Lightoller a hero or a zero

[Steven Christian]

To me Lightoller is a very fascinating character. I don’t like labelling people at all. In these final hours so much happened. There were regretful actions done by Lightoller but also moments where he showed great leadership, bravery and competence. Most prominently for me was when he succesfully lead the overturned collapsible B with dozens men who probably own their lives to him, just after Mr. Lightoller had been sucked under water himself.

All circumstances regarded, his intentions were to save people and do his duty as he understood it. I don’t like to make a judgement on him, but I personally see him more in a positive way than a negative.

Pretty much how I feel about it too. With all that he went thru that night even after getting sucked underwater, ended up in freezing water and still never gave up doing what he could to save more lives. He gets a HERO rating from me for that alone. As for his faults, so what. Never met a Sir Galahad before. Cheers.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

My feelings towards Lightoller have mellowed slightly in recent months. I have never considered him as a 'zero' but also will never think that he was a 'hero' either. But I do concede that his critics (including yours truly) might have been a tad unfair to him in the past, particularly in relation to the "women and children only" lifeboat loading policy on the port side. Considering that Lightoller came third in the pecking order on the port side after Captain Smith and C/O Wilde, it could not have been him who set the rule there; moreover, Lightoller was not involved in the loading or lowering of 4 port side lifeboats - #16, #14, #10 and #2 and almost certainly was 'secondary' to Wilde for #8 and Collapsible D.

As I have said before, my feelings towards Lightoller might have been biased by my utter dislike for actor Kenneth More who played the role of the Second Officer in the 1958 film version of ANTR. Whenever I try to form a mental picture of Lightoller, I think of More's annoying visage even though the two men did not have any resemblance. Kenneth More was particularly bad in ANTR with those awful jerky mannerisms and stupid lines that looked and sounded about as natural as stryofoam.

 

[Steven Christian]

My feelings towards Lightoller have mellowed slightly in recent months. I have never considered him as a 'zero' but also will never think that he was a 'hero' either. But I do concede that his critics (including yours truly) might have been a tad unfair to him in the past, particularly in relation to the "women and children only" lifeboat loading policy on the port side. Considering that Lightoller came third in the pecking order on the port side after Captain Smith and C/O Wilde, it could not have been him who set the rule there; moreover, Lightoller was not involved in the loading or lowering of 4 port side lifeboats - #16, #14, #10 and #2 and almost certainly was 'secondary' to Wilde for #8 and Collapsible D.

As I have said before, my feelings towards Lightoller might have been biased by my utter dislike for actor Kenneth More who played the role of the Second Officer in the 1958 film version of ANTR. Whenever I try to form a mental picture of Lightoller, I think of More's annoying visage even though the two men did not have any resemblance. Kenneth More was particularly bad in ANTR with those awful jerky mannerisms and stupid lines that looked and sounded about as natural as stryofoam.

I know what you mean. At one time I considered B. Ismay a villian. But that has changed over time. I don't believe that anymore. The more I looked into him I realized I wrong about the man. His later life kind of proved that for me by how the village he settled down thought about the man. Which was generally positive. Cheers.

 

[John Patts]

Less than a zero. Net negative.

 

[ScottyBK]

Smith really should have figured out some plan to get the steerage women and children up on deck a lot sooner. I know he was facing the most horrific and difficult situation imaginable, but he should have at least tried in some way.

 

[Ezekiel]

I don't really see how Lightoller's actions on Titanic, regardless of what he did much later in life, could be regarded as heroic. He did a terrible job with his lifeboats and his absurd "women and children only" policy, causing at least 150 more deaths than there should have been; and Murdoch's actions stand as a shining reminder that it was, indeed, possible to do better.

Ditto for Collapsible B. I have never quite understood why his presence would have supposedly 'saved' the men who climbed on it. This seems to rest on the questionable assumption that all the other thirty men were fools who wouldn't be able to stay on an upturned boat without an officer telling them what to do. People have survived worse situations without a Lightoller. I will also note that truly heroic men, in similar situations, gave up their spot on a lifeboat or raft so that others could survive. Lightoller, being personally responsible for there being substantially more people in the water than there should have been, was the closest I could ever think to someone having a duty to do so. But the thought never crossed his mind, of course.

