Boatnerd Discussion Forum

[quote=Guest post_id=273968 time=1763267809]
As to other vessels out there that night, I have seen the Frontenac listed as well, though I do not know if it was the Canadian or Cleveland Cliffs Frontenac.
[/quote]

Canada Steamship Lines Frontenac, per the US. Coast Guard Marine Casualty Report.

I'm not sure if Garbear is still on this list or not. He was on the Phillip Clark that day several hours ahead of the Fitzgerald and has posted his recollections on several previous anniversaries. At least once he has posted pictures that he took that day. I'm assuming those posts are findable here with the search

As to other vessels out there that night, I have seen the Frontenac listed as well, though I do not know if it was the Canadian or Cleveland Cliffs Frontenac.

Here's a couple of screeng rabs for the 1300 and 1900 EST weather observations from the BGSU webpage for the Marine Board of Investigation.

A NBC news video from November 11, 1975. [YouTube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7tzntwy0_8&list=FLHLQK-u4jT7i5XE0mLxS0Qw&index=39[/YouTube]


Soo Control Daily Summary for November 10, 1975

0010 Frontenac - Upbound, anchored at Big Point waiting for better visibility before heading into Algoma Steel.
0110 Fort William - Upbound, anchored astern of Frontenac, waiting for better visibility before heading into Algoma Steel.
0150 Murray Bay - Upbound, anchored 2 miles west Sweets Point due to visibility.
0151 William R. Roesch - upbound, anchored off Buoy 13 at Lime Island due to visibility
0400 Reserve at anchor Little Lime Island
0437 Benfri - Upbound, anchored 1 mile east of Pipe Island Twins
0702 George M. Humphrey - anchored at Maud Bay
0703 Fort William - underway for Algoma Steel
0843 Benfri - Upbound, underway
0854 William R. Roesch - Upbound, underway
0948 Nanfri - Upbound, anchored near Pipe Island, waiting on CG boarding team
1023 Nanfri - Upbound, underway
1550 Patris - anchored in Hay Lake due to high winds
1648 Ernest R. Breech - At anchor below Little Lime Island
1649 Patris - underway enroute to anchorage at Soo Harbor
1700 Algosoo - reported he could naot make the turn into Algoma Steel, so he went back up to anchor at Waiska Bay.
1800 Lockmaster advises locks are closed due to weather.
1802 Algosoo - At anchor Waiska Bay.
1825 River closed due to weather.
1835 Received possible overdue in area of Whitefish Bay
2145 Gave urgent security on steamer Edmund Fitzgerald
2200 Gave urgent broadcast on steamer Edmund Fitzgerald
2218 Request assistance from Benfri.
2228 Benfro reported he saw vessel lights off starboard side around 1900, vessel's name unknown.
2230 Requested assistance of Frontenac, Murray Bay, William Clay Ford and Hilda Marjanne, anchored in Whitefish Bay
2235 Hilda Marjanne - reported underway..
2236 Requested assistance of William R. Roeach and Benjamin F. Fairless
2243 Anderson advises searching off Pancake Shoal
2249 William R. Roeach -advised due to bad gyro, would not be able to get underway until morning.
2251 William Clay Ford - advises he would be unable to do any good until daybreak.
2310 Hilda Marjanne - underway to assist.
2339 - William Clay Ford - underway to assiust in search.
2351 Algosoo - Requested vessel to assist in search, captain reports vessel unable to stand strain.

