You know, I always wondered why both inquiries did not condem the British board of Trade more. Possibly too big a political target? I guess Stanley Lord would be the weaker target.

But, as Walter Lord always used to say "the Lordites just can't get away from those rockets".

Well said, I do believe they were made a scapegoat. Lord Mersey and Sen. Smith had wrong conclusions except that the ice flow held two ships: The Titanic and the Californian.

Personally, I think that the Californian was simply the victim of the need to blame which people feel after a tragedy. Any time there is a great loss of life, human nature is such that we always feel that there was something that could have been done by someone to prevent or lessen the tragedy.

It's an arrogance, a societal self deception to convince ourselves that we really do have the ability to keep such tragedies from happening.

Of course we can't. And tragedies happen again. With the wonderful gift of hindsight which we receive only in the aftermath, we can always seem to find a guilty party. Even if they aren't really guilty.

Daniel

I totally agree with you about the Californian. I always thought it would be interesting to go back in time in a helocopter and just fly around the area and just see how many ships were in the area. Try to find out if the Sampson was really between the Californian and Titanic.

From what I remember, (Stone was it?) on Californian said that the rockets he saw seem to come a great distance beyond the lights he saw. That, and the fact that the ship he seemed to see only had like a mastheadlight and a green running light instead of a ship that I heard described as "time square after dark".

However, Ernest Gill does raise up another aspect stating that that was exactly what he saw. But then again, historians have speculated he made that up for a good story for reporters.

And, if I remember correctly, the ship on the horizon dissapear roughly at the same time on Titanic as it did on the Californian (sometime after 1.00).

Oh Good! I was hoping not sound like a jerk...because I'm not trying to be. Yes, that's also interesting to hear different facts about who was where, when, why and how? I find every single thing about the Titanic interesting.

My main obsession comes in with the Titanic and the Californian though. If anything is more interesting than that in this whole tragedy, I don't know what is. In fact, if I could ever go back in time to that fateful night, it wouldn't be to the Titanic. It would be on bridge of the Californian from about 10:50pm to 5:30am. Just to see what idea's were discussed, what was seen, and who got the ball rolling with the mystery ship on the horizon? I'm not really a Lordite, but I do think they were very wrongfully blamed for the lose of lives. Need less to say, I think Lord Mersey, was wrong in his conclusion about them. I mainly side with the Californian when it comes to many matters.

Definately, and I do enjoy the debate! No harsh feelings at all That is what is so facinating about this disaster. People have so different perspective on what happened, who behaved like what, and so on (its almost as mystifying as trying to put together what happened that night).

Indeed, what does make a hero? Have you seen the movie "Flag of our Fathers?" If not, the main point of the movie is that we make heros for our own need to have something that is bigger and better than ourselves. And furthermore, people do not see themselves as heros (such as the soldiers on Iwo Jima, who were just doing their job).

I always thought Harold Bride was someone to admire (after the sinking), being horribly frost bitten and sick, and at the same time helping Thomas Cottom to the point of sheer dropdead exhaustion sending the mainland the precious names of the people who survived to waiting family members.

But at the same time, he never talked about Titanic aparently ever again after his interview in New York. He just became a traveling sailsman and vanished into obscurity. He possibly may have lived with the thought of not getting those last messages delivered. May have had the same guilt as lookout Fredrick Fleet had, that poor soul who hung himself!

But I do agree with you with calling the entire engineering department heros. Staying in the bowles of the ship even after Chief Engineer Bell released them. Or Shepard and Harvey in boiler rooms 5 and 6. When I hear John 15:13 from the Bible, I always think of those men - "Greater love has no man than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends".

I really don't know if Smith would have. I would like to think if someone knows there's a field of ice ahead of you. But we won't know. As for acting rude, not really. If you look at the inquiry, Evans said he took no offense to Phillips cutting him off. It was actually quite typical in those days.

