Hello Guest November 01, 2024, 07:29:40 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Titanic bug  (Read 8242 times)

[RWP]DJM

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 7004
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #25 on: December 24, 2007, 20:08:06 »

Hiya Captain Titanic :)

This isn't about who's right or wrong here with regards to the Titanic.  I believe you are taking things much too personally.  Any comments in this topic aren't aimed at you, they are directed towards replying to the topic at hand :)

Replies were made, and you took them as someone questioning the topic, and questioning you, then you reacted by telling other members that they were wrong and you were right.  Unless any of us on the forum were actually there that night, how can any one of us say who's right or wrong about the events surrounding Titanic ;)

Forums are a great place to have a healthy discussion, especially with something you feel passionate about (which you obviously do about Titanic :)).  Disagreements are a fact of life, it's how we deal with them that really counts, wouldn't you agree? :)

This isn't aimed at you personally, I'm just trying to be objective about things :)

Regards.

DJM.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2007, 20:09:37 by [RWP]DJM »
Logged
RNIB - Supporting Blind & Partially Sighted People. (http://www.rnib.org.uk)

I am no longer a member of the Moderation team, so please send any messages about licence key issues to a currently active member of the team.  Thank you.

mvsmith

  • Guest
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #26 on: December 25, 2007, 15:46:45 »

Even Master Mariners need their sleep. Right, Angus?
Unlike watch standers, the captain is expected to be available all 24 hours. Therefore, he must grab his ZZZs when he can. A captain will often take to his bunk, not to sleep, but to rest. If he is to be useful in an emergency, it makes no sense for him to be more fatigued than the watch.
Testimony of survivors, along with knowledge of the daily routine, shows that Smith was tending to company-mandated duties by schmoozing with the passengers until late in the evening.
Smith is known to have been a teetotaler, but even sober the evening duties were fatiguing. It would be understandable and proper for him to hit the sack when they were over.
In fact, it is not known where he was before he appeared on the maneuvering bridge after Murdoch closed the watertight doors subsequent to the collision. The timing suggests that he was either in his chartroom or in his bunk.

It does not matter. Smith had already condemned more than 1,523 people to death by ordering an excessive speed (22.5kt) through dangerous waters (the exact number is not known because infants and any stowaways were not recorded).
The lookout’s visibility was about 40 seconds of steaming. By no stretch of the imagination can this be considered safe operation in waters that might contain bergs.

One cannot lay this off on Ismay. He had absolutely no authority to order an excessive speed. Smith could have—should have—refused.
To assert that Smith was intimidated and caved in to Ismay against his own judgment is to lay upon Smith an additional charge of cowardice.

The conjecture by Fred 12 that Smith was in his bunk at the moment of collision, whether sleeping or resting, is at least plausible and is not contradicted by any known facts. It is at least as valid as the thoroughly discredited conjecture that began this topic.
Marty
 
Logged

Al Bundy

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 113
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #27 on: December 25, 2007, 19:12:07 »

We are talking 1912 so I would understand if Smith was under "influence" from Ismay.

But it is a bit harsh to say that Smith condemned 1523 people to their deaths. From the telegrams that reached Smith he actually "turned the corner" later than usual, putting Titanic more south than it would have been.

When going to bed, chartroom, reading a book or what he did when he retired, he did order "keep a lookout for small bergs and growlers" (from the top of my head), and he did not expect icebergs in the path. Had he received the telegrams from "Amerika", "Californian" and "Mesaba" I am sure he would have handled otherwise. He was not a reckless man. In my book, to condemn someone means a deliberate action, and I doubt very much that Smith would sail into iceberg waters just because Titanic was "unsinkable". I also doubt that he had bought that theory as would no sailor.

   
Logged

mvsmith

  • Guest
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #28 on: December 25, 2007, 22:00:28 »

Al,
Of course he gave orders to the watch to look out for bergs, but as you pointed out the speed and the viewing conditions gave only about 40 seconds of warning before collision. Even if he did not expect bergs that far south, he still should have considered the possibility.
The bottom line is that Titanic was travelling too fast for the conditions, and Smith gave the order to do so. He was found not to be negligent in doing so, because that was deemed to be standard practice of the day—run as fast as you like, and don’t worry about bergs until you see them. Then you can simply avoid hitting them.
By today’s standard the verdict would be different, but as you say, it was 1912.

