Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The Infographics Show" channel.

  1. No one said 'shut up.' Phillips was using Morse shorthand, and probably actually sent 'DDD' which had a number of meanings, including 'clear the frequency.' Evidence subsequently given by Californian's operator, that he did not regard Phillips' signal signal as insulting, is confirmation of this.
    27
  2. If that has been said, it was said by someone ignorant of the facts. Olympic had been in one collision, when her starboard quarter was pierced by the bow of HMS Hawke. Olympic returned to Southampton for temporary repairs, before being sent to Belfast for complete ones. At the time, Smith was indeed captain of Olympic, but he was not 'in charge.' Olympic was in the Solent, and under the command of a Solent Pilot, as the subsequent court case made clear.
    10
  3. You sure of that? Smith had one daughter. She had twin sons, one of who died of polio and the other in WW2. Neither son had any children.
    7
  4. How is sinking an armed naval auxiliary in time of war, especially one carrying troops and U-boat crews as well as refugees, a 'war crime?' The criminals were those who allowed refugees aboard a warship in the first place.
    6
  5. J. P. Morgan did not give any free tickets to anyone. Where do you get this nonsense from, unless you simply made it up?
    4
  6.  @thegreatdanetrain342  There was a small fire in a bunker, which was extinguished a day or so before the collision. The softened steel of the hull is a myth.
    4
  7. No. The lesson from 1945 is that a Soviet submarine sank an armed auxiliary warship, carrying troops and U-boat crews as well as refugees, in a time of war.
    4
  8. A lot of tragedies occurred prior to the two world wars.
    4
  9. 'Half the facts in this are wrong Olympic was not sailing at the time it was in port.' Incorrect. Olympic was around 500 miles away from Titanic, on her way to Southampton from New York. She even received Titanic's distress signals. This is simply to check. A shame that you didn't bother.
    4
  10. Largely because they weren't. The idea is simply a myth of recent origin, invented by people who think that they are making a political point.
    4
  11. Nonsense. The problem with believing conspiracy videos is that, when you repeat what they claim, it makes you look such a fool.
    3
  12. Why should someone who sank an enemy auxiliary warship in wartime have been punished?
    3
  13. There weren't 'only civilians' on board.
    3
  14. Rather difficult whren you are in the Baltic.
    3
  15. Odd that Olympic, presumably also, in your opinion, a victim of 'shoddy worksmanship' was a successful ocean liner until 1934, don't you think?
    2
  16. This is nonsense. The supposed recently discovered photographs were nothing of the sort. A journalist found a mark on a single photograph, and drew a whole series of questionable conclusions from it. It did, of course, help to sell a book. The same journalist never actually explained why a similar mark was not visible on any other photographs of course. Nor did he consider that it might, had it really existed, have been the result of a close encounter with a harbour fender, or if it didn't, might have been a smudge on the negative. The mark does not show any deformation in the hull, and it is well forward of the coal bunker. Indeed, there was a fire in one of Titanic's bunkers, but this had been extinguished around 24 hours before the collision. The affected bunker was positioned directly below the ship's swimming pool, yet there were no reports of the pool beginning to boil, or the metal distorting. Just ask yourself this. Does it make any sense whatsoever that, after the (imaginary) fire had been reported to Captain Smith, he would have said 'Never mind, we'll sail anyway. It is only the North Atlantic in April. What could possibly go wrong?'
    2
  17. The actual signal Philips send was morse shorthand. DDD, which simply meant 'clear the frequency.'
    2
  18. Who do you think said Titanic was unsinkable?
    2
  19. Don't be a fool.
    2
  20. Smith never made any such comment. I assume you have a credible source? If so, what is it?
    2
  21.  @newellcornesio428  All I asked was that you provide a credible source. It seems that you cannot. I think that that says it all. Apart, of course, from your total lack of knowledge of Smith's life & career, of course.
