Yes, I misspelled. I meant "firing".
Could somebody please explain to me what could have been a reason the rockets did no very high "about half the height of the steamer’s masthead light" as testified Californian’s Second Officer Herbert Stone? I mean it is not just the rockets appeared simply low. They appeared low comparing to the Titanic's masthead.
Thank you.
Super refraction. Other ships recorded strong refraction (distortions in the atmosphere that magnify and elevate objects on the water).
Edited photo to get a rough idea. I see this effect quite regularly on the Irish sea.
On
the Californian a crew member called Gibson testified that the lights of the ship he was looking at appeared to rise into the air (A sure sign of refraction). He was asked:
Q - When you looked at this ship's red light and thought that it seemed queer, did you also look at her lights in the afterpart of her?
A - Yes.
Q - How did they stand in relation to the red light?
A - They did not seem to be the same as they were before.
- "It seemed to be higher out of the water than what it was before."
- "They were in the same position, but they seemed to look different."
- "She looks rather to have a big side out of the water."
Q - You have told us about this red light, that you thought it was higher out of the water?
A - Yes.
Q - Did you look to see whether these after-lights seemed higher up out of the water, or lower in the water?
A - I noticed them all at the same time.
Q - What, the red light and the others too?
A - Yes.
Q - And do you mean that the white light seemed higher out of the water as well as the red light?
A - Yes.
I believe the refraction is the only plausible reason why the Titanic appeared to be much closer, why the rockets did not burst high above her mast, why no sounds at all could be heard, and why her morse lamp signals were unreadable.
A video about refraction from the Titanic documentary -
Titanic: Case Closed.