Saying that it was his decision that allowed the disaster to happen is not the same as saying he committed a crime or was guilty of anything other than not being more cautious. I do think his judgment might have been clouded by a desire to end his career with a trophy. I do believe he had the stones to stand up to Ismay. The fact that he was not running at the max of 24.5 knots indicates that.
There are lots of woulda-coulda-shouldas in this tragedy; that’s why it will be debated forever.
Probably the debate should end with a quote from the famous Captain Ron: “Stuff happens”.
I hope you enjoy a good holiday.
Marty
Logged

Fred 12

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 7
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2008, 03:17:50 »

Look people you can beleve that the captain was on the bridge. Thats just what I read> O.K.?
Logged

Tavares Junior

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 329
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2008, 09:27:20 »


Maybe the captain was on the Bridge as part of the history says and maybe not as the other part says too.

On the ship at different “Departments” Bridge/Engine/Deck/Electrician/Cook and etc the people have a time o work and to sleep.
Image at the sea passage at some hours late at night the captain still have to stay awake after a day of work?
What are the duty officers for?

Today the most of the European owned vessels have a chief officer with masters license I think the same is applied in US too. Marty could you confirm me that?
Of course at the time “Maybe” the chief officer was not so experience of such a big trip and kind of big structure.

Unfortunately the accident happened.

For a ship with more than one propeller stop the engines trying to reduce a sideways collision could be a lake of strategy view at the moment. To maneuver ships with more than 4knots comes easer than at 4knots or less of course, at 13knots and even more the steering angle is much more pronounced to the ship. “Don’t forget” She had more than 1 steering winch / rudder / propeller. Could be easy to turn her to the port side by decreasing to 50% the power applied to the port engine and steering the rudders at 20 and or on the maximum of 35 degrees to the port. This action on such big a ship can swing the bow (Ship) to the wished side, is important to consider a relevant factor that the stern is sleeping to the opposite side of the ship’s turning moment.

Try to stop such a big displacement of mass in such short distance it’s not the best idea.
Keep in mind the every ship bear some amount of water together with her hull during any time when she is moving her big mouthed structure, this mass is well know as virtual mass for ship’s with passage in depth sea the mass volume can be closer to 10% of the ships displacement and during shallow waters passage this amount of mass can be bigger than 10% of the ships displacement. Another factor (Already proved after many test. Books Ship Handling, Principals of the naval architecture and Tug Use in Port) is the Bow cushion effects. This factor acts like “cushion” in case of a sideway bows collision this acts like an energy absorption tool, this effect is daily faced by pilots and the captains during berth massive vessels on harbors (Not pier) as the water is moved along the vessel and between vessel and Jet has no way to get out sometimes the pilot is forced to increase the tugs force during berthing. This mass of water will slide through the ship’s bow and stern Between ship and berth.
In the case off a berg the same effect can be pronounced especial if the vessel turns the force the side opposite of the collision side.

Unfortunately that’s was not observed in such a short time as even it have to.

With respect to all,
My Greetings
Tavares
Logged
Tavares Jr
** Open Sea - Radar observer - SMCP - GPS / Chart Plotters / Certifyed yatch Master

mvsmith

  • Guest
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #31 on: January 06, 2008, 17:56:09 »

Thank you, Tavares, for your insight.
Yes, in the US the captain is a Master Mariner whose ticket, for a ship like Titanic, would read: “any horsepower…upon Oceans”. He has three deck officers, or Mates, to stand the watches. He sleeps when he can, and is available at any time when necessary.
You make a point, overlooked in nearly every discussion of the collision, that even if the bow had cleared the berg, the stern would have slammed into the berg. The swing could not have been reversed in time.
Best regards,
Marty
Logged

kev600

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 58
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #32 on: January 08, 2008, 19:18:42 »

look nobody has proved that captain smith was asleep or not although it is FACT that smith was in his quarters on the bridge in his room asleep or not is and was his own business. And he came out fairly immediate and he was not woken by crew from his room. by the way when people please speak on fact on the titanic. not on the 1997 film. Which portrays Smith ismay and murdoch as bad guys. It annoys me greatly the part of murdoch shoting himself and taking a bribe. Whatever about smith and ismay is another days work and there is evidence needed that will never have. It was the media and the propaganda that sank titanic. The unsinkable ship as it was portrayed. Truely White star line's fault because of the the pressure they made themselves. I personally think murdoch showed his great seaman's ship that some people forget about because he avoided the berg hiiting the stern as mvsmih mentioned briefly. Which was more important!

