made it difficult to find the wreck. The ice had melted and survivors said it was "soft ice" which scooped off the iceberg and dropped onto the deck and they observed the iceberg break into pieces as it passed behind the ship. The people in lifeboat 2 could hear the ice crunching as it continued to break apart, and there is speculation that the iceberg had melted so much that it had recently turned over. All of this points to the Titanic being in warmer water when she sank as she was well to the south east of the main ice field.
This summary video clip demonstrates the gist of it.
.
The haze ahead of the Titanic was likely affected by the refraction which elevated and masked its true appearance, so that it appeared as a peculiar haze on the horizon. There was also a haze in the water around the ship which several survivors noticed. e.g. Jack Thayer - "It had become very much colder. It was a brilliant, starry night. There was no moon and I have never seen the stars shine brighter. They appeared to stand right out of the sky, sparkling like cut diamonds. A very light haze, hardly noticeable, hung low over the water." I believe the proximity of the ice around them and the difference in temperature underneath them (owing to the Labrador current) caused the icy horizon to become an elevated haze. The Titanic was much more south easterly than many people realized which made it difficult to find the wreck. The ice had melted and survivors said it was "soft ice" which scooped off the iceberg and dropped onto the deck and they observed the iceberg break into pieces as it passed behind the ship. The people in lifeboat 2 could hear the ice crunching as it continued to break apart, and there is speculation that the iceberg had melted so much that it had recently turned over. All of this points to the Titanic being in warmer water when she sank as she was well to the south east of the main ice field.
This summary video clip demonstrates the gist of it.
.
Ioannis Georgiou
Member
Ah the haze which Fleet did not mentioned at the American Senate Inquiry but jumped on it when Lee mentioned it at the British Inquiry.
Carpathia also nearly hit an iceberg which was not capsized nor any mention of fraction.
The people in No. 2 did mention water lapping against ice/iceberg but there is no mention of "crunching as it continued to break apart".
Carpathia also nearly hit an iceberg which was not capsized nor any mention of fraction.
The people in No. 2 did mention water lapping against ice/iceberg but there is no mention of "crunching as it continued to break apart".
Aaron_2016
Guest
Could have sworn there was a survivor who distinctly heard the ice crunching. Might have been at daybreak when the sun rose up and the ice continued to melt. If not, then I stand corrected. Edith Rosenbaum said it was soft enough to play snowballs. Major Peuchen said - "It looked like shell ice, soft ice.....I heard the men walking over it, and it would crunch under their feet." Ernest Gill looked over the side of the Californian - "It was now 12 o'clock and I went to my cabin. I woke my mate, William Thomas. He heard the ice crunching alongside the ship and asked, "Are we in the ice?" I replied, "Yes but it must be clear off to the starboard, for I saw a big vessel going along full speed. She looked as if she might be a big German."
.
.
Hi Aaron, "much refraction" at nighttime proves nothing. There is no single record of anybody observing refracted stars. Many polar explorers spent months of polar night in Arctic and Antarctic, but nobody reported seeing mirage of stars. The ship might have observed star pillars (there were ice crystals in the air). Could you please give me the link to that "sea mirror" thing? Neither the Californian nor the Titanic recorded temperature rise, they only recorded it drop. The temperatures of the air and the water were the same. No refraction could happene under such conditions.
Aaron_2016
Guest
The Marengo saw great refraction at midnight and noted how strong the stars were. If there were no other ships about then the only indicator would have been the refraction of the stars on the horizon. The giant ice field was probably over 20 miles long and drifting down into warmer waters. I don't know if such a thing has ever happened on such a scale before or since. This would make all atmospheric events unique to that one area.
The analysis for the refraction comes from this documentary.
Skip to 52:30 - Logs showing radical changes in temperatures
Skip to 56:50 - Logs showing Great refraction at Midnight
Skip to 58:40 - Logs showing Air mirrors / mirages
.
Aaron superior mirage is called sometimes cold water mirage.