To answer the Guest post further below on the list of vessels that were out on Lake Superior the night the Fitzgerald sank. As Ohio Bob mentioned in his post, indeed there were 3 salties all upbound that evening. The list includes the Avafors, Benfri and Nanfri. If I am correct on my information, I believe that one of them perhaps all were asked by the CG that night to turn about and try to look and search for any survivors of the Fitzgerald. None of them did and I think it was just from fear of turning around and risk capsizing their vessels in those types of seas and wind conditions. I may and could be wrong here but, I thought that’s what I’ve read and heard. Besides those 3 salties another vessel the Armco I think I’ve heard was upbound and like the Ford also may have went to anchor somewhere? Ahead of the Fitzgerald by a few hours maybe longer was the Philip R. Clarke. From what I’ve read and heard, the Clarke I think was the last vessel to lock through the Soo Locks the day and evening the Fitzgerald sank. After the Clarke locked downbound earlier in the day or evening, they then I think closed and shut the locks down to any and all traffic until the storm had subsided and weather conditions had improved from it then. In earlier editions I have of Fred Stonehouse’s book The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, I think he shows a photo in his book of the William R. Roesch now Calumet. The Roesch I believe I’ve read and heard found something from the Fitzgerald either part of one of the lifeboats or else something else. Another vessel the USCG Cutter Woodrush was sent from Duluth the night the Fitzgerald sank to the sinking location to try and search for survivors of the Fitzgerald. I too don’t know or recall exactly what ships were out on Lake Superior the night the Fitz sank? I was only 3 years old then and most of my information is just from news accounts, reports and books!

What have been the rule of the day with the three salties that were upbound and passed the Anderson heading out into the storm? The Captain is always the Master of the Ship but would the pilots of that time also considered this storm as more normal conditions? Being shorter salties, would they handle the rough seas of Superior better?

The entire crew got a bonus if they sailed a vessel all season

[quote=Guest post_id=273943 time=1762982748]

That being said, The Fitzgerald was not some sort of exception being out there on the lake the night of Nov. 10. The idea of dropping the hook and esssentially stopping all ship traffic every time the lake churns up whitecaps is much more recent than 1975.
[/quote]

That is a good point, and one that is sometimes overlooked. Yes, several ships did go to anchor due to the worsening weather, but others were out on the lake during that same storm, all of which, apparently made it through without suffering major damage. As someone from that era, I find that over the years this particular storm has grown into some type of mythical force of nature with few other parallels in the history of Great Lakes shipping. Yes, it was a severe storm, but having met Captain Erickson from the William Clay Ford during a speaking event on the Fitzgerald during the 1990s he stated the weather he experienced during the search for survivors was similar to something encountered about two or three times a year. However, I believe he was out on the lake after the storm had started to dissipate so his recollection would be different from that of Captain Cooper on the Andeson. It is noteworthy the only apparent storm damage suffered by the Anderson during that storm was some minor damage to a lifeboat bracket and that ship made it through with no major structural issues. It is also worthy of note, as the Anderson had just been lengthened from 647 to 767 feet in overall length the previous winter, which by some accounts by those who served on the AAA class steamers before and after lengthening have described them as becoming much more limber after being lengthened. To me anyways, the lack of any significant hardship experienced by the Anderson dispels that belief that somehow this storm was extraordinarily severe in strength and duration. I'm not trying to downplay the power of that particular weather system, just trying to point out that for some reason the Fitzgerald somehow did not survive it while others did so without suffering any severe casualty.

As for the ships out on the lake during that storm other than the Anderson and Fitzgerald, I believe the list includes the Wilfred Sykes, Roger Blough, and the Fort Henry. If I recall correctly, all of these ships were downbound behind the Fitzgerald. For some reason, I cannot recall any vessels ever being named as being ahead of the Fitzgerald or even upbound on Lake Superior (although many of the latter had gone to anchor in Whitefish Bay). Most likely, with the amount of traffic on the lakes in the mid-1970s, there would be at least one or two vessels that were ahead of the Fitzgerald / Anderson.

These Captains get a tonnage bonus for what the boat hauls during the season. In 1975 I don’t know what it would have been but I have a pretty good idea of what it is today. So getting more trips in and taking minimal weather delays is always in the equation.

I remember hearing the story about this trip allegedly being McSorely's last before retirement (ala Captain Smith of the Titanic) and also talk of bonuses driving decisions with this fateful trip making the rounds in the late 1970s. This author is probably just dredging up stuff that was pushed out the discussion by people who knew better years ago.

I would think that the terms of his contract and number of loads for the season etc would be somewhere out there in the public domain, or perhaps even in the addendum of the Coast Guard's report on the sinking. If I recall correctly, the Fitzgerald was supposed to go winter layup and Frazier that year. If that proposed layup date isn't in the public record, I suspect it is findable as well. DIdn't many of Fraziers records end up in the UW-Superior collection?

