Samuel Halpern
Member
Distress signals. - These were supplied of number and pattern approved by Board of Trade - i.e., 36 socket signals in lieu of guns, 12 ordinary rockets, 2 Manwell Holmes deck flares, 12 blue lights, and 6 lifebuoy lights.
Titanic's Rockets Timeline
- Thread starter Eric R. Pajrowski
- Start date
-
- Tags
- distress signals rockets
Roy Kristiansen
Member
>>Oh, [Stone] got it all right. The intervals were short enough that he knew what he saw meant distress. He admitted to that in testimony.
Sam, as well, in TSTSS, Reade reproduced a letter to him from Stone's son in which the son wrote his father confided he always thought they were distress rockets, but that he was in a very difficult position, being a young officer and all... Reade reproduced just the first and last pages of the letter. I'm wondering if, in the intervening years, the entire document has been made public?
Roy
Sam, as well, in TSTSS, Reade reproduced a letter to him from Stone's son in which the son wrote his father confided he always thought they were distress rockets, but that he was in a very difficult position, being a young officer and all... Reade reproduced just the first and last pages of the letter. I'm wondering if, in the intervening years, the entire document has been made public?
Roy
I've read it. The intervening pages just list the ships that he served on after the Californian, and his RNR service. It says nothing about Lord et al.
Paul
Pre-order my Titanic book at http://www.paullee.com/book_details.php
Paul
Pre-order my Titanic book at http://www.paullee.com/book_details.php
Samuel Halpern
Member
The real issue for me here is what did Stone tell Lord when he called down the speaking tube. Stone said it was after he saw the 5th rocket, yet in the report written by Gibson to Lord, Gibson said that Stone told him that he called down to Lord after the 2nd rocket was seen, the 1st he thought was shooting star. If true, then that makes Lord's account believable when he said he was told about just one rocket when Stone called him on the speaking tube. And if Stone told Lord that just one rocket was seen, I can understand why Lord would not be too concerned yet since distress meant the firing of rockets at short intervals, not just one isolated rocket or signal. It also makes the question about company signals understandable, for Lord would be asking Stone just what was it that you actually saw? Was it a company signal which usually had some colors to them, or a distress rocket which usually exploded into white stars. But Stone never called down again until after the the lights of the steamer disappeared. And when Gibson reported to him at 2:05 a.m. by wheelhouse clock that they saw 8 white rockets fired, he also told him per Stones instruction, that the steamer steamed away to the SW, which a ship in distress would not have done.
Poor young Mr. Stone.
Poor young Mr. Stone.
Roy,
I was in touch with Herbert Stone's grandson a year ago. He still lives in the house that his father lived in (I won't give the address or surname of the son in case it prompts some "exclusive research articles"; the lazy author can do his own bloody research).
Stone jnr says: "My father died in 1996 without really telling us much about it, and no personal effects survived that I am aware of. With hindsight I would have liked to find out more while my father was alive - I never knew my grandfather - but some things can't be predicted."
Stone jnr. says, "Yes, I have read 'The Ship [That Stood Still]'. It was really weird to see my Dad's handwriting on a letter on one of the plates, and to read of a meeting he had with the author which was, I think, before I was born. I've also read the transcripts of Herbert's evidence at the enquiry, and they rather took him to bits. It's no wonder he never spoke much about it!"
I don't think theres much to be learned from the Stone descendants. Junior-Junior Stone didn't know that his grandfather had abandoned the sea after he had some sort of breakdown following a negative report from his captain. I was worried how he would react with this information, but Jnr.-Jnr. Stone says that he wasn't angry, but just "sad" at how Herbert's life had turned out. I quite agree.
FYI, the missing section of Reade's/John Stone's letter said, (roughly) "Herbert Stone served on the ships Dorelian, Huronian and Delilian (Leyland Line) and eventually rose to the rank of Chief Officer. During World War I, Stone was a sub-lieutenant in the RNR in Fleet Auxiliaries in the Dardanelles. He later worked on the Traveller and Wayfarer for Harrison's shipping line."
John Stone wrote that Herbert Stone suffered a brain haemorrage and died "a few hours later". How Reade found out he died leaving his wife and son "penniless" must have come from their meeting c.1965.
