Titanic's Tragic Sister

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:20 pm

If anyone's interested, there's a program on The History Channel at 10 Eastern called Titanic's Tragic Sister. The subject is Britannic, which sank in 1916.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:01 pm

I had the chance to purchase the book below, the 1898 1st edition, many years ago at a very reasonable fee, but I passed. I was always fascinated by the coincidence.

http://www.nashvillewebreview.com/autom ... /titan.htm

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:02 am

I'm watching it right now!
I also saw the Titanic Achilles Heel tonight- it was too long!

twinsrwe · Post by **twinsrwe** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:40 am

Thanks, for the heads up, Doug. I tuned into the History Channel right after reading your post and caught it from the beginning. I also saw the Titanic Achilles Heel. Excellent.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:11 am

Missed it. I was watching 'The Simpsons'.

I hope I catch it on a rerun.

It's too bad you didn't get that book, mb. My husband taught me something long ago - if you want something and it's available, just get it because it may not be there later on. We've bypassed too many things that turned out to be one-of-a-kinders.

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:43 am

I just cannot believe the absolute stupidity of having only 20 lifeboats aboard that ship! How many people could be fit into one boat? It's unfathomable that people intelligent enough to design and construct something like that could be so remiss not to include enough boats. Even if they didn't think it could sink, there could be a milion other things that could have gone wrong which would require boats to get away from the ship, like an explosion or something.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:00 pm

I watched both shows. It's almost criminal how commercial television has become - and I mean that both figuratively and literally. In roughly three hours of programming broadcast on the History Channel last night, 50+ minutes were commercials!

I was hoping for more from the Britannic program myself. What meat there was on that bone was fine, but it seemed like there should have been more!

I know what you mean too about the lack of contingency planning too Angel, but that's the way things were. Partly, they simply could not allow themselves to envision (or properly prepare for) a situation of extreme disaster.

If I understood correctly, the number of lifeboats was determined by regulations dating from the 1880s, X number of boats per 10,000 gross tons. Titanic was over four and one half times that tonnage. The safety reg's didn't catch up until afterward.

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:55 pm

How many people would those boats safely allow?

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:03 pm

Umm... Shelley would know this.

But if I recall correctly, each of the boats aboard Titanic was designed to safely hold between 60 and 65 people. At 65 per lifeboat, 60% or so of the total passengers and crew - she carried something near to 2,200 on that maiden voyage if I remember right - might have been saved. Better than the 700+ who did survive, but still not enough.

Somewhere I could swear I've seen - on one of the documentaries probably - a photograph that actually showed how many people could be stuffed safely into one of Titanic's lifeboats.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:26 pm

I think I have seen both of these shows in the past, if they are the same ones I'm thinking of. I do remember a truck load of commercials and when they come back with the show they repeat what they just showed then broke for another commercial. Bugs me!

I can't help but think about those poor helpless people getting sucked into that propeller...

-1bigsteve )o;

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:58 pm

Since it's a new season for TV, I thought they were new shows.
The Britannic was better than the Achilles Heel, I thought. At least it was adventurous.
They were both 2x longer than they needed to be.

They said the Titanic was considered its own lifeboat. They believed that. Doug-Oh's right that they said they were OK under the contemporary regulations.

[edit for spelling!]

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:26 pm

I think the British Board of Trade changed the rules to make sure liners had room for every single passenger - after the Titanic sunk.

I don't recognize the description of the Titanic show. I think there was one on the Britannic - I don't know if it's this same one or not because I missed it when it was on before, too.

One of the last survivors, I think it was Eva Hart, said her mother used to stay up all night clothed on the Titanic. Her mother did not like them saying it was unsinkable and " God Himself could not sink the Titanic". Her mother said it was flying in the face of God.

I dunno, but it seems when someone says something like that, something happens. Over-confidence - or more confidence in Man than God - not a good thing.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:57 pm

Well, it was explained more scientifically than that- but whatever it was, it was obviously a disaster!

