Poll

How difficult to transcribe are the currently available log pages of the Patterson, relative to other ships?

1-STAR:  Easy log ‒ excellent for new transcribers
0 (0%)
2-STARS:  Intermediate log ‒ good for all transcribers
3 (50%)
3-STARS:  Challenging log ‒ suitable for experienced transcribers or new transcribers willing to take on a challenge
1 (16.7%)
4-STARS:  Very challenging log ‒ suitable only for experienced transcribers because of highly variable formats
2 (33.3%)
Sometimes one level, sometimes very much another; please explain this in a reply to this topic
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 6

Author Topic: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments  (Read 106397 times)

Randi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12536
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #105 on: May 03, 2013, 07:59:21 am »
No. I sent Philip a PM but I haven't heard back yet :'(

Randi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12536
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #106 on: May 03, 2013, 03:08:00 pm »
Quote from: philip.brohan
Hi Randi.

 In general we use TWYS - put in what the log says, even if it's wrong. But that's impossible here, as there are two measurements claiming to be water temperatures.

 I agree with asterix's best judgement - the first one is actually a wet-bulb temperature; enter it as such.

Cheers, Philip
 

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #107 on: May 03, 2013, 03:24:38 pm »
aye aye, um, sir  ??? (can't be aye aye captain, since I'm the captain.  Can you say aye aye admiral?)

thanks

Janet Jaguar

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • Smell the sea, feel the sky, & fly into the mystic
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #108 on: May 03, 2013, 07:36:15 pm »
Admiral of the Fleet is probably Philip's correct title.  Admiral would be Kevin's title.  VIP both of them. ;D

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #109 on: May 09, 2013, 06:46:14 pm »
The Patterson appears to have invented time travel:

10:50 Mr Lukens left in the launch for the tide station 
10:15 Mr. Lukens returned, hoisted launch and boats

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Patterson/Book%209/IMG_5811_1.jpg

Kevin

  • Old Weather Team
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 508
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #110 on: May 09, 2013, 10:54:05 pm »
You could just call me Doctor Captain (I tried to sell that around the lab but that didn't fly!)  ;D

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #111 on: May 13, 2013, 10:27:14 pm »
Slovenliness - not generally a quality you would look for in a cook

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Patterson/Book%209/IMG_5829_1.jpg

"The wardroom cook, for general slovenliness, was put on bridge watch for 6 hours and quarantined for four weeks."

At least it was the wardroom cook.  No telling what might have happened if the officers' cook had been slovenly.

Randi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12536
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #112 on: May 13, 2013, 10:46:38 pm »
It does seem to be the officers' cook: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/wardroom :o

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #113 on: May 14, 2013, 02:08:58 pm »
Would the officers have 2 cooks?  Because Ben Chin is listed as Officer's cook throughout the logbook (why I assumed that wardroom cook is not for the officers)

Randi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12536
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #114 on: May 14, 2013, 04:36:28 pm »
I don't know...

Officer's Cook seems to be/have been a general term.

In Thetis' log (http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USS%20Thetis/vol004of024/vol004_006_0.jpg) it lists several different kinds of cooks, although Thetis 'only' has 1 Ship's Cook, 1 Cabin Cook, and 1 Ward-room Cook.
Definitions from: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq78-3.htm (for US Navy, so there may be some differences here)

Ship's Cook (Changed from Cook 1838; changed to Ship's Cook 1c, 2c, and 3c 1893; changed to Commissaryman 1948.)
Cabin Cook (Changed from Officer's Cook 1864; changed to Officer's Cook 1c 1923.)
Ward-room Cook (Changed from Officer's Cook 1864; changed to Officer's cook 2c 1923.)
Steerage Cooks (Changed from Officer's Cook 1864; changed to Officer's Cook 2c 1923.)
Warrant Officer's Cook (Changed from Officer's Cook 1864; changed to Officers Cook 3c 1923.)
Cook to Commander-in-Chief - only on a flagship (Changed from Officer's Cook 1864; disestablished 1921.)

From http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq78-3.htm
Officer's Cook - Established 1838; changed to Cook to Commander-in-Chief, Cabin Cook, Wardroom Cook, Steerage Cook, and Warrant Officer's Cook 1864.

(I hadn't associated Steerage with Officers :o ::) ???)

In the United States military, a Warrant Officer (grade W-1 to W-5) is ranked as an officer above the senior-most enlisted ranks, as well as officer cadets and candidates, but below the officer grade of O-1 (NATO: OF-1). Warrant officers are highly skilled, single-track specialty officers... - http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Warrant+Officer+%28United+States%29

Since, strictly speaking, the captain is not a wardroom officer, I wonder if the Cabin Cook is the captain's cook :-\

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #115 on: May 15, 2013, 10:49:56 pm »
Two things I think would be fun to know about this incident:

1) What inspired this guy to refuse work for 2 weeks.  The only other mention of him in the log is 2 weeks prior to this, where he was given 4 weeks quarantine for bringing whisky on board.

2) I would LOVE to see a transcript of what was said when Seaman Anderson was "given a clear understanding of his position"

John Anderson, Seaman

03/03/1912 - Refused duty and was put in double irons

04/03/1912 - Personally notified Seaman Anderson that his pay would be stopped for such time as he continued to refuse duty - RS Patton Ass't G&GS Exec Officer

05/03/1912 - still refusing to turn to was kept in irons

06/03/1912 - stiff refusing to turn to was kept in irons

07/03/1912 - still refusing duty was put on bread and water and kept in irons in the sick bay

08/03/1912 - still refusing to work was kept in irons

09/03/1912 - was brought up to the mast and given a clear understanding of his position.  He still refused to work and was kept in irons

10/03/1912 - still refuses duty was still kept in single irons but was given full ration to-day in conformity with navigation law

11/03/1912 - The irons were taken off Seaman Anderson and he was ordered to turn to, he refused to do so and the irons were replaced

12/03/1912 - The irons were taken off Seaman Anderson today to allow him to take a bath and change his clothes.  After he had done so they were replaced

16/03/1912 - Seaman Anderson this morning expressed a willingness to work for the first time since his confinement and was released from irons

Randi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12536
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #116 on: May 15, 2013, 11:16:03 pm »
 :o Keep us posted!

asterix135

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #117 on: June 04, 2013, 10:32:17 pm »
Okay, back to the miserable confusion about what is being recorded in the "Water" column for the logs.

On the last logbook (Oct 1-Dec 30, 1912 - starting here - http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Patterson/Book%2010/IMG_5872_0.jpg), the logkeepers were very kind about crossing out the word "Water" and writing in "Wet" every single day.

Now they're in Hawaii and obviously, the tropical sun has made them a bit more lax.  They are just leaving the "Water" column as is for most days (eg http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Patterson/Book%2011/IMG_6001_0.jpg)

But of course just to keep things interesting, there are a couple of exceptions when they manage to write in the word "Wet"

Jan 4, 1913
Feb 17, 1913
March 2, 1913
March 12, 1913 and thereafter as they head back to Seattle and start recording surface water temperature.

SO, based on the previous log and their once a month notation of Wet in the Water column, I'm going to record the water column from this log book as Wet. 

Janet Jaguar

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • Smell the sea, feel the sky, & fly into the mystic
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #118 on: June 04, 2013, 11:05:43 pm »
Do the best you can - you are now the most knowledgeable living soul at guessing what this log keeper was doing.

AvastMH

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6825
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
« Reply #119 on: June 05, 2013, 08:48:37 am »
oh the pleasures to come! Asterix I'm so grateful that you've logged all these oddities. It'll save me a lot of brainache later...Lucky me - so thank you lots!
Joan  :D :D :D