The californian inquiry

[Noel F. Jones]

"Could Lord not have been justified in thinking: "now had that ship been in my command she could not have come sailing right into the ice field at that speed as if there's an emergency. Because I would have acted on the ice warnings and slowed her right down."

That's the first sensible thing you've said old man. I'd leave it at that if I were you....

Noel

 

[taner tanriover]

People,
You know I cannot [or anybody else] expect to uncover hard evidence nowadays to ascertain EXACTLY what happened on the Californian that night. I am aware that I'm not a professional sailor, nevermind captain, but I've been in charge of commercial vehicles on land for example, I know what it's like to have people's lives trusted on you. That's why I felt somewhat free to theorise on the topic, no claims to being authoritative. Hey even if I am 100% wrong about my assumptions I see no harm in making public and discussing my thoughts on the matter.. with you fine people! Making it count, so to speak!

 

[taner tanriover]

I understand how difficult Lord's position must have been if he knew about Titanic, and also how this would have put him "on the spot." I am not here to accuse but understand Stanley Lord. I understand all too well how he can't be held responsible for a naval disaster he did his best to prevent, and his reluctance to help under the circumstances may well have been the more "human" thing to do rather than vice versa.

 

[taner tanriover]

Helping the foundering Titanic was not a job for humans after all, no?
It seems a task better suited to superheroes. Like if Superman existed and was around in those days, using his super-human strength he could have stabilised the ship, helped it stay afloat until help arrived, for example.
or he could have balanced the entire ship on his head and placed her [as if beached] on an iceberg.
But Batman or Spiderman would have been about as helpless as Stanley Lord, I think.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>but I've been in charge of commercial vehicles on land for example,<<

Apples and oranges I'm afraid. There is very little if any real basis for comparing what happens in commercial land vehicals to what happens on a pitch black and bitterly cold night at sea, much less the accountabilty that falls upon the master and the problems of safe navigation that goes along with it.

Taner, you seem to be ascribing some sort of melicious intent on the part of Captain Lord and those who served under his command. While I can accuse or credit them with a lot of things, this just isn't one of them. My own read of the evidence tends to point to a genuine confusion on their part over what they observed. I could argue that it should have started alarm bells ringing in their minds eye, but for some reason, it just didn't with them. What followed afterward at the inquiries was nothing more then ex post facto damage control which is pretty common in events like this. There was a lot of that going on and not just with the Californian's people.

Perhaps superheros could have helped but no such people exist and never have. All there was to be found that night were mortal and fallible human beings doing the best they could with the information they had in the situations they faced. Some didn't do so well. That's not melevolance at work, just human frailities.

'Nuff said on my part.

 

[taner tanriover]

I aggree with you for the most part, Michael. And I understand how it may seem like I am streching my imagination. But certain things keep on haunting my mind. For example:
Why was Lord [according to his claims] so unconcerned at that point in time [and felt it was a good idea to go to sleep] when I am led to believe that he KNEW something the size of Titanic was about the sail past, and for all he knew, maybe within metres of his ship, moving tons of water in the process, requiring him to take some action as a captain? How did Lord know Titanic would be sailing close by? How did he know the opposite? So the point is, he must have been keeping an eye on the situation no matter how disinterested he may have been about the sheer size and technology involved in Titanic, or no matter how many times he saw Olympic or similar vessels.
And since he made out as tho he wasn't even the least bit interested, I think we have good reason to suspect he was not 100% truthful.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>For example:
Why was Lord [according to his claims] so unconcerned at that point in time [and felt it was a good idea to go to sleep] when I am led to believe that he KNEW something the size of Titanic was about the sail past, and for all he knew, maybe within metres of his ship, moving tons of water in the process, requiring him to take some action as a captain?<<

Because he "knew" no such thing. All they saw was a large steamer that was well to the southeast and which was moving west, not northwest towards the Californian. It doesn't take long to take a few bearings on a ship that one has under visual observation to figure out where the Closest Point of Approach would be. The CPA in this case would be no less then 10 miles and possibly considerably more. There was not the slightest risk of collision, they were well aware of it, so keeping an eye on it was the most that was needed.

Two ships passing in the night. Happens all the time. No big deal.

>>So the point is, he must have been keeping an eye on the situation no matter how disinterested he may have been about the sheer size and technology involved in Titanic, or no matter how many times he saw Olympic or similar vessels.
And since he made out as tho he wasn't even the least bit interested, I think we have good reason to suspect he was not 100% truthful.<<

This is a non-sequiter One that assumes at the base that Captain Lord knew the ship in question was the Titanic, and that he had an especial interest in the ship. He had no such knowledge or interest and absent getting the information by wireless...(He made no effort to do so)...he had no way of knowing who he had under observation. So long as they didn't come close enough to hit each other, and it was obvious from the start that they wouldn't, there was no reason to be especially concerned with it.

Granted, we have reason to believe Captain Lord and his whole cast of characters was less then honest, but not for any of the reasons you've been claiming.

 

[taner tanriover]

Mate,
didn't this guy himself send a wireless message to Titanic? And don't these ships stick to a "route" of sorts? Now, this guy obviously knew around 11 o'clock that Titanic was headed his way. And since they had no radars or such I feel he had every reason to fear a potential collision. He is stopped on [what well could have been] Titanic's track, and yet he's not even watching his back!

 

[Paul Lee]

Rubbish. Titanic was on a track to New York, Californian was heading towards Boston. The tracks were completely different, and diverging.

GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT, FCS!

Paul

 

[taner tanriover]

I've come to believe
a different drama altogether [may have] started unfolding aboard the Californian that night, about the same time Cpt. Smith and his cast of characters started fearing for the ground beneath their feet.
Should we or Shouldn't we?
Lord [presumably not knowing then, that the final wireless exchange had been cut off]: "I told these people where the ice was myself and lo and behold: Smith comes screaming into the ice-field in his massive, near-impossible to manoeuvre ship and.. Not surprisingly he's sinking and wants us to help him. Gentlemen, I think we have a philosophical discussion on our hands!"

 

[John Flood]

He wasn't stopped on Titanic's track. The Californian was further to the north, than Titanic's heading. The wireless message sent to the Titanic from Californian was an ice warning, nothing else. I don't think a collision would have been on cards, in this instance.

All the Best,
John.

 

[Paul Lee]

You can believe what you like of course. But its as far divorced from reality as the notion that the Titanic and Olympic were switched in an insurance fraud.

When reading your ill-informed posts, I've tried very hard not to sneeze. Lest I blow your "facts" away in the gust.

 

[taner tanriover]

Hey
mine's just an "insane" theory
so what if isn't as accurate as you'd fancy
by that same token
some people would still like to believe Neil Armstrong actually may have landed on the moon.
and by God, they sure will die believeing that.
Maybe this is like one of those things.

 

[Paul Lee]

Quote:
some people would still like to believe Neil Armstrong actually may
have landed on the moon.
and by God, they sure will due believing that.


Proof, ladies and gentlemen, if any be needed, that this whole thread is a troll.

Paul

 

[taner tanriover]

Proof, rather, that you [some guy called Paul Lee] speaking for yourself only, have come to consider me a troll. For whatever that is worth. And thank you for bringing that to my attention. But I guess that's how life worx, my friend. Some of us are trolls. And some just people who call us "trolls." It will be all made clearer soon. you will understand
When consummation comes
and jars two hemispheres

so to speak

He who laughs best laughs all the way

and then some