The On A Sea of Glass and Part-Time Explorer 113th Anniversary Titanic Livestream, which was broadcast on Thomas Lynskey’s Part-Time Explorer channel on YouTube, is available to replay.
I am honoured to have been invited to participate in the On A Sea of Glass and Part-Time Explorer 113th Anniversary Titanic Livestream, which will be broadcast on Thomas Lynskey’s Part-Time Explorer channel on YouTube. It starts at 9.30 p.m. Eastern Time (United States) on Monday 14 April 2025 / 2.30 a.m. (United Kingdom) on Monday 15 April 2025. The livestream will also be recorded and available to replay afterwards.
Hosted by Thomas Lynskey, it includes special guests Alex Moeller and Levi Rourke; historians and On A Sea of Glass co-authors Tad Fitch, J. Kent Layton and Bill Wormstedt; and guest historians Don Lynch, Ken Marschall and I.
A review of Shan Bullock’s biography of Thomas Andrews, which was published in the Belfast Evening Telegraph later in 1912, included ‘The rules of duty which Mr. Andrews applied to everyday life’. They were taken from advice he gave to a man who was starting work as an engineer in 1905. Andrews’ advice was sound and applies to other occupations as well. He wrote:
As an old hand, who has come through the mill myself, I would just like to say how important it is for you to give your employers full confidence from you at the start. This can best be gained:
1. By punctuality and close attention to your work at all times, but don’t allow your health to suffer through overwork.
2. Always carry out instructions given by those above you, whether you agree with them or not, and try to get instructions in writing if you are not sure of your man.
3. Always treat those above you with respect, no matter whether they are fools or know less than yourself.
4. Never give information unless you are perfectly sure; better to say you are not sure but will look the matter up.
5. Never be anxious to show how quick you are by being the first out of the shop when the horn blows. It is better on these occasions to be a bit slow.
Almost two months after his thirtieth birthday, Thomas Andrews received a letter from Messrs. Ismay, Imrie & Co. – the management company of the Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. Ltd (White Star Line). They felt that all the work he had been doing at Harland & Wolff, which directly or indirectly supported the White Star Line, warranted a tangible acknowledgement. The letter was sent 122 years ago today and, sadly, a mere nine years before Andrews lost his life in the Titanic disaster. (Public Record Office Northern Ireland/PRONI)
Steamship Department
Liverpool
April 1st 1903T. Andrews Esq.
Messrs. Harland & Wolff
Belfast
Dear Sir,
At the last annual meeting of the Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. the shareholders voted a sum of money to be distributed at our discretion in recognition of services rendered to the company, and having in mind the valuable work which you have performed in a variety of ways on behalf of the White Star Line, we feel that it would be pleasing to all concerned that the opportunity should be availed of to mark our appreciation of same. We therefore enclose a cheque value £200, which we will be glad if you will accept with our best wishes for your future success.
Yours faithfully,
Ismay, Imrie & Co.
All too often, sensationalist claims are made in the media about Titanic and the disaster which befell her. A typical theme is claims of an ‘Achilles Heel’, design ‘flaws’, poor materials or even that Titanic was doomed from the start. The mundane reality that Titanic was a well built and designed ship, which sank because she sustained extraordinary damage as a result of an awesome encounter with an iceberg, does not make headlines.
I was pleased to participate in two podcast episodes where we discussed a large number of these issues over the course of nearly two hours. We covered a great deal of material. Grab a coffee and listen in!
Part 1: Hosts Tad Fitch and J. Kent Layton are joined by author and researcher Mark Chirnside for an eye-opening discussion that challenges everything you thought you knew about the Titanic and her sister ships. Over the years, myths have surfaced claiming these iconic liners were poorly designed, made with subpar materials, and doomed from the start. But how much of that is actually true? Join us as we discuss the allegations, break down what the actual historical documentation and context indicates, and dispel some long-held myths.
Part 2: Join hosts Tad Fitch and J. Kent Layton as they continue their discussion with researcher Mark Chirnside, diving into the historical record to uncover the truth about the safety, reliability, and durability of the Titanic and ‘Olympic’ Class ships. How well-designed and safe was RMS Olympic—both before and after its post-Titanic disaster refit? Tune in as they examine the evidence, compare the design of these ships to their contemporaries and debunk long-held myths.
A new article of mine, ‘A Voyage on Olympic: Willem Frederik Piek Jr.’s Notes for the Holland America Line, December 1911′ (external link) has been published on Encyclopedia Titanica.