To dicuss the Titanic a new great forum is online and i am official annoucing from the Titanic Research Group- http://mrmarshall.proboards62.com/ (http://mrmarshall.proboards62.com/) please visit as excellent advice is availible from big titanic and ship enthusiastes are helping and are offering help with anything that you need to know

Logged
Regards Kevin,
Titanic Research Group (http://mrmarshall.proboards62.com/index.cgi)

Remember The Elite Officers that perished on that night:

Captain E.J. Smith
Chief Officer Henry Tingle Wilde
First Officer William McMaster Murdoch
Sixth Officer James Paul Moody
Chief Engineer Jo

mvsmith

  • Guest
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2008, 01:24:30 »

For all the academic arguments, the fact is that there is no action that Murdoch could have taken that would have avoided a collision, given the fact that there was at most 40 seconds of steaming time at 22.5 knots from the time the berg was sighted. We might argue that stopping the screws was counterproductive on a theoretical basis because it would lessen the ability to swing the bow away from the berg, but a port around would have been impossible in any case because the stern swing could never have been reversed in time.

Murdoch first rang Astern Full to alert the engine room of an emergency, he then rang stop. None of which had any significant affect on the outcome.

The disaster happened because Titanic was going much too fast in an ice field. Although not all ice warnings reached the bridge—for that we can fault Bride—enough information reached Smith that he should have reduced speed. He should have taken into account the ability of the lookouts to spot a berg in time. There was insufficient sea to form a foam line around a berg, and only starlight. The berg was only noticed when it blocked enough stars.

A point overlooked in almost all accounts is that neither Phillips nor Bride was a White Star employee. They were employed by the Marconi Company, which derived no revenue from navigational traffic. The personal messages from the passengers were the source of revenue that paid the salaries of the operators. Marconi’s official position was that navigational traffic had priority, but…

The myth that the berg “sliced a long gash” through many compartments persisted until video of the wreck was available. It should have been questioned by anyone who tried to open a can of beans with an ice cube, or who had heard of frames.

Logged

groennegaard

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 1641
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2008, 11:15:32 »

How can a captain be fast asleep in bed, knowing that they are in the most dangorus part of the voyage, plus they were going at 25kn? Captains, have common sence. They dont snooze away while their ship is going 25kn forward, its the dead of night and the whole liner could hit an iceberg and sink... killing 1500 people with it?

Hi Captain Titanic :)

What do you know about sailing and watch duty?
Do you think it's common sence to stay awake 24x7?
Do you know what happens to your resolution if you are awake 24 hours a day?
What difference would it make whether he was asleep or not? - Nothing!
His officers did what had to do and the presence of the captain wouldn't have changed anything.

Are you a historian, do you hold a STCW certificate or what qualifies you to have the insight you claim to have about watch procedures on board?

Regards
groennegaard
« Last Edit: January 11, 2008, 11:17:06 by groennegaard »
Logged

timrobertsgb

  • Forum member
  • Posts: 1
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #35 on: January 12, 2008, 07:09:06 »

Having spent 25 years at sea serving all over the world 'hard a starboard' is turn right and 'hard a port' turn left.  the commands are universal except in america where is is to difficult to understand......
Logged

Mad_Fred

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 8689
  • ✝ In Memoriam
Re: Titanic bug
« Reply #36 on: January 12, 2008, 12:05:09 »

If you carefully read part of LucATC's post again, maybe you'll reconsider?

    Orders to the helmsman were traditionally given in terms of "helm", that is to say, the position of the tiller rather than the rudder. 'Hard a-starboard!' meant 'Put the tiller (helm) to starboard, so that the ship may go to port!'. It will be realised that not only the bow turned to port, but also the rudder, top of the wheel, and prior to the advent of the steering-wheel, the upper end of the whipstaff. Cogent reasons existed, therefore, for giving the order in what one might call the 'common sense' fashion. The transition to 'rudder' orders was made in many European countries about a century ago...The change did not proceed smoothly everywhere, since old traditions died extremely hard in the merchant service, even in lands where the new convention was readily imposed in naval vessels...In the United Kingdom, the changeover did not occur until 1933, at which time the new regulations were applied to naval and merchant vessels alike...although the United States Navy made the switch from 'Port helm!' to 'Right rudder' in 1914, practice in American merchant vessels did not change until 1935.

Regards,
Fred
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 
 


SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines