• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

found wreck...need ID

Discussion in 'Wreck Exploration and Expeditions' started by bell47, Dec 2, 2010.

  1. WetDawg

    WetDawg Captain

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Ft. Laud / Miami, FL
    343
    13
    18
    Gary's suggestion may the best one yet. A local maritime history museum or organization would be a great resource.

    Not surprisingly there is a wealth of information about anchor history and design available on the web.

    History of the anchor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    THE HISTORY OF ANCHORS AND ANCHOR DESIGN - SOLAR NAVIGATOR WORLD ELECTRIC NAVIGATION CHALLENGE - BLUEBIRD LAND SPEED RECORD PROJECT

    Stockless anchors have been extensively used in the British mercantile marine and in some other navies. In 1903 they were adopted generally for the British Navy, after extensive anchor trials, begun in 1885.


    In 1822 and 1823 Lowen and Lawkins experimented with tripping anchor-palms and stockless shanks, some 40 years before these features won general acceptance. In 1830 Pering adapted steam power to the operation of the heavy falling weights used in the welding of anchors. Rodgers introduced his "Patent Small-Palm Anchor and won considerable public favor. The Royal Navy now began to concede the superiority of iron stocks. By 1840 the Hawkins patent tumbling fluke stockless anchor and developed to a form approximating that of most stockless anchors of today.
    By 1846 the Royal Navy completely surrendered to the iron stock and gave full sanction to the type of anchors now known as the "Admiralty" anchor. This type of anchor, also known as "Old Style" or "Kedge" is no longer used for large ships but continues in use for small boats and for moorings. Although it has great holding power in a penetrable bottom it is extremely awkward and the long stock is vulnerable to mechanical damage. When in position the upstanding arm may foul a chain or pierce the hull of a vessel. The "one" arm version is popular for moorings and is equipped with a second shackle for easier placement.

    In 1852 a British Commission declared the Trotman anchor "Best". By 1859 the Mushroom type of anchor appeared as an instrument especially suited for permanent moorings. With the removal of the stock, from Mertom's anchor of 1861 and the advent of Lathem's anchor 1886 the use of stockless tumbling-fluke anchors increased rapidly. In 1866 the ball-and-socket type of stockless anchor first appeared in England.

    In 1870 A. F. White stowed the stocks of "old style" anchors by sliding them down a shank designed with a quarter-twist. In 1873 C. F. Herreshoff constructed a four-piece de mountable old-style anchor for a time widely acclaimed by yachtsmen. "Freak" anchors continuously appeared; for example the Tyzack singlefluke anchor of 1877.

    By 1885 Baxter was stowing his Stockless Anchors in a hawse pipe. This innovation proved of utmost importance, for from that day forward, the Stockless Anchor increased in popularity until today it is practically the only type of anchor used on ships of real size.
     
  2. bell47

    bell47 Instructor, Scuba

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Maine
    127
    1
    0
    Marine archeologist in Maine will take over your wrecksite, claim it for themselves, take artifacts that should go to a museum and put them on THIER livingroom wall, and have divers forbidden to dive on the site. If they were looking for it, and we found it first, I'd be the first one to tell them where it is. As, is, no one is looking for it, that we know of, so why tell them where it is and get kicked of a cool dive site? Besides, WE found it, WE want to identify it. I would gladly give them everything I find on a wreck, if it would go in a museum where everyone can see it.
     
  3. The Chairman

    The Chairman Chairman of the Board

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Cave Country!
    54,421
    21,289
    113
    I agree with this whole heartedly. When can I come up and dive with you guys! :D
     
  4. garyd54220

    garyd54220 Nassau Grouper

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Manitowoc, WI
    132
    14
    0
    Wow, what marine archeologists do you know! None that I know -and believe it or not there are some and they also teach in the university programs in Carolina and Texas- would dream of taking anything off of a wreck. Nor would they "take over a wreck site" and prevent you from diving it. Who do you think runs the underwater preserves? Are the wrecks in those preserves closed to diving? Are the wrecks protected from being plundered. Who is responsible for getting them listed as historical sites and protected. Here in the Great Lakes area we are generally pretty shocked by the disregard shown to salt water wrecks in terms of the way artifacts are taken from them. Here that would cost you at least $5000 and possibly your gear and boat. I can understand your desire to "identify it" yourself. Was merely pointing you at experts who already know how to do the research and would probably be willing to help.
     
  5. bell47

    bell47 Instructor, Scuba

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Maine
    127
    1
    0
    I appreciate your advice but a good friend found a good wreck and word got to a local marine archiologist at a nearby university. The guy came to see my friend and said that he HAD to tell him where the wreck was. My friend laughed and said "the north atlantic", but I'll show you, if I can be involved in doing the diving on the site when you do any recovery. The guy from the university said "no" that he would just have to tell him where it is, and at that point he could no longer dive there! My friend told him to go find it himself, it's in the Atlantic. I'm not gonna play politics with these guys. If we learn the name of the wreck and it was something of historical value, rest assured I'll be the first one to pick up the phone and let someone know, It just won't be the local ya-hoo's. I'm not out to plunder anything, I just wanna find out what the name of the ship is. If it has any significance, we'll go from there. I really do appreciate any advice on the subject, I hope I didn't come off to coarse.
     
  6. The Chairman

    The Chairman Chairman of the Board

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Cave Country!
    54,421
    21,289
    113
    I don't think so.
     
  7. garyd54220

    garyd54220 Nassau Grouper

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Manitowoc, WI
    132
    14
    0
    No problem. Very different attitude than I have ever encountered however. Although the people I'm referring to are not university employees but either state or NOAA. To clarify, just because its not on the charts doesn't mean its not identified. There are plenty of wrecks that are known but if they're not considered a threat to navigation they might not be on the chart. The submerged cultural resources/marine archaeology people may already be well aware of this wreck and have a name for you. There is certainly a degree of cool involved in finding and identifying a wreck but wouldn't it be kind of embarrassing to announce a "new discovery" only to be told "well hell, we've known about that one for years." ....DUH
     
  8. Rhone Man

    Rhone Man Divemaster

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: British Virgin Islands
    11,254
    10,524
    113
    I think Gary Gentile wrote a book about shipwreck identification. I haven't read it, but I expect he would approach the subject with his usual thoroughness and detail.

    Might be worth getting a copy.

    EDIT: here it is. I can't link to the sub-page but it is the Shipwreck Research Handbook.
     
  9. WetDawg

    WetDawg Captain

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Ft. Laud / Miami, FL
    343
    13
    18
    It would seem that with a wreck that close to shore that clearly came to rest on he rocks of the coast line, there were bound to be survivors. This means that the wreck was at one time known to someone somewhere (dead men tell no tales?). If it was (is) indeed of historical significance then it would stand to reason that someone somewhere knows this as well.

    Of course the possibilities are endless. A more interesting theory may be something like this: Lost Maine Coastal Schooners: From Glory Days to Ghost Ships

    ...In which case there would have been no survivors? I like the idea of a Lost Ghost ship much more. In the fading days of sailing ships there were a few schooners that were retrofitted with steam engines.

    Here is another cool looking resource:Researching American Shipwrecks
     
  10. bell47

    bell47 Instructor, Scuba

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Maine
    127
    1
    0
    I have a feeling this wreck is known to exist here. It would be kinda strange to have a ship of this size( I'm guessing 100+feet) sink so close to populated areas and it not be known. I really don't think it will be anything of importance, but it seems really strange that the local fishermen we talked to didn't know about it. I'm thinking I just haven't talked to the right person or read the right database on wrecks.


    UPDATE: One bronze valve was made by Kane Valves. They started up in 1924. So this ship was either built after 1924 or had a valve replaced after 1924. The guy at Kennedy Valve said their valves were dated. I can see no date on them so I'll call him back later. If welded boilers were pretty common place by the forties and ours is riveted, that puts our wreck built between 1924 and the 1940's.....maybe.
     

Share This Page