Born in Amsterdam on 16 March 1874, Willem Frederik Piek Jr. became the head agent of the Holland America Line in New York, in 1912; four years later, he became a director of the company, serving in that position until 1935. In December 1911, he boarded Olympic at New York for an eastbound crossing (the passenger list also included ‘Mrs Piek’). Travelling first class, his objective was to check out what life was like onboard. How comfortable was her passenger accommodation? How was the White Star service? How might they lure away her passengers?
His meticulous notes, handwritten in Dutch, provide fascinating details of what it was like to sail on Olympic. They contain the sort of observations that cannot be found in period journals such as The Shipbuilder, or in chatty, casual letters home from passengers. It all adds to the social history of Olympic and provides a glimpse of what life might have been like onboard Titanic, such as first class passengers stealing spoons from adjacent tables, or maids and valets hanging around the companionways because they only had a dining saloon on C-deck.
One common factor when observers acting for one shipping line wrote about competitors’ vessels is that they often seemed very critical about particular aspects of a ship. This can also be seen in reports Cunard’s naval architect, Leonard Peskett, wrote about Olympic in August 1911 and Imperator in June 1913. If advertisements of the period extolled a ship’s virtues, then competitors’ criticisms provide a counterweight. The reality lies in between. Indeed, we also see positives such as the lack of items which rattled in first class staterooms.
This is believed to be the first time that his notes have been published. They illustrate the importance of diversifying beyond English language sources. His observations and a vast array of other hitherto unpublished material will be included in Mark Chirnside’s next book, from which much of this article is drawn from.
This article was first published in the Titanic International Society’s Voyage 128 July 2024: Pages 158-62. (A German language version was published in the Swiss Titanic Society’s Titanic Post 129 September 2024: Pages 125-30.)
A number of the locations that Piek referred to in his notes, such as the maids’ and valets’ dining saloon, can be seen recreated as they were on Titanic through Titanic: Honor & Glory’s DEMO 401 Update 2.0 Release Day Tour.
Above: The Holland America liner Rotterdam (1908) was built by Harland & Wolff. She introduced many innovations and set a number of new standards in passenger accommodation. (Author’s collection)
The White Star Line had plans to build a sister ship to Oceanic (1899), which would be called Olympic. J. Bruce Ismay described her as ‘an improved Oceanic‘. It is popularly believed that the order to build Olympic was cancelled as a direct result of Thomas Henry Ismay’s death in 1899 and that the White Star Line chose to build the ‘Big Four’ instead. However, the company did not see these ships as an ‘either/or’ choice. We know from correspondence between J. Bruce Ismay and William Pirrie in June 1902 that the decision not to proceed with construction came about from the ‘altered circumstances’ White Star found itself in following its acquisition by IMM. In other words, the White Star Line had still been intending to proceed three years after Thomas Henry Ismay passed away.
After the White Star Line’s shareholders voted to approve J.P. Morgan’s offer for their shares in May 1902, the famous line was destined to become a key part of the new International Mercantile Marine (IMM) combine. There was little change immediately for White Star’s existing express service, but it did have implications for their plans for the future…J. Bruce Ismay wrote to Harland & Wolff’s William Pirrie on 4 June 1902:
Of course had we been left to ourselves there is little doubt … we should have gone [ahead] with an improved Oceanic, but under the altered circumstances we don’t know where we are.
It appears Harland & Wolff had intended to assign yard number 356 to Oceanic’s younger sister, but Pirrie wrote back the next day: ‘Under the circumstances I think it would hardly be justifiable to decide at a present to go on with the proposed Olympic.’ (The shipbuilder assigned the yard number to the Union Castle liner Kenilworth Castle, laid down early in October 1902.) Harland & Wolff were progressing steadily with Celtic’s sister ship Cedric; Baltic would be laid down two days later; and the order to proceed with construction of a fourth sister, Adriatic, would follow late in August 1902. In the middle of June 1902, the White Star Line were making payments to Harland & Wolff at a rate of £70,000 each month. Construction of a more expensive version of Oceanic would only have added to the cost at a time when there was significant uncertainty.
The reasons behind the cancellation of Oceanic‘s proposed sister ship are one of many little known or previously unpublished details contained in Oceanic: White Star’s ‘Ship of the Century’.
Above: Oceanic: White Star’s ‘Ship of the Century’. The History Press; 2018.
No.
Contrary to popular belief that the German-built HAPAG liners Imperator/Berengaria and Bismarck/Majestic were simply ‘given’ to Cunard and White Star by the British government following Germany’s defeat in the First World War, in fact they had to be purchased. These German ships were allocated to the United Kingdom as one of the winning Allied countries, but the British Lines then had to arrange to purchase them from the British government:
On 27 January 1921, Cunard and White Star signed an agreement with the British government. It provided for a joint purchase with a total purchase price of £1.5 million (£500,000 for Imperator/Berengaria and £1 million for Bismarck). Each ship would be bought in ten equal instalments, with interest (at a minimum of 4 per cent) charged on the cost outstanding. Each company would own their ship in its entirety, but pay the other 50 per cent of their ship’s profit. On 12 March 1921, Harland & Wolff noted that ‘White Star Line have made an offer for her to Lord Inchcape (acting on behalf of the government), which offer has been tentatively accepted.’ In April 1921, Cunard’s annual report noted that they had purchased Imperator and renamed her Berengaria. By 16 November 1921, Cunard and White Star had signed an agreement about how they would operate both ships on a joint account.
The White Star Line had already received full cash compensation from the British government for the loss of Britannic. She was less than a year old when she was lost in November 1916 and so her value was reckoned at approximately £1,947,000. During the war, there was significant inflation. Harland & Wolff produced estimates for the Holland America Line which compared June 1919 shipbuilding prices with April 1916 prices. By their estimates, the cost of building a replacement for the Holland America Line’s Statendam/Justicia (lost in 1918) had risen about 109 percent. Using the same rate of increase in a hypothetical scenario where White Star had ordered Harland & Wolff to build a new Britannic, the cost would have been over £4 million.
In this respect, the company got a very good deal by purchasing Bismarck/Majestic at approximately £1 million, because it was much cheaper than building similar new tonnage. To make matters even better, they did not have to pay it all straight away but rather in instalments over 10 years. And, the profit-sharing agreement diversified earnings over two ships instead of one. What this meant was that if one ship was out of service (such as Majestic in the first quarter of 1925), the White Star Line still received some earnings from Cunard from the operation of Berengaria. (The agreement on a profit sharing arrangement between Cunard and White Star ran until Cunard terminated it just over ten years later, on the grounds that their ship had earned more profit. That meant that they were paying White Star more than they were receiving in return.)
Further details, including a detailed analysis of both ships’ financial results, are included in Appendix Four of the revised and expanded edition of RMS Majestic: The ‘Magic Stick‘ (The History Press; 2024).
The driving force and founder of the modern White Star Line (Oceanic Steam Navigation Company), Thomas Henry Ismay, oversaw the growth of a company which made a significant economic contribution to Britain (and Liverpool, in particular). However, the Ismay family also arranged for significant social provision for retired seafarers, their widows, and the widows of those lost at sea.
Thomas Henry Ismay, J. Bruce Ismay’s father, founded the Liverpool Seamen’s Pension Fund in 1887 to provide pensions ‘for deserving seamen of whatever rank sailing from the port of Liverpool, who are past work’. It was intended to provide pensions of £20 a year. (Later, the Margaret Ismay Widows Fund was established to provide for their widows as well.) The Mercantile Marine Service Association administered the fund as the trustees and by c. 1912 it had grown to about £69,000 (£52,000 of which came from contributions either by the Ismay family or the White Star Line). (Its assets were amalgamated into the Nautilus Welfare Fund in 2009.)
By that time, the number of pensioners receiving pension payments was 126. They ranged from 54 to 94 years old and included 38 former commanders, 48 ship’s officers and 40 seamen. During the quarter of a century since the fund had been established, 423 pensioners had received pension payments from the fund, equating to a total of £37,876. (The number of widows receiving a pension from the newer Margaret Ismay Widows Fund was 74.)
Following the Titanic disaster, J. Bruce Ismay returned to the United Kingdom. He arrived in Liverpool onboard the White Star liner Adriatic on Saturday 11 May 1912. He lost no time in writing to the Lord Mayor of Liverpool later the very same day, proposing a new fund providing ‘for widows of those whose lives are lost while they are engaged upon active duty…upon the mercantile vessels of this country’. The ‘terrible disaster to the Titanic’ highlighted the ‘necessity of such a fund’ and he proposed to contribute £10,000 with a further £1,000 from his wife. It would ‘continue for all time’. News of Ismay’s letter apparently reached the press and the Earl of Derby, Lord Mayor of Liverpool sent a telegram to Ismay asking if he could publish it ‘saying I have gratefully accepted your offer?’ Ismay responded: ‘Please act in whatever manner you think best, leave myself entirely in your hands’.
See Chirnside, Mark. The ‘Olympic’ Class Ships: Olympic Titanic & Britannic. History Press; revised and expanded edition 2011.
Above: Thomas Henry Ismay (1837-99). (The Marine Engineer, 1899/Author’s collection)
My recent podcast with James Penca for his Titanic Witnesses series is available. We discussed my personal research journey, from when I first started visiting archives and undertaking research using the primary source materials, to common problems with Titanic information disseminated in the media and secondary sources. There are a large number of aspects of Titanic‘s history where there is widespread inaccurate information in secondary sources (such as media reports or television programmes), which is often subject to fierce debate online as to what is correct or not. The use of primary sources is essential to forming the most accurate understanding of history that we can. In many cases, the primary sources provide a definitive answer. Much of the confusion we see could easily be avoided by relying on the primary documentation, but instead we see demonstrably false statements repeated from one secondary source to another.
Have you ever wondered how much work goes into the writing of your favorite history books? This week, we are joined by celebrated maritime author Mark Chirnside for a look at the many road blocks and pitfalls that come with Titanic research. Welcome to WITNESS TITANIC, a podcast where we interview witnesses of the infamous Titanic disaster including modern experts, enthusiasts, and even the survivors of the sinking. Like the century-old inquiries that came before us, we may never fully determine what really happened on that cold April night but you may be surprised to find how close our efforts will bring us to Titanic herself…
How can popularity be defined? By the total number of passengers carried, or the average number of passengers carried on each crossing? The difficulty arises when trying to establish if one liner was more popular than another.
Average Passenger Lists
Taking the average passenger list for Berengaria over the 1923 to 1932 period (covering 300 crossings), she averaged 980 passengers; Leviathan averaged 1,035 passengers in the same period (over only 264 crossings), and Majestic led the way with 1,067 passengers (292 crossings). In this respect, then, when information for a comparable period is available then Majestic had the edge over both of her older sisters.
Total Passengers Carried
Leviathan’s total of 40,539 passengers carried in 1927 eclipsed Majestic’s best showing of 37,949 passengers in 1928. Berengaria’s best year of 1928 was slightly further behind. On the basis of the most passengers carried in any one year, Leviathan had the record.
Overall, Majestic had the edge in carrying higher numbers of passengers on average. Leviathan was not consistent in the 1920s, carrying the lowest average number of passengers of any of the three sisters in 1924 (983 passengers), and then the highest average of 1,448 passengers on each crossing in 1927.
(Further information can be found by referring to RMS Majestic: The ‘Magic Stick’).
How do we define ‘fastest crossing’? Part of the issue is that some sources seem to take it in terms of the time elapsed whereas others use the average speed. Average speed is the most accurate from the point of view of measuring a ship’s performance, because otherwise a slower ship could complete a ‘faster’ crossing simply because she had covered fewer miles at a slower average speed.
There is no evidence she was ever driven all-out for the full duration of any of the 514 commercial crossings she completed during her career. (What Olympic‘s schedule allowed for was a reliable, steady performance.) This is a contrast, for example, to Mauretania (highlighting in particular her attempt to regain the Blue Riband in 1929). However, we do have limited information from Harold Sanderson, who took over the chairmanship of the White Star Line from J. Bruce Ismay, and who confirmed that the company’s records showed she had maintained an average speed of 24.2 knots for a 24 hour period in the Atlantic. We have no further information as to the ship’s engine revolutions, state of loading or the weather conditions, but it is assumed that this would have been accomplished during ideal weather conditions on an eastbound crossing, when the current was typically in the ship’s favour. (Sanderson provided this information in 1915, so it is also possible that Olympic performed better than this at a later date.)
A number of older sources have referred to two crossings Olympic made in 1921. On 31 October 1921 Olympic arrived in New York, having completed 2,931 miles in 5 days 12 hours and 39 minutes, averaging 22.10 knots. However, the eastbound return crossing was even faster: she covered 2,999 miles in 5 days 12 hours and 38 minutes, averaging 22.61 knots. These appear to be her shortest westbound and eastbound crossings (for the post-war period) in terms of the time elapsed but neither was her fastest crossing in either direction in terms of average speed.
At the time of writing, I have compiled a performance record which comprises available data on about 91.5 percent of the commercial voyages Olympic completed during her career. There are still a number of voyages missing in 1913 and 1914, in particular. The available consolidated data for the 91.5 percent of these commercial voyages indicates that Olympic recorded an average speed of about 21.5 knots (including both westbound and eastbound crossings). This data is taken from log abstracts for each individual voyage and/or records of the North Atlantic crossing times of the major liners, which Cunard maintained a continuous record of from 1917.
Westbound: The fastest westbound crossing Olympic ever completed seems to have been that departing 30 June 1926. She completed 3,195 miles in 6 days 12 minutes at an average speed of 22.16 knots. (The ‘runner up’ is a crossing departing 9 May 1928, when she completed 3,160 miles in 5 days 22 hours 52 minutes at an average speed of 22.12 knots.)
| Departure Date | Distance | Time Taken | Average Speed |
| 30 June 1926 | 3195 miles | 6 days 0 hours 12 minutes | 22.16 knots |
Eastbound: The fastest eastbound crossing Olympic ever completed seems to have been that departing 5 July 1924. She completed 3,241 miles in 5 days 22 hours 47 minutes at an average speed of 22.70 knots. However, a newspaper report in the Western Daily Mercury indicated that, on the eastbound crossing departing 6 July 1912, she completed 3,248 miles in 5 days 22 hours 15 minutes at an average speed of 22.83 knots. If that is correct (it has not been possible to verify it with a primary source) then that is the fastest eastbound crossing I am aware of currently.
| Departure Date | Distance | Time Taken | Average Speed |
| 5 July 1924 | 3241 miles | 5 days 22 hours 47 minutes | 22.70 knots |
Olympic was not designed to be the fastest liner afloat but she was certainly not a slow ship.
Although it is popularly believed that they were added in 1928, at the same time as changes were made to second and tourist class areas, in fact there was not a single, major refit in 1928. Instead, some changes were made over the winter of 1927-28, and some over 1928-29. The new suites were added over the winter of 1928-29. By 1929, B-deck had become A-deck, however the original deck designation from 1911 is being used because readers will be more familiar with it. (See: ‘RMS Olympic: The Mis-dated Refit’.)
It was great to be invited to give a presentation at Public Record Office Northern Ireland (PRONI), in conjunction with the Belfast Titanic Society. Although Belfast was a hive of activity, with scores of fans queuing for the Jonas Brothers (who were performing on the same evening just a quarter of a mile away), the lecture was well attended. It was wonderful to see so many familiar faces!
The presentation discusses Majestic‘s life, covering her conception and construction as HAPAG’s Bismarck; to her completion as White Star’s Majestic; her service as the Royal Navy training ship Caledonia and her loss to fire in September 1939. It bears the same title as the revised and expanded edition of RMS Majestic: The ‘Magic Stick’ which was released in March 2024.
During my lecture at the British Titanic Society’s convention in Belfast in April 2024, one of the themes I highlighted was how various criticisms of Titanic’s design are often made without reference to the broader context.
The ‘Olympic‘ class ships were triple screw steamers with reciprocating engines driving the port and starboard propellers and a low pressure turbine driving the centre propeller. One such criticism of the ‘combination’ propelling machinery is that the centre propeller only operated ahead and could not be reversed. The criticism was that this meant only the port and starboard propellers could be reversed in a scenario where a ‘full astern’ order was given.
However, those voicing this criticism have evidently paid little attention to competitors such as Lusitania and Mauretania. The two Cunarders were quadruple screw steamers driven solely by turbine engines. They entered service in 1907 and, by 1911, Cunard’s staff had plenty of experience from their day to day operation. A memo entitled ‘New Fast Steamer’, dated 7 February 1911 and stamped with an Executive Committee stamp on 21 August 1912, noted a problem based on their experience to date. Only the two inboard propellers [‘centre shafts’] were reversible:
When going full speed ahead and the order is given to go astern, the rotors on the centre shafts are going astern quite a time before the ahead rotors on the wing shafts have stopped going ahead. This will retard the progress astern and of course there will be a little drag from the wing propellers after they have stopped going ahead.
As a result, it was suggested that the ‘new fast steamer’ (Aquitania) should be designed so that all four propellers could be reversed: ‘Astern rotors on the wing [propeller] shafts [as well] would overcome this difficulty and enable all four shafts to be revolved in the required direction, which of course would be a great advantage when manoeuvring’.
There are advantages and disadvantages between different propulsion systems. One system might be superior in one aspect, whereas another might be better on another comparison. Looking at twin screw ships such as Oceanic (1899), both propellers could be reversed. Modern day analysis of Titanic‘s or any other vessel’s design simply needs to consider the broader context. Not only did Lusitania and Mauretania have a similar issue in that only two of their four propellers could run in reverse, but Cunard’s own engineering staff noted that the two wing propellers were still going ahead for a period that the two inner propellers were running astern.
Gross tonnage is NOT a measure of weight
There is a lot of confusion about the subject of Titanic‘s weight, which is not helped by some of the terminology used. We often see references to the ship’s ‘gross tonnage’. However, despite what the term implies with the use of the word ‘tonnage’, it is not a measure of weight. It actually measures the total enclosed space within the ship’s hull and superstructure. Therefore references in the media which refer to a comparison of ‘gross tonnage’ and to Titanic being approximately 1,000 tons ‘heavier’ than her sister Olympic are completely inaccurate (and all too common).
The total weight of the ship (displacement) was calculated as 52,310 tons when she was loaded to her designed draught of 34 feet 7 inches – precisely the same as her sister Olympic. (Their larger, younger sister ship Britannic had a displacement of 53,170 tons and the same designed draught.) This was made up of the lightweight (the weight of the ship herself, including her hull, engines, machinery and permanent fittings before she was loaded for sea) plus the deadweight (the weight of the cargo loaded onboard, including everything from her human cargo – passengers and crew – to the coal, other supplies for the voyage and commercial cargo carried in the ship’s holds). These figures are all given in the British, Imperial measure.
This data is taken from shipbuilder Harland & Wolff’s records and summarised below. We see that Titanic in an unloaded condition weighed 480 tons more than her older sister Olympic and that her deadweight was correspondingly smaller. However, both ships’ total weight (displacement) was the same assuming that they were loaded to their designed draught.
It is important to understand that, despite all the confusion in secondary sources (such as articles, books, television programmes and so forth), the primary source evidence (original, contemporary documentation) is all very clear in regard to how much the ship weighed. The ship’s displacement is confirmed in multiple original documents, including Harland & Wolff’s records; Olympic‘s displacement scale (which shows how much water she displaced at a given draught); and the Board of Trade. It is benchmarked against figures Thomas Andrews provided for Olympic in 1911.
The Show About Titanic podcast (‘Thomas Andrews and the Sister Ships with Mark Chirnside’) is available online: ‘In this episode of The Show About Titanic, Edward welcomes maritime historian Mark Chirnside to delve into the history of the Titanic and her sister ships, Olympic and Britannic. Mark shares his journey into maritime research, his extensive knowledge on these renowned liners, and the vital alterations and events surrounding them. The conversation also highlights key insights into Thomas Andrews, the naval architect behind these legendary ships.’ Thanks to Edward for inviting me.
No.
The available evidence indicates that Harland & Wolff used three spare blades as replacements for the three damaged blades on Olympic’s starboard propeller.
George Cuming, one of Harland & Wolff’s managing directors, was one of a number of professionals to see Olympic in drydock. On 14 October 1911, he summarised the necessary repair work to an Engineer Commander, whose report went to the Director of Dockyards (on behalf of the Admiralty) some days later.
Olympic’s Starboard Propeller Blades
There was some good news: ‘There are no marks on the propeller blades of the centre and port shafts to show that these have been touched by anything at the time of collision’. Unfortunately, the starboard propeller blades were all damaged:
The three blades have been removed; they are damaged towards the tips. They are probably bent as well although this is not obvious. Mr. Cummings’ [sic] proposal is to scrap these three blades, appropriate three spare and replace the spare blades used. The blades are…manganese bronze.
Olympic’s Starboard Propeller Boss
The starboard propeller boss itself (the cylinder at the centre of the propeller to which the blades were attached) was ‘apparently undamaged’ but either of Titanic’s port or starboard propeller bosses were available to use as a replacement in the event that any damage to Olympic’s starboard propeller boss became apparent later. (There is no evidence that it did.) Harland & Wolff proposed to ‘anneal the studs for securing the blades, and if necessary, to renew them’. (To ‘anneal’ meant to heat the material and then allow it to cool slowly, which made it easier to work. In the event, it was necessary to renew at least some of them.)
Olympic’s Starboard Propeller Shafting
There was damage to Olympic’s propeller shafting, but Harland & Wolff did not think any bent shafting could be straightened out or repaired. Instead, it would need to be replaced:
The tail shaft can be withdrawn into the dock and so removed to the shop, the three pieces forward of this necessitate that certain plates should be removed from the ship’s side so as to pass them out into the dock and so send into the shop.
Where the shafting passes through [watertight] bulkheads, the plating has had to be cut in order to uncouple and pass the shafting to be removed through the orifice being cut in the ship’s side.
It is not expected that these four lengths will be in the shop for another seven or eight days, and so the renewal necessary as regards them is unknown. As a precautionary measure a forging has been ordered for one length of shafting. The shafting is hollow and Messrs. Harland & Wolff do not consider that if any length is bent it can be made serviceable by straightening.
The Titanic’s shafting is available if necessary but if used would entail considerable delay in that ship’s completion, as the engines are now being put into her.
While Olympic was in dry dock, Harland & Wolff took the opportunity to increase the pitch of her port propeller blades from 33 feet to 34 feet 6 inches. The cost was accounted for separately to the repairs of the collision damage. The new starboard propeller blades were undoubtedly set at the same pitch.
If you love ocean liners…what are you waiting for? Get this on your bookshelf now!
I am grateful to Captain Phill for his very positive review on his YouTube channel!
It is packed with a wealth of additional photos…The colour section has also been expanded with some wonderful colour postcards and colour views of its lavish interiors and the two big things that need to be highlighted about this edition is that more information as come to light about its life as HMS Caledonia, the training ship, and so there is more information about what life was like for boys on that establishment and also what work had to be undertaken in order to convert the Majestic into the Caledonia… In addition to this he has found some wonderful nuggets of correspondence, letters, recollections from people who have travelled on the Majestic and their information about what it was like to be on this ship in the 1920s is pure gold…It adds a touch of warmth to the tale of this wonderful ship.
For those familiar with Mark’s work, you’ll know that he has a wonderful easy flowing style…You also know that all his information and statements are backed up with rigorous research.
Copies are still available with a signature and personal inscription, with secure payment options through this website. If you have any queries before purchasing, please get in touch using the contact form.
This and many other incidents from Oceanic‘s interesting career are chronicled in Oceanic: White Star’s ‘Ship of the Century’ (signed copies are available for purchase through this website).
On 8 May 1912, every one of Oceanic’s lifeboats was ‘lowered into the water and tested’ before she left Southampton for Cherbourg, Queenstown and New York. At Cherbourg, ‘Madam Navratil, mother of the two French waifs from the Titanic now being looked after in New York’ boarded. She was one of 736 passengers, including only 61 in first class.
Five days later, Oceanic was well on her way to New York and steaming through a moderate swell with light southerly winds. First Officer Frank sighted a boat to starboard in latitude 38˚ 56’ North longitude 47˚ 01’ West around 12.45 p.m. Captain Smith ordered the ship stopped and she came to rest about 800 yards away. Then the emergency boat was lowered in charge of the fourth officer, John Withers. As word spread throughout the ship that the boat contained bodies, ‘passengers of all classes lined the rail’ to watch what was happening. One month after Titanic’s sinking, the boat turned out to be her collapsible A lifeboat: one of two collapsible boats that floated off the boat deck in the ship’s final moments as her frantic crew ran out of time to launch them.
Withers returned and reported that the bodies were ‘not in a fit condition to be taken on board, and recommended that they be buried from the boat they were in’. Dr. French was called to identify them and then Bo’sun Jones ‘volunteered to go and sew them up in canvas, as he had been a sail maker and had had experience in burying men in the Red Sea and other places in the East’. Oceanic’s flag was lowered to half mast as Dr. French read out the service and Captain Smith, his officers and crew ‘stood to attention bareheaded on the upper deck with the passengers, who followed their example’:
As the doctor uttered the words ‘We commit these bodies to the deep’, the sailors let the three canvas covered bodies sink beneath the waves, and the boat pulled back to the Oceanic towing the Titanic’s boat astern.
By the position the boat was found in she must have drifted seven and three-quarter miles a day…
Smith recorded what happened in the ship’s log:
Three bodies were found in the boat but being decomposed and unfit for removal these same were committed to the deep from the boat, service being read by Doctor French. One presumably was the body of Thomson Beattie, identified by name on pocket lining of coat, the others, a sailor and firemen respectively. A fur lined overcoat was found in the boat and letters in pocket addressed to Richard Williams, also two rings welded together as one inscription on inside of one ‘Edward & Gerta’ on the other ‘Edward’. Ship proceeded at 2.27 p.m. having taken on board collapsible boat which is marked No 1. Deck lifeboat certified by Board of Trade to carry 47 persons.
American newspaper reports (below) suggested subsequently that ‘the three men had lived for several days and died of starvation after devouring the cork in the lifejackets’. White Star officials and Dr. French were quick to deny the suggestion ‘emphatically’.
Above: One of a number of sensationalised newspaper reports which falsely claimed that people who had initially survived the Titanic disaster subsequently ‘starved’ to death. In reality, they were already dead when Collapsible A was set adrift. (New York Evening World, May 1912)
Sky HISTORY’s Series 2 of their successful Secrets of the Lost Liners is coming soon! The first episode features Titanic and will be broadcast on 29 April 2024. I contributed to some episodes in Series 1, which were broadcast in 2022, and I was pleased to contribute to Series 2 as well.
#SecretsOfTheLostLiners @HISTORYUK
The On A Sea of Glass and Part-Time Explorer 112th Anniversary Titanic Livestream, which was broadcast on Thomas Lynskey’s Part-Time Explorer channel on YouTube, is available to replay.
As I reflected earlier this week:
It was incredible to be part of the On a Sea of Glass livestream for the 112th anniversary of Titanic’s loss, hosted by Thomas Lynskey with special guests Alex Moeller and Levi Rourke; On A Sea of Glass co-authors and historians Tad Fitch, J. Kent Layton, Bill Wormstedt; and guest historians George Behe, Ken Marschall and Don Lynch.I’ve learned so much from these guys and, as I think I mentioned during the event, Ken Marschall’s paintings illustrated the children’s book Exploring the Titanic, which was my first book about the subject as a young child. If I had been told back then that I’d have the honour of being part of this event, all these years later, I wouldn’t have believed it!…Not forgetting the many other excellent events happening this last week, including Bruce Beveridge and Steve Hall discussing the countdown to collision and Titanic: Honor & Glory’s own livestream with stunning animations.As we talked through the real time animation of the sinking, it struck me how fast time was going and my perception of it. It was ‘midnight’ before we knew it and I think many of us felt the pressure of time, simply trying to get in points of historical commentary. The sinking was relatively long compared to Britannic (1916), Lusitania (1915) or Express of Ireland (1914), but that was not how it seemed – and we had the advantage of knowing how much time was left. Those aboard Titanic had no such advantage and their circumstances were not editorial concerns for a programme, but a matter of life or death.I did not sleep that night. In the morning, I emerged from the hotel to daylight and looked over the slipways where Olympic, Titanic and Britannic were built. Later, we saw a rainbow.
Since its release early last month, the long awaited revised and expanded edition of RMS Majestic: The ‘Magic Stick’ has been selling very well. I am grateful to all those who purchased a copy, because it is this support that makes it possible to continue researching, writing and publishing books about these great liners. All the research and time involved in producing something like this makes it an expensive enterprise. It is something that the vast majority of authors can only do part time, because it is not feasible as a full time occupation (if it were, I would probably have written a hundred books by now!)
The reviews are coming in and are very positive:
Just finished reading this book, after missing out on the first print, this was worth the wait, an absolutely fabulous book!
Copies are still available with a signature and personal inscription, with secure payment options through this website. If you have any queries before purchasing, please get in touch using the contact form.
I am honoured to have been invited to participate in the On A Sea of Glass and Part-Time Explorer 112th Anniversary Titanic Livestream, which will be broadcast on Thomas Lynskey’s Part-Time Explorer channel on YouTube. It starts at 9.30 p.m. Eastern Time (United States) on Sunday 14 April 2024 / 2.30 a.m. (United Kingdom) on Monday 15 April 2024. The livestream will also be recorded and available to replay afterwards.
Hosted by Thomas Lynskey, it includes special guests Alex Moeller and Levi Rourke; historians and On A Sea of Glass co-authors Tad Fitch, J. Kent Layton and Bill Wormstedt; and guest historians George Behe, Don Lynch, Ken Marschall and I.
Although it was primarily their magnificent first class public rooms which hit the headlines, Albert Ballin made sure that second class passengers were not neglected. His three enormous liners, as well as Cunard’s Aquitania, made significant advances in second class accommodation. There was an increased variety of public rooms compared to Olympic.
Their accommodation was not enough to impress Cunard’s naval architect Leonard Peskett, who wrote in 1913 that Imperator‘s second class public rooms were: ‘All a long way behind that arranged for Aquitania‘. He thought that the second class staterooms were of the same standard as other German liners ‘with the exception that all ceilings (in cabins that could be seen) are panelled’. He noted that the gymnasium was a ‘new feature’ in second class (White Star also added a gymnasium to Britannic‘s second class accommodation).
Nonetheless, Majestic‘s second class passengers had a smoking room and writing room available to them; a gymnasium; the main lounge and reading and writing room. These were facilities which were not necessarily available to first class passengers onboard liners a few years earlier. From the mid 1920s she carried second class passengers as well as tourist third cabin, but these classes were later merged to form a single ‘tourist class’. In 1932, a lavish brochure was printed to show off the tourist class passenger accommodation. The colour-coded deck plans showed all of the public rooms and stateroom accommodation available and are included in the new edition of RMS Majestic: The ‘Magic Stick’ which was released earlier this month.
Below: we see on the right the former second class public rooms in their tourist configuration and the dance floor added in the main first class companionway; to the left, the deckhouse with the large lounge further aft on B-deck was originally part of the third class accommodation; at the far left, we see part of the deck above and the veranda which was now available for tourist class passengers. (The deck designations are those used in the latter part of her career.)
