What color(s) were Titanic's rockets?

[Kyle Naber]

Interesting discussion, particularly the comments by Sam about the problems encountered with simulating the ship's sinking.

It was not my point to say that there is not research behind many, or even all of the various simulations. The trouble is that no matter how well done a simulation is still only a simulation. It is not reality. At best, a simulation demonstrates in graphic terms ideas and concepts which are difficult to explain in words. For example, stress analysis simulations have taught a lot about what took inside the hull girder.

But, in the end a simulation is no more accurate that the data used to create it. Even the best is no more than an opinion presented in living color using images that are the product of human imaginaton.

My concern is that people, especially those who arrived after the millennium are losing the ability to do original research. They prefer watching dazzling videos on hand-held devices. I get that. It is exciting to watch Titanic sink in the palm of your hand. But, at the same time, the lax education they are receiving does not teach the difference between good research and 4-K video. The combined result is a short-circuiting of the reasoning process. This isn't a problem with something on the periphery of importance like Titanic. I just worry about what happens to a society that values pretty pictures over hard facts and reasoned debate.

-- David G. Brown

The team working on the project, including the historians and naval architects, actually did their own research about the physics of the sinking after the 2012 theory came out. The only reason that it's similar is because it's had a lot of the same people that James Cameron had working on his "Final Word" documentary and I think they've come close to perfecting it. The game isn't blindly following (which would be) six-year-old research. They've really picked it apart and altered in in places to make it as close a possible to the real thing.

I know for a fact that those people could conduct research better than I ever could, so I go with the old saying, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!" I couldn't dive down to the wreck on a student budget and contact multiple historians and lecture on national television about physics. They can. That's why I have reason to trust them. They simply know more than I do about the topic.

 

[Aaron_2016]

The team behind Honor and Glory do a fanatastic job but their research and sources naturally can't be taken as gospel fact. I watched a video from Honor and Glory that mentioned the bodies that were found on a collapsible boat by a passing ship. The guy narrating the video said the victims had died of starvation. Highly unlikely, but the trouble is millions of people will watch their material and believe it is true. Sadly these days success and popularity = credibility and truth. When a celebrity like Meryl Streep makes a speech it somehow (to the public) becomes more credible and true, because the person who said it has notoriety. There is a danger that popularity can overshadow the truth. Certainly documentaries have a leaning bias towards one theory than others. They have a deadline to reach and need to make a decision. If the team do not agree, they may have to be rushed in making their decision and the person who hired them might cherry pick the evidence they favour for TV ratings. I just hope that the research teams are not in the pocket of the person who hired them, as there is a danger they could sacrifice their ethics and become hired 'yes men' who will not wish to make compromises or make waves. Perhaps independent research is the best.


.

 

[Harland Duzen]

The team behind Honor and Glory do a fanatastic job but their research and sources naturally can't be taken as gospel fact. I watched a video from Honor and Glory that mentioned the bodies that were found on a collapsible boat by a passing ship. The guy narrating the video said the victims had died of starvation. Highly unlikely, but the trouble is millions of people will watch their material and believe it is true. Sadly these days success and popularity = credibility and truth. When a celebrity like Meryl Streep makes a speech it somehow (to the public) becomes more credible and true, because the person who said it has notoriety. There is a danger that popularity can overshadow the truth. Certainly documentaries have an agenda and are biased towards one theory. They have a deadline to reach and need to make a decision. If the team do not agree they may have to take a rushed decision or the person who hired them (perhaps Cameron) will cherry pick the evidence he favours. He just needs one of them to agree and say it is possible. Naturally his credibility as a famous film director will make the audience believe whatever he says and overshadows the actual truth. I just hope that the research teams are not in the pocket of the person who hired them, as there is a danger they could sacrifice their ethics and become hired 'yes men' who will not argue or make compromises. As the old saying goes. "If you want the job, don't make waves."


.

They did say this was a mistake as they (incorrectly guessed like the Oceanic doctor's ) that they tried to eat cork from their lifejackets when in reality, their bodies swallowed cork that burst out from the stern during the sinking and subsequently floated in the wreckage field.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

I just worry about what happens to a society that values pretty pictures over hard facts and reasoned debate.

I agree with you David. We now live in an era of 'fake news' that gains credibility because the presentation media can make it extremely difficult to separate what is reality from what is not reality. The reality is only known to those who were there when it really happened, not over hundred years later when we are still trying to figure everything out.

Back to the thread topic, "what color were they?" If the designers behind H&G decided to include Californian in their simulation, then they are accepting that Californian was in sight from Titanic. That's sure enough to piss off a number of people on this site who believe otherwise. But if they did include Californian, they should also have looked hard at what those on that vessel had to say about the color of the rockets that were seen that night. They probably had the best vantage point.

 

[Aaron_2016]

Were these men seeing the same white-blue rockets?


Californian - Gill
Q - What kind of rockets were they? What did they look like?
A - They looked to me to be pale blue, or white.
Q - Which, pale blue or white?
A - It would be apt to be a very clear blue; I would catch it when it was dying. I did not catch the exact tint, but I reckon it was white.

Titanic - Hichens
Q - Can you tell us what colour rockets?
A - I did not take no particular notice of the colour, Sir. Some were green, some were red, and some were blue. All kinds of colours, and some white, Sir. I think, if I remember rightly, they were blue.


.

 

[Ioannis Georgiou]

They did say this was a mistake as they (incorrectly guessed like the Oceanic doctor's ) that they tried to eat cork from their lifejackets when in reality, their bodies swallowed cork that burst out from the stern during the sinking and subsequently floated in the wreckage field.

Aside that the part about the cork is known for years Dr. French denied the reports as wrong and stated that they were dead. They could have also used the testimony of Lowe who made sure that they were dead and left them back in collapsible boat A. In short Dr. French (from the Oceanic) was not wrong.
And what was the excuse for Rigel the dog and other mistakes?

 

[Harland Duzen]

"...And what was the excuse for Rigel the dog and other mistakes?..."

Rigel the dog?

 

[Samuel Halpern]

The pooch who swam for 3 hours and saved everyone in lifeboat #4 lives on.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Instead of trying to prove yourself right, try proving yourself wrong

Good advice if you have discipline and objectivity to pull it off.