What happened on the starboard side of the bow from 140 AM to 210 AM


E

Erik Scott Reed

Guest
After the Collapsible C lowers, there is a large time gap from 1:40 AM-2:10 AM on the starboard bow. Why did they not get Collapsible A down between this time period and what happened to Murdoch and Wilde at this time period? Opinions, please.
 
J

João Carlos Pereira Martins

Guest
Hi Lester!

I believe in that resource but if it's really true there is a significant time gap in the same way. Boats 13 and 15 were lowered, I suppose nearly 1.40. So what happened in the starboard side during this 20 minutes? I imagine the filling of boat C to be quite calm and rapid. In Cameron's film we see this part of the deck completely empty and a confused and panicking crowd in the opposite side.

Best, JC
 

Jason D. Tiller

Moderator
Member
Dec 3, 2000
8,244
22
308
Niagara Falls, Ontario
In Cameron's film we see this part of the deck completely empty and a confused and panicking crowd in the opposite side.

If I may offer a piece of advice; James Cameron's movie is not considered a reliable source and neither should it be used as such. You're better off with sources that are much more dependable, such as the inquiries and the article of the launching times of the lifeboats, posted above.
 

Paul Lee

Member
Aug 11, 2003
2,236
15
163
A Night To Remember, JC's Titanic, Ghosts of the Abyss, SOS Titanic and (I think) the 1996 mini series all show Ismay's mode of escape wrongly.
 

Jason D. Tiller

Moderator
Member
Dec 3, 2000
8,244
22
308
Niagara Falls, Ontario
Hi Paul,

I don't regard Cameron's film as final testament to what happened, although others do.

I quite agree with that statement. Some people do look at Cameron's film as the final word on the disaster, when it's not. They either refuse to look at other more reliable sources, or they just don't realize they exist and are easily accessible.
 
J

João Carlos Pereira Martins

Guest
I agree with your opinions, Cameron's film isn't a source, not at all. The movie could be done much better than we see but I referred that just hoping that JC did the minimum research in this delicate issues, not to guide wrongly the public's ideas.

Best regards, João
 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
A quirky stat is that whilst there isn't a single third class passenger launched in #4; just 10 mins later Coll C is launched almost exclusively crammed with third class passengers (the dynamic duo excepted).

Can anyone explain why in a very close snapshot of time (1.50am - 2.00am) the forward starboard part of the ship has a deluge of third class passengers whilst the forward port side seems bereft of them??
 

Paul Lee

Member
Aug 11, 2003
2,236
15
163
Boat 4 was loaded from A deck: C and deck were from the boat deck, and both had 3rd class passengers.

Paul

 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
Paul

ET names 35 confirmed survivors in #4 not one a third class passenger. If there were third class passengers in #4 can you provide the names and supporting evidence to ET so that the list can be updated.

I'm aware #4 was loaded from A deck but the passengers came down from the boat deck prior to loading. Why were there no (or hardly any) third class passengers in amongst the first & second class? If we assume for now that there were third class passengers in #4 the numbers must be relatively small when you consider over 90% of the passengers in Coll C are stated to be third class (again confirmed by ET).

Note. I'm not suggesting there were 0% third class on Port and 100% in starboard merely that there appears to be a significant imbalance between the two sides at the forward end of the ship at roughly the same time.

Therefore my question (deluge v bereft) remains.
 

Paul Lee

Member
Aug 11, 2003
2,236
15
163
Sorry I mistyped. Boats C and D had third class in them, whereas boat 4 didn't. This was because boat 4 was loaded from A deck, and I don't think the third class would have traipsied down from the boat deck.
 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
"I don't think the third class would have traipsed down from the boat deck"

Umm. Like the Titanic I don't think that one holds water.

To help stress my point let me present another set of stats covering the launch of the last 10 boats. During a 45 minute window between 1.20am and 2.05am the following 10 boats were launched:

1.20 - Starboard #9 (3 confirmed third class)

1.25 - Port #12 (2)

1.25 - Starboard #11 (5)

1.30 - Starboard #15 (36)

1.30 - Starboard #13 (29)

1.40 - Port 10 #(5)

1.45 - Port 2 #(6)

1.50 - Port 4 #(0)

2.05 - Starboard Coll C (37)

2.05 - Port Coll D (9)

Total third class passengers boarding boats in this period = 22 in 5 Port boats & 110 in 5 starboard boats. In my eyes this 17%/83% split represents a significant imbalance.

