What if the Titanic had been slowed down earlier?

[Jim Currie]

View attachment 49503

“I like talking to a brick wall- it's the only thing in the world that never contradicts me!

Oscar Wilde"

OK. Sam, let's cut the childishnes out. We are both (hopefully) trying to set the history record straight for posterity...here, in public, for the benefit of everyone...not just those who can afford to buy a book. So let's do it. Begin by showing me and everyone else where I am going wrong in my assessrtions that these guys did not see and warn about ice danger util it was too late to avoid it. Remember that there are new members who have not seen the clash of our sabres in the past. Consider yet again the following words of a witness, who unlike any of us, was there...Fred Fleet : I quote:
" They told us to keep a sharp lookout for small ice."
" I reported an iceberg right ahead, a black mass. "
Then:
" I have no idea of distances or spaces.
But...
" it was so close to us. That is why I rang them up."
" it kept getting larger as we were getting nearer it. "
" we were making straight for it. "
I siggest to you, Sam and everyone else, these last three answers paint a very clear word picture of almost panic.
Fleet sees a black mass which he very quickly identifies as an iceberg. It is so close a head that he only has time to give the bell warning followed immediately by the verbal one .

Is there anyone out there who is willing and able to offer their ten bob's worth, instead of negativity?

"

 

[Samuel Halpern]

So let's do it. Begin by showing me and everyone else where I am going wrong in my assessrtions that these guys did not see and warn about ice danger util it was too late to avoid it.

OK, one more last try.

Regarding you assertion that these guys did not see and warn about ice danger util it was too late to avoid it. According Lee, the other lookout in nest:
2445. How far was the vessel from the iceberg? - [Lee] What did you say?
2446. You have told us your vessel veered to port and then you got the iceberg on your starboard side? - Yes, that is where she hit.
2447. Quite right; that is where she hit, but can you tell us how far the iceberg was from you, this mass that you saw? - It might have been half a mile or more; it might have been less; I could not give you the distance in that peculiar light.

A 1/2 mile is about 3000 ft. Let's say he well overestimated by a factor of two. Let's say it was as close as 1/4 mile. That's 1500 feet. At 38 ft/sec that berg would have been about 40 seconds away when spotted. Say it took Murdoch 20 seconds to assess what was happening and then issue the order. The leaves the berg 750 ft ahead when helm order given. Just enough time for the ship to swing about 10° to port when first contact is made.

If the ship was only 6 seconds away when that order is given, and if the ship was headed straight for it as Fleet said, then 6 seconds later the ship would still be headed almost straight for it and it would have struck basically head-on. So this business of Hichens just getting the helm hard over when she struck cannot be right. It certainly is inconsistent with turning a full 2 points before she struck as Hichens also had claimed.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

If the ship was only 6 seconds away when that order is given, and if the ship was headed straight for it as Fleet said, then 6 seconds later the ship would still be headed almost straight for it and it would have struck basically head-on. So this business of Hichens just getting the helm hard over when she struck cannot be right. It certainly is inconsistent with turning a full 2 points before she struck as Hichens also had claimed.

Also, it takes a normal man about 2 seconds to shout "Hard a Starboard!" and allowing for normal human reaction perhaps another second before Hichens acknowledged the order and started to turn the wheel. I don't know how long it would have taken him to achieve the "hard over" position, but am guessing probably another 3 seconds at least?

Therefore, in my landlubber estimate, if the berg was only 6 seconds away when the helm order was given, the most optimistic result would have the helm just reach the hard over position in that time. Surely the ship could not even have started its turn by then, let alone 2 points?

Sam, may I again ask you to estimate what would have happened at 12 knots in the same manner as you have done at 22 knots via serial sketches in your excellent article "An Encounter in the Night"?

 

[Jim Currie]

OK, one more last try.

Regarding you assertion that these guys did not see and warn about ice danger util it was too late to avoid it. According Lee, the other lookout in nest:
2445. How far was the vessel from the iceberg? - [Lee] What did you say?
2446. You have told us your vessel veered to port and then you got the iceberg on your starboard side? - Yes, that is where she hit.
2447. Quite right; that is where she hit, but can you tell us how far the iceberg was from you, this mass that you saw? - It might have been half a mile or more; it might have been less; I could not give you the distance in that peculiar light.

A 1/2 mile is about 3000 ft. Let's say he well overestimated by a factor of two. Let's say it was as close as 1/4 mile. That's 1500 feet. At 38 ft/sec that berg would have been about 40 seconds away when spotted. Say it took Murdoch 20 seconds to assess what was happening and then issue the order. The leaves the berg 750 ft ahead when helm order given. Just enough time for the ship to swing about 10° to port when first contact is made.

If the ship was only 6 seconds away when that order is given, and if the ship was headed straight for it as Fleet said, then 6 seconds later the ship would still be headed almost straight for it and it would have struck basically head-on. So this business of Hichens just getting the helm hard over when she struck cannot be right. It certainly is inconsistent with turning a full 2 points before she struck as Hichens also had claimed.