The program showed how innovative the design was and then compared the innovations to other tragic mistakes that killed a lot of people when a new design was put to the test with humans on board. They named a new plane design that happened to and the wartime innovation of welding ships rather than riveting them. These resulted in disasters from which the designers learned a lot.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:20 am

Square windows are not a good idea in airplaines. Who'd have thought?

The explanation they gave though makes perfect sense from an engineering POV.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:15 pm

You got 50 minutes of commercials in 3 hours of the History channel viewing?!

I knew it was bad, but I am surprised that it's that much.

Court TV is my main commercial irritant right now. They never used to break with someone on the stand. Now they are breaking every few minutes, it seems, and most of the commercials are just ads for their own channel's shows.

And they quit broadcasting a trial at 4 pm EST to run their own channel's programs. They say we can watch the rest on their website. They always kept it live until the testimony was done for the day. And a lot of times they'd re-run the daytime testimony at night. I'm disgusted with it.

Where I'm staying now does not have court tv, and I didn't even care! Now that's withdrawal!

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:40 pm

Well, The tragedy of the Titanic falls in the hands of one man , although you can make a case with Capt Smith since he listened to him.

MR.BRUCE ISMAY

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:31 pm

Angel @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:43 am wrote:I just cannot believe the absolute stupidity of having only 20 lifeboats aboard that ship! How many people could be fit into one boat? It's unfathomable that people intelligent enough to design and construct something like that could be so remiss not to include enough boats. Even if they didn't think it could sink, there could be a milion other things that could have gone wrong which would require boats to get away from the ship, like an explosion or something.

So true, Angel. Some people are just not too bright. Building water-tight bulkheads that only go up part way is like wearing a bullet-proof vest on only one side of your body. Having half as many lifeboats on board is about the dumbest thing I ever heard of. What are the other half of the passengers going to do? Stay behind and wave good-bye? Dog paddle?

I have a book on man's engineering mistakes and blunders called, "To Engineer Is Human." I should read it. I need a good laugh.

-1bigsteve (o:

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:52 am

The saddest documentary I ever saw on the lifeboat question was called A Question of Murder. The Wellin davit could accommodate many more lifeboats and the original number proposed was 64 proposed by Axel Wellin himself. 8 port and 8 starboard davits, 4 at each davit. What they ended up with was 16 , 1 in each davit and 4 Englehardt collapsibles. The British board of Trade had not updated their requirements as the liners grew larger. Titanic was carrying lifeboats based on outdated regulations -ships over 10,000 tons had to carry what Titanic carried. The thing was, Titanic was over 46,000 gross tons! Murder- well, YES- if you want a killer, it was the British Board of Trade. Titanic had a double hull but her watertight bulkheads only went part way up the ship . Picture a row of 16 teacups and you can see how each compartment filled up, then spilled into another. Too many adjacent compartments were open to the sea and the ship didn't have a prayer when the bow started to go down. You may have heard about a ship called the Explorer which sank after hitting a berg this past weekend.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:38 am

I did see and hear about the Explorer sinking a few days back, and the first thing that came to mind was this question: What manner of village boob would dare take a passenger ship that near to an ice field? Now I'll grant you, they were apparently trying to follow in Shackleton's footsteps but... Know what I mean? Mercifully, the Explorer took about 12 hours to go under. The live shots reminded me a lot of film I've seen of the Andrea Dorea/Stockholm collision in 1956.

That's exactly right though - the "guilt" of Titanic lies first and foremost with the British Board of Trade, the keepers of the lifeboat regulations. Smith was at the helm, Ismay very likely not far behind - but it was the BoT that made and enforced the rules.

Of all the tragic vignettes I've ever heard described, the one that strikes the hardest blow from an engineering standpoint is the fate of Thomas Andrews, the man who probably knew as well as anyone aboard every inch of Titanic. I've often wondered what he might have told the "Smith Committee" and the Wreck Commissioner's Court had he survived.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am

I guess the board thought the deck would be to cluttered w/ life boats for an "unsinkable ship". Their ignorance played a major part in the amount of lost lives.
But Mr. Ismay had to be the toast of the town by getting in earlier
than scheduled and make "headlines". He put the pressure on Smith to speed the ship up. Hence , they couldn't port arounfd the ice berg in time.

Ismay was right. Capt Smith did "retire with a bang"

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am

Yes, it was a shame poor Tommy was not saved. He took a sounding of the ship immediately after collision and would have been an expert witness. He is greatly loved in Ireland, especially in his home town. Every school child knows his name. I once saw his drafting tools when the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum had a Mystic exhibition on Titanic. One sort of chokes up seeing these- sort of like seeing Wallace Hartley's violin.

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:36 am

Yes, deck space was money. Rather have recreation room than lifeboats. The ship was thought to be "her own lifeboat" anyway with the hydraulic watertight doors and bulkheads and double hull. Her design was very faulty and the transverse bulkheads were not much help. The British Admiralty helped finance Cunard's twin sisters Lusitania and Mauretania, with the view to the two ships being able to serve as warships if needed. These ships were faster than Titanic and had longitudinal bunkers and many more of them as befits a warship. Ismay became a nerve case after the inquiries and turned into a recluse at his mansion in Ireland. Actually Titanic could not have "gotten in earlier" as tides and tugs were on a schedule, so it would have been pointless. I think Ismay wanted to beat Olympic's maiden voyage for sheer publicity purposes. White Star never built speed ships- they built big luxury ones for the carriage trade!

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:17 am

What did the Titanic's owners end up paying in damages as opposed to the cost of providing enough lifeboats? It may have literally been a calculated risk. Too many lifeboats on an "unsinkable" ship may have implied a lack of confidence in the ship's invincibility, which might impact ticket sales.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:18 pm

It's a shame that Mr. Andrews and Capt Smith's bodies were never found!
I hope they have big monuments to honor them at their family plots.
Thomas was inside the ship at the time of the sinking, so he must have went all the way down w/ the ship. Capt Smith was probably in his quarters or on the bridge.

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Last time Tom Andrews was seen was in the smoking room in front of the fireplace mantel. Some say they saw Smith in the water holding up a baby, on the bridge, swimming in the ocean turning aside an offer in a boat, standing on the decks saying "Be British"etc etc. More legends and myths than the Lizzie Borden tale!
Oh White Star had to pay off, after the British Inquiry, but it was pennies on the dollar. I admire Michigan's Senator Alden Smith who ran the U.S. Inquiry. He acted fast before the crew and Ismay could boogie off back to England! Yes both men have glorious memorials. Smith's at Litchfield is amazing.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:20 pm

White Star also billed crewmembers’ families for “lost articles” too, didn’t they – things like band instruments, uniforms, etc?

Ironically, Bruce Ismay deserves at least a little credit as a mover and shaker as far as the inquiries are concerned, doesn’t he? If not for the interception of his wireless messages concerning the Titanic crew (in effect ‘get ‘em the hell outta Dodge and fast!’) Senator Smith wouldn’t have gotten valuable information in time. Ismay’s messages detailing arrangements were apparently signed “Yamsi”…

Bert Pitman's account (I think it's Pitman anyway) of "Lower Away" Ismay is - I think, anyway - darkly amusing. Pitman issued an order to lower away his boat. Ismay went flash into action, waving his arms and calling out "Lower away!" The officer in charge of lowering the boat apparently said something like "if you'll get the hell out of the way I'm doing just that! You want me to lower away quick? You'll have me drown the whole lot!"

Ismay, so the story goes, got the point.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:07 pm

Well I couldn't believe Ismay jumped in a lifeboat. He should have gone down w/ the ship. Afterall, if he didn't tell Smith to speed up there would not have been one of the biggest tragedies of the 20th century

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:43 pm

Ah, well, Ismay may have urged a good passage but Smith was the final authority. He directed the ship 12 miles further south in the shipping lanes than usual, hoping to keep the ice to his north. As far as Ismay- well he sort of got a bad rap. He looked down the deck- there were no women left to put in that boat. So he got in. Other men did , and at some boats men were allowed in when no women appeared. I must say, if ther was an empty place, no child or woman or elderly person was around to fill it, I would also have gotten in. Washington Dodge, First class got in a boat- and ended up a suicide later on-Billy Carter suffered the stigma as well. Smith, who went down with his ship went on to become a hero, even though he was imprudent to be steaming so fast in a dangerous area. Most damning was the failure of wireless men to bring those ice warnings right to the bridge and to the attention of those in charge immediately. The casualness of some of the staff amounted to , in my opinion, gross negligence-but if they died, we tend to immortalize them.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:40 pm

If we can consider all Ocean Liners "Sisters" when it comes to the lost of life the Titanic rates low compared to a couple of others.

During WWII in the Baltic Sea the German Ocean Liner WILHELM GUSTLOFF went down towards the last months of the war with 10,000 souls; sunk by a Russian sub. Over 9000 died. Though many were German soilders and their families, it also included elderly and children. The Russians were closing in and there was a mass exodus from Poland by Germans.

Around the same time the German Ocean Liner CAP ARCONA also suffered the same fate and was also sunk. Also being used as a military transport in the same evacuation, it contained many prisoners of war; about half it's population. It contained well over 7000 people. At the time Hitler was already dead.

Though a military operation, 16,000 to 17,000 souls went down between these two ocean liners.

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:38 pm

Dobson's Cruellest Night tells the heart-rending story of the Gustloff, which is indeed a story not known by many.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:51 pm

Such is war. Will we ever learn?

-1bigsteve )o:

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:54 pm

Well, if we enlarge things to take in warships we should remember the HMS Hood. Approximately 28 feet shorter than Titanic with 48,360 tons displacement fully loaded, she took some 1,415 men to the bottom on the 24th of May 1941, courtesy the Bismarck. That ranks as possibly the greatest proportional loss of life I would think. Exactly three members of Hood's crew survived the sinking.

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:32 am

Ships don't need to sink beneath the waves to produce a loss of life. On July 24, 1915 the excursion ship Eastland capsized in the Chicago River with 815 people lost. It turned 90 degrees with its port side resting on the river bottom and the starboard side high and dry. The ship was top heavy and had an inadequate ballast tank system which was used when loading passengers.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:49 am

Good grief - that's terrible. I was just reading a bit on the Chicago Public Library site about the Eastland. From the sound of things she was in trouble almost immediately after she cast off. The site and a link to more photos is at http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/tim ... tland.html

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:46 am

The Eastland was a terrible tragedy from overloading.. , she literally tipped over sideways with a huge loss of life. The boat had the problem once before but they did not learn from it. Yes, she practically sank at the dock. Titanic International Society ( of which I am a trustee) had a convention with the Eastland as a focus last May in Chicago. There are several good books on the subject. Here is the website for that convention (which my daughter designed).
http://titanicinternationalsociety.org/ ... index.html

Today is her 28th birthday and she is the baby- so I am feeling OLD!

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:40 pm

I watched a special on the history channel about the Titanic yesterday
and saw some pictures I have never seen before!! They found the body of Wallace Harltey when they went back to retrieve bodies and he had a huge funeral. Thousands of people where outside the church and they had
a pic of his casket being taken out of the church. That man is a hero!!

Don't like Charles Lighttoller. He was dancing around questions when
he was called in . I also found it interesting that they asked Mr. Ismay
why he didn't go down with the ship.

It was a very intriguing program and I was locked into it.

It didn't answer one of my question though. Does anyone know if
Lady Duff Gordon, her hubby or Mrs John Jacob Astor survived??

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:24 pm

That's a yes to all three. Both Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff lived on for many years afterward - the same with Madeline Astor. Strangely enough, young Mrs. Astor was apparently one day old on the 20th June 1893.

The Gordons survived into the 1930s; Sir Cosmo passed away April 20, 1931, Lady Duff Gordon passed away on April 20, 1935.

Madeline Astor died in 1940 at age 46.

Perhaps it was conscience (or some desire to right an old wrong) that drove Lightoller to it. But his own heroic day came during the evacuation at Dunquerque in 1940, when he put his launch Sundowner to work ferrying troops to safety.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:05 pm

That's almost too creepy. The Gordon died on the same date and just a few days after the anniversary of the Titanic going down