Talk:USS Oneida (1861)

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Controversy over collision[edit]

I have added some extra detail on the collision and subsequent loss of this ship. The controversy over the actions of Captain Eyre (of Bombay) after the collision is a significant part of the story. At the time, there was a particularly unpleasant nationalistic blame game - the actions of Captain Eyre conveniently directed public feeling over the loss of life away from the failings on the Oneida, from poor watchkeeping to not having an appropriate number of ship's boats.

I doubt the accuracy of the remark about Japanese fishing boats rescuing those that were saved. Other accounts suggest these men got away in the two serviceable ship's boats - this gives further relevance to the failure to obtain replacement boats after their loss, suggesting that many more men could have been saved if officialdom had not blocked the purchase of appropriate equipment.

I've also corrected the name of the P&O ship - it was just "Bombay", not "City of Bombay"ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]