Why was Andrews? Well let me ask you what makes a hero? Maybe you are right. Maybe he isn't a hero. I guess since he knew the Titanic's fate, went through to get people out to the lifeboats. Then went through to try and close portholes to make her last longer. Then in his own sincerity went to wait for the end when there was no more to do. Maybe you are right, maybe he isn't a hero. But it sure says something about his character to me.

Now why is Jack Phillips a hero? Because he simply was doing his job by sending CQD? Then punched a stoker for trying to take his lifebelt??

Now lets look at Mr. Shepard and Mr. Harvey when the bulkhead between 5 & 6 collapsed. Barrett tells us Harvey told him to make a run for it and Harvey headed for the pump room where Shepard was, injured. Both men perished. Is going after a friend when he could have climbed up the stairs heroic? He could have said "No way I could have saved him and dragged him up the stairs...." He didn't. He didn't abandon his fellow worker and friend. To me, that's heroic.

Perhaps we just have different perspectives my friend...

Well, I will stop making excuses for them. I do believe that Phillips acted rude to Californian, telling him to shut up shut up, im busy. But again, the question must be asked, would Smith have slowed the ship down if he got either the Mesaba or Californian message. Lightoller said he would have, but Lightoller did his share of lying during the inquiry.

However, I think you are looking at this in the context of modern times- Would of, could of, should of,.

You say that Thomas Andrews was a hero? Why? Because he helped direct some people in the boats and went into shock in the lounge?

You could make an argument that Andrews was to blame for the loss of life, being a member of Harland and Wolff who wanted to acomodate fully with the wishes for White Star, and therfore, give lifeboat capacity for only half on board, fully knowing that the regulations of 1912 on a ships that size were out of date.

But I will not make that argument, because of the mindset back then. Titanic was "pratically unsinkable" and there was no real worries over "lifeboat capacity" or in the wireless operators case "field ice". Also, the ice conditions for 1912 were a little more extreme because the winter was aparently mild for that year.

The wireless broke down on Saturday night and was fixed around 4 or 5am. I know both stayed up all night and fixed the problem. So Sunday morning, if they were behind. Why take other messages if you are behind? They had 9 messages, only 1 wasn't recorded. That was the final one from the Californian. If people complain, so be it. The fact the Mesaba(sp) and Californian both sent messages warning of "heavy pack ice and ice fields and being stopped." You'd think if he took the time to write them down, he would send them to the bridge. He had Bride to help him. And they were stationed very close to the bridge. Jotting down an ice warning would take only a few moments. And if people complained, they had a valid excuse. The machine broke down for hours....It was April, ice in the sea lanes was very common and should have been taken into consideration. It wasn't, and now we see the end result. Just my thoughts.

I can see your point in a way. However, you are still missing fact that those last two or three messages were seen as secondary importance, especially the way they were transmitted (not urgent).

Yes, Bride and Phillips had other messages sent to the bridge. However, they had a moment to do it. If you do not know, the marconi unit broke down for some time on the 14th. Phillips and bride worked franticly to get it going again, it took hours!!! Now, you have to think about it from their perspective. "My way of making a living has just been fixed after hours of being useless. A whole pile of PAYING passenger mail is waiting for me to transmit to cape race". THE SHIP IS NOT PAYING FOR MY SERVICES, THE MARCONI COMPANY IS. I need to get my rear in gear and send these highly influential people's messages before they make a complaint!!!".

Also, if there is not fixed message as "urgent for the captains eyes" (as the other messages were also not marked), then what does a marconi officer know about lattitude and logitude. It probably looked to them just like the other messages they delivered. Furthermore, you could speculate that maybe Phillips and bride thought these messages were telling them what they already knew (that ice was ahead of Titanic), and indeed, the officers knew that!.

The senior officers as well as the Captain still new about the other ice warnings. They knew about them for days before the collision. They still kept up the speed on the 14th. Also, you have to consider if the bridge did recieve those messages, would the captain slowed the ship down? Wireless was a new toy, yes, a toy back then. Old captains like Smith were piloting ships across the Atlantic at full speed for years without wireless, and ships were not sinking left and right from icebergs.