Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
redken  
#1 Posted : 31 October 2012 16:28:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
redken

colinreeves  
#2 Posted : 01 November 2012 13:59:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
colinreeves

You should remember that Titanic was unsinkable so, in fact, had a superfluity of lifeboats .....
SP900308  
#3 Posted : 01 November 2012 14:19:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
SP900308

I'd imagine this 'obvious' deficiency was picked up long before the 'five hours before sailing' inspection.
During design maybe? Seems like a good time to raise such fundamental 'sea worthiness' issues!

Reminds me of something, aahh yes, designers health and safety considerations, that's it!
chas  
#4 Posted : 01 November 2012 14:51:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chas

Whilst on the subject of the Titanic I am lead to believe that a certain Capt. Smith said somethnig along the lines of......I've been at sea for 20 (?) years and nothing has happened to me whilst being in charge. Don't know if it is true, but if it is true it is somewhat ironic and I do at times repeat it to those who say....we have been doing things this way for 20 years and never had an accident. It seems like we could learn a lot from that one incident in 1912.
pete48  
#5 Posted : 01 November 2012 16:56:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

I think I am correct in saying that the BOT Regs in force at the time specified a minimum of 16 lifeboats not the 20 carried by the Titanic. So, one point of view could be that it already had 25% above the legal minimum required. The Inspector's opinion to provide even more was, therefore, significantly above what was considered acceptable BEFORE the disaster. In other words it could quite easily have been seen as an over-cautious approach which might well have impacted his relationship with his employers and the White Star Company. I am not at all surprised that a single Inspector would have felt his opinion likely to receive a harsh welcome especially in Edwardian society.

The facts of history, and that the Regs were undoubtedly overdue a revision, are only available in hindsight and there is a risk that we write history from a modern perspective.
We have the facts that the designers believed they had built an unsinkable ship and one which would not in any case sink quickly. They appear to have agreed the number of boats based on likely failure scenarios and rescue plans. There is the view on record that if the SS Californian had responded to the Titanic's distress calls then the lifeboats would have been adequate to ferry the passengers to safety as planned. We also have the accepted operational practice that ice held little danger for the larger powered vessels.
These design beliefs would have driven all their judgments and decisions during the project and beyond until the disaster occurred. In such an environment it is almost impossible to imagine that a single opinion from one Inspector would/should ever have been considered valid.

So, whilst I do not attempt to justify the tragic consequences of their decisions I nonetheless suggest that it was a far more complex situation than the article and some comments here suggest.

p48
Johnmann  
#6 Posted : 06 November 2012 12:18:14(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Johnmann

pete48 wrote:

We have the facts that the designers believed they had built an unsinkable ship and one which would not in any case sink quickly. They appear to have agreed the number of boats based on likely failure scenarios and rescue plans. There is the view on record that if the SS Californian had responded to the Titanic's distress calls then the lifeboats would have been adequate to ferry the passengers to safety as planned. We also have the accepted operational practice that ice held little danger for the larger powered vessels.
p48

Actually, the designers did specify enough lifeboats. It was a marketing decision to reduce the number, to avoid the first-class promenade decks from being cluttered up with lifeboats.
If the Californian had responded, the rescue would have been difficult as the decks of the smaller Californian would have been well below the Titanics decks making direct transfer difficult. Given what we know about the time taken to fill and lower the lifeboats there would not have been time to transfer everyone between the two ships using the lifeboats. But at least they would have tried and some people would have been saved.
Victor Meldrew  
#7 Posted : 06 November 2012 12:21:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Victor Meldrew

Like everything else in this game..... 'you're alright, until you're not'
m  
#8 Posted : 06 November 2012 15:32:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
m

Not the most topical thread on the forum!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.