StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.hunley.org/

Lots and lots of info there if you’re interested in Civil War submarine
warfare



The H.L. Hunley breaks the surface after 136 years.



Flags at Fort Sumter flew at half-mast in honor of the sailors who
gave their lives during the Hunley's last mission and are still
entombed within her.


View of the concreted interior of the sub facing towards the stern. Note the wooden bench on the right and the crank on the left.


Hunley submarine immersed in refrigerated storage tank at the WLCC
upon recovery. Note the cathodic connection to the sub at the spar
attachment and the titanium anodes in the white pipes along
the submarine.

Most fascinating thing I heard about the Hunley was they found a coin with a bulge in the side. It reinforced a myth about one of the crew members ( I think it was the Captian ) surviving a hit from a musket ball because it struck the gold dollar in his pocket. He carried around as a good luck charm from then on.

TrailerParkJawa wrote:Most fascinating thing I heard about the Hunley was they found a coin with a bulge in the side. It reinforced a myth about one of the crew members ( I think it was the Captian ) surviving a hit from a musket ball because it struck the gold dollar in his pocket. He carried around as a good luck charm from then on.

Actually thanks to that's it's been proven. It was the captian and it was a pewter medallion he was given a by his fiance.

I was always surprised that the hull remained in one major piece after so long, though far older ships have also survived at least in part huge times submerged and buried.

Aw man, I hope the sub wasn't still holding in air, the corpses of those men there for almost 150 years would really stink.

anarchistbunny wrote:Aw man, I hope the sub wasn't still holding in air, the corpses of those men there for almost 150 years would really stink.

It wasn't. I got filled in with a clay mud that pretty much preserved everything inside.

Sea Skimmer wrote:I was always surprised that the hull remained in one major piece after so long, though far older ships have also survived at least in part huge times submerged and buried.

In fact, Clive Cussler’s crew found the Hunley in the 80s, not in 1995, but
back then they thought it was a sunken buoy, because the hull was
so smooth, IE that it wasn’t riveted....

When they finally raised it, they noticed it had countersunk rivets that
were FLUSH with the hull....a big technological innovation for the 1860s

MKSheppard wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:I was always surprised that the hull remained in one major piece after so long, though far older ships have also survived at least in part huge times submerged and buried.

In fact, Clive Cussler’s crew found the Hunley in the 80s, not in 1995, but
back then they thought it was a sunken buoy, because the hull was
so smooth, IE that it wasn’t riveted....

When they finally raised it, they noticed it had countersunk rivets that
were FLUSH with the hull....a big technological innovation for the 1860s

He also writes bad books...

Sea Skimmer wrote: He also writes bad books...

They’re about on par with the Ian Fleming
books, etc but their great saving plot piece
is that Pitt gets the living fuck beat out
of him by the end of the book, he’s like the
Bruce Willis of the book world

So what did they do with the bodies?

Durran Korr wrote:So what did they do with the bodies?

They're looking at them, scanning them up the wazoo with electron microscopes,
etc

They're going to do a complete facial reconstruction, etc of what the
men looked like with clay mannequins from their data, and then
bury them with full military honors in 2003 next to the other crews of the
Hunley.

MKSheppard wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: He also writes bad books...

They’re about on par with the Ian Fleming
books, etc but their great saving plot piece
is that Pitt gets the living fuck beat out
of him by the end of the book, he’s like the
Bruce Willis of the book world

I've read two of them, and I only recall him being beaten up in one of em, Sahara.

Sea Skimmer wrote: I've read two of them, and I only recall him being beaten up in one of em, Sahara.

Thats when they beat the fuck out of him in the diamond mine and then
threw him into the desert.

In other books, they've blown up his cars, had him beaten up by a she-male (no shit!), and well....the list goes on and on....

MKSheppard wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: I've read two of them, and I only recall him being beaten up in one of em, Sahara.

Thats when they beat the fuck out of him in the diamond mine and then
threw him into the desert.

In other books, they've blown up his cars, had him beaten up by a she-male (no shit!), and well....the list goes on and on....

He wrote Raise the Titanic right?

Sea Skimmer wrote: He wrote Raise the Titanic right?

Yup, in that one, Pitt got trapped in a helicopter
about to go overboard and he crawled out of it
bleeding like a stuck pig....

EDIT: They raised the Titanic to recover a vital mineral
that wsa needed for the SDI program, and of course, the
Commies didn't want that to happen...

