What do you think?
Rate this book
Report into the Loss of the SS Titanic: A Centennial Reappraisal
An incredible group of experts reappraise the loss of the Titanic based on evidence that has come to light since the discovery of the wreck in 1985
Here, a team of dedicated, passionate, and expert authors issue their modern-day version of the report on the Titanic, with all the benefits of hindsight. Following the basic layout of the report, this ultimate Titanic reference book, provides fascinating insights into the ship herself, the American and British inquiries, the passengers and crew, the fateful journey and ice warnings received, the damage and sinking, protocol and process of rescue, the circumstances in connection with the SS Californian and SS Mount Temple, and the aftermath and ramifications around the world. These experts offer the last words on the subject, 100 years on.
Here, a team of dedicated, passionate, and expert authors issue their modern-day version of the report on the Titanic, with all the benefits of hindsight. Following the basic layout of the report, this ultimate Titanic reference book, provides fascinating insights into the ship herself, the American and British inquiries, the passengers and crew, the fateful journey and ice warnings received, the damage and sinking, protocol and process of rescue, the circumstances in connection with the SS Californian and SS Mount Temple, and the aftermath and ramifications around the world. These experts offer the last words on the subject, 100 years on.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
256 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 2011
8 people are currently reading
160 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
April 26, 2016
Report into the Loss of the SS Titanic might be as close as we’ll ever get to a Titanic book as written by Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory.
The reason that we remember the Titanic over a hundred years and a thousand disasters since she slipped beneath the North Atlantic is because it is an intensely human story. The ship struck an iceberg at around 11:40 p.m. ship’s time and disappeared from the surface of the ocean at around 2:20 a.m. She sunk on a relatively even keel and – until the final death plunge – at a stately pace. Couple that with the fact that there weren’t enough lifeboats on board – that mathematically there would be fatalities – makes this a rare moment in which people had time to look death in the face and make a conscious choice how to face it.
Those life-and-death choices is the reason Titanic thrives in historical memory while the Lusitania languishes as a historical footnote, one of the multiple choice answers to why America entered World War I. The life-sized drama on the ever-falling decks begs the question of every observer: what would I do? Consider three first class men. John Jacob Astor asking to accompany his wife in a lifeboat, and then meekly stepping away when refused entrance; Benjamin Guggenheim dressing in his best to die as a gentleman; and J. Bruce Ismay taking an empty spot in a lifeboat and rowing away with his back turned to the ship. Three fates, three decisions, and more potency than any novel.
Samuel Halpern and the ten other contributors to this book don’t care anything about that. At least not here. More to the point, they are not interested in that. They know the narrative of the sinking has been told dozens of times in classic works such as Walter Lord’s A Night to Remember. That’s been done. Halpern & Company are headed in the completely opposite direction. They want to discuss the rivets. They want to discuss specifications. They want to talk about how many tons of water came into the ship and how fast it entered. There is not much pathos, but there is a bunch of math. In short, they are undertaking a technical reevaluation of the sinking using as a foundation the 1912 Wreck Commissioner’s Report.
(Following the sinking, there were two Titanic inquiries. One conducted by the U.S. Senate. The other conducted by the British Board of Trade. The authors suggest that the British Wreck Inquiry was the more professional of the two. I would suggest only that it was the more British of the two. Concerned entirely with the technical dimensions of the collision, it called only three passengers, and one of those was J. Bruce Ismay. I humbly proffer that were it not for the American inquiry, with its abundance of passenger tales, the Titanic legacy would have lasted but a short hour).
The eleven authors of Report each take different chapters looking at different aspects of the sinking. There are chapters devoted to the two inquiries; a description of the ship; a list of passengers and crew lost and saved; an account of the Titanic’s Atlantic journey (including discussions on the ice warnings and visibility conditions); description of the damage caused by the iceberg; an account of the evacuation of the ship; and an exploration of the controversial roles played by the Californian and Mount Temple.
Because the topics vary widely, and are authored by different men and women, the overall quality of the book is uneven.
