Page 130 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 23 - 26

The Commissioner: I am told it is 46,000. The Attorney-General: The last line was the one I first gave you. I will tell you why it was taken as 39,830 - because in the course of the evidence on the last occasion we had some discussion, and it was taken as between those two. The Commissioner: What was the exact tonnage of the “Titanic”? Mr. Laing: Forty-six thousand three hundred and twenty-eight. The Commissioner: Then you take the last line. The Attorney-General: It is the same thing, only it comes to a little more; it is 42,656 cubic capacity. The Commissioner: Then is that accommodation for 44,205? The Attorney-General: Approximately, yes. It does not follow, of course, that they all have a divisor of 10, but approximately that is the case. The Commissioner: How many could the “Titanic” carry altogether? The Attorney-General: Three thousand five hundred and forty-seven passengers and crew. The Commissioner: And this would give a boat accommodation of more than the carrying capacity. The Attorney-General: Yes. Mr. Laing: If the “Titanic” had been fitted as an emigrant ship she could have carried something like 10,000. The Commissioner: Yes, I know. The Attorney-General was going to draw my attention to the difference between the carrying capacity of the German boats and the English boats. What I mean is the German boats of the size of the “Titanic” would be certified to carry a good many more, as I understand, than the “Titanic” was certified to carry. Is not that the case? The Attorney-General: Yes, that is right. I am not sure that I have sufficient material to do the sum or to get it done; I do not think we have, but we can give you some idea of what the requirements are. The proposition is right. 24281 (Mr. Scanlan - To the Witness.) Mr. Archer, from your practical experience as a shipwrights’ Surveyor, do you see any difficulty in placing on the boat deck of a ship like the “Titanic” sufficient boats to accommodate 3,547 persons? - May I ask if you mean a new vessel which is under construction, or in the “Olympic” that is already constructed? 24282. Yes, a new vessel under construction? - No, there is no reason why. It is quite possible to put boats on board such a vessel to accommodate 3,500 persons. 24283. If you were asked to give a recommendation as to the boats, what proportion of wooden boats and what proportion of rafts or boats like the Englehardt would you have? - I would not have rafts at all. 24284. Take Englehardt boats? - The Englehardt boat is a somewhat new type of boat, and we have not had a very large experience of it. I would not suggest that more than about half of the boats should be of that Englehardt type, which I call a deck boat, with collapsible bulwarks. 24285. Do you think that boats sufficient to accommodate so many people could be carried, and leave at the same time sufficient working space on the boat deck? - Yes, so far as I am in a position to judge. I am not a nautical man; I do not know much about lowering boats, but so far as I am in a position to judge, I think there would be sufficient space around the boats. 24286. Might some of the boats be carried inboard? - Yes, they must be. 24287. Have you any idea as to any arrangement for changing lifeboats from the starboard side to the port side, or from the port side to the starboard side in stress of weather? - I know that some such plan has been mooted, but personally I have never seen such an arrangement. 24288. Is that one of the matters that you think should be submitted to the Committee that you desire? - It is one of them, yes. 24289. (The Commissioner.) Would it be of any use to carry motor-boats? - I think, my Lord, that motor-boats would be useful, a certain proportion of them. 24290. What will be the advantage of them? - The chief advantage, I suggest, would be their greater speed, which would enable them to -