MKSheppard wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: He wrote Raise the Titanic right?

Yup, in that one, Pitt got trapped in a helicopter
about to go overboard and he crawled out of it
bleeding like a stuck pig....

Such a great plot.

"We need this super ore to power our secret partial beam cannons cause the Russians would notice a bunch of nuclear plants, but they surely wont notice us raising 45,000 tons of steel in the North Atlantic."

Erm, why is a US Army fort flying flags at half staff for the dead crew of a hostile naval vessel?

Howedar wrote:Erm, why is a US Army fort flying flags at half staff for the dead crew of a hostile naval vessel?

ASSHOLE OFF THE STARBOARD BOW!

So the Hunley was a Confederate ship, then?

http://www.hood.army.mil/history/history_hood.htm

History
Fort Hood was named for the famous Confederate General John Bell Hood, an outstanding leader who gained recognition during the Civil War as the commander of Hood's Texas Brigade.

http://www.bragg.army.mil/history/BraxtonBragg.htm

Fort Bragg was named in honor of a native North Carolinian....

...

At the outbreak of the Civil War, he was called from private life into the Confederate Army and was made a Brigadier General. Actively engaged in the two day Battle of Shiloh, in April, 1862, he further exemplified his military genius, and on the death of General Albert S. Johnson was elevated to the rank of full General. His most notable success, the defeat of General Rosecrans at the Battle of Chickamauga, was followed by his own defeat at Chattanooga in November 1863.

....

Thus, Fort Bragg bears the name of a "brave, resourceful, hard-bitten fighting man...a soldier's soldier...a fighting man who saw action in three wars and won distinction in each of them"...GENERAL BRAXTON BRAGG.

http://www.lee.army.mil/history.html

When construction work ended, there were accommodations for 60,335 men. On July 15, 1917, the War Department announced that the camp would be named in honor of General Robert E. Lee (1807- 1870), the most famous of the Confederate Civil War commanders.

http://www.aphill.army.mil/history.asp

Fort Named for Distinguished Confederate Commander

The installation was named in honor of Lt. Gen. Ambrose Powell Hill, a Virginia native who distinguished himself as a Confederate commander during the Civil War. Rising from colonel to major general in three months, General Hill took command of one of Lee’s three corps in 1863. Two years later, as Grant’s forces laid siege to Petersburg, Va., General Hill was mortally wounded as he rode his stallion, Champ, to the front. He had not yet reached his 40th birthday.

One week later, Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox. A fortnight later, John Wilkes Booth was killed at the Garrett farmhouse, which was situated just beyond the present boundaries of the fort.

Add to that several tanks named for Confederate Generals

And a few Post Civil War Frontier Forts. Also many minor staging areas in WWI, WWII, Korea, & Vietnam were named after Confederate Generals.

Howedar wrote:Erm, why is a US Army fort flying flags at half staff for the dead crew of a hostile naval vessel?

It was still an American submarine, crewed by Americans, which fought in an American war —even if it was the Civil War and the personnel involved were Confederates. Besides which, it is traditional to accord funerial honours to the brave dead even if they are enemy, as a gesture of martial respect. The custom has its roots in the ancient codes of chilvary and has carried over even into modern times.

Patrick Degan wrote:

Howedar wrote:Erm, why is a US Army fort flying flags at half staff for the dead crew of a hostile naval vessel?

It was still an American submarine, crewed by Americans, which fought in an American war —even if it was the Civil War and the personnel involved were Confederates. Besides which, it is traditional to accord funerial honours to the brave dead even if they are enemy, as a gesture of martial respect. The custom has its roots in the ancient codes of chilvary and has carried over even into modern times.

In some armies anyway.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Patrick Degan wrote:

Howedar wrote:Erm, why is a US Army fort flying flags at half staff for the dead crew of a hostile naval vessel?

It was still an American submarine, crewed by Americans, which fought in an American war —even if it was the Civil War and the personnel involved were Confederates. Besides which, it is traditional to accord funerial honours to the brave dead even if they are enemy, as a gesture of martial respect. The custom has its roots in the ancient codes of chilvary and has carried over even into modern times.

In some armies anyway.

In the seventies, the US went to great pains to recover an obsolescent Soviet sub in the Pacific. Several bodies were found, and given military funerals with full honors in English and Russian. Videotapes of this service were given to Boris Yeltsin in the early 90's, apparently, he was moved by the gesture.