Sam, Lee very cleraly started that session by telling you, me and everyone else " I could not give you the distance in that peculiar light. " Why is that so hard to accept?

Murdoch would be frequently sweeping the horizon with his binoculars but not all the time.
If, as Fleet said, Lee told him the bow began to move left while he, Fleet , was at the phone, then Murdoch ordered that hard left rudder after the last of the three bells were sounded. This tells me that when Fleet rang three bells, Murdoch would first look for a light... not see ng one, he would immediately raise his binoculars. He would see the berg right ahead...not immediately because if it was close and less than the height of the bridge it would be below his natural horizon. But when he did, he would shout his helm order.

Lee also confirmed the evidence of Lee:
" Three bells were struck by Fleet, warning "Right ahead," and immediately he rung the telephone up to the bridge, "Iceberg right ahead."
This is the man who also said:
" He [Fleet]said, "Well; if we can see through that we will be lucky."
Would you buy a second hand car from a man such as this?

 

[Jim Currie]

Also, it takes a normal man about 2 seconds to shout "Hard a Starboard!" and allowing for normal human reaction perhaps another second before Hichens acknowledged the order and started to turn the wheel. I don't know how long it would have taken him to achieve the "hard over" position, but am guessing probably another 3 seconds at least?

Therefore, in my landlubber estimate, if the berg was only 6 seconds away when the helm order was given, the most optimistic result would have the helm just reach the hard over position in that time. Surely the ship could not even have started its turn by then, let alone 2 points?

Sam, may I again ask you to estimate what would have happened at 12 knots in the same manner as you have done at 22 knots via serial sketches in your excellent article "An Encounter in the Night"?

Hello Arun. As you rightly suggest, the time we are considering is from the moment the helm was applied until the moment of impact...i.e. from when the ship was running on her course until she hit the ice.
When a ship's steering wheel is turned one way or another, there is very little delay between the moment of application and heading response. If otherwise, ...in the case of Titanic... she would not have been able to maintain her course within a degree of either side. A ship does not stay heading in one direction until you apply helm.

I remind you of what Hichens told his questioners concerning the helm:
"Mr. HICHENS: Put the helm to starboard, sir. That is the order I received from the sixth officer.
Senator SMITH.: What was the effect of that?
Mr. HICHENS.: The ship minding the helm as I put her to starboard.
On a ship su ch as Titanic, the OOW gives the order which in turn is rfepeated by a Junior Officer and finally the man at the steeri.ng wheel.
AS to how the ship responded normally to small applications of helm? Here's Hichens again:
"942. Was she a good steering ship? A - Fairly well, yes.
943. Up to the time of the collision did she vary from her course at all? A: - Not that I am aware of, not more than a degree on either side."

That last exchange tells you that Titanic responded quickly to small amounts of applied helm.

I hope that clarifies any doubt you may have in that direction (no pun intended)

PS On a ship like Titanic with hydraulic telemotor, it would take a second for an expert helmsman to apply a turn...four complete turns would put the rudder hard over to 35 degrees from the midship spoke position.
Normally, steering wheels had a midship spoke which was marked by what was called a "Turks Head knot". The method of applying emergency hard over to the left was as follows:
The helmsman would turn slightly right, grip the midship spoke with his left hand thumb downward and virtually spin he wheel left until it stopped

 

[Samuel Halpern]

943. Up to the time of the collision did she vary from her course at all? A: - Not that I am aware of, not more than a degree on either side."
That last exchange tells you that Titanic responded quickly to small amounts of applied helm.

What that statement tells me is that the ship had a high degree of yaw stability during flat calm conditions and didn't require much helm correction. Here's what a typical 15 minute trace on a course recorder looks like with a fairly good helmsman at the wheel. The ship was going at nearly 22 knots in foggy conditions at the time.

FYI, full over on Titanic put her rudder over to 40°, not 35°. Also, Titanic had steam-engine driven helm that operated under telemotor controls. There would always be a slight delay between getting the rudder all the way over and getting the wheel all the way over.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

The writing on the brick wall:

If the ship was only 6 seconds away when that helm order was given, and if the ship was headed straight for it as Fleet said, then 6 seconds later the ship would still be headed almost straight for it, and it would have struck basically head-on. So this business of Hichens just getting the helm hard over when she struck cannot be right.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

Sam, may I again ask you to estimate what would have happened at 12 knots

You are asking me to do some work Arun. Perhaps later today after I take care of a few errands.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Thanks Sam. Whenever you are ready.

 

[Jim Currie]

What that statement tells me is that the ship had a high degree of yaw stability during flat calm conditions and didn't require much helm correction. Here's what a typical 15 minute trace on a course recorder looks like with a fairly good helmsman at the wheel. The ship was going at nearly 22 knots in foggy conditions at the time.
View attachment 49507
FYI, full over on Titanic put her rudder over to 40°, not 35°. Also, Titanic had steam-engine driven helm that operated under telemotor controls. There would always be a slight delay between getting the rudder all the way over and getting the wheel all the way over.

