|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 8, 2015 8:58:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by c64 on May 22, 2018 19:24:13 GMT
...until they ran into each other. This is actually very likely. Both drivers had to be car enthusiasts. Naturally they were highly interested in each other's car. But unlike nowadays, people back then didn't grow up being taught to be careful where you are going. It still happens today that people steer their cars into nasty crash sites just because they can't stop looking at the wreckage. And drivers steer their car to where they are looking at unless they willingly look somewhere else and know not to steer that way. Fascinated by a wreck, people steer right into the wreck they ogle at. So before people grew up with traffic and being constantly taught to deasl with traffic or driving, it is likely that those two first car owners had crashed. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 22, 2018 22:35:56 GMT
...until they ran into each other. This is actually very likely. Both drivers had to be car enthusiasts. Naturally they were highly interested in each other's car. But unlike nowadays, people back then didn't grow up being taught to be careful where you are going. It still happens today that people steer their cars into nasty crash sites just because they can't stop looking at the wreckage. And drivers steer their car to where they are looking at unless they willingly look somewhere else and know not to steer that way. Fascinated by a wreck, people steer right into the wreck they ogle at. So before people grew up with traffic and being constantly taught to deasl with traffic or driving, it is likely that those two first car owners had crashed. the odds against are based on the odds of there being only two cars in the state and the cars being in the same place at the same time. still a good change that both car owners lived in the same city, since states tended to have only one or two population centers that long ago. so the posibility of the crash happening before a third car was brought into the state would be the question. |
|
|
|
Post by c64 on May 23, 2018 17:19:51 GMT
This is actually very likely. Both drivers had to be car enthusiasts. Naturally they were highly interested in each other's car. But unlike nowadays, people back then didn't grow up being taught to be careful where you are going. It still happens today that people steer their cars into nasty crash sites just because they can't stop looking at the wreckage. And drivers steer their car to where they are looking at unless they willingly look somewhere else and know not to steer that way. Fascinated by a wreck, people steer right into the wreck they ogle at. So before people grew up with traffic and being constantly taught to deasl with traffic or driving, it is likely that those two first car owners had crashed. the odds against are based on the odds of there being only two cars in the state and the cars being in the same place at the same time. still a good change that both car owners lived in the same city, since states tended to have only one or two population centers that long ago. so the posibility of the crash happening before a third car was brought into the state would be the question. Since the first cars were toys for the rich only, it is likely that they have visited the same location e.g. for a special event. O course the odds are small. I'm just saying that the odds are not that bad once they drive on the same road in opposite directions. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 23, 2018 18:09:13 GMT
the odds against are based on the odds of there being only two cars in the state and the cars being in the same place at the same time. still a good change that both car owners lived in the same city, since states tended to have only one or two population centers that long ago. so the posibility of the crash happening before a third car was brought into the state would be the question. Since the first cars were toys for the rich only, it is likely that they have visited the same location e.g. for a special event. O course the odds are small. I'm just saying that the odds are not that bad once they drive on the same road in opposite directions. and I am saying the thing that reduces the odds the most are the odds of it happening before there was a third car in the state. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 24, 2018 1:45:06 GMT
Since the first cars were toys for the rich only, it is likely that they have visited the same location e.g. for a special event. O course the odds are small. I'm just saying that the odds are not that bad once they drive on the same road in opposite directions. and I am saying the thing that reduces the odds the most are the odds of it happening before there was a third car in the state. Still, it only takes two. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 24, 2018 2:38:02 GMT
and I am saying the thing that reduces the odds the most are the odds of it happening before there was a third car in the state. Still, it only takes two. in this case it is limited to two. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 24, 2018 7:04:27 GMT
Two cars in a "desert", they see each other, and pop over to say "hello"...
What are the chances of me and my friend hitting each other in the cars?.
Pretty damn high, as one time when trying to get both cars on the same drive, I did "touch" his bumper whilst reversing in.
As ever, touch like a butterfly with sore feet, I was trying to get real close, got a bit too close.
So it can happen... "chances are" aside, it is possible, and this was just one state in 51 of the USofA, out of how many countries that at some time would only have had the first two cars.
Possible?. Plausible?. probable?. especially if the two drivers knew each other therefore had reason to meet up.
The main question is, did it actually happen?.
