Thomas Krom
Member
It is more of a personal experience, I'll explain it to you in the private messages.
Alfred Nichols
- Thread starter Nola Yarney
- Start date
-
- Tags
- alfred nichols
Arun Vajpey
Member
I hope Thomas does not mind me copying his image from Post #98 of this thread to illustrate a point.
As I mentioned earlier (and copied the excerpt in an earlier post), another member had pointed out that once opened, the port side gangway door would have been very difficult to close again, especially if the port list had just started. Thomas' picture above shows that to some extent; the heavy, outward-opening door appears as though it would have been difficult to close again from the inside even if there had been no list. But if the port list had just started, it might not have been possible to close it at all even if Nichols wanted that done.
Since it is now known that it is the D-deck gangway door on the port side that is open on the wreck, the question arises if there was already an imperceptible port list when Nichols and his men opened it and if so, what time it was then. IF Lightoller gave the order during the loading of Lifeboat #6, it would have taken Nichols a few minutes to gather his men and go below. Lightoller at first alluded to the E-deck door in his testimony but later said that it was a "general" order without specifying any particular gangway door he wanted opened. Assuming that I am reading the information supplied by Thomas correctly, there is no evidence that Nichols even tried to open the E-deck door, probably because it was too close to the sea by the time they got there. If they then went to the D-deck door (the one in the above picture), released the safety grill and opened the door itself, it must have been around 01:20am at least. I believe so because Thomas pointed out that Lifeboat #6 would have descended right past that door at around 01:10am and no one in the boat - Hichens, Peuchen, Molly Brown, Helen Candee to name a few - noticed that it was open at that time. Also, at the time the ship probably had come back from its earlier starboard list and was on an even keel; some 10 to 12 minutes later there might have been a very early and slight port list, barely noticeable to Nichols and his men but enough to make re-closing of the gangway door from the inside almost impossible.
As I mentioned earlier (and copied the excerpt in an earlier post), another member had pointed out that once opened, the port side gangway door would have been very difficult to close again, especially if the port list had just started. Thomas' picture above shows that to some extent; the heavy, outward-opening door appears as though it would have been difficult to close again from the inside even if there had been no list. But if the port list had just started, it might not have been possible to close it at all even if Nichols wanted that done.
Since it is now known that it is the D-deck gangway door on the port side that is open on the wreck, the question arises if there was already an imperceptible port list when Nichols and his men opened it and if so, what time it was then. IF Lightoller gave the order during the loading of Lifeboat #6, it would have taken Nichols a few minutes to gather his men and go below. Lightoller at first alluded to the E-deck door in his testimony but later said that it was a "general" order without specifying any particular gangway door he wanted opened. Assuming that I am reading the information supplied by Thomas correctly, there is no evidence that Nichols even tried to open the E-deck door, probably because it was too close to the sea by the time they got there. If they then went to the D-deck door (the one in the above picture), released the safety grill and opened the door itself, it must have been around 01:20am at least. I believe so because Thomas pointed out that Lifeboat #6 would have descended right past that door at around 01:10am and no one in the boat - Hichens, Peuchen, Molly Brown, Helen Candee to name a few - noticed that it was open at that time. Also, at the time the ship probably had come back from its earlier starboard list and was on an even keel; some 10 to 12 minutes later there might have been a very early and slight port list, barely noticeable to Nichols and his men but enough to make re-closing of the gangway door from the inside almost impossible.
Last edited:
Julian Atkins
Member
Would it be possible for Thomas or else someone else to explain in simple terms exactly where this open D deck gangway door is located, and what parts of the ship might have had access to it please?
Do gangway doors have locks on them? Or is it simply heaving up or down a few levers (which might have been a bit stiff on a new ship etc). Would you need a key to open a lock to release the door closing levers?
Was there a locked grill gate inside? (The sort of gate I recall many years ago at the platforms of Victoria, Waterloo, and Brighton railway stations).
Could a group of passengers have opened the D deck gangway door?
How forward is this open gangway door on the wreck, and at what sort of timing would it have been at sea level as the ship was sinking?
And as an aside, how would all this fit in with the various sinking characteristics and especially those in the Centennial Reappraisal book?
Is there a possibility of metallurgical failure of a 'new' ship with a faulty of badly made D deck gangway door?
Just sort of thinking aload and trying to keep an open mind on all this.
Do gangway doors have locks on them? Or is it simply heaving up or down a few levers (which might have been a bit stiff on a new ship etc). Would you need a key to open a lock to release the door closing levers?
Was there a locked grill gate inside? (The sort of gate I recall many years ago at the platforms of Victoria, Waterloo, and Brighton railway stations).
Could a group of passengers have opened the D deck gangway door?
How forward is this open gangway door on the wreck, and at what sort of timing would it have been at sea level as the ship was sinking?
And as an aside, how would all this fit in with the various sinking characteristics and especially those in the Centennial Reappraisal book?
Is there a possibility of metallurgical failure of a 'new' ship with a faulty of badly made D deck gangway door?
Just sort of thinking aload and trying to keep an open mind on all this.
Julian Atkins
Member
(Apologies, my knowledge of the deck plans and layout of Titanic is not something I have studied in any great detail).
Thomas Krom
Member
First it's location on the port side of the ship:
It was located between the number one and number two funnel of the Titanic on D-deck, right below lifeboat number 6.
And now for the route. The shortest route of them would have been to take the forward Louis XIV staircase all the way down to D-deck, walk forward to the port side boarding entrance and there you would find both gangway doors.
Since the door itself was brought up you can see that there were locks around the door, only three on the right as seen from the inside survived. The gates in front of the gates don't appear to have a lock built in them, but I can make out that they potentially had a lock with chain around them based on a formation of rusticles.
Yes, it was on the inside of the ship as the picture here shows (this is on the starboard side):
A render by Parks Stephenson even shows it better perhaps.
If the gates were locked by a lock and chain it would have been impossible to open the gate in front of it to expose the mechanism
About 290 feet from the very bow of the ship and it is believed by some the water would have reached this gangway at about 1:20.
While I am not too certain about it being the main influence, it is believed to be around the same time the ship increasingly started to list to the port side.
All the other gangway doors, identical in terms of design, remain closed. Not to mention the gate is folded wide open in front of the gate, it has even been used as access point for ROV's in 2001. All the other doors remained, and remain to this day, in the closed position
I hope this might answers your question Julian.
Don't worry about it, as a visual researcher I always love to explain the interior of the ship in detail.
Kind regards,
Thomas
Attachments
Arun Vajpey
Member
Thomas, I am really impressed with your knowledge of the ship's interior. Based on that, I have a question related to this thread; it involves a bit of basic physics as well and so I would appreciate opinions from other members too, please.
From its condition on the wreck, I have understood that it is now fairly certain that Nichols and his men opened the port side D-deck gangway door at some stage during the sinking and for some reason did not close it again. It could have been because Nichols was simply following the order that he was given by Lightoller to the letter, but my personal opinion (and that only) after reading Nichols' bio is that he was a very experienced and responsible sailor and the only reason that he did not get his men to close that door again was because they were unable to do so. If that was the case, Nichols is very likely to have reported about that to Captain Smith and/or Chief Officer Wilde but since none of those three gentlemen survived, we can never know for certain. I would like to know what others think of that possibility.
Taking that eventuality further, IF the Titanic had just started its port list at the time (say, less than 2 degrees), would that have been enough to prevent that heavy, outward-opening gangway door to be closed again from the inside of the ship IF Nichols decided to do that?
Julian Atkins
Member
Thank you Thomas. Very helpful.
I don't think that we should jump to conclusions about this open gangway door on D deck. Given Thomas's view that the sea would have reached this gangway door around 1.20am, and the timing of lifeboat 6 being lowered (passing it on it's way down), and that a lot is known about lifeboat 6, and what we can gather of the ship listing, there are lots of questions that are unanswered I would suggest.
My initial uneducated thoughts are that lifeboat 6 might have made contact with this open gangway door, and no one comments about this. Furthermore, if it was open, it does not fit with the sinking behaviour in the Centennial Reappraisal book. If Thomas's timing is correct this would indicate the sea rushing into an open D deck gangway door of an area greater than the iceberg damage.