 

[Gordon Mooneyhan]

I used to think of Lightoller as rather "heroic," even considering his "misinterpretation" of "women and children first." But then I read the several chapters in "Titanic and Other Ships" related to the Titanic and the sinking, and I now don't know what to think of him.

He claims that Captain Smith's action at the helm avoided the collision between the Titanic and New York (which he calls St. Paul in the book). The Titanic was within Southampton Harbor at the time and was, therefore, under the command of a Harbour Pilot. Later, he claims that he talked with Chief Wireless Officer Jack Phillips on Collapsible B about the Mesaba message. And then his publisher withdrawals all books from the bookstores after being threatened with a lawsuit by the Marconi Company.

The last time I checked, an autobiography wasn't supposed to be a work of fiction, yet parts of "Titanic and Other Ships" read more like a work of fiction. Any thoughts/comments? And to apologize in advance, but I don't buy the excuse of a "faulty memory." An event like the sinking of the Titanic, you're going to remember everything.

 

[Prorsum]

For some reason nobody mention this before... all officers on board should have been more or less familiar with the total number of men / women / children aboard the ship, and it should have been very clear to them that a lot of women and children would perish that night, even if in theory all boats would have been loaded with them to a maximum capacity. Now just try for a second to assume the socio-cultural upbringing of a Titanic officer, the code of honour programmed into him, and it would not be hard to see that this fact very easily leads to a cruel but romantic view that in such situation men have no moral right to save their lives while women and children perish. And so men would only be allowed in the boats to ensure survival of those ladies and children who made it to the boats. And all other men were to bravely face their destiny together with those women who could not or would not board the boats. Of course it can be argued that by those standards, Lightoller should have done something like Captain Smith does in the 1997 movie - but unlike Japanese culture of the same time, suicide was not exactly romantisized in the Western culture and was at odds with Christian morality. It was more like a valiant last stand in defiance of impending doom. In that way, Lightoller was indeed a hero, but Murdock was a super-hero who demonstrated extreme compassion uncharacteristic of a man of his time.

 

[Ezekiel]

For some reason nobody mention this before... all officers on board should have been more or less familiar with the total number of men / women / children aboard the ship, and it should have been very clear to them that a lot of women and children would perish that night, even if in theory all boats would have been loaded with them to a maximum capacity.

Nobody mentioned it because it is completely false. The boats had room for 1,178 people, and there was a grand total of 534 women and children aboard. They could have saved all the women and children and a further 644 men, including in all likelihood all the husbands and fathers of the women and children. Now that I think; they could have saved even a bit more than 1,178 people, as 1,178 was calculated based on adults, and the 109 children would weigh less and take up less space. Lightoller (and Wilde, and Smith) with his 'women and children' only nonsense is the primary reason they managed to lose 400 more lives than they should have, including 162 women and children. They senselessly prevented men and even teenage boys from entering shamefully half-empty lifeboats; while not putting half of the effort they put in preventing men from entering the boats in actually trying to get the third class women and children up on deck and into said boats. That is why the port side disaster trio are not heroes, unlike Murdoch who really did his best to save lives.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

They could have saved all the women and children and a further 644 men, including in all likelihood all the husbands and fathers of the women and children.

Ezekiel, you might be right in terms of numbers involved, but remember we are not talking about statistics but real-life people and practicalities here. Putting aside the practical difficulties of filling every available lifeboat to capacity under the circumstances that prevailed on board the sinking Titanic, do you really believe any Officer, even at gunpoint, would have been able to enforce the "husbands and fathers only" policy that you mention above? They just about accepted women and children only on the port side because of the existing social order of the day. But the slightest attempt to discriminate in favour of men who had wives or children would have resulted in pandemonium and God knows what else. Remember that almost every single man on board the Titanic was someone's son and/or husband and/or father and by what logic or moral justification could anyone order them to remain to die while those fortunate enough to be travelling with their wives and/or children were saved?

 

[Ezekiel]

do you really believe any Officer, even at gunpoint, would have been able to enforce the "husbands and fathers only" policy that you mention above? They just about accepted women and children only on the port side because of the existing social order of the day.

