Was any lifeboat lowered full


Status
Not open for further replies.
Dec 13, 1998
295
3
263
No problem, Lester. Estimates, certainly, and that is exactly what they are;

1: 12
3: 39
5: 37
7: 28 (but I have only 27 names)
9: 40-45
11: 55-62
13: 62 or 63
15: about 65
C: 35-40

2: 18
4: some 35 (plus six from the sea and eight or ten from B - about 50 or so in total.
6: 24
8: 26 or 28
10: 30-35 plus ten or twelve from 14, minus two sailors to 14; 40-45.
12: 28 (rough estimate) plus three from 12, ten or twelve from 14 and twelve or more from B; 55-58 in total.
14; 45-48 when lowered; about 15 remained, three or four taken from the sea, eleven or twelve from A; about 30 in total.
16: 35-40 minus one stoker to boat 6.
D: 24 when lowered, plus F Hoyt and about ten from 14, minus three crew to boat 12; about 32 in total.

A: eleven or twelve
B: perhaps 25 (I don't believe there were more)

Again, these are my estimates.

Peter
 
Dec 13, 1998
295
3
263
One interesting issue regarding boats 9-15; I believe that nearly 40% of the occupants were male crew. 22% were male passengers; 60% or more adult men. The forward starboard boats had a ratio of some 25% crewmen and 35% men passengers - again some 60% adult males. I don't think there was any 'sneaking in' of men; the officers simply let them in.

Regards,

Peter
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
Greetings Peter,

Thank you for the added informations. Many years ago I had concluded that most of those in the after starboard boats were men; mainly crew with a large number of 3rd Class male passengers.

For what you kindly posted above at the moment I am inclined to the view that "some 35 (plus six from the sea ....." is fractionally too high for boat 4; but accept that it depends on who you include. Do you include the Asplunds; the Hocking party; or the Nicola-Yarreds?
I reject 24 for boat 6 based on the photo I referred to above.

Kind Regards,
Lester
 
Dec 13, 1998
295
3
263
Lester, I do not believe the Asplunds were in No 4. Nothing in their lengthy interviews even hint at being in or near boat 4. The Nicola Yarrads describe their boat scraping the sides of the ship when lowered away and mention nothing of rescuing people from the sea. I believe they were in C.
Mrs Hocking, Mrs Richards and two children, Mrs Hämäläinen and son, about 25 first class passengers, three sailors and Thomas Ranger who slid down the falls....these are the 35 I have in boat 4. There may have been some third class passengers as well; Mrs Backström and or Mrs and Miss Hirvonen.....

Peter
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
Hello Peter,

Thank you for that. I now understand how you arrive at: about 35.
I was not aware of Mrs Backström and or Mrs and Miss Hirvonen..... being possibilities.

I had meant to ask you about Mrs Hamalainen.

Just as I have always had difficulties working out how 2nd & 3rd Class passengers, particularly the women & children accessed the after-starboard section of A-deck to board boats 11, 13 & 15, I have always wondered about the Hocking party and Mrs Hamalainen accessing boat 4. - Any thoughts?

I now guess that it could have been the Richards or Hamalainen baby that Gracie held.

With my best wishes for 2004.
Regards,
Lester
 
Dec 13, 1998
295
3
263
I assume you are right concerning the baby mentioned by Colonel Gracie. I believe Mrs Hämäläinen or Mrs Hirvonen could have been the woman with a baby referred to by John Foley in boat 4.
I have no idea how come the Richards entourage ended up near boat 4. I have seen that Ellen Hocking went in an earlier lifeboat and that Mrs Hocking therefore did not want to leave the ship until the latest possibility; not knowing where one of her daughters was. Other sources suggest Ellen entered the same boat as Mrs Hocking anyway. I don't know.

Best wishes for 2004 to you too. And to everybody else as well, of course.

Peter
 
Apr 24, 2003
84
1
156
Peter, you said that boat 12 carried 55 or 58 people. But didn't they mentioned that their wheals lied deep in the water, only one inch or so about the sea line? I think this is a indication that 12 carried more, about 70 or so. Maybe they took over more than 12 people from B.

Cordially
Manuel Reiprich
 
Dec 13, 1998
295
3
263
Manuel, there was a lot of water in boat 12, which I believe may have lowered the boat's edges a bit. Did all the occupants claim there was only one inch to the water line? I must admit I haven't that particular aspect thoroughly as yet.

Best regards,
Peter
 
Apr 24, 2003
84
1
156
I just read in "Titanic-An Illustrated History" (and in "A night to remember", I believe)
that Lightoller counted 75 persons, childrens not included. Lightoller was a precise men, I guess we should trust him.
On the same page, I read that the boat was in danger to become awash by the waves because of the low boat edge.
Unfortunately I don't know who else stated something like that or on which page of the inquiry protocols Lightoller stated that, my available source to this fact is only Don Lynchs and Walter Lords book.