Paul
-
Pre-order my Titanic book at http://www.paullee.com/book_details.php
I was in touch with Herbert Stone's grandson a year ago. He still lives in the house that his father lived in (I won't give the address or surname of the son in case it prompts some "exclusive research articles"; the lazy author can do his own bloody research).
Stone jnr says: "My father died in 1996 without really telling us much about it, and no personal effects survived that I am aware of. With hindsight I would have liked to find out more while my father was alive - I never knew my grandfather - but some things can't be predicted."
Stone jnr. says, "Yes, I have read 'The Ship [That Stood Still]'. It was really weird to see my Dad's handwriting on a letter on one of the plates, and to read of a meeting he had with the author which was, I think, before I was born. I've also read the transcripts of Herbert's evidence at the enquiry, and they rather took him to bits. It's no wonder he never spoke much about it!"
I don't think theres much to be learned from the Stone descendants. Junior-Junior Stone didn't know that his grandfather had abandoned the sea after he had some sort of breakdown following a negative report from his captain. I was worried how he would react with this information, but Jnr.-Jnr. Stone says that he wasn't angry, but just "sad" at how Herbert's life had turned out. I quite agree.
FYI, the missing section of Reade's/John Stone's letter said, (roughly) "Herbert Stone served on the ships Dorelian, Huronian and Delilian (Leyland Line) and eventually rose to the rank of Chief Officer. During World War I, Stone was a sub-lieutenant in the RNR in Fleet Auxiliaries in the Dardanelles. He later worked on the Traveller and Wayfarer for Harrison's shipping line."
John Stone wrote that Herbert Stone suffered a brain haemorrage and died "a few hours later". How Reade found out he died leaving his wife and son "penniless" must have come from their meeting c.1965.
Paul
-
Pre-order my Titanic book at http://www.paullee.com/book_details.php
Roy Kristiansen
Member
Thank you, Paul!
I've printed out your post and will tuck into my TSTSS right next to the plate. I feel sad for that family - I truly hope they're doing well.
Roy
I've printed out your post and will tuck into my TSTSS right next to the plate. I feel sad for that family - I truly hope they're doing well.
Roy
Jim Currie
Member
Just a thought!
I wonder how Stone's grandson feels when he reads some of the comments regarding his grandfather on this web site?
He commented 'They rather took him to bits' - guess what? - it still goes on!
Well if you do read this Mr. Grandson: I for one do not condemn your grandfather. He was at the wrong place at the wrong time, seeing something he had never seen before - something that he only knew about from text books. He was asked by those who should have known better, to retrospectively interpret signals which were neither constant and were themselves, irregular to say the least- certainly not 'text book'.
Is it any wonder that when he, as well as everyone else became 'wise after the event' - he cobbled together a prosecutors dream response?
That fateful night your Grandfather and all the rest of them saw something they had never seen before. Something which did not immediately convey urgency as it was designed to do.
I believe they all reacted in a very normal, human way. At the time they had no idea that a ship was in trouble - much less Titanic. The ship they saw seemed close to them - certainly not way off on the horizon. Who could blame them for being any more than vaguely curious about what they thought they were seeing?
The wondrous web bit came when third and fourth parties encouraged by the press set-out on a witch hunt.
As I have said before; All these me, including your Grandfather, showed their bravery during the terrible years of WW1 that followed. Anyone who has witnessed such war at sea can not doubt their bravery.
I wonder how Stone's grandson feels when he reads some of the comments regarding his grandfather on this web site?
He commented 'They rather took him to bits' - guess what? - it still goes on!
Well if you do read this Mr. Grandson: I for one do not condemn your grandfather. He was at the wrong place at the wrong time, seeing something he had never seen before - something that he only knew about from text books. He was asked by those who should have known better, to retrospectively interpret signals which were neither constant and were themselves, irregular to say the least- certainly not 'text book'.
Is it any wonder that when he, as well as everyone else became 'wise after the event' - he cobbled together a prosecutors dream response?
That fateful night your Grandfather and all the rest of them saw something they had never seen before. Something which did not immediately convey urgency as it was designed to do.