In the good category is the job done by Bill Wormstedt and Tad Fitch to compile the lifeboat launch sequence, along with occupancy estimates. I also liked Halpern’s section on the Californian, which distills a long-running disagreement over that ship’s location vis-à-vis Titanic. The chapter on the damage to the ship, while detail-laden, is also quite interesting, especially the authors’ handling of the infamous “coal-bunker fire” that smoldered in Titanic’s hold from the moment she left port.
Some of the chapters left me wanting more. For instance, Halpern’s discussion on the collision raises as many questions as it answers. It tantalizes with the possibility that Titanic’s lookouts spotted the berg and warned the bridge much sooner than typically thought. Indeed, Halpern states that First Officer Murdoch, the senior officer on the bridge at the time of collision, waited thirty seconds after spotting the ice to issue any orders. Thirty seconds! This raises many questions – chiefly, why? – for which answers are not even attempted.
I was also surprised at the shallow analysis of Murdoch’s fateful commands in attempting to avoid the iceberg. Halpern sticks to the conventional story: that Murdoch ordered the ship turned to port (“hard a starboard”) and the engines rung to “Stop” (not “Reverse”, which would have been a “crash stop” with a violent, jarring shudder that would’ve been much remarked upon).
When you turn a ship the length of Titanic, the stern acts a pivot point; the bow swings in the ordered direction, but the stern remains in place. Thus, while the bow of Titanic was moving away from the berg when she struck, the stern was still in its initial position, meaning that the iceberg might have scraped along the entire length of the ship. To avoid this, the story goes, Murdoch ordered the ship turned to starboard (“hard a port”) once Titanic struck ice. This had the effect of clearing the stern from the ice and minimizing damage.
However, according to Fourth Officer Boxhall’s testimony, Murdoch reported to Smith that he had tried to “hard a port around it.” This has led some Titanic historians to speculate that Murdoch was actually attempting a drastic maneuver in which he first ordered the ship to port (meaning the bow would swing left) and then, once the bow had cleared the ice, ordered the ship to starboard (meaning the bow would swing right, towards the ice). This would have the effect of clearing the stern from the ice. According to this theory, Murdoch’s orders actually put Titanic into the ice, though in an attempt to clear the berg completely. For whatever reason, Halpern does not discuss this at all.
Report sometimes skirts the edge of what is readable. I love minutiae as much as the next person, especially when it involves Titanic. There are times, however, when it just becomes too much. For instance, there is this discussion of watertight bulkhead A, by Bruce Beveridge:
That paragraph is followed by 14 other paragraphs just like it. One paragraph for each watertight door.
Frankly, I know intuitively that each of those paragraphs was made up of words. And individually, I know what most of those words mean. But put into sentences, I am entirely lost. Blame it on the fact that I’m not a naval architect.
I understand that there are probably some Titanic superfans out there for whom this is all important material. Fine. I will grudgingly accept that. But why can’t the writing here be accessible? Why can’t you define some of the nautical terms that you use? What does it mean for a bulkhead to be “stepped forward”?
One of the great annoyances in this book was the tendency towards elitism and exclusion typified by the excerpt above. It’s as though the authors were treating this book as a special club that only allowed in people who knew the special handshake (or who care far too much about the difference between “New York Time” and “Apparent Ship’s Time). I don’t think that advanced concepts and accessibility have to be mutually exclusive. Especially when you are trying to sell books.
(Of course, I’m assuming the authors wanted to sell books. Perhaps they were just creating another totem to lay at the altar of Titanic.)
Really what I’m saying is that buyer beware. If you are a reader with a casual interest in Titanic, you probably won’t bother reading past the Introduction. This is a book that is targeted at a specified audience. It is like a graduate-level course with many prerequisites. If you’ve done the prior reading, Report can provide some interesting insights and reappraisals.
If you haven’t, then you will discover how quickly your mind starts to wander when learning about bilge pumps.
The reason that we remember the Titanic over a hundred years and a thousand disasters since she slipped beneath the North Atlantic is because it is an intensely human story. The ship struck an iceberg at around 11:40 p.m. ship’s time and disappeared from the surface of the ocean at around 2:20 a.m. She sunk on a relatively even keel and – until the final death plunge – at a stately pace. Couple that with the fact that there weren’t enough lifeboats on board – that mathematically there would be fatalities – makes this a rare moment in which people had time to look death in the face and make a conscious choice how to face it.