    2
  22.  @freegamer4549  Originally it had been, but she had been assigned to the Kriegsmarine since November, 1940, and based at Gdynia as a U-boat support ship. In 1945, she was fitted with an armament of anti-aircraft guns, and put into service as an armed auxiliary warship.
    2
  23.  @freegamer4549  Then the blame lies squarely with the German authorities who loaded civilians onto a warship in a war zone, not with a submarine commander who did his duty.
    2
  24. J. J. Astor IV didn't.
    2
  25. Canada was a self-governing Dominion, not a colony.
    2
  26. Then, as now, people needed villains. A wealthy British businessman (Ismay) and the British captain of a nearby ship (Californian) were ideal for the American politicians running the US Inquiry.
    2
  27. Olympic was a successful liner until withdrawal in 1934. The scrapping of 'Old Reliable' saddened many.
    2
  28.  @maximilianodelrio  The bomb was made by scientists from a number of countries, Canada and Britain being the most prominent.
    2
  29. It was not an innocent ship. Gustloff was an armed auxiliary, carrying troops and U-boat crews as well as civilians.
    2
  30.  @nathanholton5335  Actually, 52 third class children (i.e., under 14 years of age) died. There were 109 children in total aboard the ship. There are detailed records for passengers and crew, and for survivors and those lost. The claim that more 3rd class children than first class men died is not borne out by the records.
    2
  31.  @nathanholton5335  When did I make any reference to a video? I simply referred you to actual, verifiable, facts. Oh, and my knowledge of the events surrounding the sinking of Titanic is based on far more than the internet. I actually read books, and have access to many archives from the period. If you wish to maintain you claim, kindly provide a credible source.
    2
  32. You mean King, the Anglophobe who allowed over 600 merchant ships to be sunk during Operation Rheinubung, rather than set up convoys, because they were a British idea. Admirals such as Nimitz, Spruance & Halsey, were happy to have the BPF with them.
    2
  33. The ship was an armed naval auxiliary. Some of those on board were troops, whilst others were U-boat crews.
    2
  34.  @Xpwnxage  Gustloff was carrying troops and U-boat crews. The civilians were crammed on board by the German authorities at the last moment. I assume that these authorities knew exactly what the Germans had done in the East, and anticipated retribution.
    2
  35. Gustloff was an armed auxiliary warship carrying troops and U-boat crews. If it was a war crime, the crime was committed by those (German) authorities who loaded civilians onto a warship in a war zone.
    2
  36. No one told Californian to shut up. At least, not according to Californian's marconi operator, that is.
    2
  37. You think that ships, as a matter of routine, set out to cross the North Atlantic with damaged hulls? You have been misled.
    1
  38. Odd that the same 'enlightened' opinion is never applied to people like Winston Churchill, isn't it?
    1
  39. He attacked an armed enemy auxiliary warship in time of war.
    1
  40. Indeed. Apparently he was a great painter. He could do an entire apartment in a week-end. Two coats!
    1
  41. No, it doesn't. A combination of factors were involved.
    1
  42. No.
    1
  43. @Paul Allen Nonsense. Whrn do you think Smith ever made so asinine a comment? Please provide a credible source.
    1
  44. @Paul Allen If you are unable to give a proper answer, why bother replying?
    1
  45. @Paul Allen Your source is NBC news? MON DIEU!! Well, here on earth I can absolutely guarantee that Smith never said anything quite so cretinous. NBC is not, by the way, a source. Where did NBC get this nonsense from?
    1
  46. Seafires were used aboard Implacable & Indefatigable. They were used to carry out CAPs over the fleet because of their short range, but were very successful in this role.
    1
  47.  @thepotato1178  Because they operated from aircraft carriers. A Seafire was simply a navalised Spitfire, with a strengthened rear fuselage to accommodate an arrestor hook.
    1
  48. They weren't actually slower, but the armoured flight deck meant that they carried less aircraft. An Essex carried 90-100, a Formidable around 60.