I don't think that we should jump to conclusions about this open gangway door on D deck. Given Thomas's view that the sea would have reached this gangway door around 1.20am, and the timing of lifeboat 6 being lowered (passing it on it's way down), and that a lot is known about lifeboat 6, and what we can gather of the ship listing, there are lots of questions that are unanswered I would suggest.
My initial uneducated thoughts are that lifeboat 6 might have made contact with this open gangway door, and no one comments about this. Furthermore, if it was open, it does not fit with the sinking behaviour in the Centennial Reappraisal book. If Thomas's timing is correct this would indicate the sea rushing into an open D deck gangway door of an area greater than the iceberg damage.
Samuel Halpern
Member
Nichols was busy over on the forward starboard side of the ship well before any of the port side boats were lowered. If he was sent down to do that choir it had to be about the time #4 was let down to A deck by Lightoller, or shortly after. And at that time the ship was still carrying a very noticeable list to starboard. When boat #6 was being lowered, the ship still carried a list to starboard and boat #6 had to be pushed off the side a bit as it was lowered down (see Hichens). By the way, when boat #8 was being lowered no such pushing off was needed according to Crawford, which also supports #8 being lowered after #6. (In fact, Crawford thought she might have been carrying a slight list to port when #8 was lowered; agreeing to a suggestion by the wreck commissioner.)
As far as what some passengers had to say, Molly Brown for one was notorious with embellishing her stories. The recently revised W-F-B lifeboat article tells a story by Margaret Brown where she claims that water was gushing out of a D deck porthole as her boat (#6) was being lowered. The authors, who I know very well, should have realized that that story was pure nonsense, but they tried to link it to Barrett's seeing water on E deck when he vacated boiler room No. 5, by first claiming the Molly must have meant E deck, not D deck, and then saying that Barrett said he came out of the escape at 1:10am (despite Barrett's admission that it was only a guess since he never carried a watch). This was done to somehow tie Barrett's 1:10am to the same launch time they put down for #6 in their launch sequence, therefore trying to prove their timing was right.
I hope I don't have to explain why Molly's story is pure nonsense.
Samuel Halpern
Member
At the time they were sent down to open the gangway door(s) the ship was carrying a list to starboard, and as boat #6 was being lowered, according Hichens, it was still carrying a list to starboard. This would have kept the swing door closed, but not locked, unless it was fully swung out when it was opened. Not all that easy to do against a starboard list.
Samuel Halpern
Member
Why do I bring this up again? Searching for something else, I ran into this little bit of testimony from steward Hardy:
"Mr. HARDY. ... We got clear of the ship and rowed out some little distance from her, and finally we all got together, about seven boats of us, and I remember quite distinctly Boatswain Lowe telling us to tie up to each other, as we would be better seen and could keep better together. Then Officer Lowe, having a full complement of passengers in his boat, distributed among us what he had, our boat taking 10. We had 25 already, and that number made 35..."
Johnstone was not the only one to wrongly use the term "boatswaine."
Arun Vajpey
Member
Nichols was certainly busy on the forward starboard side of the ship. lookout Symons saw (and named) him working with the loading of Lifeboat #3 (lowered at 12:55am) and then again with Lifeboat #1, but IMO Nichols left the vicinity of Lifeboat #1 just before it was lowered at 01:05am. But those witnessed activities of the boatswain mean that he was on the starboard side forward in the 12:50am to almost 01:05am timeframe. Since you have said Sam that none of the port side lifeboats were lowered yet (above quote), it follows Lifeboat #6 was also waiting to be lowered when Nichols arrived at about 01:05am
From an excerpt on p192 of the softcover copy of OASOG, Lightoller lowered Lifeboat #4 to the A-deck for loading from there at about 12:40am. It would have taken a few minutes for him to realize his error (as even he admitted himself), decide to abandon Lifeboat #4 for the time being, order those windows unlocked and opened and return to the boat deck to start work on Lifeboat #6. Lightoller himself confirmed this:
13906. (The Solicitor-General.) Yes. (To the witness.) Can you help us when it was that you gave this order to the boatswain? I mean, can you give it us by reference to boats. Was it before you had lowered No. 4 to the a deck or after?
- I think it was after and whilst I was working at No. 6 boat.
