The common view is that the top of the iceberg threw chunks of ice straight down onto the deck. It is also the common view that there was no extreme overhang at the berg that reached over to the ship straight above the deck. Regarding both aspects it is hardly possible that ice was thrown from an icebergs top that was NOT hanging over the Titanic deck: furthermore it is widely known that the upper decks did not even touch the berg.

However we have very different witnesses reports. Fourth Officer Joseph Groves Boxhall was examined from the British Enquiry to this point as well (Day 13):

Mr. Raymond Asquith: ”Did you then go up again through the other decks as far as C deck?”

Boxhall: ”I came up the same way as I went down.”

Asquith: ”Without noticing any damage?”

Boxhall: ”I did not see any damage whatever.”

Asquith: ”When you got to C deck did you see some ice there on the deck?”

Boxhall: ”Yes, I took a piece of ice out of a man's hand, a small piece about as large as a small basin, I suppose; very small, anyhow; about that size (Describing.) He was going down again to the passenger accommodation, and I took it from him and walked across the deck to see where he got it. I found just a little ice in the well deck covering a space of about three or four feet from the bulwarks right along the well deck, small stuff.”

Boxhall was the only witness who described very precisely the quantity of ice he saw on deck. Not a ”couple of tons” as Lucas said, but ”small stuff”. The Able Bodied Seaman Thomas Jones testified before the US Inquiry (Day 7), that he went on deck and could see ”some ice”. The Able Bodied Seaman Edward John Buley also reported ”a couple of tons of block ice” to the British Inquiry (Day 16). The Leading Fireman Charles Hendrickson saw ”a lot of ice...on the deck” (British Inquiry, Day 5). But not one of these accounts was as precise as Boxhall´s one.

Another interesting statement was given by Lookout Reginald Lee at the British Inquiry (Day 4) after a short talk between the Commissioner and the Attorney-General:

The Commissioner: ”What is supposed to have caused the ice to fall on the deck? Was it some part of the ship, the Titanic, striking the berg above the waterline, or was it something that fell from the iceberg without the iceberg being struck.”

The Attorney-General: ”I should have thought myself that it followed that the vessel must have struck the iceberg, and brought the ice on to the deck.”

The Commissioner: ”So I should have thought, but I was wondering what part of the Titanic would strike the iceberg.”

The Attorney-General:  ”I do not think there is any such suggestion.” (To the Witness.) ”You have told us that you saw some ice fall on to the forewell deck?”

Reginald Lee: ”It must have been overhanging from the berg as she struck, otherwise it could not have come there, because there were no yards on the mast or anything of that sort. It must have been.”

The Attorney-General: ”It must have been either the head or the side?”

Reginald Lee: ”It caused it to fall inboard. This is where it landed, just on that forewell deck.” (Showing on the model.)

The Attorney-General: ”You did not notice that, did you. Did you notice whether there was any overhanging part?”

Reginald Lee: ”No, I cannot say what was overhanging; I cannot say the size.”

If we try to get a precise quantity of ice on deck we cannot get a good result: some witnesses said ”a lot”, some said ”some” ice. But Boxhalls description was the most precise one. Lee´s report is very interesting because he spoke from an overhang he did not see.

Was the iceberg somewhat higher than the guard rail or not? Boxhall spoke of an iceberg which was very low in the water and probably did not extend above the level of the guard rail. Other witnesses said that the iceberg reached up as high as the boat deck. As mentioned above Rehorek´s iceberg photograph doesn´t give any clue about its size. If we assume the iceberg did not reach up to the upper decks, how did the chunks of ice then get onto the ship? As Charles H. Lightoller, Second Officer, explained at the US-Hearing (Day 1):

Senator Smith: ”Was the vessel broken in two in any manner (i.e.: as a result of the collision) or intact?”

Lightoller: ”Absolutely intact.”

Smith: ”And the decks?”  

Lightoller: ”Intact.”

Boxhall’s report to the same hearing, after having inspected the ship’s interior, was similar (Day3):

”... I went on the bridge and reported to the captain that I could not see any damage.”

Boxhall repeated this at the British Inquiry (Day 13).

If the Titanic had chipped chunks of ice off the iceberg at the forecastle level, then Lightoller and Boxhall would certainly have spotted some visible damage. But there are no reports from any other witnesses either of any damage suffered by the Titanic above the water line. This is also confirmed by the report of the British court of inquiry:

”The collision with the iceberg, which took place at 11.40 p.m., caused damage to the bottom of the starboard side of the vessel at about 10 feet above the keel, but there was no damage above this height.”

This must mean that the Titanic did not come into contact with the iceberg in the area of the upper forecastle – but, nevertheless, chunks of ice were thrown onto the deck. In the Cameron film, in which the collision was reconstructed as accurately as possible, this moment is cleverly disguised: the Hollywood iceberg rises straight up out of the water well above the height of the guard rail, and chunks of ice break away high up and plummet straight (!) down onto the forecastle deck. If the collision had happened as it is portrayed in the film, then the Titanic would most certainly have shown signs of damage in the upper area.

Chunks of ice were thrown upwards then rebounded from the upper overhang of the iceberg and finally deflected onto the deck. Of course a bigger part of these chunks fell back into the water.

(This theory is based on eyewitness accounts and on the shape of the Rehorek iceberg. It has been published the first time in 2001).