TMOliver wrote:

> [snip]As for the turning/taking the berg head on/turning the other
way debate,
> the legions of Monday Morning quarterbacks who participate have likely
> never had the personal experience of imminent/certain collision staring
> them in the face (especially at the conn of a large vessels at any
> speed). The conning officer and Captain folllowed the only viable
> couse, to turn away from danger as rapidly as possible, and almost
> succeeded, given the minimal nature of the damage sustained.
> Unfortunately, even “minimal damage area” is too much when it allows the
> flooding of one too many compartments in a vessel without longitudinal
> bulkheads or watertight bulheads extending up to the main deck.
>
> Would you have had the capacity to evaluate risk allowing you to hold
> course for a head on collision with a berg, insuring major damage and
> giving up any hope of avoiding collision/
>
> Would you have had the courage/foolhardiness to attempt to turn toward,
> an absolutely foolish choice insuring the likelihood of the worst
> possible damage, a broadside midhips blow at the ship’s most vulnerable
> pointm the fire and engine rooms?
> —

I would have to agree that turning directly toward an object is
highly unlikely for
any conning officer. However, there were other things that the
conning officer on
the Titanic could have done. The first order given, All Back Full,
did nothing to
aid the ship and certainly reduced the ship’s maneuverability. The
reciprocating
engines probably hadn’t even started to reverse by the time the ship
hit but there
was a corresponding reduction in wash over an already inadequate
rudder. I have
also read that the center screw was not capable of reversing, just
stopping which
would have deflected water away from the rudder. While the ship was making in
excess of 20 knots, direct wash from the screws to the rudder is
always the most
effective.

Mark Perry