by Tim Maltin
- Yes.
25173. Have you heard the evidence in this case with regard to the weather conditions which existed when the "Titanic" struck?
- Yes.
25174. You know them?
- Yes.
25175. Now what practice did you follow with regard to maintaining your full speed or reducing your speed, assuming similar conditions, and assuming you had information that there was a probability of your meeting ice on your course?
- As long as the weather is clear I always go full speed.
25176. You always have done so?
- Yes.
25177. What was the speed of the "Mauretania"?
- 26 knots.
25187. If it was a flat calm and you expected ice - you were warned of ice and knew you would meet ice in the course of the night - would you double the look-out?
- No, as long as the weather is clear.
25190. (The Commissioner.) Have you never seen an iceberg?
- I have seen them, my Lord, yes.
25191. How far off?
- Sometimes two or three miles, sometimes 10 miles.
25192. Have you never passed close to an iceberg?
- No, not nearer than two miles.
25213. And you have been at sea altogether 30 years?
- More, 51 years at sea.
25216. (Sir Robert Finlay.) And you have had, I think, a Master's certificate for 37 years?
- Yes.
25217. You told us your practice as to speed when ice was reported or you were in an ice region; did you also hold your course?
- Always, if it is clear weather.
25218. You have kept your course in clear weather, and maintained full speed?
- Yes.
25219. And was that the universal practice in your experience?
- Yes.
Captain Hugh Young: 25222. For 37 years did you command steamers in the Anchor Line?
- Thirty-seven years.
25223. In such position were you travelling backwards and forwards between Glasgow and New York?
- For 35 years I was travelling across, all that time.
25224. Are you familiar with ice-fields and icebergs?
- Quite.
25225. Do you know the weather conditions which existed when the "Titanic" struck the iceberg?
- I understand it was a dead calm.
25226. It was a dead calm; it was a clear night?
- Yes.
25227. No sea?
- No sea.
25228. And no moon. Now assuming those to be the conditions, and assuming that you had had information that there was a probability that you might be travelling through a region of the sea at night where you might meet icebergs, would you or would you not reduce the speed of your vessel?
- No, sir.
25233. Captain Young, if ice were reported, would you keep your course, as well as maintain your speed, in clear weather?
- I should keep my course and maintain my speed.
25234. How many years were you in the New York trade, crossing the Atlantic?
- About 37 years.
25235. (Sir Robert Finlay.) If your Lordship pleases. (To the witness.) Suppose you were told there was field ice, would your practice be the same, or different?
- Just the same.
25236. Has that been the universal practice in the trade as long as you have known it?
- As far as I know, yes.
25237. All ships have done so?
- I think so.
Captain William Stewart: 25244. Have you been in the North Atlantic trade for 38 years?
- Yes.
25245. I think you held command for some years in the beaver Line?
- All the time that it ran, 35 years.
25246. Sailing between Liverpool and Canada?
- Yes.
25252. Do you know the weather conditions which existed when the "Titanic" struck?
- I have read about them in the newspapers.
25253. See you have them accurate. It was a clear night, no moon, no swell, no sea, and stars?
- Yes.
25254. Given those conditions, and that you had command of a ship, and were given information that you might meet ice and that your course would take you through the place where you might meet ice, and meet it at night, would you reduce your speed?
- No, not as long as it was clear.
25255. Not as long as it was clear?
- No.
25256. I am going upon the assumption that you might meet icebergs - you would not reduce your speed?
- No.
25257. If you had information that you might meet field ice, would you still maintain your speed?
- Until I saw it, and then I should do what I thought proper.
25258. With regard to the look-out, if you have information that you may meet ice, either field ice or icebergs at night, do you take any special precautions with regard to the look-out?
- In clear weather we have the ordinary look-out.
25259. Where is that ordinary look-out kept?
- In the crow's-nest.
25260. Would you maintain your course as well as your speed if ice were reported?
- Yes.
25261. And has that been the invariable practice in the North Atlantic?
- It was with me.
25262. And, as far as you know, with others?
- As far as I know with others.
Captain Andrew Braes: 25285. Have you commanded steamers of the Allan Line for the last 17 years?
- Yes.
25286. Have you heard the evidence of the last four Witnesses?
- Yes.
25287. Is your practice when you may be meeting ice at night similar to their practice?
- Just the same. I never slowed down so long as the weather was clear.
25288. And did you hold your course?
- Yes, I kept my course.
25289. You kept your course and your speed?
- Yes.
25290. In your experience is that the universal practice in the Atlantic?
- I never knew any other practice.
Captain Jones came across field ice at 11pm on the 9th April 1912, on a clear, dark night, about sixty miles north of where the Titanic sank and he could not understand how Titanic’s lookouts could possibly miss it:
Captain Richard O. Jones: 23590. Are you Master of the steamship "Canada"?
- Yes.
23593. Of course, you hold a Master's certificate. How long have you held it?
- Twenty-eight years.
23598. Let us take April, 1912, the month in which this calamity happened, did you sail as Master of the "Canada" from Portland (Maine.) in that month?
- Yes.