If Lightoller gave Nichols the gangway door order while he was working on Lifeboat #6, it can only be after Nicholas arrived on the port side of the forward boat deck after he left starboard Lifeboat #1 with Murdoch and Lowe and crossed over. Since it would have been 01:05am or very close to it when Nichols arrived at the still unlaunched Lifeboat #6, worked for a couple of minutes with Lightoller before receiving the order to open the gangway door and leaving the boat deck. It was then that Lightoller completed the loading of and lowered Lifeboat #6 and so a launch time of 01:10 am does seem about right.
As for the ship's list perceived by Crawford and others, they are subject to significant perceptive bias. If a a lifeboat's Welin Davits had not been cranked back far enough, the boat could well rub against the ship's side on its way down even if there was no list. I don't think that the report that Lifeboat #8 had no lowering issues while Lifeboat #6 had to be manhandled to avoid scraping against the side of the ship can be used to decide that there was a residual starboard list when Lifeboat #6 lowered. It also means that the perception of the list cannot be used a yardstick to decide which lifeboat was lowered first.
Well, Lightoller does not appear to agree with Hichens on that and speaks of a slight port list when he tried to lower Lifeboat #6.
13863. That is what happened?
- Yes.
13864. Then turning your attention to No. 6 you then noticed the ship had got a list?
- Yes, I think it was No. 6.
13865. (The Commissioner.) And it was a list to port?
- Yes.
13866. Did you ever notice a list to starboard?
- No.
13867. Was there a list to starboard?
- Not that I am aware of, and I think I should have noticed it in lowering the boat
.
I agree wholeheartedly to that opinion and frankly, unless something she said tallied with statements of a few others and is circumstantially plausible, I ignore it. That said, I mentioned her name with a few other 'characters' in Lifeboat #6 because collectively they would certainly have noticed an open gangway door as their lifeboat was lowered.
Last edited:
Samuel Halpern
Member
What was written in OASOG was:
"Second Officer Lightoller moved on to Boat No. 6 to begin work on it.[74] He remembered that he was working on No. 6 about ‘three quarters of an hour’ after coming on deck, which places the efforts there at around 12:40–12:45 a.m."
Boat #4 was lowered to A deck before 12:40. By 12:40 Hichens was ordered to go to No. 6 and start loading it. Hichens said he found the boat already swung out and ready for loading. He said he worked there ay #6 for about 15 to 20 minutes before being sent away. That puts the launch time for No. 6 at 12:55 to 1:00am. Fleet agrees. He said his boat reached the water by about 1:00am.
What should be in bold in Lightoller's quote is:
"I think it was after and whilst I was working at No. 6 boat."
Like many other things, Lightoller was not too sure about his details, and he certainly was not consistent. You quoted him regarding a list to port while working on #6, ("Yes, I think it was No. 6."), yet weeks earlier, at the American inquiry:
Mr. LIGHTOLLER. When the ship was taking a heavy list - not a heavy list - but she was taking a list over to port, the order was called, I think, by the chief officer. "Everyone on the starboard side to straighten her up," which I repeated.
Senator SMITH. How long before you left the ship?
Mr. LIGHTOLLER. I could not say, sir.
Senator SMITH. About how long?
Mr. LIGHTOLLER. Half an hour or three quarters of an hour.
Senator SMITH. Before you left?
Mr. LIGHTOLLER. Yes.
Now that fits with the evidence we have from many others.
Arun Vajpey
Member
With respect Sam, I have to disagree with your line of reasoning on this because IMO it does not quite add-up. Please forgive me for saying so but you seem to be occasionally contradicting your own statements regarding Nichols' whereabouts in the 12:40 to 01:05am timeframe. With regard to Lightoller, I'll be the first one to agree with you that not only was he vague and sometimes inconsistent with his statements but also used a lot of "I can't say" or "I think so" type of statements on both sides of the "Pond". But having said that, he was at the end of the day the only surviving Senior Officer of the disaster and was asked more questions than any other survivor; we cannot dismiss everything he said but try to take it in the right perspective.