    1
  49. Who would you bribe? The ship was sinking.
    1
  50. Titanic's indeed White Star's bread & butter was the carriage of Third Class passengers across the Atlantic. Passenger capacity was : First class: 735 Second class: 674 Third class: 1026
    1
  51.  @FrankBUILTperformance  It lasted long enough to result in the loss of over 600 merchantmen, all because Ernie King was Anglophobic, and refused to organise convoys because they were a British idea.
    1
  52. Because it was an act of war, committed in wartime. What do you think US & British submarines did during WW2.
    1
  53. Who?
    1
  54. I don't see the relevance. Several ships transmitted ice warnings.
    1
  55. 14 lifeboats could hold 65 people each. 2 emergency sea boats 35 people each, and 4 collapsible boats 49 people each.
    1
  56. And if it wasn't for the scientists of many countries, Britain & Canada included, the US wouldn't have had the Atomic bomb as soon as they did.
    1
  57. How can anyone take seriously the views of someone who posts a comment like that?
    1
  58. No one ever made such a comment.
    1
  59. Actually, no he didn't.
    1
  60. No one said 'Shut Up!' At least according to the evidence of Californian's operator. He described the message from Titanic as a request to clear the frequency. It was not offensive, and he did not take it as such. The people who make these comments don't seem to have much, if any, understanding of what 'Morse Shorthand' was.
    1
  61. Actually, around £850, based on the £7 of 1912. It wasn't merely a trip, by the way. It was emigration in the belief that they would be starting a new life.
    1
  62. No, it wasn't. It was not, however, connected to the engines, but was used for ventilation purposes.
    1
  63.  @nickdanger3802  Indeed. But you have stopped at half-time. You haven't mentioned the shattering defeat of the Japanese Operation U-Go, with 55,000 Japanese casualties.
    1
  64. It is another of the many myths which people have subsequently invented.
    1
  65. Actually, around £850, based on the £7 of 1912.
    1
  66. Gustloff carried troops, and U-boat crews, as well as civilians. She was also an armed auxiliary warship.
    1
  67. The Swordfish wasn't used in the Pacific. This 'training plane, not a combat aircraft' as you describe it, sank a greater tonnage of axis shipping than any other allied aircraft of WW2.
    1
  68. No one told Californian's Marconi Operator to 'shut up.' Phillips used a morse shorthand, 'DDD' which simply was a request to clear the frequency. Californian's operator even said as much in later testimony.
    1
  69. 'They wanted to try president Roosevelt for treason after the war but for what ever reason did not.' No, they didn't. Firstly because he was dead, and secondly because neither he nor Churchill had any pre-warning of any attack.
    1
  70.  @captaincanada5139  Actually, he owned an enamelware factory. I doubt that dropping crockery on advancing troops would have had much effect on the outcome of WW2.
    1
  71.  @captaincanada5139  Odd how people like you seem to feel the need to resort immediately to insults, rather than simply being able to discuss a subject, isn't it?
    1
  72. In which case, they should have been available over 30 years ago. Where are they?
    1
  73. How does it show that?
    1
  74. Why would there be? The fire had been extinguished at least 24 hours earlier.
    1
  75. Gustloff also carried troops and U-Boat crews. Moreover, she was an armed auxiliary or, in other words, a legitimate target.
    1
  76. Watches generally do not react well to being immersed in water.
    1
  77. Look up the 'Birkenhead Drill.'
    1
  78. No, they didn't storm any beaches, although they did inflict 55,000 casualties on the Imperial Japanese Army when XIV army defeated Operation U-Go. The Japanese were in more areas that the Pacific alone, even if you didn't know that.
    1
  79.  @davidhackamack4143  Really? Then you should be aware of what Slim's XIV Army did to the the IJA in Burma.
    1
  80. Is there an English translation of your post available for people to read?
    1
  81.  @tmel708  The words are English, but sadly not comprehensible English.