How the duck do you find out, because as much as I search on duckduckgo.com , I aint getting anything beyond "rumours"
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 24, 2018 13:37:49 GMT
The last one calling it a battleship is probably a bit of a stretch, she was an armed merchant cruiser and had 8 4 inch guns, about the same type of weapon most destroyers carried battleships carried guns of a far larger calibre. She also did not have armour plating like a battleship carried. SMS Trafalgar was a German armed merchant cruiser, and carried only 2 4 inch guns and some 6 pounders, see too did not have an armoured hull. She was disguised as the RMS Carmaina presumably to act as a merchant raider sneaking up on British ships to attack them, Carmaina was at the time one of Cunards most famous ships so any other British ships would know her. And allow her to get close. But to do so she would have also have to have been in the same general area other ships were expecting the real Carmaina to be. The coincidence of the two ships meeting each other probably is not as far fetched as it seems at first. And it seems Carmania was not disguised as Traflgar, that's just another bit of hyperbole added by such internet sites. |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 25, 2018 6:17:27 GMT
Violet Jessop was a stewardess working for the White Star Line, that she served on three of their ships is not as unlikely as it seems at first.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 25, 2018 14:30:55 GMT
Violet Jessop was a stewardess working for the White Star Line, that she served on three of their ships is not as unlikely as it seems at first. although there is the factor that she had to SURVIVE the titanic, and not decide to go into a safer line of work, like bayonet testing. |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 25, 2018 17:15:48 GMT
Violet Jessop was a stewardess working for the White Star Line, that she served on three of their ships is not as unlikely as it seems at first. although there is the factor that she had to SURVIVE the titanic, and not decide to go into a safer line of work, like bayonet testing. There is that but it reduces the coincidence factor down a level. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 26, 2018 0:55:47 GMT
although there is the factor that she had to SURVIVE the titanic, and not decide to go into a safer line of work, like bayonet testing. There is that but it reduces the coincidence factor down a level. true, being that she was on every run while she was on staff makes better odds than if she had just happened to be a passenger on each fateful trip. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 28, 2018 16:00:22 GMT
There is that but it reduces the coincidence factor down a level. true, being that she was on every run while she was on staff makes better odds than if she had just happened to be a passenger on each fateful trip. Consideration, in all three [minor] motorcycle crashes of Bikes I owned, I was riding them at the time. On all three [minor] incidents in light vans for a company I once worked for during the time I was there, I was involved as either passenger or driver in none of them whilst I was there... And the White Star line at the time of the ladies employment had "how many" ships that she could have been working on? AS a potential employee of White Star, being my Father was Peninsular and Oriental, [P&O}, so would have got a good referral, if I had found out that ladies employment history and found I was to be on the same liner, I would have jumped ship before it sailed?. Note, I am taking liberties with time scales there, I aint "That" old?...]
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 28, 2018 16:13:32 GMT
true, being that she was on every run while she was on staff makes better odds than if she had just happened to be a passenger on each fateful trip. Consideration, in all three [minor] motorcycle crashes of Bikes I owned, I was riding them at the time. On all three [minor] incidents in light vans for a company I once worked for during the time I was there, I was involved as either passenger or driver in none of them whilst I was there... And the White Star line at the time of the ladies employment had "how many" ships that she could have been working on? AS a potential employee of White Star, being my Father was Peninsular and Oriental, [P&O}, so would have got a good referral, if I had found out that ladies employment history and found I was to be on the same liner, I would have jumped ship before it sailed?. to make an accurate assessment, you have to know how many trips she made that were incident-free, and how many incidents did white star ships have when she was not aboard. |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 28, 2018 17:54:20 GMT
According to Wikipedia there where 14 White Star line ships at the time some of which were liners, others were tenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 28, 2018 19:00:36 GMT
According to Wikipedia there where 14 White Star line ships at the time some of which were liners, others were tenders. so assuming she was living onboard ship, she would have a minimum of a 1:14 chance of being onboard for one of the major incidents, 1:196 of being onboard for two, or 1:2744 of being onboard for all three. if I remember how to process probabilities. |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 28, 2018 19:16:16 GMT
According to Wikipedia there where 14 White Star line ships at the time some of which were liners, others were tenders. so assuming she was living onboard ship, she would have a minimum of a 1:14 chance of being onboard for one of the major incidents, 1:196 of being onboard for two, or 1:2744 of being onboard for all three. if I remember how to process probabilities. Yes but those probablities might be altered slightly depending on White Stars policies at the time, perhaps as she had had training on one of the vessels in the RMS Olympic class she was more likely to be transfered between other vessels of the same class rather than going to another type of ship. If that was the case it would be more like 1:3 1:9 or 1:27. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 28, 2018 22:43:15 GMT
so assuming she was living onboard ship, she would have a minimum of a 1:14 chance of being onboard for one of the major incidents, 1:196 of being onboard for two, or 1:2744 of being onboard for all three. if I remember how to process probabilities. Yes but those probablities might be altered slightly depending on White Stars policies at the time, perhaps as she had had training on one of the vessels in the RMS Olympic class she was more likely to be transfered between other vessels of the same class rather than going to another type of ship. If that was the case it would be more like 1:3 1:9 or 1:27. the odds were probably also low that they would have a lot of passenger attendants on the tenders. |
|
