Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Vox" channel.

  1. Titanic was not a warship. I doubt that counter-flooding would even have been possible.
    1
  2. It isn't worth noting that at all. The Olympics were designed to survive four compartments being compromised, because no designer from any shipyard of the time envisaged that happening. When Olympic was in collision with a protected cruiser with a ram bow, only two compartments were breached. Indeed a ship could have been built able to withstand that level of damage, It just wouldn't have been able to carry many passengers, of whatever class.
    1
  3. Titanic didn't collide with an iceberg because Californian's marconi operator did work 24 hour shifts.
    1
  4.  @PriscinaSkyy  Californian's watchkeeping operators saw Titanic's flares and notified her captain. The decision not to investigate, or even wake her operator, was his.
    1
  5. 'They' never branded Titanic as unsinkable.
    1
  6. Then, had she survived, the Officer of the Watch would have been the subject of a Board of Trade Inquiry, resulting in him being dismissed from White Star for failing to alter course in order to avoid any collision.
    1
  7.  @Guy82652  Olympic didn't. Indeed, Old Reliable sank a U-boat. As far as I know, the only liner ever to have done that.
    1
  8.  @Guy82652  Olympic was used as a trooper for most of WW1, as was Mauretania & Aquitania. All three survived the war undertaking those duties. Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, and Aquitania, again, did the same in WW2. Britannic was used as a Hospital Ship, which led her into dangerous waters where the speed which protected the others could not be utilised.
    1
  9. The berg was not actually near to the ship after the collision.
    1
  10. No.
    1
  11. No. The ship, like Olympic, was built as designed. There are too many ill-informed myths about Titanic.
    1
  12. You should read the evidence given to the British Inquiry by several Master Mariners. They unanimously said that Smith behaved exactly as they would have done, which was to maintain course and speed, whilst instructing lookouts to be particularly vigilant.
    1
  13. You think he should have been on duty 24 hours a day for over a week? Don't be silly. Moreover, he was not remotely to blame for anything.
    1
  14.  @DePoRtEd20  Whereas you clearly didn't know that there was only one marconi operator aboard Californian. A three or even two watch system is only possible when there are three or at least two people aboard the ship capable of operating the equipment.
    1
  15. Wjat element of Titanic's design was not fully in accord with Board of Trade regulations in force at the time?
    1
  16. You read wrongly, then.
    1
  17. Titanic had a double hull, or, at least, a double bottom. The design was not changed.
    1
  18. The Inquiries noted this in 1912.
    1
  19. It was wrong. Harland and Wolff at the time had an entirely Protestant workforce.
    1
  20. Not according to the several Master Mariners who gave evidence at the British Inquiry, who stated that Smith acted exactly as they would have done in the same situation.
    1
  21. It sank because an iceberg compromised five, or perhaps even six, compartments.
    1
  22. Quite correct. It would be baffling. Which perhaps explains why no one from H & W or White Star ever said it.
    1
  23. Why? What do you think he did wrong?
    1
  24. No.
    1
  25. Nonsense. The ship carried more lifeboats than BoT regulations required. More indeed than the Lusitanias.
    1
  26. Yoiu really think that any officer of the watch on any ship, then or now, would not try to avoid a collision rather than bring one about?
    1
  27. Who was this 'Employee of the White Star Line, at the launch of the Titanic, May 31, 1911?'
    1
  28. No. Five com,partments were compromised.
    1
  29.  @axelfoley133  The point is that 12 square feet at one point would not have compromised five compartments. The damage was actually a long thin slit , possibly 220 to 250 feet long.
    1
  30. No. She carried more lifeboats than the Lusitanias, and more than Board of Trade regulations required.
    1
  31. You might have saved even more time by not posting such an incomprehensible comment.
    1
  32. Why? He did nothing wrong.
    1
  33. Do you seriously believe that any naval officer would intentionally allow a collision when a course alteration might have avoided it completely?
    1
  34. Because she was a liner, not a warship. Large numbers of people needed to be able to move around inside her. The bulkheads were already higher than Board of Trade regulations required.
    1
  35. Titanic did not have a warship's ability to counterflood. Do you know any liner of the time which did?
    1
  36. The bulkheads were actually higher than BoT regulations demanded. Sometimes, an accident is simply too overwhelming to survive.
    1
  37. Board of Trade regulations stated the minimum number of lifeboats a ship of this type was required to carry. The Olympics carried more than was dictated, and certainly more than the Lusitanias. No one in authority from Harland & Wolff or White Star ever made any such a claim.
    1
  38. Even in those days, no-one worked 24 hour days.
    1
  39. 'He had to evade a Stuka attack using a tactic taught by his other son who was in the RAF and was killed prior.' Nonsense. One of Lightoller's sons was killed aboard an MTB in March, 1945. The other survived the war, reaching the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel. You should not confuse the movie, much of which was total fiction, with the facts.
    1
  40.  @davidrenton  Yes, you are right about his third son. I apologise. However, the nonsense in the movie is still nonsense. Herbert did not return from the raid, in the Schillig Roads, so he could not have told anyone anything.
    1
  41.  @davidrenton  So I understand. I hope the restoration is successful, as it is important not to lose such memories of Britain's past.
    1
  42. I wonder, Light bomber squadrons such as 107, 110, & 139 seem to have had any anti-shipping training at this stage of the war.
    1
  43. As there is only around 40 seconds of newsreel footage of the actual Titanic, of her preparing to move berth in Belfast in early 1912, it was that or nothing.
    1
  44.  @mikemancini313  Occasionally, but it is simply a few seconds of Titanic moving away from the quay.
    1
  45.  @sashadala346  Actually, NONE.
    1
  46.  @sashadala346  The only person replying to you is not American, and it is still nonsense.
    1
  47. Californian was not 'shut off.' She had simply stopped for a few hours. Do you suggest that, because she wasn't big enough (she was, by the way) she was entitled not to respond?
    1
  48.  @raylivaldez5564  Which 'experts?' The engines were not 'shut down' as the boilers remained lit and the engines could have been fired up comparatively quickly. Lord had stopped for the night, but intended to set off again at dawn. SS Californian had a maximum speed of 12-13 knots. Although she may not have been as close as the six miles suggested at the Inquiry, even at twice the distance she might well have been able to reach Titanic before she sank.
    1
  49. She had only one Marconi operator. He was not expected to work 24 hour shifts.
    1
  50. Do you also believe in the Tooth Fairy?
    1