I believe they all reacted in a very normal, human way. At the time they had no idea that a ship was in trouble - much less Titanic. The ship they saw seemed close to them - certainly not way off on the horizon. Who could blame them for being any more than vaguely curious about what they thought they were seeing?
The wondrous web bit came when third and fourth parties encouraged by the press set-out on a witch hunt.
As I have said before; All these me, including your Grandfather, showed their bravery during the terrible years of WW1 that followed. Anyone who has witnessed such war at sea can not doubt their bravery.
Samuel Halpern
Member
Emotion just gets in the way of objectivity Jim. Few people do things that turn out badly because they want to. The best of all of us gets it wrong sometimes. Herbert Stone saw rockets being fired at short intervals during his watch and did not take actions that could have cleared up what he was truly seeing one way or the other. Yes they took him to bits at the British Inquiry, and deservedly so I'm afraid. What he did later in life does not change what happened back in April 1912, or how he is viewed today.
Jim Currie
Member
Sam, I have cat that views lizards much the same way you describe. What I was trying to convey was that we all tend to be carried away by the excitement of the hunt and forget that we are discussing real people with surviving relatives. If I am guilty of any emotion it is one of compassion. I make no apology for that.
Thinking objectively is fine if the objective is to establish fact beyond reasonable doubt.
However since we are considering the thought process of one long dead there will always be doubts that all the objective thinking under the sun will fail to clear-up satisfactorily.
In this case, I would suggest there is not one person on this forum who can be absolutely sure what was in Stone's mind when he saw the rockets. As far as can be determined, he did what he was ordered to do and reported both sightings to his boss. The only clue as to what was in his mind was the picture his report conveyed to the Captain and the subsequent actions taken. In other words, it is likely he did not recognise these as signals sent-up from a vessel in need of immediate assistance.
Sure! as he remarked, "such signals are not sent up for nothing". Perhaps by their nature an viewpoint(from a vessel nearby) he did not view them as being from a vessel in need of immediate assistance. They did not convey immediacy or urgency to him or Gibson. The whole purpose of the 'short interval' is to convey urgency. I don't think Titanic conveyed that at all if the firing sequences are anything to go by. Try holding your breath for as long as it took them to fire a rocket - even at the shortest time.
The problem today's researchers have is in fact that very emotion you are warning me against. The words distress and disaster are truly emotive words. They were equally so in 1912. The Senators and Commissioners were very aware of this back then as were the politicians of the day and they used emotion very effectively.
Let's consider; Stone saw five rockets between 0035 and 0055 when the Apprentice returned to the bridge. That is indeed 5 rockets fired at 4 minute intervals if the first one was fired at 0038 Californian time. (0050 Titanic time). Another three were then seen. The first one about 0058. Were these at the same intervals? i.e was the last one seen at say 0106?(0116 Titanic time). This would mean that the 8 rockets were fired in a period of about 40 minutes. However, despite Gibson's claim that the last three were fired at 'short' intervals; Stone states he saw the last one about 0140 - the last one of that three. Are we talking about the same three that Gibson saw? If so then something is very strange indeed.
We are now talking about 8 rockets fired in 1 hr. 05 minutes. That's intervals of about 8 minutes - almost exactly double. Not apparently a sign of urgency.
If the first rocket was fired at around 0050 Titanic time, where was Rowe and his watch relief with the box of detonators from aft? After all, he was supposed to be relieved at around 0024 14th. time ship - 26 minutes earlier.
Now lets consider the three spotted at the end of the 12-4 watch. How could these have been from Carpathia when she was supposed to be firing them at 15 minute intervals?
Why hasn't anyone condemned Californian for not charging off to these ones?
I think there's more unanswered questions that those with answers.
Still having great fun!
Jim.
Thinking objectively is fine if the objective is to establish fact beyond reasonable doubt.
However since we are considering the thought process of one long dead there will always be doubts that all the objective thinking under the sun will fail to clear-up satisfactorily.
