White Star and Titanic, What Could have Been

Status
Not open for further replies.

Md139115

Banned
AIUI, even had the lookouts had binoculars, the freaky conditions meant they'd never have seen the 'berg in time, even if Titanic had been going a lot slower.

Binoculars would not have made much a difference, slowing down might have, but it may also have adversely impacted manuverability.

More life boats would have made a difference. Properly training the crew on their use definitely would have made a difference. Attempting damage control could have made a difference. Actually responsibly managing the evacuation on the part of the senior officers would have been huge (it's borderline criminal that male first-class passengers had to take over in many cases in getting women and children to the boats).

I can go on. Almost all of this was in some way known prior to April 14, 1912, but none of it was internalized by the shipping industry or the governments until April 18, 1912.
 

SsgtC

Banned
Binoculars would not have made much a difference, slowing down might have, but it may also have adversely impacted manuverability.

More life boats would have made a difference. Properly training the crew on their use definitely would have made a difference. Attempting damage control could have made a difference. Actually responsibly managing the evacuation on the part of the senior officers would have been huge (it's borderline criminal that male first-class passengers had to take over in many cases in getting women and children to the boats).

I can go on. Almost all of this was in some way known prior to April 14, 1912, but none of it was internalized by the shipping industry or the governments until April 18, 1912.

Part of the "problem" was that this was a time period when men were simply expected to do the right thing. Such as ensuring that women and children were rescued first. So it only makes sense that the male passengers took over making sure their women and children were in the boats.

The other issues, as you said, were all known. But here, again, it was considered inconceivable that a large liner could sink before help could arrive. If anything, the biggest contributing factor to the Titanic disaster was hubris.
 
Actually, from what I understand, they didn't issue binoculars to lookouts at night due to them fogging up and stuff. They preferred they use their own eyes as it was much more likely they would see something sooner.
Under normal conditions, maybe (tho I don't believe it). In this case, AIUI, the binoculars were locked up, & even had they not been, the 'berg wouldn't have become visible until seconds before impact anyhow--at any speed much above a crawl.
 
Under normal conditions, maybe (tho I don't believe it). In this case, AIUI, the binoculars were locked up, & even had they not been, the 'berg wouldn't have become visible until seconds before impact anyhow--at any speed much above a crawl.
Very true, as the normal procedure to spot bergs at night was to look for the white waves (chop) caused by the swell along their waterline. On such a still night, there was no chop, which didn't help at all.
 
Binoculars would not have made much a difference, slowing down might have, but it may also have adversely impacted manuverability.

More life boats would have made a difference. Properly training the crew on their use definitely would have made a difference. Attempting damage control could have made a difference. Actually responsibly managing the evacuation on the part of the senior officers would have been huge (it's borderline criminal that male first-class passengers had to take over in many cases in getting women and children to the boats).

I can go on. Almost all of this was in some way known prior to April 14, 1912, but none of it was internalized by the shipping industry or the governments until April 18, 1912.

The order to 'full astern' also impacted manoeuvrability as the centre screw did not work in reverse, which robbed the ship of water flow over the rudder.

The thing about damage control- we don't really know what they tried, or what worked if they did.

More life boats would not have made a difference unless they had starting filling them sooner. They didn't have time to launch the ones they had. A faster start would have helped. Officers being fully briefed on the davits would have been invaluable.

A boat drill would certainly have helped with letting people know where they are supposed to be- but the 'men' helping the ladies/children to boats would have been social more of the time. However a boat drill may have also helped with the number of people in each boat since they knew which boat to turn up to.

I still wonder what might have happened if the Marconi set had not broken down on Titanic, and thus Phillips and Bride were not behind on passenger traffic, thus ensuring all the ice warnings made the Bridge. Esp if Californian had referenced their aborted message as 'for the Masters eyes' meaning it had to goto Captain Smith.
 
Last edited:

SsgtC

Banned
The order to 'full astern' also impacted manoeuvrability as the centre screw did not work in reverse, which robbed the ship of water flow over the rudder.

This one is debatable. As it's not really known whether the engineering crew actually had time to stop the shafts or not. Titanic hit the berg less than a minute after sighting it. While they likely had time to close the steam valves, it's highly doubtful they had stopped the shafts before she hit.
The thing about damage control- we don't really know what they tried, or what worked if they did.
Technically true. We don't know what they did or did not do. However, none of the surviving officers or crew mentioned any efforts at damage control beyond closing the watertight doors and keeping the pumps running. There's also evidence that several hatches were left open (particularly the forepeak hatch and the gangway door on D Deck) were left open, increasing the pace of flooding.
More lift boats would not have made a difference unless they had starting filling them sooner. They didn't have time to launch the ones they had. A faster start would have helped. Officers being fully briefed on the davits would have been invaluable.

A boat drill would certainly have helped with letting people know where they are supposed to be- but the 'men' helping the ladies/children to boats would have been social more of the time. However a boat drill may have also helped with the number of people in each boat since they knew which boat to turn up to.
They did launch the boats. All but collapsible D (include B if you count her being allowed to float off the deck). The issue wasn't the davits. The issue was really two fold. One being the officers were concerned that the boats would collapse if filled to capacity. They were unaware that the boats had already been tested before leaving Belfast. The other issue was interpreting "women and children first" as "women and children only." That caused a number of boats to be launched when there were no more women or children visible in the area.

As far as boat drill, yes it would have been invaluable. However, there are key differences between boat drill in 1912 and boat drill in 2017. Today, boat drill is to show every passenger their assigned lifeboat and where to go in an emergency. In 1912, it was primarily used to show the CREW where to muster in an emergency and to go over emergency procedures. Passengers were given general muster areas, where they were expected to basically keep out of the way and await instructions from the crew. They were not signed to boats as they are today.
I still wonder what might have happened if the Marconi set had not broken down on Titanic, and thus Phillips and Bride were not behind on passenger traffic, thus ensuring all the ice warnings made the Bridge. Esp if Californian had referenced their aborted message as 'for the Masters eyes' meaning it had to goto Captain Smith.
That wouldn't have made a huge difference. Maybe a few more I've warnings are posted to the bridge. As for Californian's message, I seriously doubt addressing it directly to Captain Smith would have made a difference. Phillips was tired, overworked, with a mountain of messages to send and receive. As soon as Californian cut in, Phillips exploded.
 

Md139115

Banned
As far as boat drill, yes it would have been invaluable. However, there are key differences between boat drill in 1912 and boat drill in 2017. Today, boat drill is to show every passenger their assigned lifeboat and where to go in an emergency. In 1912, it was primarily used to show the CREW where to muster in an emergency and to go over emergency procedures. Passengers were given general muster areas, where they were expected to basically keep out of the way and await instructions from the crew. They were not signed to boats as they are today.

Agreed, but aside from the one small drill held in Southampton with lifeboat 14, not even that was really done.

The crew may not have abandoned ship and left the passengers behind, but their performance was... inconsistent bordering on anarchy, to say the least.

By the way, if anyone here has not yet read it, I highly recommend reading Colonel Archibald Gracie's account of the sinking. In my opinion, it is possibly the best survivors account of the whole disaster.
 
Agreed, but aside from the one small drill held in Southampton with lifeboat 14, not even that was really done.

The crew may not have abandoned ship and left the passengers behind, but their performance was... inconsistent bordering on anarchy, to say the least.

By the way, if anyone here has not yet read it, I highly recommend reading Colonel Archibald Gracie's account of the sinking. In my opinion, it is possibly the best survivors account of the whole disaster.
I have a book on Titanic's sinking published in 1912, with many accounts from survivors
 
I read that another way the ship could have been saved was to have kept the watertight doors open, thus preventing water from flowing into the anchor holes and the vent pipes on the forecastle and speeding up the flooding due to the bow submerging first. This would also have allowed the stern pumps to be used as well. The book said the ship could have stayed afloat for 8-9 hours just by keeping the doors open. It's possible with the stern pumps in use also, the ship may not have sunk at all.
 
I read that another way the ship could have been saved was to have kept the watertight doors open, thus preventing water from flowing into the anchor holes and the vent pipes on the forecastle and speeding up the flooding due to the bow submerging first. This would also have allowed the stern pumps to be used as well. The book said the ship could have stayed afloat for 8-9 hours just by keeping the doors open. It's possible with the stern pumps in use also, the ship may not have sunk at all.
No, that would have been worse then useless. Firstly the watertight doors would have shut automatically when the water reached them and secondly even if they could have kept the doors open she would have lost power an hour after the collision and would have rolled over and sank within an hour and a half.
 