Those life-and-death choices is the reason Titanic thrives in historical memory while the Lusitania languishes as a historical footnote, one of the multiple choice answers to why America entered World War I. The life-sized drama on the ever-falling decks begs the question of every observer: what would I do? Consider three first class men. John Jacob Astor asking to accompany his wife in a lifeboat, and then meekly stepping away when refused entrance; Benjamin Guggenheim dressing in his best to die as a gentleman; and J. Bruce Ismay taking an empty spot in a lifeboat and rowing away with his back turned to the ship. Three fates, three decisions, and more potency than any novel.
Samuel Halpern and the ten other contributors to this book don’t care anything about that. At least not here. More to the point, they are not interested in that. They know the narrative of the sinking has been told dozens of times in classic works such as Walter Lord’s A Night to Remember. That’s been done. Halpern & Company are headed in the completely opposite direction. They want to discuss the rivets. They want to discuss specifications. They want to talk about how many tons of water came into the ship and how fast it entered. There is not much pathos, but there is a bunch of math. In short, they are undertaking a technical reevaluation of the sinking using as a foundation the 1912 Wreck Commissioner’s Report.
(Following the sinking, there were two Titanic inquiries. One conducted by the U.S. Senate. The other conducted by the British Board of Trade. The authors suggest that the British Wreck Inquiry was the more professional of the two. I would suggest only that it was the more British of the two. Concerned entirely with the technical dimensions of the collision, it called only three passengers, and one of those was J. Bruce Ismay. I humbly proffer that were it not for the American inquiry, with its abundance of passenger tales, the Titanic legacy would have lasted but a short hour).
The eleven authors of Report each take different chapters looking at different aspects of the sinking. There are chapters devoted to the two inquiries; a description of the ship; a list of passengers and crew lost and saved; an account of the Titanic’s Atlantic journey (including discussions on the ice warnings and visibility conditions); description of the damage caused by the iceberg; an account of the evacuation of the ship; and an exploration of the controversial roles played by the Californian and Mount Temple.
Because the topics vary widely, and are authored by different men and women, the overall quality of the book is uneven.
In the good category is the job done by Bill Wormstedt and Tad Fitch to compile the lifeboat launch sequence, along with occupancy estimates. I also liked Halpern’s section on the Californian, which distills a long-running disagreement over that ship’s location vis-à-vis Titanic. The chapter on the damage to the ship, while detail-laden, is also quite interesting, especially the authors’ handling of the infamous “coal-bunker fire” that smoldered in Titanic’s hold from the moment she left port.
Some of the chapters left me wanting more. For instance, Halpern’s discussion on the collision raises as many questions as it answers. It tantalizes with the possibility that Titanic’s lookouts spotted the berg and warned the bridge much sooner than typically thought. Indeed, Halpern states that First Officer Murdoch, the senior officer on the bridge at the time of collision, waited thirty seconds after spotting the ice to issue any orders. Thirty seconds! This raises many questions – chiefly, why? – for which answers are not even attempted.
I was also surprised at the shallow analysis of Murdoch’s fateful commands in attempting to avoid the iceberg. Halpern sticks to the conventional story: that Murdoch ordered the ship turned to port (“hard a starboard”) and the engines rung to “Stop” (not “Reverse”, which would have been a “crash stop” with a violent, jarring shudder that would’ve been much remarked upon).
When you turn a ship the length of Titanic, the stern acts a pivot point; the bow swings in the ordered direction, but the stern remains in place. Thus, while the bow of Titanic was moving away from the berg when she struck, the stern was still in its initial position, meaning that the iceberg might have scraped along the entire length of the ship. To avoid this, the story goes, Murdoch ordered the ship turned to starboard (“hard a port”) once Titanic struck ice. This had the effect of clearing the stern from the ice and minimizing damage.