In this case, I would suggest there is not one person on this forum who can be absolutely sure what was in Stone's mind when he saw the rockets. As far as can be determined, he did what he was ordered to do and reported both sightings to his boss. The only clue as to what was in his mind was the picture his report conveyed to the Captain and the subsequent actions taken. In other words, it is likely he did not recognise these as signals sent-up from a vessel in need of immediate assistance.
Sure! as he remarked, "such signals are not sent up for nothing". Perhaps by their nature an viewpoint(from a vessel nearby) he did not view them as being from a vessel in need of immediate assistance. They did not convey immediacy or urgency to him or Gibson. The whole purpose of the 'short interval' is to convey urgency. I don't think Titanic conveyed that at all if the firing sequences are anything to go by. Try holding your breath for as long as it took them to fire a rocket - even at the shortest time.
The problem today's researchers have is in fact that very emotion you are warning me against. The words distress and disaster are truly emotive words. They were equally so in 1912. The Senators and Commissioners were very aware of this back then as were the politicians of the day and they used emotion very effectively.
Let's consider; Stone saw five rockets between 0035 and 0055 when the Apprentice returned to the bridge. That is indeed 5 rockets fired at 4 minute intervals if the first one was fired at 0038 Californian time. (0050 Titanic time). Another three were then seen. The first one about 0058. Were these at the same intervals? i.e was the last one seen at say 0106?(0116 Titanic time). This would mean that the 8 rockets were fired in a period of about 40 minutes. However, despite Gibson's claim that the last three were fired at 'short' intervals; Stone states he saw the last one about 0140 - the last one of that three. Are we talking about the same three that Gibson saw? If so then something is very strange indeed.
We are now talking about 8 rockets fired in 1 hr. 05 minutes. That's intervals of about 8 minutes - almost exactly double. Not apparently a sign of urgency.
If the first rocket was fired at around 0050 Titanic time, where was Rowe and his watch relief with the box of detonators from aft? After all, he was supposed to be relieved at around 0024 14th. time ship - 26 minutes earlier.
Now lets consider the three spotted at the end of the 12-4 watch. How could these have been from Carpathia when she was supposed to be firing them at 15 minute intervals?
Why hasn't anyone condemned Californian for not charging off to these ones?
I think there's more unanswered questions that those with answers.
Still having great fun!
Jim.
Samuel Halpern
Member
>>If I am guilty of any emotion it is one of compassion. I make no apology for that. <<
No problem with that Jim. I feel sorry for Stone too. As I said, few people do things that turn out badly because they want to.
>>I would suggest there is not one person on this forum who can be absolutely sure what was in Stone's mind when he saw the rockets. <<
I agree. We only know what may have been on his mind at the time by what he said he was thinking about. But we also have information on how he was perceived by others who knew him and what those others were willing to say. That doesn't mean that their perceptions about him were accurate, only that they may explain a few things that we can only speculate on.
>>Now lets consider the three [rockets] spotted at the end of the 12-4 watch. How could these have been from Carpathia when she was supposed to be firing them at 15 minute intervals? <<
I could turn this question around very easily and ask how do you know Carpathia was firing them at 15 minute intervals only? Rostron also said that they fired a rocket every time they saw one of those green flares. That alone would have broken a fixed 15 minute firing interval.
>>Why hasn't anyone condemned Californian for not charging off to these ones? <<
Put another way, why didn't Stone report these at the time they were seen? I find it interesting how often we use the term "Californian" to avoid mentioning certain individuals by name. Californian was just a ship. It was individuals with certain responsibilities that decided what or what not to do. I don't condemn Californian for not charging off anywhere, and I also don't condemn people in charge of her. But we certainly can ask why certain actions were or were not taken by those people, and look to find some answers.
The problem with much of this Californian stuff is that there are some that decide early on that a person is guilty or not guilty of something. They then go about trying to prove it. Lordites Vs. anti-Lordites. All too often compassion or condemnation leads to blindness. It becomes more of a emotional debate than an objective study. That is why I said what I said above.
Still great fun.
No problem with that Jim. I feel sorry for Stone too. As I said, few people do things that turn out badly because they want to.
