Talk:Farallon Steamship Disaster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Comments and Questions[edit]

The topic about the Brave Six is was very appropriate in that you went into great detail about their perserverance to find aid. Also, the section about J.E. Thwaites documentation explained the artistic persepective of the disaster. I agree that it was a good idea to include that section because pictures speak a thousand words; they tell the story of the men surviving in a different persepctive. Also, knowing that there were photographs show that there was another form of evidence of the wreck. It was also interesting how , by mere chance, there was a man who had a camera that was able to document the lives of the stranded men.

I have a few quick questions.How many people survived/were saved in the end? On the scale of shipwrecks in American history, was this one relatively significant? Was enough to get Congress'/local/state attention? Why or why not? Also, of all other similar disasters, why was a book written about it? What sort of illnesses, diseases and conditions did the other men (not the brave six) face while waiting to be rescued? and finally, were there implications/changes that impacted the locals, the steamship company and the survivors? Vivpat (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

J.E. Thwaites[edit]

What happened to J.E. Thwaites after he was rescued and lived? Did he develop his career in photography? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nliconti (talkcontribs) 18:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Responding to Vivpat[edit]

Thank you so much for reading my article. To answer your questions, all thirty-eight men survived the wreck. The men that did stay on Iliamna Bay faced extremely harsh conditions, with strong gales (high winds), freezing cold temperatures and once they ran out of provisions collected from the ship, they had to scavenge the barren coast for nourishment. In regards to it's relative significance, it was not as significant as such disasters as Luisitania and the Titanic, and was not mentioned in The Perils of the Atlantic: Steamship Disasters, 1850 to the Present, by William H. Flayhart, which describes the major steamship disasters that have occurred in the United States. Hence in relation to all the steamship disasters that have occurred in American history, this disaster is not as well remembered or recognized. The disaster of the S.S. Farallon did have an impact on the Alaska Steamship Company. In July of 1954 the company stopped transporting passengers as a result of a cummulation of factors, one of them being increased rates of destruction to the company's fleet. The S.S. Farallon disaster was one of these incidences and was a factor in the termination of passanger transport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katharine Reszetnik (talkcontribs) 14:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Responding to Nliconti[edit]

John. E Thwaites did continue his career in photography and as a mail clerk aboard steamers after his experience on the S.S. Farallon. Most of his time after the disaster was spent on the S.S. Dora, a steamer that was part of the Northwestern Steamship Company. Thwaites was actually in another accident after the S.S. Farallon disaster. On June 8, 1915 he was aboard the Mariposa when it hit a rock in Fitz Hugh Bay, British Columbia. Thwaites would again have his camera and documented the 95 passangers who were stranded along with him.

In 1914 Thwaites was transfered to the Seattle-Seaward mail route and began a photography bussines operated from his home in Seaward. Thwaited officially retired from the mail service in 1919 and opened a photography and curio store on Dock Street in Ketchikan, Alaska, specializing in hand coloured photographs. In 1924 he moved his photography bussiness to the Ingersoll Hotel in Ketchikan. Eventually in 1932, Thwaites sold the business to his assistant and moved to Mercer Island, Washington. He would spend the remainder of his life there with his wife until his death in 1940. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.218.190 (talk) 20:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Farallon Islands?[edit]

There is a group of islands and rocks/reefs off San Francisco so named and the link in this article leads there. The article on Cook Inlet says this ship struck Black Reef. It would appear that the ship was named after the California islands. I am guessing that if any island(s) in the Cook Inlet are named "Farallon", they were named for the ship after this diaster and that the ship was names after the California islands. But I am not sure about this. Can someone clear this up?Wschart (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

That was evidently guesswork on someone's part. GNIS returned null for Farallon Islands in Alaska. The entry on Black Reef says that the Board on Geographic Names named it as such by official board decision in 1916. Perhaps more research is in order to determine if it was known by another name prior to 1916.RadioKAOS (talk) 19:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Two more things[edit]

  • I reassessed the article as Start-Class, as there appear to be a host of minor issues. This could be B or C-Class without a whole lot of effort, though.

Ray Mears UK survival expert had a programme about this incident. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laUVzyYes5E Worth adding a reference? AnnaComnemna (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2016 (UTC)