Rocket Test

[Steven Christian]

Has anybody in the past conducted a test to determine how far the rockets can be seen under the conditions that night. Ok a little pun here but it wouldn't be rocket science to set that up. Have a ship with maybe a platform to mirror Titanic's height and 3 or 4 ships to mirror Californian's bridge height spaced 10, 15, 20 miles or so. Since rockets were observed that night from the Californian and you fired equivilant rockets that Titanic used and could be seen from 15 miles and not 20 ( you could narrow it down even further) then you could at least determine her max distance that night from Titanic. Has this test been done before?

 

[Jim Currie]

You do not need a test, Christian. All you need is the averge height of a projectile above the sea and the height of eye of the observer above the sea. Under normal conditions of barometric pressure and air temperature the distance separating firing position and observer can be found by multiplying the square root of the heights by 1.15. If the atmosphere is clear, as it was that night, the barometer was very high, as it was that night and the air temperature above the sea was close to freezing, as it was that night, then that will effect the ability to see the signal, in that it will be seen at a much greater distance than normal.
The classic example is the distance between the stopped Californian and the SS Carpathia at or near to 3-30 am that morning. It has been claimed elsewhere that Carpathia was firing socket signals. If these had been sen at extreme range i.e. on the horizon, by those on the Californian at that time, then Captain Lord's navigation was most certainly at fault and his ship would have been 5 or 6 miles farther north that where he said it was when he stopped which would have made the separation distance between the Californian and the sinking Titanic closer to 28 miles. Now who believed that?
Any of the "experts" reading this will, I hope, forgive my approximations since I am writing this "on the hoof" as it were.

 

[Rob Lawes]

There was a six part series a few years ago now which I believe was called "Project Titanic" or something like that. In each episode they recreated several things associated with the ship. This included a section of the Hull, a fitted out first class cabin and, in one episode they recreated and tested a period life jacket and a socket signal. I can't count for the accuracy of the signal recreation and don't think the programs are available anywhere but I know a recreation has been done.

 

[Jim Currie]

Not sure if we are discussing "rockets" or "Socket Signals". We know that the latter rose to a height of 600 feet , but the actual distress rockets did not rise as high. I'm sure the manufacturer's blurbs would be a source of that information.

 

[Georges Guay]

Noting that firing socket distress signals on a vessel heeled over and on top of freezing cold temperature … didn’t certainly help to keep the flare burning that high and that bright!

 

[Jim Currie]

Hello Georges,

I think you will find that a list to port simply meant that the projectiles fired from the starboard wing went straight up rather than as meant...out at an angle from the ship's side.
I also think that the cold, clear atmosphere would enable the pyrotechnic flares to be seen a very long way... right to the limit of their enhanced horizon. Do you agree or otherwise?
PS. Not at home at the moment but will send you the full BoT Examination syllabuses for all grades when I get back. I have the originals on file.

 

[Georges Guay]

How can a projectile go up higher if it is fired at angle instead of straight up? And there was not only a list, but a trim as well! It would defy all projectile motion laws!

To blaze, a fire needs oxygen, combustible and heat. If you reduce the heat … you unequivocally reduce the blaze!

 

[Georges Guay]

Notwithstanding the fact that thermal inversion existed that night; Titanic could have appeared closer but the rockets further and masthead light flickering!
Run for your life!!!

 

[Rob Lawes]

How can a projectile go up higher if it is fired at angle instead of straight up? And there was not only a list, but a trim as well! It would defy all projectile motion laws!

To blaze, a fire needs oxygen, combustible and heat. If you reduce the heat … you unequivocally reduce the blaze!

I guess it depends on the angle of the firing socket. It would only go straight up as shown in your first picture of the socket itself was pointing vertically. If the socket was slightly angled to allow for the signal to launch away from the rail slightly the when the shop listed it would bring the launcher into the vertical position. That's what I think is being suggested.

 

[Georges Guay]

As far as I know, the socket was installed right through and screwed down pretty much straight up in the railing. It could have been a degree outward due to ship camber but certainly not 10 degrees transversally due to port heel and 4 degrees longitudinally due to trim by the head. Since the socket was not installed via gimbals, the unfortunate distress signal had no choice but to fly toward the portside and in the direction of the bow, therefore not as high as if it would have been fired upright. Logic, no?

The Patent Socket Distress Signals; «the most simple and the most perfect signal of distress ever invented» was so but only for a vessel sinking upright !

 

[Steven Christian]

There was a six part series a few years ago now which I believe was called "Project Titanic" or something like that. In each episode they recreated several things associated with the ship. This included a section of the Hull, a fitted out first class cabin and, in one episode they recreated and tested a period life jacket and a socket signal. I can't count for the accuracy of the signal recreation and don't think the programs are available anywhere but I know a recreation has been done.

Ok thanks. I will hunt around the web and see if someone posted it.

 

[Dave Gittins]

The Board of Trade regulations required the sockets to be set at 20° from the perpendicular. They don't seem to say whether this means athwartships or fore and aft.

 

[Rob Lawes]

Ok thanks. I will hunt around the web and see if someone posted it.

Having looked into it further, it was called Titanic: The Mission or Rebuilding the Titanic depending on which country it was broadcast in. There are 4 episodes on YouTube but ironically, episode 5 which was the final episode and the one that had the rockets in it is not on YouTube. I can't find it anyway. Having said that, from what I remember the series was a good watch so it would be worth watching the other 4.

 

[Georges Guay]

I guess it would be 20° off the vertical away from the vessel. But it does not change anything much since 20° - 10° list = 10° off the vertical. What about the trim by the head? The Patent Socket Distress Signal publicity must have been wrong since both the railing and the deck socket have collar or footplate at 90°. The installer must have had a lot of fun to shim them at 20°. Do you think Titanic would not be given her safety certificate because the socket was not fixed at 20° off the vertical?

 

[Jim Currie]

Hello Georges,

I think you will find that a list to port simply meant that the projectiles fired from the starboard wing went straight up rather than as meant...out at an angle from the ship's side.
I also think that the cold, clear atmosphere would enable the pyrotechnic flares to be seen a very long way... right to the limit of their enhanced horizon. Do you agree or otherwise?
PS. Not at home at the moment but will send you the full BoT Examination syllabuses for all grades when I get back. I have the originals on file.

Here's the bit about Extra Master.