Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="timASW" data-source="post: 6054132" data-attributes="member: 6698787">Then perhaps you should learn before trying to defend the well acknowledged worst captain in the annals of recent naval history.  He should have realized that as the most experienced man there and the one who had ultimate responsibility for the safety of the ship and passengers he should have been on duty when it was MOST dangerous, not LEAST. Which is SOP for ship captains and always has been. Not some novelty he would be inventing. Actually no, it was too few eyes on the sea and the eyes they had were too inexperienced. He was given 7 separate warnings by other captains of icebergs in the region and refused to slow down because it was his retirement cruise and he wanted to get it over with as soon as possible and put the lives of all of his passengers and crew lower in priority then retiring on time. Oh and yes, floodlights are absolutely STANDARD on ships in those waters because they make an absolutely HUGE difference. HUGE. This is yet another thing thats long been SOP for naval captains that captain smith ignored. Yes it is his fault. Its the captains job to make the final call on things like that before leaving port. He could have said no and threatened to go to the papers if it wasnt fixed. Maybe they would have replaced instead of fixing it. But you know what? Then 2 would have changed. 1. Smith would have lived. 2. It would have been the other captains fault for sailing a faulty vessel, and not his own.  Not nearly as different as you seem to think. Most of the things that are laws now are things that were common sense and good captains had been doing all along. It was his responsibility to be a good captain, not just to follow the letter of the law if the law was insufficient. Laws are guidelines, not crutches so you can turn your brain off</blockquote>

Verification