23599. I think on the 7th of April?
- On the 7th of April I left Portland.
23600. Bound for Liverpool?
- Yes.
23601. Did you get any messages on your voyage about ice?
- Yes, several.
23602. Which was the day?
- On the 9th I had a message from the "Tunisian."
23610. Never mind; you got more messages than one about ice?
- Yes.
23611. Did you come up to the ice; did you see it?
- Yes.
23612. Tell us what you did when you found yourself in the neighbourhood of the ice. That is what we want to know?
- It was some hours later when we came to the ice.
23613. Whenever it was, what did you do?
- When I saw the ice I stopped.
23615. (The Solicitor-General.) What sort of ice?
- Pack ice.
23616. You stopped altogether, did you?
- Yes, I stopped altogether. I let my ship run her way off, and then I gave her a touch ahead, so as to get close to the ice, so as to inspect it.
23617. Was this in daylight or at night?
- At night, 11 o'clock at night.
23623. After you got the
messages about the ice did you continue going on full speed ahead until the ice was reported by the look-out?
- Yes, certainly.
The Commissioner:
Now I see the object.
23624. (The Solicitor-General.) That is the point. (To the witness.) Is that in your opinion the usual practice?
- Certainly, always.
23625. (The Commissioner.) What speed were you going at?
- 15 knots.
23626. (The Solicitor-General.) Is that your full speed?
- Yes.
23627. What was the weather?
- Dark and clear.
23628. (The Commissioner.) Suppose you had had a 22-knot boat would you have gone 22 knots?
- I should think it would be just as safe to go full speed with 22 knots.
23629. (The Solicitor-General.) What was the distance at which the ice was picked up. You are going your 15 knots, and it is reported, and then you say you stopped and ran on to reach it. Do you know how far ahead of you it was seen and reported?
- Well, I saw the glare of it; I should say about three miles off.
23630. You did yourself? - Yes, and I saw the ice itself fully a mile and a half.
23638. You have been crossing the Atlantic year after year constantly. What do you say in this period of the year in the month of April, as to the probability of meeting ice?
- How far east do you mean?
23639. Do you expect to meet it?
- Oh, certainly.
Sir Robert Finlay:
He is on the Northerly track; he is in the Canadian trade.
The Commissioner:
He was very much North of the spot where the "Titanic" came to grief.
23645. (The Solicitor-General.) Yes, My Lord; he is 60 miles North. (To the witness.) I think you said your longitude was 49° 20' W.?
- Yes, when we got out of the ice.
23646. With your experience on a clear night, have you always been able to detect ice by this ice blink?
- No, not by the ice-blink; the ice-blink does not always occur.
Light reflecting off sea ice onto clouds is known as 'ice blink'. Dark sky reflecting open water is known as 'water sky', Ross Sea, Antarctica © Rob Suisted, Nature’s Pic Images
23647. Then if it is not the ice-blink which enables you to see it, what do you see it by?
- You see the ice itself.
23648. Can you suggest to us at all why it should be, if a good look-out is kept, that a ship would not see ice until she is close upon it?
- No.
23649. You cannot imagine?
- No; I have always seen ice in plenty of time on a clear night.
23650. (Mr. Scanlan.) There is one point I wish to ask this Witness. (To the witness.) In clear weather what distance ahead can you see an iceberg at night?
- It depends upon the light. If it is a moonlight night you might be able to see it six to twelve miles.
23651. Supposing it is not moonlight, but the stars are clear?
- I should say at the very least a mile and a half to two miles.
23691. Did you receive another message later on from the "Bulgaria"?
- Yes.
23692. What was that?
- "Nine p.m. hazy, pack ice in 42-24 N. and 50-6 W."
23698. Were you still going East at full speed?
- Yes.
23699. What was the state of the sea?
- Calm and clear.
23700. Was there any swell?
- There might be a light swell, yes; but the sea was smooth.
23701. If there was any swell it was moderate?
- Yes; I mean to say there was no wind, the surface of the sea was calm; there might be a little swell.
23703. Now, will you just explain to me about this ice-blink. That is not always seen?
- No, not always.
23704. What is it; how is it produced?
- By a reflection of the light. I suppose it is the reflection of the light on the ice.
23705. The reflection of what light?
- It might be a star.
23706. Is it a sort of shimmer?
- Yes, a kind of a flicker.
23708. Where you have ice about, in your experience, are you liable to have fogs?
- Very liable [Author’s note: Because of the temperature inversion].
23709. Does that, in your judgment, afford any reason for the practice you have always pursued as to speed?
- Yes, we always make what speed we can.
23710. Just tell us, in your own way, what effect that fact has on your practice as to speed?
- Well, we always try to get through the ice track as quickly as possible in clear weather.