    1
  82. Graf Spee, Bismarck, Scharnhorst, the U-Boat fleet.
    1
  83. HMAS Sydney only commissioned in 1948.
    1
  84.  @anthonyburke5656  Indeed, but she was a light cruiser, transferred to the RAN before completion, and renamed Sydney. She did not survive the war. The carrier of the same name was a Majestic class light fleet carrier, launched as HMS Terrible in 1944, but not commissioned, as HMAS Sydney, until 1948.
    1
  85.  @anthonyburke5656  Sorry. I replied to your first post before I read the second!
    1
  86. No-one from H & W or White Star actually said that.
    1
  87.  @maximilianodelrio  The bomb was made by scientists from a number of countries, Canada and Britain being the most prominent.
    1
  88. In point of fact, the US Navy was better in large scale carrier based fleet actions in the Pacific. The Royal Navy quickly dealt with the German surface fleet, neutralised the Italian fleet, and became the most proficient in the world in the field of convoy defence. The two navies had different objectives, and they both achieved them.
    1
  89. Quite a challenge towing river barges full of troops across the Atlantic. Why not just shoot them on shore and cut out the middle man?
    1
  90. Which, of course, no-one from White Star or H & W ever said.
    1
  91. The Germans didn't have any long range bombers.
    1
  92. Nonsense.
    1
  93. No one yelled at anyone. Voice communications were still in the future.
    1
  94. At Sakishima Gunto, Corsairs, Avengers, Hellcats, Fireflys & Seafires. Why should that be relevant? Were the Canadians, or the Poles, any less Canadian or Polish because they used British equipment?
    1
  95. If his autobiography was destroyed, how do you know what it did or didn't claim?
    1
  96.  @leon419  The only fire was a small one in a coal bunker, which had been extinguished at least a day before the collision. Do you seriously believe that Smith would have set out to cross the Atlantic in a ship with a compromised hull?
    1
  97. Who thought that they were better than others?
    1
  98. Don't be silly. There was no 'uncontrollable' coal fire. There was a smouldering fire, caused by spontaneous combustion of damp coal, in one of 19 bunkers. This was discovered almost immediately, during the bunker checks carried out on a daily basis, in accordance with IMM regulations. A team was set to work on it, and it was extinguished at least 24 hours before the collision. The only part of the ship affected was the paint inside the bunker. No-one left the ship. You are confusing the replacement of the passage crew, mainly of Belfast men, with the deep-sea crew, of men recruited from the Southampton area. This was a fairly common procedure. Why do you think shovelling coal into the boilers would increase speed? Have you never heard of safety valves? Once the working operating pressure of the boilers, in this case 215 psi, was reached, the safety valves would simply lift. Speed would be unaffected. 'When one of the coal stokers who survived later testified at a court inquiry in the UK as to the fire & above facts, his testimony was squelched by the judge'. Sorry, but that is, unambiguously, untrue. I have never understood why people find the need to invent lies on this subject. Perhaps you could explain the reason to me?
    1
  99.  @JS-bm9tf  I see the problem. I fear that Senan Molony is simply a journalist who thinks he has found a good way to sell a book, and may well have succeeded. I doubt factual accuracy is his primary concern. The three points you took from the book are highly questionable. There was a smouldering fire in one of 19 bunkers, which had no effect on the material condition of the ship. Coal from that bunker was simply used first. After all, the Olympics burned around 600-800 tons per day when at sea. Titanic was not at full speed, as five boilers were never connected, and there was no weakened steel.
