Detailed Map Plotting All Positions

[Kirk Groeneveld]

Excuse me fr joing the discussion late, but it would seem only logical for all the reports of ice, growlers (what are those?), ships and movements could be plotted upon a map of latitude and longitude or an animated video so that the relative distances could be seen and some agreement made on the course, movements and locations of the ships.

Has anyone seen such a map? Other than the plotting of the ice in Walter Lord's "The Night Lives On...", has there been any published maps or animated videos placed on line?

Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks.

[Michael H Standart]

Several such maps were made and provided to the U.S. Senate at the time that Senator Smith was holding the investigation. Captain Knapp's charts may be accessed at:

http://www.titanicinquiry.org/images/charts/Chart1.gif

http://www.titanicinquiry.org/images/charts/Chart2.gif

http://www.titanicinquiry.org/images/charts/Chart3.gif

Unfortunately, the existance of the charts didn't do much to end any controversies since the various interested parties were inclined to take issue with anything they disagreed with. That includes modern day historians and enthusiasts.

[George Behe]

In viewing Knapp's Hydrographic Dept. charts, it should also be born in mind that the icefield is depicted inaccurately; the ice actually stretched from NNW to SSE.

[Kirk Groeneveld]

Thank you for the links to the three charts. The color trace of the various ship's courses is very helpful.

I had seen Chart One reproduced in Walter Lord's "The Night Lives On". Are you saying that the ice field is misoriented on this chart?

Can someone interpret the difference between charts 2 and 3 for me? What is the point of the two?

Would anyone like try their hand at modifying any of these charts with an alternative interpretation? I would think a graphics program or Photoshop would allow an overlay... as long as you clearly label them as ALTERED or HYPOTHETICAL.

Anyone? Scholars? Lorties? Titanic fans? Anyone?

[Timothy Trower]

Kirk,

One source you might want to look at is the book by Dr. Paul Lee titled The Indifferent Stranger. (My review of this book is here http://www.titanichistoricalsociety.net ... f=139&t=93 )

Dr. Lee covers this subject in great detail, reprinting major swaths of text and being careful not to omit parts that don't necessarily support his point of view. He has numerous illustrations and detailed information that should help in your search for an interpretation of the ice field.

[Kirk Groeneveld]

Based upon recommendations and my quest for drawings and charts to help me visualize the controversial aspects more clearly, I have purchased "The Ship That Stood Still".

My what small print!
What an incredibly well researched book. Well documented, footnoted and annotated!
And my word, how clear the diagrams are... just what I was looking for!
I skimmed the book for two hours from 1am to 3am last night, and feel more confident that I agree with how many ships were in the area, and now understand how they could both report what they saw, and how close they might have been.

Thank you for recommending this one to me!

I will pursue a copy of "The Indifferent Stranger" next...

[Genevieve Laursey]

Thanks for the idea, Mr.Trower, I examined Mr.Lee's website and found the following maps and datasets:

http://www.paullee.com/titanic/ice.html for the ice reports of April 1912
http://www.paullee.com/titanic/pv.html has a map showing locations of ships that picked up the CQD
http://www.paullee.com/titanic/northatlanticships.html analyses all ships in the North Atlanic in 1912.

Reagrds
Gen

[Jim Buchanan]

Hello there!

There is one map missing from the collection. Captain Lord produced a sketch which he said showed the shape of the icefield:
"7382. Can you tell us what the extent of the ice-field was?
- The width of it?
7383. Yes, the width of it from your position to the position of the wreck?
- It was running north and south after the style of a T, and the T was dividing the position where the "Titanic" was supposed to have sunk and where we were. I suppose for the two or three miles all the way down to where she was it was studded with bergs and loose ice.

Has anyone ever seen this?

JIm

[SamHalpern]

A chart attributed to Albert Foweraker was published in The Ship That Stood Still (App. E) and in A Ship Accused. It is allegedly based on the sketch drawn by Capt. Lord, but it is not known just how much Lord was involved in Foweraker's sketch. The Foweraker chart conflicts with some of the evidence given in 1912, and contains some inconsistencies especially with regard to current.

[Jim Buchanan]

Captain Lord said something about " It was running north and south after the style of a T, and the T was dividing the position where the "Titanic" was supposed to have sunk and where we were"

In those days, they did not use too many typwriters. I wonder if the captain meant a long-hand capital T or a long-hand lower case T?
I would have thought the latter since it would look like a vertical, slightly back-slanting line, slightly hooked to the right at the bottom and with a slanting line bisecting it about 1/8 it's length from its top.
The slight hook would represent the the way the ice was slanting eastward under the influence of the Gulf Stream and where the greatest concentration of separate bergs were located. The slanting line, the course of the Californian through the ice when she started off at first.

