David G. Brown
RIP
Captain Collins has brought us another insight into one of the mystifying aspects of the sinking--Boxhall's "final position." Even in 1912 there were questions over its accuracy. The discovery of the wreck has led to general awareness that Boxhall's CQD position was @ 13 miles west and north of where the ship probably foundered. If Captain Collins is right in his assessment of Boxhall's navigation, then an analysis of the difference between the final CQD position and the debris field yields some interesting possibilities.
What Captain Collins has done is reconstruct the dead reckoning plot of Titanic during the last few hours of the voyage. He found that Boxhall's final CQD position fits the known data. The one person who absolutely would not be surprised by Collins' conclusion is Joseph G. Boxhall. Using the standard practices of dead reckoning, the ship's final CQD position is "correct." Captain Collins has shown that Boxhall was justifiably proud of his work.
Why the difference between the wreckage and Boxhall's location? Things Titanic are seldom cut-and-dried. There is an alternative solution to why Boxhall's final position was "off." I suggest checking Dave Gittens' web site where he discusses a possible mistake in using the traverse tables. Dave may want to provide more details, but for the moment I want to continue as if Captain Collins is correct.
Early last spring I did most of the same work as Captain Collins by plotting the known information. Until then, I had accpeted that Boxhall simply made a mistake. My plots, although still incomplete, support Captain Collins position. Boxhall followed the precepts of dead reckoning and produced a "correct" final position for the ship. I have put the word "correct" in quotes because in navigation a correct position is not always an accurate one. That is, the dead reckoning plot shows where the ship ought to be and not where it actually is. There are reasons for this, such as learning the set and drift of currents being experienced.
If we look at the difference between CQD and actual positions as a current problem, it appears the ship was stemming a head current. In other words, the ships speed over the ground was less than its speed through the water.
There is no known current in that part of the ocean of the required magnitude and direction. What else could have caused the ship to be west and slightly south of Boxhall's dead reckoning position? The only plausible answer to that question is maneuver by Titanic. That is, the ship did not take a straight course to its final wreck site and thereby caused it to be somewhere other than on its DR track. This would explain the difference between Boxhall's dead reckoning and the debris field.
If Captain Collins is correct, then the logical conclusion of his research is that Titanic was doing a lot of steering around something. Or, at least it was doing enough maneuvering to slow its velocity made good toward New York and cause it to be south of the intended track. And, if maneuvering was the case, the inevitable conclusion is that Captain Smith did not ignore the ice that night--on the contrary, he was actively dodging it right along.
If for some reason only incomplete records of the ship's maneuvers were kept, Boxhall would have had no choice but to ignore them in calculating his final DR position. That's one of the rules of dead reckoning. But, he would have known that while his position was correct, it was probably not accurate. And that may be why Boxhall of all the officers who manned lifeboats had the prudence of forethought to take and fire rockets to guide Carpathia. Boxhall knew the rescue ship was coming to their general location, but would need help finding the spot where the boats lay.
--David G. Brown
What Captain Collins has done is reconstruct the dead reckoning plot of Titanic during the last few hours of the voyage. He found that Boxhall's final CQD position fits the known data. The one person who absolutely would not be surprised by Collins' conclusion is Joseph G. Boxhall. Using the standard practices of dead reckoning, the ship's final CQD position is "correct." Captain Collins has shown that Boxhall was justifiably proud of his work.
Why the difference between the wreckage and Boxhall's location? Things Titanic are seldom cut-and-dried. There is an alternative solution to why Boxhall's final position was "off." I suggest checking Dave Gittens' web site where he discusses a possible mistake in using the traverse tables. Dave may want to provide more details, but for the moment I want to continue as if Captain Collins is correct.
Early last spring I did most of the same work as Captain Collins by plotting the known information. Until then, I had accpeted that Boxhall simply made a mistake. My plots, although still incomplete, support Captain Collins position. Boxhall followed the precepts of dead reckoning and produced a "correct" final position for the ship. I have put the word "correct" in quotes because in navigation a correct position is not always an accurate one. That is, the dead reckoning plot shows where the ship ought to be and not where it actually is. There are reasons for this, such as learning the set and drift of currents being experienced.
If we look at the difference between CQD and actual positions as a current problem, it appears the ship was stemming a head current. In other words, the ships speed over the ground was less than its speed through the water.
There is no known current in that part of the ocean of the required magnitude and direction. What else could have caused the ship to be west and slightly south of Boxhall's dead reckoning position? The only plausible answer to that question is maneuver by Titanic. That is, the ship did not take a straight course to its final wreck site and thereby caused it to be somewhere other than on its DR track. This would explain the difference between Boxhall's dead reckoning and the debris field.
If Captain Collins is correct, then the logical conclusion of his research is that Titanic was doing a lot of steering around something. Or, at least it was doing enough maneuvering to slow its velocity made good toward New York and cause it to be south of the intended track. And, if maneuvering was the case, the inevitable conclusion is that Captain Smith did not ignore the ice that night--on the contrary, he was actively dodging it right along.
If for some reason only incomplete records of the ship's maneuvers were kept, Boxhall would have had no choice but to ignore them in calculating his final DR position. That's one of the rules of dead reckoning. But, he would have known that while his position was correct, it was probably not accurate. And that may be why Boxhall of all the officers who manned lifeboats had the prudence of forethought to take and fire rockets to guide Carpathia. Boxhall knew the rescue ship was coming to their general location, but would need help finding the spot where the boats lay.
--David G. Brown