Getting back to Nichols, you said above that:
As far as evidence goes, the forward starboard lifeboats were lowered in the order #7 (12:40am), #5 (12:45 to 12:48am), #3 (12:55am) and #1 (01:05am). Some people argue that Lifeboat #7 was Nichols' "designated lifeboat"; I don't know it it was or was not, but he did not go in it anyway. Lookout George Symons clearly testified that he worked with Boatswain Nichols (identified the rank and named him) during the loading of Lifeboat #3 and then again Lifeboat #1 before leaving the ship in himself in the latter. I don't think we can dismiss arbitrarily Symons' statement and if we accept, it places Nichols in the general vicinity of the forward starboard lifeboats certainly in the 12:50am to almost 01:05am timeframe, very likely a little bit earlier. As you said yourself, he was busy with the starboard forward lifeboats before any of the port forward boats were lowered.
So, Lightoller left Lifeboat #4 on A-deck for the time being and got back to the boat deck and went to Lifeboat #6; even accepting your opinion that #6 was swung out and ready by then and Lightoller ordered Hichens to start loading it, we have:
Meanwhile, Lifeboat #8 was not encountering any of those issues and IMO was lowered to the sea by around 01:00 am as is generally believed. As I have admitted previously, it might have been slightly behind Lifeboat #6 in preparation and start of loading but I do believe that Lifeboat #8 at some point 'overtook' Lifeboat #6 and reached the sea first. That is supported by what we discussed in another thread recently where Lightoller's statements suggested that he had seen and/or be involved with another port side forward lifeboat that reached the water first and then Lifeboat #6 was loaded under "same order and same conditions".
Getting back to Nichols, Lightoller testified (sorry for requoting):
13906. (The Solicitor-General.) Yes. (To the witness.) Can you help us when it was that you gave this order to the boatswain? I mean, can you give it us by reference to boats. Was it before you had lowered No. 4 to the a deck or after?
- I think it was after and whilst I was working at No. 6 boat.
I don't think we can dismiss that entire statement simply because Lightoller used the word "think"; it was during Day 1 of an official testimony. So, if we go by your timelines, how could Nichols have been near Lightoller and Lifeboat #6 during its loading within the same timeframe as when he was busy with the starboard forward boats? Also, as already quoted above, Lightoller thought that the ship was starting to list to port just as Lifeboat #6 was being lowered; he mentioned it twice and also confirmed that he did not notice a starboard list at the time. That ties in with various delays that Lifeboat #6 experienced due to one reason or another.
Once again with the greatest respect Sam, we have to disagree on these issues for the time being at least.
Getting back to Nichols, you said above that:
That translates to a statement that Nichols was active with the forward starboard boats before Lifeboats #8 and #6 were lowered; I am not sure of you included the early "lowering" of Lifeboat #4 to the A-deck in that statement.
As far as evidence goes, the forward starboard lifeboats were lowered in the order #7 (12:40am), #5 (12:45 to 12:48am), #3 (12:55am) and #1 (01:05am). Some people argue that Lifeboat #7 was Nichols' "designated lifeboat"; I don't know it it was or was not, but he did not go in it anyway. Lookout George Symons clearly testified that he worked with Boatswain Nichols (identified the rank and named him) during the loading of Lifeboat #3 and then again Lifeboat #1 before leaving the ship in himself in the latter. I don't think we can dismiss arbitrarily Symons' statement and if we accept, it places Nichols in the general vicinity of the forward starboard lifeboats certainly in the 12:50am to almost 01:05am timeframe, very likely a little bit earlier. As you said yourself, he was busy with the starboard forward lifeboats before any of the port forward boats were lowered.
All right, when then do you think Lightoller did that? Also, Lightoller admitted on the first day of the US Inquiry that it was a mistake on his part; for him to have realized that, he must have gone down and seen the locked windows on the Promenade Deck and made arrangements for them to be unlocked. He admitted that: On lowering it down I found the windows were closed. So I sent some one down to open the windows and carried on with the other boats, but decided it was not worth while lowering them down, that I could manage just as well from the boat deck.
So, Lightoller left Lifeboat #4 on A-deck for the time being and got back to the boat deck and went to Lifeboat #6; even accepting your opinion that #6 was swung out and ready by then and Lightoller ordered Hichens to start loading it, we have:
One assumes by "being sent away" Hichens meant that he was ordered to get into and take charge of Lifeboat #6, which he certainly did. But he would have received that order before they started lowering Lifeboat #6 and realized the shortage of seamen on board. Then there is the admittedly unsubstantiated but oft quoted scenario of Bess Allison hysterically getting out of Lifeboat #6 with Loraine (mentioned by both Colonel Gracie and Major Peuchen) just as it was ready to be lowered. Finally, there was the attempted lowering of the boat, the realization that there were not enough men to row and Peuchen's "Grand Entry" down the falls. All that would have taken time and IMO there is no way Lifeboat #6 could have reached the water between 12:55 and 01:00am. As I said before, things do not add-up for it to have done so.