>>I would suggest there is not one person on this forum who can be absolutely sure what was in Stone's mind when he saw the rockets. <<
I agree. We only know what may have been on his mind at the time by what he said he was thinking about. But we also have information on how he was perceived by others who knew him and what those others were willing to say. That doesn't mean that their perceptions about him were accurate, only that they may explain a few things that we can only speculate on.
>>Now lets consider the three [rockets] spotted at the end of the 12-4 watch. How could these have been from Carpathia when she was supposed to be firing them at 15 minute intervals? <<
I could turn this question around very easily and ask how do you know Carpathia was firing them at 15 minute intervals only? Rostron also said that they fired a rocket every time they saw one of those green flares. That alone would have broken a fixed 15 minute firing interval.
>>Why hasn't anyone condemned Californian for not charging off to these ones? <<
Put another way, why didn't Stone report these at the time they were seen? I find it interesting how often we use the term "Californian" to avoid mentioning certain individuals by name. Californian was just a ship. It was individuals with certain responsibilities that decided what or what not to do. I don't condemn Californian for not charging off anywhere, and I also don't condemn people in charge of her. But we certainly can ask why certain actions were or were not taken by those people, and look to find some answers.
The problem with much of this Californian stuff is that there are some that decide early on that a person is guilty or not guilty of something. They then go about trying to prove it. Lordites Vs. anti-Lordites. All too often compassion or condemnation leads to blindness. It becomes more of a emotional debate than an objective study. That is why I said what I said above.
Still great fun.
Jim Currie
Member
Hello Sam,
Nearly missed this one.
On the subject of 'missing' something. Most researchers miss-understand the thought process of Captain v subordinate.
Whe a Captain gives an order, he does not expect his subordinate to make an arbitrary decision or 'take the initiative' too often. Ship's are not governed by a committee nor are they a democracy. When the Captain gives an order, written or verbal, he expects it to be carried out to the letter. In the case of Stone his exact orders were:
"Watch the other steamer and report if she comes any nearer "
When Stone first reported the rockets:
"Call her up with the Morse lamp and try and get some information from her. When you get an answer let me know by Gibson."
At 12-30am Stone told Lord that the other ship had not come any nearer nor did she do so throught the time she was in sight. Order number one obeyed exactly.
He never did make signal contact with the other vessel but he did report the rockets..initiative.
In accordance with his orders, he sent Gibson down to tell Lord that he had not been able to do so. He also added the intelligence that at about the time of the last rocket, the other vessel changed her bearing from Californian and moved off without firing any more rockets. She was underweigh. Order number two plus was then carried out.
Accordingly, all threat had been removed and since the other vessel was moving and had not answered the signal light communication, she was not in any trouble.
If we apply the foregoing scenario to two vessels separated by 5 miles of sea, it makes sense to a seafarer.
If the distance was much greater but the ships were still in sight of each other and still signalling continuously without either replying then it make absolutely no sense to a seafarer. Particularly when both parties each had two people involved one of whom was using binoculars.
As a footnote: I believe that if Titanic had not sunk when she did, given the scenario above, most masters would have behaved exactly as did Stanley Lord.
We can all be wise after an event. All of us know what we should have done had we been in possesion of the full facts
Jim C
Nearly missed this one.
On the subject of 'missing' something. Most researchers miss-understand the thought process of Captain v subordinate.
Whe a Captain gives an order, he does not expect his subordinate to make an arbitrary decision or 'take the initiative' too often. Ship's are not governed by a committee nor are they a democracy. When the Captain gives an order, written or verbal, he expects it to be carried out to the letter. In the case of Stone his exact orders were:
"Watch the other steamer and report if she comes any nearer "
When Stone first reported the rockets:
"Call her up with the Morse lamp and try and get some information from her. When you get an answer let me know by Gibson."
At 12-30am Stone told Lord that the other ship had not come any nearer nor did she do so throught the time she was in sight. Order number one obeyed exactly.
He never did make signal contact with the other vessel but he did report the rockets..initiative.
In accordance with his orders, he sent Gibson down to tell Lord that he had not been able to do so. He also added the intelligence that at about the time of the last rocket, the other vessel changed her bearing from Californian and moved off without firing any more rockets. She was underweigh. Order number two plus was then carried out.
Accordingly, all threat had been removed and since the other vessel was moving and had not answered the signal light communication, she was not in any trouble.
If we apply the foregoing scenario to two vessels separated by 5 miles of sea, it makes sense to a seafarer.
If the distance was much greater but the ships were still in sight of each other and still signalling continuously without either replying then it make absolutely no sense to a seafarer. Particularly when both parties each had two people involved one of whom was using binoculars.
As a footnote: I believe that if Titanic had not sunk when she did, given the scenario above, most masters would have behaved exactly as did Stanley Lord.
We can all be wise after an event. All of us know what we should have done had we been in possesion of the full facts
Jim C
Samuel Halpern
Member
>>Hello Sam, Nearly missed this one.<<
Hmmm? Did you realize that you are replying to a post that went up 4 years ago?
Hmmm? Did you realize that you are replying to a post that went up 4 years ago?
Jim Currie
Member
Certainly did!
But heck; it happened a hundred years ago, what's four years among friends? More to the point: I take it you have read it. So what's your take?
JIm C.
But heck; it happened a hundred years ago, what's four years among friends? More to the point: I take it you have read it. So what's your take?
JIm C.
Samuel Halpern
Member
Stone followed orders. But there is one thing that is in conflict between what Stone said and Capt. Lord said. Stone wrote to Lord that he called down on the speaking tube to Lord and told him about seeing 5 rockets. Lord recalls being told only about one rocket. And Gibson wrote that Stone told him that he called down to Lord after Stone saw the 2nd rocket, as the 1st one he was not too sure about. Gibson's hearsay account tends to back up Lord's version. Was Stone confused about how many rockets were seen before calling down to Lord on the speaking tube when he wrote his report to Lord? Did he remember telling someone that he saw 5 rockets, and then confuse Gibson for Lord? That's my guess, and if true, then I have to question why he waited for the rocket display to end and the steamer's lights to disappear before sending Gibson down to report.
The other strange thing is Stone calling down to Lord 40 minutes after sending Gibson down to only report again that the steamer had gone out of sight in the SW and that they saw altogether 8 white rockets. Yet he never called down after 3 more white rockets were seen after 3:20am. Even if you believe he was still watching a stern light between 2:05 and 2:20, as he said he did during the British inquiry - which, by the way, Gibson denied ever seeing - why bother to wake up the master first 20 minutes after you see it disappear, yet not reporting anything about those subsequent rockets that were seen 40 minutes later? He was never asked about that.
Jim Currie
Member
The problem with all of this is that those who were asked to recall events, did not think them as significant events at the time. So, in all probability, they did not shelve them carefully in their memories.
As I've said in the past, it is easy to be wise after the event. When Stone and Gibson wrote their affadavits for Lord, they had had to reach back 3 and a half days or so, beyond a traumatic, excitement-filled time. It is quite possible that they did not immediately tie-in the sighting to the SE with an event which took place to the SW. It was a 'now that I come to think of it' moment clouded by more immediate, larger than life happenings. In fact, Lord alluded to such a thing during the time he gave evidence. He had an 'uneasy' feeling.
The other puzzling thing about this is the fact that Lord did not attempt to turn suspicion away from Californian. He could quite easily have done so by pointing out that the other ship could not have been Titanic since Titanic was in another direction from Californian but he did not do that.
This was before he knew about the moving vessel seen by Boxhall and others.
Jim C
As I've said in the past, it is easy to be wise after the event. When Stone and Gibson wrote their affadavits for Lord, they had had to reach back 3 and a half days or so, beyond a traumatic, excitement-filled time. It is quite possible that they did not immediately tie-in the sighting to the SE with an event which took place to the SW. It was a 'now that I come to think of it' moment clouded by more immediate, larger than life happenings. In fact, Lord alluded to such a thing during the time he gave evidence. He had an 'uneasy' feeling.
The other puzzling thing about this is the fact that Lord did not attempt to turn suspicion away from Californian. He could quite easily have done so by pointing out that the other ship could not have been Titanic since Titanic was in another direction from Californian but he did not do that.
This was before he knew about the moving vessel seen by Boxhall and others.
Jim C
Similar threads