Yes, I really believe so. The "social order of the day" did not prevent the men on Arctic, La Bourgogne etc from storming the lifeboats ahead of the women and children. On Titanic, the men who in real life only stood back because of the guns and crew physically beating them back could have been dealt with the same way in a "couples/families first" scenario. The others, the ones who obeyed on their own accord, would have done the same. If someone could accept the absolute nonsense of staying back and watching 65-seat lifeboats leaving the ship with 20 - 30 people in them, I am willing to bet they would have also accepted giving precedence to couples and families. Wanna give them a rationale in line with the social order of the day? The social order of the time is that men have to escort and protect their wives, so the rationale is they go with them to protect them.

But the slightest attempt to discriminate in favour of men who had wives or children would have resulted in pandemonium and God knows what else.

I disagree. They accepted to stay back, or were somehow held back, while half-empty lifeboats kept leaving the ship, which would have been far more of a reason to storm the boats.

Remember that almost every single man on board the Titanic was someone's son and/or husband and/or father and by what logic or moral justification could anyone order them to remain to die while those fortunate enough to be travelling with their wives and/or children were saved?

By the same "logic" or "justification" anyone could order them to remain to die while the women were saved, I would say. The vast majority of those traveling without wives/children were crew, anyway, who by the social order of the day weren't entitled to a place in the lifeboats except the select few who were to man them. For the rest, have the order be "couples and families first" instead of "women and children first" and stick by it. Even better, have some of the hundreds of stewards/firemen who are not needed working on the boats round up the single men and organize them to gather furniture, wooden panels etc. and build makeshift rafts, possibly in places away from the lifeboats. It might save some more lives, and even if it won't, it would keep them busy/distracted while giving them hope.

 

[James Murdoch]

It is easy to look back at the tragedy of the Titanic and think that all the lifeboats should have been filled to capacity, but such thinking does not take into account the reality of the situation. Firstly, the ship sank slowly and on a relatively even keel, which meant that many passengers did not initially grasp the severity of the situation. Additionally, the sound of the steam venting was deafening, which made communication difficult and disorienting.

Furthermore, the idea that all lifeboats could have been lowered fully loaded is simply not practical. The crew on the Titanic were not trained for such a scenario, and many passengers were not willing to leave the warmth and relative safety of the ship until it was too late. How long should the officers hold back the initial boats for? Doing so would have a knock on effect on the launching of later boats, which only just managed to leave the ship before she foundered. Were that to happen, forums like this would be dominated by discussions along the lines of "Why were the crew so reluctant to launch the first boats? Surely it would have been better to get it down half full and then manage to get all boats away than the ship sinking with four boats still attached to the ship?"
It was exceptionally difficult to fill the initial boats, Murdoch only managed to get twelve people into the emergency cutter, Boat #1.

And I must take issue with the suggestion of rounding up hundreds of crew members and single men to construct makeshift rafts during the sinking of the Titanic and call it out for what it is: a ludicrous idea. It assumes that untrained individuals could construct seaworthy rafts in a matter of minutes while ignoring the limited time available, the crew's existing struggles with launching lifeboats given the lack.of able seamen onboard, and of course social barriers between passengers and crew. It would only highten the sense of panic on the ship, which really want pervasive until the final forty or forty five minutes or so. Hindsight is always 20/20, but in reality, the focus needed to be on launching the available lifeboats and getting as many passengers to safety as possible.

 

[Ezekiel]

It is easy to look back at the tragedy of the Titanic and think that all the lifeboats should have been filled to capacity, but such thinking does not take into account the reality of the situation. Firstly, the ship sank slowly and on a relatively even keel, which meant that many passengers did not initially grasp the severity of the situation.

It also meant that they had the best possible conditions to launch the lifeboats without accidents, unlike in most other maritime disasters.

The crew on the Titanic were not trained for such a scenario,

What kind of further training that they lacked did they require? I remind you that they did launch some full lifeboats... and that was after a sizeable portion of the able seamen had already left the ship with the early boats.

and many passengers were not willing to leave the warmth and relative safety of the ship until it was too late.

Many first class passengers, since these were the only ones present at the launching of the early boats... they would have found more people willing to board them if they had actually taken action to get the second and especially third class couples and families on the boat deck as soon as the decision to launch the boats was made. And as you fully know, on Lightoller's (and Smith's, and Wilde's) side, men who were willing to enter the boats were prevented from doing so. From the start, and to the very end. There was no lack of men willing to enter the far from full port aft boats, but they were violently prevented from doing so. There was no doubt that the ship was sinking, and no lack of men willing to abandon ship, by the time boats 2 and 4 and Collapsible D were launched, but they were prevented from entering and even ordered out at gunpoint if they entered. When one compares the number of people saved on Collapsible B and D, one almost wishes they had not been able to launch D, either.

How long should the officers hold back the initial boats for? Doing so would have a knock on effect on the launching of later boats, which only just managed to leave the ship before she foundered.

How much time did Lightoller and his deceased associates waste in parting couples and families that did not need to be parted? How much did they waste in ejecting men out of boats that were never even close to being full?

It was exceptionally difficult to fill the initial boats, Murdoch only managed to get twelve people into the emergency cutter, Boat #1.

Murdoch did not prevent anyone from entering his early boats. Lightoller, Wilde and Smith barely put two dozen people each in boats 6 and 8, each designed to carry 65 people, and prevented husbands who were willing to get into said boats from entering them. There is no going around it. Boat 1 was launched with twelve people, despite having room for 40, when nobody else was available to enter. Boat 2, with the same capacity, was launched with seventeen people, just five more than #1 (I am not counting Anton Kink, as he was not allowed in, he was only smart enough to jump in as it was being lowered and thus deprive Wilde of the chance of making yet another widow and orphan), despite there being no lack whatsoever of men willing to get in by the time it was launched. Boat 2 is, in fact, the infamous boat where Wilde ordered out a group of men who had climbed in at gunpoint. I've always found the Boat 2 fiasco to be infinitely more shameful than anything that ever had to to with Boat 1. Launching Boat 1 with twelve people in it, at the time it was launched, may have been questionable. But launching Boat 2 with seventeen, at the time it was launched, was unforgivable.

And I must take issue with the suggestion of rounding up hundreds of crew members and single men to construct makeshift rafts during the sinking of the Titanic and call it out for what it is: a ludicrous idea.

Not as ludicrous as the excuses given for the port side lifeboat fiasco.

It assumes that untrained individuals could construct seaworthy rafts in a matter of minutes while ignoring the limited time available, the crew's existing struggles with launching lifeboats given the lack.of able seamen onboard, and of course social barriers between passengers and crew.

Indeed, if you read my entire reply, I suggested it mostly as a way of keeping those people busy. Although I do believe it might have saved a few more people. But it would have mostly been a positive side effect.

It would only highten the sense of panic on the ship, which really want pervasive until the final forty or forty five minutes or so.

I disagree.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but in reality, the focus needed to be on launching the available lifeboats and getting as many passengers to safety as possible

When you analize the actions of the port side trio you get the opposite impression. Effort placed in getting third class women and children up on deck and into the boats? Minimum, if not nil. Effort placed in preventing men and boys standing around the boats from entering them when there was still room for dozens? Maximum. A starting point to achieve the objective of 'getting as many passengers to safety as possible' would have been, you know, not preventing willing men from entering disgracefully half-empty lifeboats.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

It also meant that they had the best possible conditions to launch the lifeboats without accidents

Not necessarily. It depends on what one means by "best conditions" and it is not easy to define in a slowly sinking ship in the middle of the ocean. The fact that not everybody knew at the same time that the ship was sinking and when they did, there was uncertainty with some about how much time was left meant that the conditions were not as straightforward as they might seem at first glance. There was certainly a great deal of reluctance among the passengers to board the forward starboard lifeboats when they were being loaded; even with no one being stopped from entering any of those boats and Murdoch making up numbers by allowing non-essential crew to board, they were far from loaded to capacity.