    1
  100. Look up Operation U-Go, a Japanese offensive against Burma & India, which ended with 55,000 Japanese casualties, before you assume that the British & Commonwealth were not playing a significant role against Japan. Formidable, by the way, carried 51 aircraft at Okinawa, Implacable 81, Indomitable 60, & Victorious 51. None were withdrawn from the battle as a result of damage, or from shortage of aircraft. 'Um, the British weren't fighting in Europe, really.' Presumably, you mean, apart from North Africa/Tunisia, Italy, and NW Europe? The Royal Navy planned and executed all the major assault landings, and the British and Canadians provided two of every three men who landed on the Normandy beaches on 6 June, as well as 3261 of the 4127 landing craft, and 892 of 1213 warships. Us troops became numerically superior for around the last six or seven months of the German war. Prior to that, the RN & RCN fought and won the Battle of the Atlantic, kept control of the Mediterranean, prevented Japanese incursions into the Indian Ocean, and protected 78 Arctic convoys. The RN was overwhelmingly the dominant allied navy in the west, leaving the US navy to concentrate against Japan in the Pacific.
    1
  101.  @nickdanger3802  US population in 1941 was 135 million. UK & Canada combined was 59.7 million. As I wrote, 'US troops became numerically superior for around the last six or seven months of the German war.' Glad you agree.
    1
  102. Technically, they were 'Socket Signals.' White, with explosive heads.
    1
  103. Other way round. Tiller Steering orders were still in use in Titanic, and in the British Royal & Merchant Navies until 1933. The first order was 'Hard a Starboard' which would swing the ship to port. As this would bring most of the starboard side of the ship into contact with the berg, a second order of 'Hard a Port' was given in an attempt to swing the after part of Titanic, and her propeller, clear.
    1
  104. Who says that there was no alternative? Do you seriously think that any naval officer, then or now, would intentionally allow a collision, when an alteration of course might have avoided it completely? Isn't it fun being wise after the event? 'It does not help the captain was criminally inept to pilot such a ship, and the crews were untrained.' The captain was not on the bridge at the time of the collision, but his watchkeeping officers were all experienced, and some had previously served aboard Olympic.
    1
  105. There was no 'raging fire,' simply a smouldering one caused by the spontaneous combustion of wet coal. This had been resolved around 24 hours before the collision. The 'raging' fire was the invention of a journalist/writer in 2017, to sell his book. If the rivets were sub-standard, how is it that Olympic was a successful liner for 23 years.
    1
  106. The guns at Singapore didn't face the wrong way. Their problem was that they were intended to prevent a seaborne attack, and were supplied with AP rather than HE shells. As you didn't even know that, I suspect that you will never have heard of the 55,000 casualties suffered by the Imperial Japanese Army when XIV Army defeated Operation U-Go. Now you might learn something new as well?
    1
  107. Smith didn't 'crash' Olympic. She was in the Solent at the time, and in the charge of a Solent Pilot.
    1
  108.  @officialflikz  Olympic collided with HMS Hawke. Both ships were quickly repaired. That doesn't alter the fact that Smith was not in charge of Olympic at the time of the collision.
    1
  109. Really? Olympic was agile enough to be able to ram and sink a U-boat in WW1. The 'small rudder' nonsense doesn't seem to apply to her.
    1
  110.  @Brammy007a  There are a number of such books around. Every one is utterly convincing, and almost certainly wide of the mark. One minor problem here is that Sickert appears to have been in France when most of the murders took place, at least according to contemporary letters written by members of his family. Cornwell's claim that Sickert probably wrote some of the Ripper letters rather fades into irrelevance, even if true, when the opinion of the police at the time was that it was improbable that the actual murderer actually wrote any of them anyway.
    1
  111.  @Someguy4007  No, he didn't. You should read the testimony of Californian's operator, who said that he did not regard Phillips as being rude. Operators communicated by a form of Morse shorthand in those days. They did not talk to each other. The signal was probably simply DDD, a general request to clear the frequency. Badly informed people seem to have a need to invent a 'villain' and for some Phillips fits the bill.
    1
  112. Read up about Operation U-Go, if you think the British & Commonwealth lost Burma. Australia, by the way, was never seriously threatened.
    1