However, according to Fourth Officer Boxhall’s testimony, Murdoch reported to Smith that he had tried to “hard a port around it.” This has led some Titanic historians to speculate that Murdoch was actually attempting a drastic maneuver in which he first ordered the ship to port (meaning the bow would swing left) and then, once the bow had cleared the ice, ordered the ship to starboard (meaning the bow would swing right, towards the ice). This would have the effect of clearing the stern from the ice. According to this theory, Murdoch’s orders actually put Titanic into the ice, though in an attempt to clear the berg completely. For whatever reason, Halpern does not discuss this at all.
Report sometimes skirts the edge of what is readable. I love minutiae as much as the next person, especially when it involves Titanic. There are times, however, when it just becomes too much. For instance, there is this discussion of watertight bulkhead A, by Bruce Beveridge:
The first watertight bulkhead, also called the collision bulkhead. It extended up from the bottom of the hull at frame 134F to the underside of E deck. The lower portion of this bulkhead formed the forward end of the foremost double bottom tank, and the after bulkheads of both the forepeak tank and the chain locker. At E deck, the bulkhead was stepped forward to frame 140F and then continued up to the underside of C deck as a structural element, but was made watertight to the underside of D deck only.
That paragraph is followed by 14 other paragraphs just like it. One paragraph for each watertight door.
Frankly, I know intuitively that each of those paragraphs was made up of words. And individually, I know what most of those words mean. But put into sentences, I am entirely lost. Blame it on the fact that I’m not a naval architect.
I understand that there are probably some Titanic superfans out there for whom this is all important material. Fine. I will grudgingly accept that. But why can’t the writing here be accessible? Why can’t you define some of the nautical terms that you use? What does it mean for a bulkhead to be “stepped forward”?
One of the great annoyances in this book was the tendency towards elitism and exclusion typified by the excerpt above. It’s as though the authors were treating this book as a special club that only allowed in people who knew the special handshake (or who care far too much about the difference between “New York Time” and “Apparent Ship’s Time). I don’t think that advanced concepts and accessibility have to be mutually exclusive. Especially when you are trying to sell books.
(Of course, I’m assuming the authors wanted to sell books. Perhaps they were just creating another totem to lay at the altar of Titanic.)
Really what I’m saying is that buyer beware. If you are a reader with a casual interest in Titanic, you probably won’t bother reading past the Introduction. This is a book that is targeted at a specified audience. It is like a graduate-level course with many prerequisites. If you’ve done the prior reading, Report can provide some interesting insights and reappraisals.
If you haven’t, then you will discover how quickly your mind starts to wander when learning about bilge pumps.
April 9, 2017
An excellent resource for anybody that wants to gain a deeper understanding of Titanic. Well worth the read if you can find a copy.
December 6, 2020
While there is some very useful and quite interesting information in this book, I often found the tone of it quite snobbish.
It's definitely not a "Titanic" book for everyone. Unless you're quite dedicated to the study of the ship in much (even if not all) of its minutiae, you'll find this QUITE tedious in several spots. I've been studying the ship, its history, tragedy, etc. for over 15 years, and even I found many areas where my eyes glazed over. Then again, I'm not an engineer or such, so perhaps there will be spots where you'll be super interested, and other parts that I found of interest where you'll be bored to tears.
One thing I found extremely interesting was at the beginning, when the authors said they intended the book to answer questions and not perpetuate rumors and disinformation that is so often found in other publications, both in books and on websites. An admirable undertaking, for sure!
And yet...
Of particular interest is the area where they address the "'Californian' incident." They have claimed to read interviews and the evidence presented at both inquiries into the disaster (American and British), but I found that several pieces of evidence that weren't convenient to their preconceived narrative were summarily ignored. They appear firmly in the camp of "Captain Lord is at fault and he could have saved everyone on 'Titanic' if he'd tried." They ignored the fact that Quartermaster Rowe and Quartermaster Olliver, both of whom helped fire off the rockets (more appropriately 'sockets') that night testified to there being far MORE than the 8 traditionally accepted. Also ignored were other members of the crew and many, many passengers who testified to seeing more than 8, and several colored rockets in amongst the white. Also ignored was Boxhall's description of the masthead lights of the ship he saw, which did NOT match the "Californian," but in fact match "Mount Temple," also described in a German officer's log when he spotted "Mount Temple" from his sub during WWI. "Mount Temple" crewmembers' stories told to newspapers are looked down upon by the authors, because after all, "Many of these details were widely known by this point." Same could be said by the details talked about by the crewmembers of the "Californian," and yet they are not censured at all, let alone with the same severity. "Mount Temple" is excused for not coming to "Titanic"s aid because of the ice between the two ships, and Capt. Moore not wanting to put his crew and passengers at the same risk. IF indeed "Titanic"s distress was seen by "Californian," they were in the SAME ice field and would have faced the same risks, yet once again Capt. Lord was scolded for not rushing to the rescue. The challenges he faced the next day getting to the scene of the wreckage and lifeboats proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they could not have arrived in time to save anyone, except those already in the lifeboats - oh, like the "Carpathia." Also ignored was the Marconi messages sent from "Mount Temple" before anyone save for those on "Carpathia" and in "Titanic"s lifeboats knowing the ship went down, attesting to that fact.
