 Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index Titanic historic  Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner?
|
Browsing this Thread:
169 Anonymous Users
 Bottom  Previous Topic  Next Topic |
 2 |
|
|
|
|
|---|
Topic options
Threaded
Oldest First| Poster | Thread | Rated: 1 Votes |
|---|
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #17 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/3/14
From New Hampshire
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users  |
well...that's a tricky one. i personally don't think they were stolen but wnder why there wasn't an extra pair aboard the ship. that strikes me as odd that a ship so luxurious wouldn't bring an extra pair of binoculars...
|
||
|
_________________
myspace: www.myspace.com/woahitzswazy facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/profile.php?id=524623472&ref=profile |
|||
Posted on: 2005/5/13 10:20
  |
  |
||
edward9139
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #16 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Quote:
Hello, I'm not commenting on the nature of the iceberg debate -- the question surrounding the sighting of the iceberg, and whether it could have been seen sooner, has always generated a detailed dicussion. All I am asking here is why you believe the binoculars had been 'stolen'? Best wishes, Mark. |
|||
|
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/12 13:18
|
|
|||
Visit Website
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #15 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2005/5/12
From Essex
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
well also take into account that it was nearly the middle of the night when they saw the Iceburg so it would have been hard to see from a distance. in the end they did see it dident they but it was just too late.
|
|||
|
_________________
 CQD
|
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/12 12:20
|
|
|||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #14 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Quote:
Hello, Why do you believe that someone stole the binoculars? With regards to the sighting of the iceberg, as I've said, binoculars are more useful for identifying distant objects than scanning the horizon and spotting objects. Best wishes, Mark. |
|||
|
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/12 12:08
|
|
|||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #13 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2005/5/12
From Essex
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
personally I think someone stole the binoculars.
Just image to yourself, if they dident leave em behind and/maby/or they wasent stolen. Titanic mite even still be around to this day. |
|||
|
_________________
CQD
|
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/12 10:19
|
|
|||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #12 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/3/30
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Quote:
All the binoculars and lifevests in the world would not have saved the Titanic. Nobody will ever know for sure why the iceburg was not spotted earlier. Chances are the berg was nothing more than a growler and it could not have been seen till they were right on it. It's really a dead subject "why". If they had the binoculars would they have used them, were the lookouts engaged in conversation or even not paying attention at all! I have been on the Mississippi when ice flows break up and even on smaller water its easy to overlook ice flows 5 feet tall in darkness. Faith decided Titanic would sink and by God she did. Don't tempt God by declairing that "God himself can't sink that ship". |
||
Posted on: 2005/5/11 17:53
|
|
||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #11 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Quote:
Hello, There's no evidence that the binoculars were left ashore, and in any case my post above indicates some of the debate around the binoculars. There's much to question, and consider whether that debate is a 'red herring.' As for extra lifeboats, why would there be any additional lifeboats ashore prior to the disaster, when the requirement for additional lifeboat capacity was not apparent? Best wishes, Mark. |
|||
|
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/11 13:38
|
|
|||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #10 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/1/8
From London UK
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Because they left the binoculars and extra lifeboats ashore.
|
||
Posted on: 2005/5/11 13:28
|
|
||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #9 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Hello,
Quote:
While I realise that you know there is some debate as to this, I do think it's important to emphasize that binoculars are more important for identifying objects than sighting them. At least that's a view I've encountered several times. Then again, there's always a debate in that. Best wishes, Mark. |
|||
|
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/11 12:11
|
|
|||
|
Re: Why didn't the crew see the iceberg sooner? | #8 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joined: 2003/9/14
From
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Hello,
Quote:
While the figure of 37 seconds was the time the Olympic took to turn an estimated 2 1/2 points at around 21 1/2 knots, there's a fair bit of evidence putting Titanic's speed just over a knot higher -- so straightaway we have a small variation. The 37 second figure is from the time that the helm was shifted; in Titanic's case, it doesn't allow for the time before the helm was shifted, but after the lookouts had signalled their warning. So in my view, the 37 figure is incorrect. For instance, the estimate of 2 1/2 points might be wrong, and in any case no time is allowed for the 'hard a port' order which was later given. As for the order of 'full astern,' nobody from the engine room (such as Frederick Scott or Thomas Dillon) recalled the engines being reversed before the collision. Boxhall is the only source for that order, and many people have come to believe that the engines were not reversed. Best wishes, Mark. |
|||
|
_________________
Mark Chirnside, Warwickshire, England. 'RMS Olympic: Titanic's Sister.' |
||||
Posted on: 2005/5/11 12:09
|
|
|||
 Top Previous Topic Next Topic |
2 |
 |
|
You cannot start a new topic.
You can view topic.