For reasons which are difficult to explain, the situation was different on the port side, where there was more willingness among passengers to board. Perhaps more First Class passengers gathered on the port side because the Captain was there - we will never know. The Titanic was a huge ship and it might not have been immediately apparent to many passengers that things were different on the two sides.

What kind of further training that they lacked did they require? I remind you that they did launch some full lifeboats..

It is not so much the mechanics of swinging out, positioning, loading and lowering that the crew lacked training; I think many works have exaggerated that part. But the fact that the Captain's orders to start loading the lifeboats was interpreted differently on the two sides suggests that there was at least some uncertainty among the crew about how to go about their tasks. A combination of that uncertainty and aforementioned initial passenger reluctance on the starboard side contributed to partially filled early boats. Then there was some officer's belief that it was not safe to load a lifeboat to near-capacity as it hung from its davits, something Lightoller admitted to in his testimony. But later, when their options were clearly limited, they did launch lifeboats that were full, like #11 and #15, which were lowered without problems (the close encounter that Lifeboat #15 had with #13 during lowering had nothing to do with passenger numbers in either boat).

Boat 2 is, in fact, the infamous boat where Wilde ordered out a group of men who had climbed in at gunpoint.

The men who initially occupied Lifeboat #2 were crew - I think mainly stokers, trimmers etc - from deep below who took their chance when the boat was briefly unsupervised during the Firearms Meeting. There is no certainty that it was just Wilde who ordered them out, much less that he did so at gunpoint. I think Captain Smith was the first to order the interloping crew members out of Lifeboat #2 before Wilde arrived from aft to join him..

 

[Ezekiel]

There was certainly a great deal of reluctance among the passengers to board the forward starboard lifeboats when they were being loaded; even with no one being stopped from entering any of those boats and Murdoch making up numbers by allowing non-essential crew to board, they were far from loaded to capacity.

I know that, Arun - which is why I mantain that Lightoller, Smith and Wilde did a shameful job with their lifeboats. Even with reluctant passengers, Murdoch was still able to launch Boats 3 and 5 with 35-40 people in each, and even Boat 7, the first one, still carried (slightly) more people than the 25 each carried by #6 and #8. Had the trio not been the... insert unflattering adjective of your choosing... they were, they could have launched #6 and #8 with a dozen more people each, and they could, and should, have launched the later boats with a full complement.

It is not so much the mechanics of swinging out, positioning, loading and lowering that the crew lacked training; I think many works have exaggerated that part. But the fact that the Captain's orders to start loading the lifeboats was interpreted differently on the two sides suggests that there was at least some uncertainty among the crew about how to go about their tasks. A combination of that uncertainty and aforementioned initial passenger reluctance on the starboard side contributed to partially filled early boats. Then there was some officer's belief that it was not safe to load a lifeboat to near-capacity as it hung from its davits, something Lightoller admitted to in his testimony. But later, when their options were clearly limited, they did launch lifeboats that were full, like #11 and #15, which were lowered without problems (the close encounter that Lifeboat #15 had with #13 during lowering had nothing to do with passenger numbers in either boat).

Indeed. #11, #13, #15 and Collapsible C were all quite full. As you know, they were all launched by Murdoch, and the former three left the ship before #2, #4, and even some of the aft port boats. And all left before Collapsible D, of course. Yet Smith, Lightoller and Wilde failed to take notice of the fact that filled boats could indeed be safely launched (and that allowing men in after all women and children were loaded did not result in catastrophic rushes - if anything, the risk of this happening was much greater on their side, as one would expect...), and continued with their insane policy that resulted in half-empty lifeboats to the very end. Let me stress again: Collapsible D saved fewer people than its never launched, overturned counterpart on which hypothermic, drenched wet men had to stand for hours before being rescued. Enough said.

The men who initially occupied Lifeboat #2 were crew - I think mainly stokers, trimmers etc - from deep below who took their chance when the boat was briefly unsupervised during the Firearms Meeting. There is no certainty that it was just Wilde who ordered them out, much less that he did so at gunpoint. I think Captain Smith was the first to order the interloping crew members out of Lifeboat #2 before Wilde arrived from aft to join him..

They ordered them out... and then... launched a boat that had room for 40 with just 17 people in it.