Meanwhile, Lifeboat #8 was not encountering any of those issues and IMO was lowered to the sea by around 01:00 am as is generally believed. As I have admitted previously, it might have been slightly behind Lifeboat #6 in preparation and start of loading but I do believe that Lifeboat #8 at some point 'overtook' Lifeboat #6 and reached the sea first. That is supported by what we discussed in another thread recently where Lightoller's statements suggested that he had seen and/or be involved with another port side forward lifeboat that reached the water first and then Lifeboat #6 was loaded under "same order and same conditions".
Getting back to Nichols, Lightoller testified (sorry for requoting):
13906. (The Solicitor-General.) Yes. (To the witness.) Can you help us when it was that you gave this order to the boatswain? I mean, can you give it us by reference to boats. Was it before you had lowered No. 4 to the a deck or after?
- I think it was after and whilst I was working at No. 6 boat.
I don't think we can dismiss that entire statement simply because Lightoller used the word "think"; it was during Day 1 of an official testimony. So, if we go by your timelines, how could Nichols have been near Lightoller and Lifeboat #6 during its loading within the same timeframe as when he was busy with the starboard forward boats? Also, as already quoted above, Lightoller thought that the ship was starting to list to port just as Lifeboat #6 was being lowered; he mentioned it twice and also confirmed that he did not notice a starboard list at the time. That ties in with various delays that Lifeboat #6 experienced due to one reason or another.
Once again with the greatest respect Sam, we have to disagree on these issues for the time being at least.
Samuel Halpern
Member
He wasn't. If Nichols received that order from Lightoller, IMO it was likely before Lightoller started loading it. It probably was sometime before the first boat #7 was lowered. Ask yourself, why would Nichols have told Hogg to get a Jacob's ladder? Hogg came down from the nest around 12:20 and started to uncover boats. Hogg was sent away by Murdoch in #7 around 12:40.
By the way, it seems 5/O Lowe was also told about Nichols and some of the deck crew being sent below to open gangway doors.
Mr. LOWE. You must remember, sir, in the first place that we had the full ship's crew on our hands then, at Southampton, when we manned those two boats, and we had the choice of the men; and in the second place, when this accident took place there was a crowd of men - which account for the shortness of sailors - a crowd of men went down with the boatswain to clear away the gangway doors in the hope that we should be able to find people down there when we had lowered the boats down.
Sen. Smith was grilling him about why he let male passengers into some of the boats he worked on instead of sailors. Now just when do you suppose Lowe would have been told about Nichols being sent down?
Julian Atkins
Member
I am trying to keep an open mind on this and dealing with the obvious common sense of not opening a gangway door on deck E or D or any other deck whilst Titanic was sinking.
We know there was a proper ladder for E deck. No Jacobs Ladder required from Hogg presumably?
How did this open D deck door get raised from the wreck? It would have been on a hinge, and on one side the closing levers are entirely missing? (See Thomas's pics posted on here).
I still cannot get over the bit of common sense I hope I have over all this that it would have been ridiculous and extremely dangerous to Titanic to open an E deck or D deck gangway door, and that Nichols must have realised this.
Always ask the "why's". Question everything. Never assume anyone has a correct recollection, and firstly assume what was said might not be accurate or truthful.
We know there was a proper ladder for E deck. No Jacobs Ladder required from Hogg presumably?
How did this open D deck door get raised from the wreck? It would have been on a hinge, and on one side the closing levers are entirely missing? (See Thomas's pics posted on here).
I still cannot get over the bit of common sense I hope I have over all this that it would have been ridiculous and extremely dangerous to Titanic to open an E deck or D deck gangway door, and that Nichols must have realised this.
Always ask the "why's". Question everything. Never assume anyone has a correct recollection, and firstly assume what was said might not be accurate or truthful.