I think you will find that the graduations on Titanic's rudder angle indicator, like most such instruments ws graduated to 40 degrees each side. However. I would be very surprised if those who designed the steering gear did not know that a rudder loses efficiency after 35 degrease and in fact, an cause unwanted effects. That is why the quadrant stops are normaly located at 35 degrees each side. It also regulated he length of the shock springs.
In fact, it is noted somewhere (I' can't find the notes at the moment)that the delay in achieving full , efficient rudder angles one side to the other was between 16 and 20 seconds.
Your example looks like a Sperry course recorder linked to a steering gyro. Steerring with such equipment was relatively simple. Steering using a magnetic compass required a certain amount of skill on the part of the helmsman. Flat calm certainly helps, but a vessel will yaw as you call it for many other reasons. For istance, steering in the Pentland Firth is an experince never to be forgotten. In flat calm conditions, the ship's head wil alter as much as 10 to 15 degrees in a matter of moments.

 

[Jim Currie]

Quite. I agree that Ismay might have considered the possibility of a Tuesday night arrival but, as I said, it would not have been very high on his or anyone else's priorities. Despite what the media depicted then or later, I don't think Ismay would have objected if Captain Smith had made the decision to slow the Titanic down as they approached the ice field.

By the way TK, I'd like your further opinion about my post #17 of this thread. Do you still feel that the collision would have occurred if the Titanic had been travelling at only 12 knots when the iceberg was first sighted, all other considerations being the same? Remember, in that scenario the ship would not only have been travelling much slower but also would have been further away from the iceberg when Murdoch gave his first order and Hichens responded.

If you feel the collision would still have occurred, what do you think would be the 'anatomy' of the damage and eventual effect on the ship and its occupants?

The number of minutes that the clocks were to be set back tells us that Captain Smith had no intention to increase speed before Monday, Noon, April 15. He would also know that at that time of the year, he would most probably encounter fog in that area as he got nearer the Eastern seaboard.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

I would be very surprised if those who designed the steering gear did not know that a rudder loses efficiency after 35 degrease and in fact, an cause unwanted effects.

I don't really disagree with you on that point. The curve is starting flatten out above 35° as it is getting nearer the rudder stall point. I do know Hichens was asked about that. Here is the exchange:

996. Then “Hard a starboard,” and you immediately put up your helm? - Hard a starboard.
997. Right over? - Yes.
998. What is it, 35 degrees? - Forty degrees.
999. Then you got the helm right over? - Right over, Sir.
1000. Then she comes round two points and then strikes. Is that right? - The vessel veered off two points; she went to the southward of west.
1001. And then struck? - Yes.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

I request that we assume that although the Titanic was travelling at only 12 knots in my hypothetical scenario, at 11:39 pm on Sunday 14th April 1912 it was at exactly the same spot on the Atlantic Ocean as it actually was that night. Every human reaction thereafter - Fleet sighting the berg, 3 bells, Moody's reaction, Murdoch's order, Hichens' response, Murdoch's subsequent actions, relative positions of Boxhall, Olliver etc remain exactly the same. The only difference therefore is the ship's speed.

What I can tell you is that the turning circle of a ship does not change much with speed. What changes is the rate of turn. So if Murdoch gave the order when the berg was at the same distance ahead of the ship as she was on the night of Apr 14th, then the ship would still have struck the berg in the same place going at 12 knots as she did at 22 knots, but the energy of collision would have been about only 30% of what it was at 22 knots.

What I believe is that either the berg was not directly ahead as Fleet said it was and the ship struck the side of the berg in the bluff of the bow, or the ship turned away about a point before striking the berg in the bluff of the bow. The first can happen in 6 seconds. The second takes about 22 second.

 

[Jim Currie]

On the subject pf slowing down to 12 knots...you have a ready made example in the evidence of Captain Rostron of Carpathia.
He had to swerve to avoid an ice berg which was very close and right ahead at about 4-05 am that morning. At the time, he could not have been making much over 12 knots if there had been a head current as claimed because despite his claims, he ran 46.9 miles in 3.5 hours, averaging uless than 13.5knots. In addition, unlike those on Titanic, he was on the lookout for ice that he already knew for certain was there and had at least 6 pairs of eyes straining ahead, aided by binoculars.
Incidentally, the berg's proximity to Boxhall and the survivors makes it the leading contender for the one that did for Titanic...regardless of how Rostron described it.
Even at 12 knots, Titanic would have hit that berg

 

[Arun Vajpey]

What I can tell you is that the turning circle of a ship does not change much with speed. What changes is the rate of turn. So if Murdoch gave the order when the berg was at the same distance ahead of the ship as she was on the night of Apr 14th, then the ship would still have struck the berg in the same place going at 12 knots as she did at 22 knots, but the energy of collision would have been about only 30% of what it was at 22 knots.

OK, two questions then.

First, at just 30% kinetic energy compared with the actual event, would the resultant damage be still bad enough to sink the Titanic? If so, over what time scale approximately?

Second, all other parameters and events being the same (as before), at what speed would the Titanic have completely avoided collision? This may sound awkward, but there has to be a speed limit at or under which collision would definitely have not taken place.