Aaron, think for yourself: no officer from Titanic, Californian, Mount Temple, Carpathia reported seeing "much refraction". Were they all so unprofessional not to know there was refraction and a false horizon? No, they all were professionals. They did not report seeing the refraction because there was none. I do not know what The Marengo meant under "much refraction". Maybe they also saw brightening on the horizon as Lord did? Maybe they meant light pillars Light Pillars (but I doubt this either) and besides I believe The Marengo was not even close to the ice. BTW back then most sailor called mirages reflection, not refraction
All mirages in your pictures and videos are of inferior mirage. The atmosphere is much clearer during inferior mirages. I bet you have never seen any "haze" with your inferior mirages. If there was a superior mirage I doubt stars would have been seen setting in the ocean. I do not recall seeing a very clear horizon with superior mirages display.
All mirages in your pictures and videos are of inferior mirage. The atmosphere is much clearer during inferior mirages. I bet you have never seen any "haze" with your inferior mirages. If there was a superior mirage I doubt stars would have been seen setting in the ocean. I do not recall seeing a very clear horizon with superior mirages display.
Aaron_2016
Guest
The officers on all surrounding ships made no mention of the Northern Lights which illuminated the night sky and were described by one survivor as a "search light" owing to their intensity, yet none of the officers on either ship mentioned it. That of course, does not mean it wasn't present. When the Titanic sank the survivors in the boats saw a huge plume of smoke rise up and flatten at the top like a mushroom, as if it had reached an invisible barrier. This was a layer of cold and warm air meeting. Survivors close to the wreckage saw a haze hovering just above the sea. This was another indication of the temperature difference. Survivors such as Charles Joughin said he felt much colder out of the sea than he did when he was in the water. The ice was melting all around them as they were in the warmer Labrador current and the ice was scattering all around them as it melted free from the icefield which was I understand the size of Manhattan. The wreck was found far to the south east of her position and the expeditions to find the wreck were surprised to find out she had drifted so far east owing to the warmer Labrador current.
When I saw the refraction it was a dark overcast night. There were no stars, and the vessel which was affected was surrounded in a dazzling glare, like a cloud or haze. According to my local weather reports the temperature of the air and sea was only 1 or 2 degrees different that night. When I zoomed in with the camera I could see the real lights were clear and easy to focus on, but the affected lights that were reflected were in a glare and impossible to focus on. I believe that is what the crew on the Californian had witnessed and why the glare of her reflected masthead light was possibly mistaken for a second masthead light. It also explains why the ship appeared 4-5 miles away when she was perhaps 20 or more miles away and why they could not hear the rockets, and why they could not see Boxhall's green light as his boat was closer to the water and further south and just out of reach to be raised up by the refaction onto the elevated horizon. When the survivors saw the lights of a ship to the north (Californian) the lights were described as being in a haze and a glare. They could not see it distinctly owing to the refraction. The atmospheric effects of the massive ice field would have played tricks on anyone in the vicinity of it.
.
When I saw the refraction it was a dark overcast night. There were no stars, and the vessel which was affected was surrounded in a dazzling glare, like a cloud or haze. According to my local weather reports the temperature of the air and sea was only 1 or 2 degrees different that night. When I zoomed in with the camera I could see the real lights were clear and easy to focus on, but the affected lights that were reflected were in a glare and impossible to focus on. I believe that is what the crew on the Californian had witnessed and why the glare of her reflected masthead light was possibly mistaken for a second masthead light. It also explains why the ship appeared 4-5 miles away when she was perhaps 20 or more miles away and why they could not hear the rockets, and why they could not see Boxhall's green light as his boat was closer to the water and further south and just out of reach to be raised up by the refaction onto the elevated horizon. When the survivors saw the lights of a ship to the north (Californian) the lights were described as being in a haze and a glare. They could not see it distinctly owing to the refraction. The atmospheric effects of the massive ice field would have played tricks on anyone in the vicinity of it.
.
Last edited by a moderator: