Which is more disturbing.......

[mike_s]

Thanks guys. I learned something today.

But...................




<<An 18th Century, coral-crusted cannonball was discovered February 2 in a checked bag at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Broward County, Florida,>>

If shrapnel shells were first used by the British in 1803, how come an 18th century Wreck off the Keys would have exploding cannonballs?

Good (excellent) timeline observation.


perhaps it was just an "exploding shell" and not an "exploding shrapnel shell" ? dunno.

 

[Thalassamania]

There might have been some form of exploding shell earlier.

It might not have been from wreck that of the seventeen hundreds.

The writer of the article might not remember that the 18th century went from 1700 to 1799.

Me ... I'd bet on the last.

 

[Gilldiver]

Exploding shells go back quite a bit into the early 1700's if not a good bit earlier as mortar shells. The first ones were just iron shells filled with black powder. The first ones had a wood plug with a fuse in it, the mortar crew lit the fuse and then fired the mortar. If the fuse was a bit faster than normal, or too short, the shell could explode in the mortar or just after leaving the breach which was not all that good to the mortar crew. The Brits figured out that if they just fired the mortar the flames bypassing the shell were enough to light the fuse and the Royal Navy eventually built dedicated Bomb Ketch's that fired very heavy mortars for harbor and fort assaults.

The real shell with shrapnel, was invented by Henry Shrapnel in 1784 and consisted of an iron shell with lead or iron balls mixed with black powder and a fairly good fuse that could be set to explode over a column of infantry etc.

But even sold iron shot can explode - if a solid shot has been in salt water and then not fully de-salted in the conservation process, the salt within the remaining iron matrix will create stresses within the ball that can, under the right conditions, cause the ball to explode from those internal stresses. Sometimes, these stresses can also cause rapid oxidation with a lot of heat build up which enhances the power of the explosion. I have seen a few of the results which can be quite dramatic in a small "wreck" room. Once I was in a "wreck" room of a friend when this occurred, when my friend picked up a shard he got a nasty burn.

 

[Capt Scotty]

Here one that made the news.....Cannonballs explode on desk

 

[DennisS]

Man, last year in a trip report I referred to a wreck in a park. The Park Service underwater archeology ... ummmm... woman threatened me with violations of the Historic resource preservation act and the antiquities act. They have no sense of humor.

The state of FL denied Meylach (Diving to a Flash of Gold) a permit for one of the 1733 wrecks and gave it to someone else back in the early 70's. The book was his revenge, he listed about 100 wrecks with precise locations and the state tried to stop publication.

 

[The Chairman]

If shrapnel shells were first used by the British in 1803, how come an 18th century Wreck off the Keys would have exploding cannonballs?

It's not that unusual for multiple wrecks to be on the same site. I know of one marine archaeologist that has found at least three wrecks on top of each other. So, unless the person was an expert, how could they really tell the difference? If they were an expert, they would not have tried to get the ball on a flight in the first place.

 

[kombiguy]

The writer of the article might not remember that the 18th century went from 1700 to 1799.

To be completely and unnecessarily pedantic, the 18th century went from 1701 to 1800. 1700 hundred was the last year of the 17th century.

 

[Thalassamania]

Right, I forgot about the "Year One" thing.

 

[kombiguy]

Right, I forgot about the "Year One" thing.

Sorry. Some times I can't help being a jerk. Other times, I enjoy it!

 

[Thalassamania]

No problem, a legitimate criticism.