The Laconia

[Keith at Tregenna]

Waiting for part two.

K.

[Ivan Cloherty]

ref post #10
Watched the first episode last night, cannot say that it enthralled me, as an ex seafarer perhaps I'm nit-picking, there appeared to be so many inaccuracies I wonder who the advisors were. I know that the majority watching are not interested in accuracy of detail, but it does spoil it for thousands who are.

First time I've seen a "Junior" third mate with three gold bars on his epualettes whilst in addition having crossed anchors with a crown on his sleeves together with three large brass buttons around his cuffs and the poor captain was restricted to four gold bands and the first mate had two and a half gold bands with a rondel on top. Poor radio officers had naval rating uniforms. Whilst proceeding north at a lowly 13 knots the officers wore white uniforms one day, blues the next and back into whites the next and on one day wore both colours. How come a deck rating is dragging a beat up Italian prisoner of war along passenger alleyways, this was before any incidence of the torpedo effect.

Perhaps I sailed in the wrong companies, or I'm just a grumpy old man.

Apart from the inaccuracies the programme left a lot to be desired in the acting department, those playing the U-Boat crew seemed the most realistic, thought most of the others were pretty wooden. Was I expecting too much fro the programme, hope part two fares better

Regards Ivan

[Bob Hollis]

Couldn't agree more Ivan except I thought the acting as a whole was a load of crap, don't think I'll bother with part 2.

[Jim Brady]

I was having a pint with my mate(ex-seaman) yesterday and he mentioned he was looking forward to watching last nights show.I pointed out to him that I had only just found out it was by Alan Bleasedale(a great playwright by the way) but I thought he would be out of his depth with this one and it would not come up to our expectations,I think that turned out tobe about right.What do you think was it more Drama than Docu,?
Regard.
Jim.B.
P.S. I was listening to a guy on Radio Merseyside before who lost two uncles on the Laconia,I'm not sure if I heard him right but I think he said that there was a follow up to the show on Saturday with survivors talking on the show.I havent got Saturdays T.V. programmes yet so I cant check it out.

[Keith at Tregenna]

Would hope to watch part 2 and the whole thing, not so much for good TV, but more the fact millions will know more of some of the forgotten, there is so much more to remember.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lknR2nc6--A

K.

[Ivan Cloherty]

P.S. I was listening to a guy on Radio Merseyside before who lost two uncles on the Laconia,I'm not sure if I heard him right but I think he said that there was a follow up to the show on Saturday with survivors talking on the show.I havent got Saturdays T.V. programmes yet so I cant check it out.[/QUOTE]

Laconia survivorsBBC2 Saturday 7.30 pm or 1930 hrs if you prefer.

I know the following should be on a different thread, but I don't know how to start one

Also watched the "Real" story of the Titanic" on Channel 5 tonight," experts" saying what did happen, even using a up-to-date bridge simulation with a modern master, which was going okay until they used some ignoramus to do the editing

Scene 1

Captain shouts "hard a starboard" with the iceberg close on the starboard bow !!!!!!!!!!!!!, meanwhile the QM is spinning the wheel to port and the vessels head comes around to port

Scene 2

Captain shouts "hard a starboard" with the iceberg on the starboard beam to cant the vessels stern to port away from the iceberg- perfectly correct, BUT !!!!!!!!! the QM is spinning the wheel to port and the vessels head is canting to starboard

There were other incidences of lazy editing, a good programme ruined by lazy editing, but I also blame the "experts" for not picking up on these, as it looked like an expensive programme to make. The experts were so busy blowing their own trumpets they missed the obvious and ruined what could have been a believable scenario

Ivan

[Captain Kong]

Ivan,
In those days the configuration of the steering gear meant that to turn the ship to Port the wheel had to be turned to Starboard and vice versa.
I guess that it could have been a bit difficult for the QM if he forgot.
Cheers
Brian.

[happy daze john in oz]

Ivan,
In those days the configuration of the steering gear meant that to turn the ship to Port the wheel had to be turned to Starboard and vice versa.
I guess that it could have been a bit difficult for the QM if he forgot.
Cheers
Brian.

I thought at the time of the Titanic shipping had gone to direct steering port to port etc. But this is not the first time the producers have stuffed up, and no doubt it will happen again.

[John Cassels]

Nothing to do with configuration of the steering gear. In those days it was HELM orders not rudder
orders that were given.

[Ivan Cloherty]

Ivan,
In those days the configuration of the steering gear meant that to turn the ship to Port the wheel had to be turned to Starboard and vice versa.
I guess that it could have been a bit difficult for the QM if he forgot.
Cheers
Brian.

Hi Captain

Knew that would get you back !

In the documentary when the captain shouted "hard a starboard" in " both" scenes the QM spun the wheel to port but in scene one the bow went to port and in scene 2 the bow went to starboard.

On the Titantic from techn'l data I've read the rudder followed the wheel and not like the old rudder days when you put on port wheel to go to starboard and vice versa like one old trawler I sailed on, thats why the old skippers used to say, port helm and starboard helm as they knew which way they wanted to go. Knew some old Humber pilots who still used those orders in the 1950's on modern ships, now that WAS confusing for the QM especially when the pilot wanted the bow to go the other way !!!!!!!!!!!!

Now don't you go sliding back down that bloody gangway to get ashore again, onwards and upwards as they say!

Cheers Ivan