Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How did changes in tide, water temperature, and currents in November 1962 affect the likelihood of survival for escapees from Alcatraz?
Executive summary
Computer simulations and contemporary reporting conclude that tidal timing, currents and cold water made survival from Alcatraz on the night of 11–12 June 1962 unlikely but not impossible: Delft researchers’ model showed a narrow window — roughly between about 11:00 p.m. and midnight — when a raft launched from some points could be carried to safer waters, while launches before/after that window were likely swept out or on a different course [1] [2]. Official investigations (FBI, National Park Service) and major reference works continue to treat drowning as the most probable outcome in the absence of definitive evidence [3] [4].
1. Why tide and current matter: the bay is not uniform
San Francisco Bay’s circulation is driven by strong tidal flows that change direction roughly every six hours; on the night of the escape researchers recreated historical tidal data and released dozens of virtual rafts to see where they would drift, finding that tiny differences in launch time and start location produced radically different end points — so the success probability hinged on catching a favorable tidal phase, not just paddling strength or a makeshift raft [1] [2].
2. The Delft simulation: a narrow survival window
Deltares scientists who ran the 2014-style computer modelling released 50 virtual boats every 30 minutes from multiple Alcatraz launch points between 22:00 and 04:00; their output showed that if the prisoners entered the water between roughly 23:00 and 00:00 they had a plausible route toward the north side of the Golden Gate and beyond, whereas entering the water later—after about 01:00—meant the tide would have reversed and taken them on a very different, more hazardous path [1] [2].
3. Water temperature and physical exposure still stacked the odds against survival
Contemporary accounts and official positions emphasise frigid, rough waters surrounding “The Rock.” Even if currents could carry a raft toward land, cold-water shock, hypothermia and exposure remained serious threats. Major outlets and reference works underscore that while models and recreations show plausibility under ideal timing and preparation, those same sources stress that most authorities regard drowning as the likeliest outcome without hard evidence of survival [5] [4] [3].
4. Empirical experiments and popular reconstructions: plausibility vs. proof
Practical tests such as the MythBusters reconstruction and subsequent recreations have shown a raincoat raft can stay afloat and that a skilled crew might reach shore under favourable conditions; these experiments support the Delft conclusion that survival was possible with “adequate preparation and favorable tidal conditions.” But experiments demonstrate plausibility, not documentary proof that the three men actually survived [6] [2].
5. Official investigations, uncertainty, and why institutions lean toward drowning
The FBI conducted a long investigation and ultimately closed the file concluding the men most likely drowned; the National Park Service and historical encyclopedias likewise treat the case as unresolved but favor drowning in the absence of credible sightings or bodies. That institutional stance reflects both the physical hazards documented by modeling and the lack of corroborating post‑escape evidence deemed convincing by investigators [3] [4] [7].
6. Competing narratives: family claims, letters and continued speculation
Family members, alleged letters and some later photos or purported sightings have been advanced to argue the men survived and lived under new identities, and proponents point to modeling and reconstructions to say survival was feasible. Major reference works and law enforcement treat those claims as unproven; handwriting analyses and anonymous letters have been inconclusive, and the FBI closed its active case in 1979 for lack of definitive proof [8] [9] [7].
7. Bottom line for the November-1962 style question you asked (contextual caveat)
Available sources focus on the June 1962 escape and simulations built from that night’s tidal records; they show that timing of tides and currents — plus exposure to cold water — were decisive variables that could make survival either plausible (if launched during a narrow favorable window and well prepared) or highly unlikely (if launched at the wrong tidal phase), and official bodies continue to regard drowning as the most probable fate absent hard evidence of survival [1] [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention a separate November 1962 event in connection with the Alcatraz escape question (not found in current reporting).