OK. To clarify, Barry, and not to emphasize semantics to a picky degree, I wrote that your tone was becoming patronizing, not that you as a person are patronizing. One doesn't need to be a professional aviator, sailor, etc., to be able to critique a situation such as Capt. Smith and the Titanic.
I would encourage you to read the transcripts of the American inquiry and the British Board of Trade inquiry, neither of which censured Smith.
Kathy, you really can't guess my "tone" from what I put in words. Both my avocation and my profession involve assuming responsibility for passengers' and patients' safety and lives. As such, I am qualified to comment on such matters from that standpoint.
The American and British Inquiries differed in their findings. The American Inquiry found Captain Smith had shown an "indifference to danger [that] was one of the direct and contributing causes of this unnecessary tragedy."
The British Inquiry's report was a piece of double talk about excessive speed in icy waters, previous non-fatal ship piloting in icy conditions, the fine overall record of the White Star Line, lack of binoculars for the lookouts, etc., etc. The report concluded with a ridiculous statement that Captain Smith was at fault for not changing course or slowing down but he had not been negligent because he had followed long-standing practice which had not previously been shown to be unsafe.
At least the Titanic disaster brought about a change in the number of lifeboats ships had to have and drills for their proper use.