Just a guess I'm afraid!

Jim

[Timothy Trower]

Um, actually, the typewriter was in common use, both ashore and even on ships, in 1912.

[Jim Buchanan]

Yes I know that Timothy. In fact, I have still some typwritten documents from that era and actually the 't' in these look very similar to this 't'
However, would Lord describe a 't' as a typwriter 't' or for general information?

I don't think it matters too much. I was just curious.

If we mechanically write 't' in italics it would be sloped like this 't'.[/i]. The slope would be in compass terms NNE..SSW. I wondered if Lord drew a sloped lower case 't' but instead of sloping it as with italics, he sloped it the oposite way i.e. NNW..SSE. After all, that's the course he and Moore follwed down the west side of the pack ice. The cross of the 't' would be Californian's track through the ice from east to west.

I think the maps shown on Paul Lee's article must be completely wrong.

JIm.

[Timothy Trower]

Although Dr. Lee and I may disagree on a great many things outside of the Californian, on this, I feel that his maps are unimpeachable. If there is to be a disagreement with this stance, it would have to come from someone such as Sam Halpern -- another who has studied this subject in great detail.

[Jim Buchanan]

What maps are we talking about? If it's the ones produced by Captain Knapp, I'm afraid they are inaccurate because they show Titanic distress position to be on the wrong side of the ice.
They also show the west side to be rather strange. Captain Lord travelled down the west side on a course of SSE. he could not have done that according to Captain Knapp.

Also, they do not incorporate the large icebergs that were seen to the south east of the weck site in the way of Carpathia when she came north west.

Jim

[Thomas Golembiewski]

Jim:

Excellent observations . . . superb . . . keep up the good work!

[Jim Buchanan]

Thank you Thomas!

Here is something else to think about:

I have read much of Dr. Lee's work.
He is a marvelous gatherer of facts and information. However I grieve that he does not always join the information properly!
In the article you referred me to, he talks about a 1.3 knot current setting to the SSW or SSE. Niether of these were possible!

Although the SS Carpathia was pointed directly toward Titanic's distress position, she actually arrived at where Mr. Boxhall was setting off his green flares. This means Carpathia must have been set northeast of her intended course, not in the opposite direction of southwest as she would have been if such currents were flowing. Even if she had been affected by such currents, she was still set to the northeast. But the current setting her northeast must have been geat enough to overcome these south setting currents and still set her northeast at 2 knots. Very powerful indeed!

At 7am on the morning of the 15th, the Captain of the Mount Temple found that his ship was close to the west side of the pack ice in a position which was 3.5 miles east of Titanic's distress position.
7 hours earlier...at the time when Titanic hit the iceberg... if there had been a current setting south-southwest at 1.3 knots all the time, the edge of the pack ice would have been 10 miles to the north-northeast of Mount Temple's 7am position. The captain of the Mount Temple said the pack ice was about 5 miles wide. This means that 7 hours earlier, the eastern side of the pack ice would have be 15 miles to the north-northeast . If so, then the place where Titanic actually hit the iceberg was covered by pack ice.
Mr Boxhall's boat was to the eastward of the pack ice. He did not row therefore he was at the same distance from it as he had been when Titanic sank.

From Dr. Lee's vast icberg report data, it would seem that the southern limits of the pack ice did not go much below 42-40N between 14th April and after 22nd April . This clearly shows there was no south setting current. Otherwise,if there was a southward setting current, it would have moved over 31 miles to the south every day until it met the Gulf Stream.

Jim

[Jim Buchanan]

Sorry! my mistake! it should read much below 41-42N.

JB

[Thomas Golembiewski]

Jim:

Yes, everything you post is true . . . those maps are all badly flawed . . . however, they're all in the official record . . .

[Jim Buchanan]

That's the huge problem Thomas. The oficial record!

We are left like the passengers of Titanic, floating about on an ocean of uncertainty. Not knowing where to turn. Having to believe concocted conclusion arrived-at by people who had agendas to meet. These agendas obviously include, self agrandisement, greed and political expediency but most certainly do not exclude many or all of the other distasteful habits of mankind.

Heck it's Friday.. time for my weekly beer!

Cheers!

Jim

[Thomas Golembiewski]

Jim:

Yes, how right you are . . . trying to get threw the nonsense and the truth of the matter may take a long time, and one must be diligent . . .

As you posted, Capt. Lord was there . . . not Capt. Knapp . . . but Knapp's maps rule . . . we're stuck with them . . . or burdened . . . keen observations on your part . . . keep it up!