All in all, a solid 2 stars for the interesting and useful information scattered amongst.
It's definitely not a "Titanic" book for everyone. Unless you're quite dedicated to the study of the ship in much (even if not all) of its minutiae, you'll find this QUITE tedious in several spots. I've been studying the ship, its history, tragedy, etc. for over 15 years, and even I found many areas where my eyes glazed over. Then again, I'm not an engineer or such, so perhaps there will be spots where you'll be super interested, and other parts that I found of interest where you'll be bored to tears.
One thing I found extremely interesting was at the beginning, when the authors said they intended the book to answer questions and not perpetuate rumors and disinformation that is so often found in other publications, both in books and on websites. An admirable undertaking, for sure!
And yet...
Of particular interest is the area where they address the "'Californian' incident." They have claimed to read interviews and the evidence presented at both inquiries into the disaster (American and British), but I found that several pieces of evidence that weren't convenient to their preconceived narrative were summarily ignored. They appear firmly in the camp of "Captain Lord is at fault and he could have saved everyone on 'Titanic' if he'd tried." They ignored the fact that Quartermaster Rowe and Quartermaster Olliver, both of whom helped fire off the rockets (more appropriately 'sockets') that night testified to there being far MORE than the 8 traditionally accepted. Also ignored were other members of the crew and many, many passengers who testified to seeing more than 8, and several colored rockets in amongst the white. Also ignored was Boxhall's description of the masthead lights of the ship he saw, which did NOT match the "Californian," but in fact match "Mount Temple," also described in a German officer's log when he spotted "Mount Temple" from his sub during WWI. "Mount Temple" crewmembers' stories told to newspapers are looked down upon by the authors, because after all, "Many of these details were widely known by this point." Same could be said by the details talked about by the crewmembers of the "Californian," and yet they are not censured at all, let alone with the same severity. "Mount Temple" is excused for not coming to "Titanic"s aid because of the ice between the two ships, and Capt. Moore not wanting to put his crew and passengers at the same risk. IF indeed "Titanic"s distress was seen by "Californian," they were in the SAME ice field and would have faced the same risks, yet once again Capt. Lord was scolded for not rushing to the rescue. The challenges he faced the next day getting to the scene of the wreckage and lifeboats proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they could not have arrived in time to save anyone, except those already in the lifeboats - oh, like the "Carpathia." Also ignored was the Marconi messages sent from "Mount Temple" before anyone save for those on "Carpathia" and in "Titanic"s lifeboats knowing the ship went down, attesting to that fact.
All in all, a solid 2 stars for the interesting and useful information scattered amongst.
March 24, 2023
Much like a lot of other reviewers who have read this book, I am also a Titanic nut. You kinda have to be to want to read this book and actually enjoy reading it - which I did, a lot.
I absolutely devour anything about the Titanic and all the rich, little details from this book that I either forgot about or never knew in the first place satisfied me immensely. The sections about each and every telegram messages the Titanic received from other ships nearby about ice in the area and the telegram messages the Titanic sent out to receive aid were just - chef's kiss - to my Titanic-obsessed mind. Especially the parts with Olympic and their utter determination to find out what was happening to their sister ship and what they could do to save her - my heart melted.