Cordially
Manuel
 

Kyrila Scully

Member
Apr 15, 2001
2,079
35
243
South Florida
According to my own personal research (and Lester will correct me if I'm wrong) here is a list of the number of people believed to be in each boat:
Boat#1 - 12 (capacity 40) All accounted for.
Boat#2 - 26 (capacity 40) 19 accounted for.
Boat#3 - 50 (capacity 65) 39 accounted for.
Boat#4 - 40 (capacity 65) 46 accounted for.
Boat#5 - 41 (capacity 65) 38 accounted for.
Boat#6 - 28 (capacity 65) 25 accounted for.
Boat#7 - 27 (capacity 65) 25 accounted for.
Boat#8 - 39 (capacity 65) 26 accounted for.
Boat#9 - 56 (capacity 65) 39 accounted for.
Boat#10 - 55 (capacity 65) 28 accounted for.
Boat#11 - 70 (capacity 65) 50 accounted for.
Boat#12 - 42 (capacity 65) 26 accounted for.
Boat#13 - 64 (capacity 65) 65 accounted for.
Boat#14 - 63 (capacity 65) 44 accounted for.
Boat#15 - 70 (capacity 65) 61 accounted for.
Boat#16 - 56 (capacity 65) 35 accounted for.
Englehardt A - 30 (capacity 47) 14 accounted for. 4 additional died during the night.
Englehardt B - unknown (capacity 47) 30 survived, 3 died.
Englehardt C - 71 (capacity 47) 45 accounted for.
Englehardt D - 44 (capacity 47) 22 accounted for.

The figures in the first column are those estimated by the British Inquiry. The second figure indicates those I was able to place in the lifeboat. There are still quite a few I have not been able to place. But it gives you a general idea of how full the boats were.

All the best,
Kyrila
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
Hi Kyrila,

You know I have no idea why you have some passengers and crew listed for particular boats. - I can only guess that you have access to informations supplied by those persons or by others saying that 'xyz' was in their boat.

You also know that I believe you are wrong to use the British Inquiry figures when you give a boat number followed by the 'BI' figures, which leads you to then say 'xx' accounted for.

Hope you are well.
Regards,
Lester
 

Kyrila Scully

Member
Apr 15, 2001
2,079
35
243
South Florida
I think I did preface the post by saying it was my own personal research. I must have posted in the wrong thread - I thought I was responding to someone's question about whether any boats were filled to capacity. I wasn't trying to be an expert or anything, just offering a general overview to satisfy a question. Sorry if I offended. Bob, don't distract me next time when I'm trying to post something serious. :-D

Kyrila
 
B

Brendan John O'Rourke

Guest
Sure, there were some boats lowered full, some over-full. Take boat 11, for instance, launched at 1:25, capacity 65, lowered with exactly 70 persons on board. Being that these boats were tested in Belfast,Ireland with the weight of seventy men, they could just get away with it. Bear in mind that most of the boats that were fully loaded were lowered near 1:00, when people could actually see this ship sinkin' out from under them and they knew if they didn't board, they would die. As we all know, most of the lifeboats were lowered half-full, because, after all, people thought Titanic was unsinkable, and as one passenger said "It seems more dangerous to go float around in that little boat than stay on this big ship."
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,665
880
563
Easley South Carolina
Actually, the number of people documented to have been on Boat 11 amounted to no more then 36 people. Some more may have been picked up or transferred in but 36 is about all that can be verified.

Regarding the boats being tested with the weight of 70 men and your other claims, I hope you didn't get this from the movie as this is anything but a useful or reliable source. Regardless of that, there's an important point you're missing here. Its not just the question of weight that's at issue but the volumn in which to stuff the people.

The official capacities were rated based on assumptions about how much space an average single person would take up. The problem is that averages seldom have a lot to do with reality. You have people who come in a whole range of sizes, including some who were "robust" enough to take up the space that would be taken up by three "average" men.
 

Aly Jones

Member
Nov 22, 2008
1,174
70
183
Australia
Some one Quoted "Why was the lifeboats not full when lowed (something like that).

The officer's had no idea how many people the lifeboats could hold,they were so reluctdent to full to capacity for safty reasons. True?
 

Kyrila Scully

Member
Apr 15, 2001
2,079
35
243
South Florida
The life boats had been tested to hold between 65-70 grown men during the sea trials. However, this bit of information may not have been known by the men filling the boats, or forgotten in the panic. Another reason the boats left without being filled to capacity is that many passengers who had the chance to get in the boats refused to believe the ship would sink. The sailors released the boats because there was no time to wait for people to change their minds. In these cases, the boats were ordered to return for more passengers once they were in the sea. Only one of those boats did indeed return. The others were fearful of being swamped.
 

Tad G. Fitch

Member
Dec 13, 1999
581
14
263
Some of the lifeboats were launched full, in one or two cases, possibly overcrowded. The aft starboard boats were close to full, and there is evidence #15 was overloaded to the point that its gunwales were somewhat close to the water. This was mentioned in the inquiries, and in the private accounts of a third class passenger, who leaned against the gunwale, and her hair hung into the water.

Some of the aft port boats were loaded more fully as well. I think this was because at that late stage of the sinking, it was readily apparent that the situation was serious.

Keep in mind that short of Lifeboat #1, it is virtually impossible to know for certain the exact number of passengers that were in each boat. We can identify a large number of some, but in many cases, the number was actually higher than the number whose names can be identified based on the evidence and accounts given.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads