Lightoller autobiography

[Arun Vajpey]

Lights was with Chief Officer Wilde supervising the departure from their station on the forecastle.

That sounds more like it. I would have thought that it was a bit unusual for a senior officer to supervise operations from the Crow's Nest.

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

I would have thought that it was a bit unusual for a senior officer to supervise operations from the Crow's Nest.

Yes seeing a senior officer in the Crow's Nest would have definitely looked out of place and raised some eyebrows, at the same time.

 

[Thomas Krom]

Lights was with Chief Officer Wilde supervising the departure from their station on the forecastle.

At first but he later went up the crow’s nest, this is according to White Star Line protocol as listed in the officers handbook. I even got a picture of a third figure together with the lookouts.

How did you think former second officer David Blair got hold on the key of the crow’s nest loud speaking telephone?

 

[Thomas Krom]

Yes seeing a senior officer in the Crow's Nest would have definitely looked out of place and raised some eyebrows, at the same time.

That sounds more like it. I would have thought that it was a bit unusual for a senior officer to supervise operations from the Crow's Nest.

Yet it was the protocol. I’ll supply a source later today as I woke up from my sleep.

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

At first but he later went up the crow’s nest, this is according to White Star Line protocol as listed in the officers handbook. I even got a picture of a third figure together with the lookouts.

I've never come across this and was simply going by, what is stated in Lightoller's biography. It's hard to discern who is in that photograph, as it is blurry.

Yet it was the protocol. I’ll supply a source later today as I woke up from my sleep.

I'd be interested to see your source.

 

[Thomas Krom]

It's hard to discern who is in that photograph, as it is blurry

You can see three people in the crow’s nest, one on the starboard side of the crow’s nest (a lookout) , one in the middle (Lightoller) and one on the port side (a lookout).

I'd be interested to see your source.

I’ll send it once I get out of bed, I’ll turn back in for a while.

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

You can see three people in the crow’s nest, one on the starboard side of the crow’s nest (a lookout) , one in the middle (Lightoller) and one on the port side (a lookout)

I'm not disagreeing with you on that Thomas, but I cannot make out the faces. Furthermore, I do not have access to the White Star Line Officer's Handbook, so please provide what it states pertaining to this.

How did you think former second officer David Blair got hold on the key of the crow’s nest loud speaking telephone?

Honestly, that thought did not occur to me. As I said, I've never come across this before. So please enlighten me.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

How did you think former second officer David Blair got hold on the key of the crow’s nest loud speaking telephone?

I was not even aware that the phone in the Crow's Nest needed a key. Seems a bit self-defeating IMO it that was indeed the case. What if the phone needed to be used in a hurry and the key could not be found?

I thought the key Blair had was for the cabinet containing the ship's binoculars.

 

[Thomas Krom]

Furthermore, I do not have access to the White Star Line Officer's Handbook, so please provide what it states pertaining to this.

45.-Watches at Sea.

With a view to increased efficiency, five Officers are carried on all steamers of the Line, viz., Chief, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th. The three seniors are the bridge Officers, and divide the time into three watches of two hours' duration, i.e., each will have two hours on the bridge in charge of the ship, followed by four hours below. The Chief Officer shall keep the first two hours of the middle watch, say from midnight until two a.m., to be followed by the 1st Officer, he being followed by the 2nd Officer, and so on in the same rotation for each 24 hours. The two Junior Officers will keep watch and watch with the seamen, four hours on and four hours off, one having charge of the port, and the other of the starboard watch, and to be under the direction of the bridge Officer for the time being. When all hands are at stations entering or leaving port, the Officers are to be stationed as under: Chief Officer ... On the forecastle head. 1st , ... Aft or on the after bridge. 2nd ... Look out crow's nest. 3rd … At con. standard compass. 4th ... On bridge with Commander, in charge of telegraph. The watches are to be equally divided, and the ship is never to be left without an Officer in charge of the deck, either at sea or in harbour; and no Officer is, on any occasion, to leave the deck until he is relieved. Officers are expected, when performing the duties of the ship, or when at their different stations, to preserve silence among the men, and to see that the orders from the bridge or deck are executed with promptitude, and without confusion or noise. At sea, when the Officer of the watch believes the ship to be running into danger, it is his duty to act, at once, upon his own responsibility; at the same time he is immediately to pass the word to call the Commander. The Chief, First, and Second Officers are never to give up charge of the bridge during their respective watches, unless with the express permission of the Commander. When the watch is relieved, the Officer in charge of the watch going off duty is to be responsible that the correct course is passed to the Quartermaster relieving. This should be done in the presence of the Officer relieving, who is to satisfy himself that it is being steered. When the watch is changed, it is to be understood that the Officer who is being relieved is to remain on the bridge and in charge during the change, that he is to see that the seamen placed as look-outs do not quit their posts until relieved, and he is to be the responsible Officer until he leaves the bridge.

There you go my friend.

Honestly, that thought did not occur to me. As I said, I've never come across this before. So please enlighten me.

During the departure from Belfast during her sea trails and her arrival in Southampton he would have been there together with the two lookouts and would have been on the loud speaking telephone. When the ship was docked, he putted the key of the phone box in his pocket and went down again.

I was not even aware that the phone in the Crow's Nest needed a key. Seems a bit self-defeating IMO it that was indeed the case.

It was of the phone-box, and based on what he know he thankfully didn't lock it.

I thought the key Blair had was for the cabinet containing the ship's binoculars.

That's the biggest misconception about former second officer Blair, he never took the key of the cabinet with the binoculars with him but the key of the phone box of the crow's nest loud speaking telephone.

He has been falsely blamed for something he didn't do, that wouldn't have made much of a difference in the first place, for years.

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

I am well aware of how long each watch was to last, but I had never seen that the second officer was to be stationed up in the crows nest, when entering or leaving port. Interesting information, thank you Thomas.

During the departure from Belfast during her sea trails and her arrival in Southampton he would have been there together with the two lookouts and would have been on the loud speaking telephone. When the ship was docked, he putted the key of the phone box in his pocket and went down again.

Good to know, I've learned something.

That's the biggest misconception about former second officer Blair, he never took the key of the cabinet with the binoculars with him but the key of the phone box of the crow's nest loud speaking telephone.

All this time, the media has incorrectly been reporting that the box held a pair of binoculars, when in fact it was for the telephone in the crows nest. They have created a huge myth that has spread akin to wildfire, throughout the Titanic community. David Blair unjustifiably has been blamed and his name raked through the coals, for something he did not do..shameful.

 

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

I have an original copy in good condition. It's definitely nice to own as a collector's item, but it's not accurate. I agree with Arun, that the actual facts as opposed to fiction became blurry for Lights in later years.

I understand what you're saying, Jason, but I'm not sure I totally agree with it. I think Lights knew full well what he was writing. I don't think a tragedy like that gets blurred with time, especially when you live through it. I think he wrote it the way he wanted it to have happened.

I finally did it. I came right out and called Titanic's Second Officer, Charles Herbert Lightoller, a liar.

 

[Jason D. Tiller]

I understand what you're saying, Jason, but I'm not sure I totally agree with it. I think Lights knew full well what he was writing. I don't think a tragedy like that gets blurred with time, especially when you live through it. I think he wrote it the way he wanted it to have happened.

I finally did it. I came right out and called Titanic's Second Officer, Charles Herbert Lightoller, a liar.

I'm not really sure about it, Gordon. Maybe Lights was a liar but then again perhaps, he wasn't. Personally, I'd like to give him the benefit of doubt. Memories do get blurry and fade over time with some people; it happened with other survivors.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I think calling Lightoller an outright liar would be a bit harsh. Yes, as I have repeatedly said, I believe he was a man with a great sense of self-preservation and consciously or subconsciously was going to protect "Number One" no matter what. Yes, he was a good "Company Man" and probably thought long and hard about what he was and wasn't going to say during the long hours on board the Carpathia. Yes, he did make statements that were contradictory and some of them were later shown to be inaccurate. But for all that he too went through a traumatic experience and as the most senior surviving officer, would have been under pressure knowing that he would be grilled during the Inquiries; and he most certainly was, on both sides of the Atlantic.

As far as his book was concerned, I have read a few readers' comments that they felt Lightoller's memory was perhaps fading when he wrote the book. As someone with a medical background, I'd like to qualify that opinion. I don't think Lightoller's apparent failing memory was age-related; when Lightoller wrote his book, he was slightly younger than Captain Smith had been on the Titanic. I think some aspects of the Titanic disaster itself had become a bit disorganized in his mind, at least partly due to his knowledge of other testimonies and opinions. That sort of thing is a human tendency.

 

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

I think calling Lightoller an outright liar would be a bit harsh. Yes, as I have repeatedly said, I believe he was a man with a great sense of self-preservation and consciously or subconsciously was going to protect "Number One" no matter what. Yes, he was a good "Company Man" and probably thought long and hard about what he was and wasn't going to say during the long hours on board the Carpathia. Yes, he did make statements that were contradictory and some of them were later shown to be inaccurate. But for all that he too went through a traumatic experience and as the most senior surviving officer, would have been under pressure knowing that he would be grilled during the Inquiries; and he most certainly was, on both sides of the Atlantic.

As far as his book was concerned, I have read a few readers' comments that they felt Lightoller's memory was perhaps fading when he wrote the book. As someone with a medical background, I'd like to qualify that opinion. I don't think Lightoller's apparent failing memory was age-related; when Lightoller wrote his book, he was slightly younger than Captain Smith had been on the Titanic. I think some aspects of the Titanic disaster itself had become a bit disorganized in his mind, at least partly due to his knowledge of other testimonies and opinions. That sort of thing is a human tendency.

Maybe I was a bit harsh with that assessment of Lightoller. For about the last year, while working on the book, I was trying to resolve the differences between Lightoller's testimony and the narrative in his book. There was a lot to consider there and, of course, there was no way to question Lights regarding the differences.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Why are malign intentions so often ascribed to Lightoller?

I think 'malign intentions' is too strong because most of the mistakes (for lack of another word) attributed to Lightoller were neither malign not intentional in the conventional sense. But the disadvantage he started to have even as the Carpathia docked in New York was that he was the senior-most surviving officer and had remained on board till the end; that latter part would have both positive and negative effects on Lightoller's image over time. Many, particularly in the aftermath of the disaster and for a few years afterwards, would hail him a hero; that opinion was boosted by the character's portrayal in the 1950s films and perhaps Lord's ANTR book. But decades later, the discovery of the wreck with the resultant renewed interest in the Titanic and especially advent of the internet with things like the Titanic Inquiry Project available to all online, Lightoller's image began to change till contemporaneously a few see him almost as a villain. IMO, neither was true; Lightoller did have what later appeared to be a few oversights (like those binoculars) and make errors of judgement - like being one of the Officers deciding to enforce the 'women and children only' policy on the port side lifeboats. Incidentally, the other two who were involved with the latter decision - Captain Smith and Chief Officer Wilde - were both senior to Lightoller but neither of them survived and so a lot of us saw that as 'Lightoller's policy'.

During his Testimonies on either side, Lightoller did not help himself with those sometimes vague and contradictory statements like the one Sam alluded to above about the 'flat calm' sea conditions. He admitted to the highly questionable gangway door order involving Nichols without any preamble or prompt, something that caused raised eyebrows even at the time and is rightly criticized by the likes of us to this day. Lightoller's faltering image in later years brought forth other things which were probably forgotten till then - like criticism of his 1935 book and his disagreements with Bride. Thus, looking at the big picture over 100+ years, I feel that the very fact that Lightoller was celebrated as something of a hero in the early years contributed to his comparative 'fall from grace' later as more and more debatable facts emerged. The old adage "Higher you climb, harder you fall" - and its various variants - is actually true.