Another thing that made me enjoy this book that much more was that my copy contained commentary from it's previous owner who was just as Titanic-obsessed as me, if not more so. Their commentary, especially their professed love of Frederick Barrett and Joseph Bell, warmed my heart and further immersed me into the book and events, rather than took away.
This is a great read if you are someone who has always loved Titanic and doesn't mind reading about each and every little thing about her!
I absolutely devour anything about the Titanic and all the rich, little details from this book that I either forgot about or never knew in the first place satisfied me immensely. The sections about each and every telegram messages the Titanic received from other ships nearby about ice in the area and the telegram messages the Titanic sent out to receive aid were just - chef's kiss - to my Titanic-obsessed mind. Especially the parts with Olympic and their utter determination to find out what was happening to their sister ship and what they could do to save her - my heart melted.
Another thing that made me enjoy this book that much more was that my copy contained commentary from it's previous owner who was just as Titanic-obsessed as me, if not more so. Their commentary, especially their professed love of Frederick Barrett and Joseph Bell, warmed my heart and further immersed me into the book and events, rather than took away.
This is a great read if you are someone who has always loved Titanic and doesn't mind reading about each and every little thing about her!
May 14, 2014
Report into the loss of SS Titanic, a Centennial Reappraisal
What do you get when you put together eleven of the foremost Titanic historians? A great book full of information, and insight into the Titanic that you never considered before. Understand that this book is not a narrative of the events, literally it is an encyclopedia of Titanic and the disaster that befell her. At first to me it seemed slow, but as I delved deeper into the book it became more and more fascinating. If you are looking for facts, figures and explanations of the events surrounding Titanic, this is the book for you. Highly recommended for Titanic buffs!
What do you get when you put together eleven of the foremost Titanic historians? A great book full of information, and insight into the Titanic that you never considered before. Understand that this book is not a narrative of the events, literally it is an encyclopedia of Titanic and the disaster that befell her. At first to me it seemed slow, but as I delved deeper into the book it became more and more fascinating. If you are looking for facts, figures and explanations of the events surrounding Titanic, this is the book for you. Highly recommended for Titanic buffs!
August 12, 2017
For serious students of Titanic
People who want to know all the details concerning the sinking of the Titanic, not necessarily the human stories, but times, dates, messages, times lifeboats were launched, etc., this is the book for you. For me, there was a lot of information I didn't understand because of its technical nature, a lot of repetition where information overlapped and very little human aspect. There are a lot of illustrations of different parts of the ship, lots of charts, lists, etc. I'm sure it's perfect for the reader for which it was intended. I skimmed a lot of the book, but learned some things I hadn't read about elsewhere.
People who want to know all the details concerning the sinking of the Titanic, not necessarily the human stories, but times, dates, messages, times lifeboats were launched, etc., this is the book for you. For me, there was a lot of information I didn't understand because of its technical nature, a lot of repetition where information overlapped and very little human aspect. There are a lot of illustrations of different parts of the ship, lots of charts, lists, etc. I'm sure it's perfect for the reader for which it was intended. I skimmed a lot of the book, but learned some things I hadn't read about elsewhere.
March 15, 2014
An excellent book for those who want to know all the details about the ship and the sinking but not an easy read as so much of it deals in statistics. If a person wanted to rebuild the Titanic, this would be the book to have in their library.
October 12, 2018
A lot of facts, lists, and technical jargon, not much in the way of storytelling, but interesting for fans who want to know technical details.
*Thank you to Samuel Halpern, the publisher, and NetGalley for allowing me to read an advanced copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
*Thank you to Samuel Halpern, the publisher, and NetGalley for allowing me to read an advanced copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
August 8, 2020
Wow. Just wow. This was supposed to be a casual in the side read but it completely took over. Packed with fascinating facts which gives you a far deeper understanding of the ship and how events affected her.
Amazing read for any Titanic enthusiast.
Amazing read for any Titanic enthusiast.
March 20, 2012
A very detailed look at all the issues by a recognized team of Titanic historians. Good stuff for Titanic junkies.
October 25, 2024
If I could give it 10 stars, I would. For anyone interested in a deeper knowledge of Titanic before, during, and after her sinking. This is a book for you.
May 1, 2025
A must-have for the serious Titanic researcher.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews