Alexander Carlisle – Mark Chirnside's Reception Room

Olympic & Titanic: Triumph and Disaster – Chapter 2

If you have reached the end of Chapter 1, you’ll have seen the background leading up to the decision to proceed with the new ships and the record of their order on 30 April 1907.

Chapter 2, ‘Yard Numbers 400 and 401’, explores the nature of the relationship between White Star and Harland & Wolff. They effectively outsourced their ship design to the shipbuilder, whereas other companies – such as Cunard – designed their ships ‘in house’ and went out to competitive tender from different shipyards. We come to understand more about Lord Pirrie, Alexander Carlisle, Thomas Andrews and Edward Wilding, both through biography and their roles at Harland & Wolff as they related to the new ships. They were keeping an eye on the competition, including the observation that the lavatory pans on Lusitania were too shallow (a rather unfortunate problem when the ship was rolling!). Thomas Andrews also drew a comparison, pointing out that the stability of the new White Star liners would be much greater than the Cunarders.

Press reports soon begin to appear about the new ships, with a wide variation in levels of accuracy. Cunard tried to work out the key details before they had been publicly announced (a highlight of the chapter is a previously unpublished drawing which apparently represented their ‘best guess’ of the new White Star ships’ design). Meanwhile, their size grew significantly as Harland & Wolff worked through the detail and the various design concepts. The earliest known estimate of size put them at about 38,000 gross tons, which eventually grew to over 45,000 – more than doubling the margin of size over Mauretania! By July 1908, design work had progressed far enough for the White Star Line to approve the proposed ‘Design “D”‘ concept which finalised all the fundamental details including the ships’ dimensions. (Many smaller details changed or remained to be worked out.)

We track all the preparations that Harland & Wolff had to make throughout the late summer and autumn of 1908, as the shipyard and engine works were ordered to proceed with all the practical details of construction. This included placing numerous orders for materials and component parts with subcontractors, such as the stern frame castings and propeller boss arms. Unusually, the orders for the enormous rudders contained particular specifications for quality of material and manufacture, including ultimate tensile strength of the material and its elastic limit.

One of the subjects that is not often covered is the close degree of cooperation between the various shipping lines’ technical staff, such as the marine superintendents. We follow a conference between major shipping lines which the White Star Line hosted in Liverpool during August 1910.

The White Star Line and Harland & Wolff had to cope with exacting demands from the postal authorities. Their new ships would be Royal Mail Steamers and, as such, the post office facilities and accommodation needed to be satisfactory. They spent more than a year going back and forth with the postal authorities to make sure the plans met requirements. One extraordinary request was that the post office accommodation be placed on the lower promenade (B-deck). White Star argued that this was simply not possible:

it is really impossible in a passenger steamer to put accommodation of this nature upon the upper decks, as it would interfere seriously with the earning power of such costly vessels

They reassured them that post office accommodation could be provided on a lower deck as well as being very well ventilated and comfortable. The original proposal for the post office accommodation to be placed towards the stern was also changed so that the facilities were at the bow.

We see some of the health and safety challenges common to all shipyards of the period. There were unfortunately a number of incidents and fatalities at Harland & Wolff. Incidents of theft were also recorded. One worker was caught stealing paintbrushes from the shipyard and pawning them. Another man, who was not even employed by Harland & Wolff, was caught stealing workers’ food. Their morning supplies had been vanishing daily for a number of consecutive days, naturally causing a lot of concern: the men were ‘getting wild’ and angry about it. All these details, great and small, shed light on what it was like at the Belfast shipyard as construction progressed…

Titanic & Social Media Misinformation

There is a huge volume of Titanic information online but the quality of that information can be very poor.

Titanic is one of the subjects that drives ‘hits’ and engagement on social media. The speed at which information can be shared to thousands of people is remarkable. In many ways, that is a positive. However, in others there is a very negative impact. One problem is where inaccurate information is shared using graphics or memes, which are so often seen by people who take them as a true representation of the facts. An example of this is a series of claims about Thomas Andrews which have been circulating:

Above: A photo of Thomas Andrews, accompanied by various inaccurate claims, circulated on Facebook in February 2023. (Author’s collection)

There are a lot of problems with the factual accuracy of these various claims.

Starting with the positive, he was one of the wider design team at Harland & Wolff who were responsible for Olympic and Titanic. He was also onboard for the fateful maiden voyage. We also know from witness accounts that Andrews put a lot of effort into helping to save lives during the evacuation.

However, there are numerous claims which are not supported by evidence:

The text speaks about ‘his original design’. The earliest designs for these ships, including details of the structural elements, were prepared while Alexander Carlisle was in charge of the design department and were, ultimately, the result of a team effort. At that time, Thomas Andrews was in a more junior role at Harland & Wolff, taking on duties from Alexander Carlisle after he retired at the end of June 1910. It is therefore incorrect to attribute the ‘original design’ to Andrews.
The claim that ‘a double hull’ was included is incorrect. The earliest midsection plan we have – a ‘cutaway’ drawing which essentially looks through the ship and shows all the key structural elements of the hull and the general design – dates from June 1908. It includes a double bottom only, which was of very strong cellular construction, and is exactly how the ship was built. The purpose was to provide protection in the event she grounded. It was not Harland & Wolff’s practice to build ships with ‘double hulls’.
The claim that ‘more watertight compartments’ were included is incorrect. Comparing the ‘Design “D”‘ concept, which was approved by the White Star Line’s directors in July 1908, with the completed ship, the number of watertight compartments was increased in the finished product.
The claim that ‘twice as many lifeboats’ were included is incorrect. The ‘Design “D”‘ concept showed sixteen lifeboats (14 standard lifeboats and two emergency cutters), which was later increased to a total of twenty by the addition of four collapsible (or semi collapsible) boats. During the design process, Alexander Carlisle recommended the use of a new Welin davit design in an effort to make sure the ships could easily be adapted to any change in lifeboat regulations. (At this time, there was anticipation that the Board of Trade would mandate a significant increase in the number of lifeboats carried by passenger liners.) J. Bruce Ismay approved Carlisle’s recommendation in January 1910. The benefit of the new Welin davit design was that a second row of lifeboats could be carried inboard, which provided the option to increase easily the number of lifeboats onboard. As part of the approvals process for using a new davit design, which had to be approved by the regulator, detailed blueprints of the davits were prepared and submitted to the Board of Trade. A blueprint was also prepared by the Welin company, showing how the boat deck would look with these davits installed and two rows of lifeboats carried on either side of the ship. Carlisle retired at the end of June 1910 and he testified that a decision about the number of lifeboats to be carried had not been taken at that time. By May 1911, no change in regulations had materialised and Harland & Wolff and White Star added the four collapsible boats so that they exceeded the statutory requirements. According to his own testimony, Alexander Carlisle never explicitly advocated for more lifeboats to be carried and there is no evidence that Thomas Andrews did either. Edward Wilding testified that Harland & Wolff’s collective view was that the number of lifeboats these ships carried was sufficient and in excess of the regulations. The full story is included in detail in my September 2021 presentation at PRONI.

Unfortunately, many people see claims made on social media and treat them as credible, without being aware of the inaccuracies. In an age when we have access to such a huge volume of data and digital information, it is imperative to take a sceptical approach and to try and fact-check as far as possible. There is a huge volume of Titanic information online but the quality of that information can be very poor.