I read that another way the ship could have been saved was to have kept the watertight doors open, thus preventing water from flowing into the anchor holes and the vent pipes on the forecastle and speeding up the flooding due to the bow submerging first. This would also have allowed the stern pumps to be used as well. The book said the ship could have stayed afloat for 8-9 hours just by keeping the doors open. It's possible with the stern pumps in use also, the ship may not have sunk at all.
Yeah they did a computer simulation looking at various things like keeping watertight doors open & running pumps fwd. I can't remember what documentary that was, but if I recall correctly the outcome was something like 5 to 10 minutes more in the best case. In one case she did capsize within 30 minutes of the collision (Damage on one side, took on a list, rolled that way). The advantage of keeping the watertight doors shut is that it evens the flooding out so she settles on an even keel, rather than to one side - Which was the RMS Lusatina and HMHS Britannic's problems.
 

SsgtC

Banned
I read that another way the ship could have been saved was to have kept the watertight doors open, thus preventing water from flowing into the anchor holes and the vent pipes on the forecastle and speeding up the flooding due to the bow submerging first. This would also have allowed the stern pumps to be used as well. The book said the ship could have stayed afloat for 8-9 hours just by keeping the doors open. It's possible with the stern pumps in use also, the ship may not have sunk at all.

Whoever wrote that doesn't have a clue what they're taking about. Keeping the watertight doors open would have resulted in the ship losing power very quickly. As the boiler and engine rooms would have flooded faster. Meaning no radio and no pumps. As for using the stern pumps, they already were. All of the bilge and ballast pumps were tied into the main bilge pipe. Even then, Titanic had a total pumping capacity of only 1,700 tons per hour. That's not nearly enough to counteract the flooding. She was taking on water at a faster rate than she could pump it out
 

SsgtC

Banned
The stern pumps couldn't have been used. The stern was rising up out of the water, meaning it was dry until the ship broke in two. And early on, the flooding would not have reached the aft part of the hold due the closed doors.






the stern pumps

Again, ALL of Titanic's pumps were tied into the main bilge pipe which ran the length of the ship. Meaning any pump, in any part of the ship could be used to dewater any other part of the ship.
 
I read that another way the ship could have been saved was to have kept the watertight doors open, thus preventing water from flowing into the anchor holes and the vent pipes on the forecastle and speeding up the flooding due to the bow submerging first. This would also have allowed the stern pumps to be used as well. The book said the ship could have stayed afloat for 8-9 hours just by keeping the doors open. It's possible with the stern pumps in use also, the ship may not have sunk at all.
This is a laughable proposal.
Do you have a link for this?
 
Again, ALL of Titanic's pumps were tied into the main bilge pipe which ran the length of the ship. Meaning any pump, in any part of the ship could be used to dewater any other part of the ship.

I didn't get that part at first. I reread it and deleted my post a minute after I posted it, but too late.:)
 
Is the nuclear option available to civil organisations? A few civvy ships have had nuclear propulsion, but never with great success. Could British enterprise solve the problem? NS Titan, NS Goliath, NS Leviathan... God Save the Queen.
 

SsgtC

Banned
Is the nuclear option available to civil organisations? A few civvy ships have had nuclear propulsion, but never with great success. Could British enterprise solve the problem? NS Titan, NS Goliath, NS Leviathan... God Save the Queen.

Realistically, no. Nuclear power is behind ITTL. And even if it wasn't, it's not economically viable. Look up the costs for the NS Savannah. The cost for the reactor alone was almost as much as the rest of the ship.
 
Realistically, no. Nuclear power is behind ITTL. And even if it wasn't, it's not economically viable. Look up the costs for the NS Savannah. The cost for the reactor alone was almost as much as the rest of the ship.
Aww, I thought there was an update.
Sob
 
Realistically, no. Nuclear power is behind ITTL. And even if it wasn't, it's not economically viable. Look up the costs for the NS Savannah. The cost for the reactor alone was almost as much as the rest of the ship.

Shame, I deeply dislike our (British) current (reality) position of being chained so firmly to the rock like Prometheus for a supply of oil, while the American and Arabian eagles plunge in for their daily supply of liver. Some way of reducing oil consumption to levels supply-able without recourse to such friends (who needs enemies?).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top