The stats seem to show that for some reason the third class passengers mainly congregated on the starboard side.

During this final critical period with the head well down I envisage the third class passengers beginning to arrive on the boat deck in increasing numbers. Those arriving after 1.30am would have found no boats remaining in the davits on the starboard side but with #10 and #2, plus #4 hanging over the side, still present on the Port side. Would the arriving passengers not have automatically made their way towards the remaining port boats and thus have been present to fill Coll D in more significant numbers?

And yet between 1.30am and 2.00am only 11 third class passengers were loaded into the 3 remaining port boats - #10,#2 and #4 with only 9 finally getting into Coll D, the majority (37)clearly congregating around coll C.

Any tangible reasons that may explain this away?
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,087
1,402
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Steve, you raise some very interesting questions with those statistics and observations. The one thing that comes to mind is that the ship had started to take on a list to port some time after 1:30. By 1:40 it reached about 10 degrees based on the observed 2 ft gap between the deck and boat 10 that passengers had to jump or be lifted across. Once boat 10 left, all remaining boats were forward. The starboard side of the ship would have been the high side, about 15 ft higher than the port side above the water and a more natural place to stand around. And wasn't it Lightoller who said that either Wilde or Murdoch called out for everyone to go the starboard side to try and correct that list at one point?
 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
"Chaos"

I wouldn't think so. Chaos has a random quality. 83%/17% does not suggest "chaos" is the answer. Testimony also suggests order wasn't too bad pre 2.00am and I would therefore expect more of an even split.

There has to be a tangible factor coming into play. Does it suggest for example that access up from the lower decks on the port side was restricted or blocked forcing more people initially to the starboard side?

Mr Abelseth was initially on the port side of the stern and states in his US testimony that:

a) the gate allowing access to the boatdeck was initially shut

b) his female companions were only allowed up to the boatdeck when invited by an officer and the gate opened.

This seems to suggest there was a form of movement control in place and maybe the port access was being controlled more restrictively than the starboard access.

Could there have been some bias in the loading on the Port side? What for example was said when passengers were ordered down to A deck to load #4. "Women & children to deck A"? Or could it possibly have been "all 1st & 2nd class women and children to deck A"?

We may find it implausible to consider such a thing but didn't Lightoller try and prevent young boys from entering certain boats, something that we find inconceivable today?

I don't have any answers I'm afraid as I'm too far down the Titanic learning curve but maybe the expert Titanic observers out there have looked into this before.
 

Paul Lee

Member
Aug 11, 2003
2,236
15
163
Steve,
Any 3rd class (or anyone) going up to the boat deck would see boat 4 gone- the davits being empty. Unless they had been told, or had looked over the edge, they wouldn't have known that boat 4 was actually on the deck below.

If you were someone on the Titanic, you'd look around, and see that only boat D on the port side was left, and you'd go there. You wouldn't bother with boat 4 because it would look like it was gone!
 
May 25, 2007
35
0
86
>>And wasn't it Lightoller who said that either Wilde or Murdoch called out for everyone to go the starboard side to try and correct that list at one point?<<

Quoting "A Night To Remember" (Pg. 62): "...The roar of steam had died, the nerve-racking rockets had stopped-but the slant of the deck was steeper and there was an ugly list to port.
About 1:40, Chief Officer Wilde shouted, "Everyone on the starboard side to straighten her up!" Passengers and crew trooped over, and the Titanic swung sluggishly back on an even keel. The work on the boats resumed..."
 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
Sam

If there was a mass movement of people over to starboard you would naturally expect a proportion of the 1st and 2nd class passengers who were on the port side to be involved. However the only non third class passengers who ended up on the starboard side and hence around to get into Coll C were Ismay & Carter who had been there anyway.

In the meantime whilst C was being prepared & loaded to take at least 37 third class passengers; at least 60 first & second class passengers were leaving the ship in #10, #2 and #4.

Your point would potentially be the answer but only if the order around 1.30am had been "all steerage over to the starboard side" (which could possibly have been said to relieve the growing pressure around the last three port boats).
 

Similar threads

Similar threads