Miraging ice barrier
Although visibility was extremely good, the night Titanic sank was not as crystal clear as it seemed. As we have seen in the Sea Hedges chapter, refraction on the horizon looks like a haze, due to the extra light scattering in the miraging zone. As well as being noticed by Titanic’s lookouts, this slightly hazy, abnormally refracting horizon was also noticed by Second Officer James Bisset of Titanic’s eventual rescue ship, the Carpathia, then eastbound, 30 miles to the southward of Titanic’s track. At 9.30pm on 14th April 1912 the Carpathia was in about 41.9N 50.3W, directly south of the ice barrier which, only two hours later, Titanic would crash into an outlaying iceberg of. As Bisset headed eastward, he and Captain Rostron looked northwards from the port wing of Carpathia’s bridge:
“I walked with the Captain in the darkness to the port wing of the bridge. The weather was calm. The sea smooth with no wind. The sky was clear and the stars were shining, there was no moon, but the Aurora Borealis glimmered like moonbeams shooting up from the northern horizon. The air was intensely cold. Though visibility was good, the peculiar atmospheric conditions caused partly by the melting of the large ice field to our northwards in the waters of the Gulf Stream, made the sea and sky seem to blend into one another so that it was difficult to define the horizon.”
And Bisset recorded the refracting horizon again in the early hours of the following morning, as he steamed towards the ice field and Titanic’s wreck site:
The peculiar atmospheric conditions of visibility intensified as we approached the icefield with the greenish beams of the Aurora Borealis shimmering and confusing the horizon ahead of us.
Second Class Titanic survivor, Lawrence Beesley, described the Aurora Borealis as follows in his 1912 book, The Loss of the Titanic:
“Towards 3am we saw a faint glow in the sky ahead…the soft light increased for a time, and died away a little; glowed again, and then remained stationary for some minutes! The Northen Lights! It suddenly came to me, and so it was: presently the light arched fanwise across the northern sky, with faint streamers reaching towards the Pole-star.”
Aurora Borealis, photograph by Pekka Parviainen. The aurora display seen at Titanic’s wreck site must have been very bright in order for it to register to the eye as green, as weaker displays usually appear whitish or grey.
But the Aurora were not confusing the horizon on their own, they were merely lighting the confused horizon over the miraging field ice. This field ice beyond Titanic’s wreck site was described by Captain Rostron of the rescue ship Carpathia, when she arrived at Titanic’s wreck site:
“…about two or three miles from the position of the "Titanic's" wreckage we saw a huge ice-field extending as far as we could see, N.W. to S.E.
As well as this enormous area of field ice, there were also icebergs surrounding Titanic’s wreck site:
Rostron 25501 “In the morning, when it was full daylight, did you see many icebergs?” “Yes, I sent a Junior Officer to the top of the wheelhouse, and told him to count the icebergs 150 to 200 feet high; I sampled out one or two and told him to count the icebergs of about that size. He counted 25 large ones, 150 to 200 feet high, and stopped counting the smaller ones; there were dozens and dozens all over the place”
This is confirmed
by Quartermaster Hitchens at the American Enquiry: “In the morning, when it turned daybreak, we could see icebergs everywhere; also a field of ice about 20 to 30 miles long, which it took the Carpathia 2 miles to get clear from when it picked the boats up. The icebergs was up on every point of the compass, almost.”
At 2pm in the afternoon before Titanic’s collision, the Mesaba had also been heading about west, when she arrived at it, in daylight:
“At 2pm on April 14 1912 in latitude 42° north, longitude 50° west we passed another field of pack ice, with numerous bergs, intermixed, and extended from four points on the starboard bow [NW] to abeam on the port side. Had to steer about 20 miles south to clear it. Ice seemed to be one solid wall of ice at least 16 feet high, as far as could be seen. In latitude 41° 35’ north, longitude 50° 30’ west, we came to the end of it, and at 4 p.m. - April 14 - we were able to again steer to the westward.”
Field ice with superior mirage at sunset, North West Greenland © ArcticPhoto
Notice in the photograph above how a superior mirage makes the flat ice in the distance appear like a wall of ice, several feet high. When Mesaba says: “Ice seemed to be one solid wall of ice at least 16 feet high, as far as could be seen”, she is in fact describing miraging field ice. This is because for field ice to be floating 16 feet above the water, it would have to be about 120 feet thick, which it was not. In reality, we know from the positional data given by the Mesaba and by the location of Titanic’s wreck site that this was the field ice that Titanic sank only a couple of miles east of and which the Californian later was able to plough through, twice, during the early morning of the 15th April 1912.
Lord 1959 Affidavit: “I immediately got under way and proceeded as quickly as possible on courses between S. and S.W., pushing through about two to three miles of field ice.”
It was therefore only a few feet thick, at most, as you would expect from pack ice. Atmospheric refraction expert Dr. Andrew T. Young pointed out that the Mesaba’s description of this field ice as being 16 feet thick sounded like the following report published in “Marine Observer”, from H. M. S. "Cleopatra", re “Mirage on the Gulf of Finland, May 1st, 1919,” (Met. Mag. 56, 40, 1921):
"The ice presented a curious mirage effect, being reflected upwards. When first sighted with the sun on it, it looked very like a continuous line of chalk cliffs in a slight haze; with the sun behind it, small detached pieces appeared as dark blurred objects which might be anything, and might be mistaken for land. On closing, it was found to be floating not more than a foot or so above water."