That being said, The Fitzgerald was not some sort of exception being out there on the lake the night of Nov. 10. The idea of dropping the hook and esssentially stopping all ship traffic every time the lake churns up whitecaps is much more recent than 1975.

[quote="J Kerwin" post_id=273933 time=1762880365]
I watched two programs last week regarding the Fitzgerald; one aired by WDIV Ch 4 out of Detroit and another from PBS ch 56 out of Detroit. One of them mentioned that Captain McSorely would get a yearly bonus by never stopping for storms and getting loads to the receiver without delays. My impression was that they were saying if he exceeded a certain expectation for cargo totals for the year, he would get his bonus (just my interpretation of what they were saying). Perhaps this is what the author of the article was familiar with. It seems unlikely to me that one more load would have made a difference in the bonus but perhaps in 1975 they had not made the magic number required for the bonus and this load would have put them over.
Lastly, although both programs were very good in my eyes, one painted Captain McSorely in a positive light while the other seemed to be more critical of his style of managing rough seas. I would like to think that as a captain, he would have always had the safety of his vessel and crew at the forefront of any decisions he made. Since this was a show to commemorate the ship sinking, I wish they would have just kept it respectful and refrained from mentioning any negatives.
[/quote]
McSorely doesn't get a pass because he perished with his vessel. At the end of the day, the loss of the Fitzgerald falls on his shoulders.

If I’m correct, wasn’t the trip where the Fitzgerald unfortunately sank then Trip #38 for the 1975 season? If that’s true then on the documentary that was made in the mid-1990s by the Discovery Channel it says “This would’ve been the 40th trip & Voyage in her 17th year of service!” I thought I’ve seen, read and heard that it was only their 38th trip of the season. Can someone please explain and elaborate then if I’m correct or not? Also, I thought I did read once from somebody on this board a long time back, this was not their last trip as they had at least two more planned before the sinking and I think 🤔 they were to lay up either in Cleveland or Toledo that Winter then if my info is correct then?

I watched two programs last week regarding the Fitzgerald; one aired by WDIV Ch 4 out of Detroit and another from PBS ch 56 out of Detroit. One of them mentioned that Captain McSorely would get a yearly bonus by never stopping for storms and getting loads to the receiver without delays. My impression was that they were saying if he exceeded a certain expectation for cargo totals for the year, he would get his bonus (just my interpretation of what they were saying). Perhaps this is what the author of the article was familiar with. It seems unlikely to me that one more load would have made a difference in the bonus but perhaps in 1975 they had not made the magic number required for the bonus and this load would have put them over.
Lastly, although both programs were very good in my eyes, one painted Captain McSorely in a positive light while the other seemed to be more critical of his style of managing rough seas. I would like to think that as a captain, he would have always had the safety of his vessel and crew at the forefront of any decisions he made. Since this was a show to commemorate the ship sinking, I wish they would have just kept it respectful and refrained from mentioning any negatives.

I’ve previously posted on bacons book. The guy misrepresents many “ facts.” In his book. I challenged him at his signing event in Ann Arbor. He became defensive and resentful and stopped responding to me. Very little of the books content is worthy of one’s time reading it. Yes I read the book!

In reading an article from a link provided on the News Page for November 11, 2025, that describes some of the facts from the book The Gales of November: The Untold Story of the Edmund Fitzgerald by John U. Bacon. It appears the author claims that the Fitzgerald's last trip of the season was supposed to have been the trip previous to the voyage that claimed the vessel, but that McSorley added another trip on to get a bonus. I don't know if the person who wrote the article misconstrued what was in the book or related by the author, but I don't think McSorley would determine whether or not the Fitzgerald would carry another cargo as I would assume this decision would have been made by Columbia's scheduling department to meet seasonal tonnage demands. Perhaps, the story about the McSorley bonus was that he decided to make another trip himself aboard the Fitzgerald to qualify for what I would believe to be a seasonal bonus rather than actually deciding to have his ship carry another cargo to get a bonus. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting this article, and I have not read the book, so maybe someone else can clarify this. It just seems to be another way to find some way to sensationalize this event.