True Course

[Cathy Akers-Jordan]

David H wrote: " I feel I have given out much information over the past couple of years regarding many ship board practices that were similar to Titanic's time but most of it unfortunately has fallen on deaf ears and has been a waste of my time.
I would have preferred some straight answers to my questions and criticisms but that would have been too much for some I fear.
Next Tuesday 13th, I shall be coming off line indefinitely as I can't be bothered to read this stuff much longer so if anyone wants a final ''dig'' before then they had better get their oar in quickly. "

I'm sorry to hear that, David. I always enjoy reading your posts because I respect your knowledge and experience. I know the discussions can be frustrating at times, but that's why I appreciate reading them. Even when I disagree with something someone has written, I learn from it.

Anyway, I hope you will keep your web site on-line and come back to ET once in a while.

Best wishes,

Cathy

 

[Cathy Akers-Jordan]

Hi Monica,

How about this: shoreside range markings are just a way of measuring deviation when you are close to shore. Instead of comparing the ship's bearing to the azimuth of the sun, a star, or a planet, you swing the ship towards tall buildings you can see on shore (usually churches) and measure the deviation.

Deviation varies as a ship's heading changes because the metal of the ship moves in relation to the ship's compass as the ship swings around (Kemp, Peter. The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1976. p. 244).

Here's how it works: I swing my ship to point at church A, then measure the deviation. Then I swing my ship to point at church B, and measure the deviation again. Comparing the two numbers helps me calculate the amount of deviation on my current heading.

Does that make sense? If I am mistaken, I'm sure Charlie can set us both straight. He's the real expert!

Cathy

 

[Parks Stephenson]

David,

I understand and respect your right to debate the issue that Dave Brown raised. I have exercised the same right in this very thread. What I take issue with -- as I always have -- is your oft- and plain-stated disdain for the opinions and/or experience of others on this board, myself included. Speaking for myself, I have never doubted or belittled your sea-going experience, even when you were dismissing mine. But I'll be damned if I'll respond to your questions when I know that you'll only slap me for it. So, if you would like my response on information that you have provided, then you'll have to return some of courtesy that I attempt to show you. If you don't care about my opinion, then you can look to someone else for a response. In this most recent thread, I directed you toward the surviving crew remembrances because I know from previous conversations that you do not want to hear what I have to say. If you don't respect me, then maybe you would respect them.

In other words, your 'sea stories" have not fallen on deaf ears...you just make it difficult for some, myself included, to respond to, or comment on, them. Silence does not mean that people aren't listening and learning. We're not aboard ship now...in a forum such as this, people won't respond to chastisement. My children taught me that lesson when I retired from our Navy and I'm still trying to learn it. What worked aboard ship doesn't always work on dry land.

If asked, I would rather that you not leave the board, despite our differences. But I have no say in the matter.

Parks

 

[Charles B. Weeks Jr.]

monica:
Just to clarify something Cathy & I said. You have to have two fixed charted objects onshore, then you determine the compass bearing when they are in line. That is the heading of the range, while your ship is lined up on the range you observe the difference between your compass course and the range. This difference is total compass error. I wish you could make it to Maine in April, it will be very interesting, and we could show you some examples of ranges in the bridge simulator.
Regards,
Charlie

 

[Charles B. Weeks Jr.]

Hello, my fellow Titanic enthusiasts:
I am saddened to see all the acrimony that has arisen in this thread. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but we must respect others rights to their opinions. It is fine to disagree with someone else, but do it in a gentlemanly fashion. I view the whole Titanic issue like a large mosaic or picture puzzle. It is made up of many small pieces, each of us has a broad general interest in the whole picture, and a specific interest in one or more of the individual pieces. As I see it the only way we will ever put the puzzle together is by working together to fit the individual pieces that we each have been working on together. To do this might require some reshaping of individual pieces so they fit.
I believe that the best sources of information are they primary sources. These are things like: testimony at either inquiry, testimony in court and publications by survivors. Everything else is a secondary or a further removed source. As we know the primary sources far from answer all the questions, this is where we have to fall back on our personal experience and knowledge, to fill in the gaps or make the pieces fit together. If we can work together and draw on each others strengths we have the best chance of making the pieces fit.
Regards,
Charlie

 

[Cathy Akers-Jordan]

Charlie,

I'm looking forward to the bridge simulator!

Cathy

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>I am saddened to see all the acrimony that has arisen in this thread.<<

So am I as there's no need for it. If one person or another claimed to be inspired inerrant on this or any other matter, that might be a different story, but this hasn't happened.

I've been aware of the ideas that David Brown and Erik Wood have been researching for nearly two years now, and I think they can demonstrate that there's enough there...from their read of the evidence available...that some sort of manuever had been completed prior to that fatal encounter with the ice. Something which led to a loss of situational awareness just long enough for them to have a run in (Literally!) with a nasty surprise.

Whether anything happened exactly as these two men believe is certainly debatable, but both of these men bring their own insights as mariners...and Erik's insights as an accident investigator to the table...and I think that at least warrants giving them a fair hearing.

David Haisman brings his insights as a sailor in the British Merchant Marine to the table as well, and in that vein, I think a collaberation between them would be well worthwhile. The end result would certainly be a lot more credible then the mythos that's been perpetuated for nearly 92 years.

How about it???

 

[monica e. hall]

Charlie,
how I wish I could make it to Maine as well. And I can't resist simulators either, wish you hadn't told me about it. Thanks to you and Cathy - I think I have actually got it all straight now.
Parks - was interested in your comment about your children teaching you that people won't respond to chastisement. Among other classes I do, I teach marketing to the Military (all services) who are about to retire into civilian life, and the most difficult thing they find is to step down from orders to co-operation. I think it's odd, as the services are always going on about teams and so forth, but when it comes to real team behaviour, they find it very difficult. I can see why - a team in the services has to do as it is told, no questions etc., but they do find the transition difficult - people actually have the temerity to ask 'Why'!

 

[Parks Stephenson]

<font color="#000066">So am I as there's no need for it. If one person or another claimed to be inspired inerrant on this or any other matter, that might be a different story, but this hasn't happened.

Well, if one only looks at this thread in isolation, I can see that what you say is true. Given that perspective, I therefore apologise to the membership at large for taking the attitude I did with David without apparent provocation.

<font color="#000066">Something which led to a loss of situational awareness just long enough for them to have a run in (Literally!) with a nasty surprise.

Despite the way you worded it, I hope that you do not intend that to be a statement of fact. I have seen nothing that proves that First Officer Murdoch lost any situational awareness during his watch. On the contrary, my read through the evidence seems to indicate that he was quite alert and responsive to the situation.

Monica,

Yes, teamwork is important in the military and aboard a naval vessel, as it is in normal, successful life. The main difference I find between the military and civilian life is that in civilian life, a leader can often be questioned. In family life, leadership is a much more nebulous thing; in fact, I have given up any pretention of leadership in my household. The new puppy has more authority than me. I was a fairly senior-ranking officer by the time I retired, and accustomed to having orders carried out without much question and with alacrity. I was also a single man for most of my military career (not counting my first, childless, marriage) and started a family only during my last year in uniform (and after my last sea tour). It was therefore a shock when I moved from the environment that I had grown up in for over two decades to the new one. That was over 8 years ago and I'm still learning to adjust. In my wife's view, my attitude has been getting better with each passing year, and I guess that I can't really argue with her (see, I AM learning!).

Parks

 

[David G. Brown]

Parks-- no offense taken as I know that none was intended. Nothing good comes of weak debate. I expected resistance to my suggestions and demands for proof. Proof will be forthcoming in April if my plans come to fruition.

With regard to Murdoch's loss of situational awareness...I am quite certain he was a victim of this problem, but no more than Captain Smith, Boxhall, Moody, Olliver, and Hichens. The problem that I am citing arose from the lack of communications among these men due to the physical layout of the bridge. Hence my original comments about the compass platform.

And, while I believe their communal loss of awareness was the primary factor in the accident, I also agree that Murdoch's performance that night was otherwise above reproach.

-- David G. Brown

 

[Parks Stephenson]

Dave,

You have kept me informed of the progress of your theories all along and I have refrained from commenting in full on them for the various reasons that I have given you along the way. At this point, though, I will add another reason...I should wait for the totality of your research and reasoning and not comment on your draft in piecemeal fashion. After your plans come to fruition, and you have presented your case in full with all the evidence you would like to present, that would be the time for me to consider your argument and give you my best response.

I wish that circumstance did not prohibit me from attending the April event...I would love nothing more to attend so we can enjoy a face-to-face. I would like again to thank both you and Capt. Weeks for the invitation and it is with the most serious regret that I am forced to decline. However, I know that 2004 won't be the last year for serious Titanic research, so maybe next time...?

Parks

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Despite the way you worded it, I hope that you do not intend that to be a statement of fact.<<

I don't. Since none of us was there, the most any of us can do is scour the available evidence as best we can, offer a theory on is what could have happened, what most likely did happen, and what could not have happened, and be mindful of the fact that we could be wrong. Regarding the hypothetical loss of situational awareness, I don't see this happening in the overall picture as I don't see how Will Murdoch could have managed as well as he did in his attempt to avoid the berg without it. However, I can't rule out a brief lapse...some distraction that would have been trivial otherwise and may have passed largely unnoticed...but which turned a somewhat dicey night into a very bad one. A few seconds is all it takes.

>>I wish that circumstance did not prohibit me from attending the April event...<<

That's unfortunate as I would have enjoyed meeting you as well. I'll be putting in my vacation request for this time tomorrow and it's an event I'm looking forward to. The Topeka and Toledo meets gave me a lot of food for thought. I expect more of that this time around.

 

[Erik Wood]

Charlie,

Although this does belong in a different thread, could you possibly update the thread on your event. My schedule is quickly getting busy.