History according to random people...

stona said:

Again a grain of truth. The first successful submarine we know of was indeed English (not British at that time) though it was designed by a Dutchman.
What that has to do with the American Civil War I have no idea
Cheers
Steve

Click to expand...

There have been many attempts at practical submersibles throughout history and the one you mentioned is perhaps the best documented of all those early projects. Something I always wondered about, though, is how they managed to propel it with oars without swamping it!

Of the first "military" types, the Turtle used during the Revolutionary war is considered the first, although not successful.

Between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, the Nautilus, developed by Fulton, brought on a more modern shape, but it was the Hunley that is considered the first true modern submarine by virtue of it's hull design, submersing abilities, and the combination of propulsion via propellor and steering by way of rudder.

Interestingly enough, about the same time the Hunley was going into action, the French and Spanish were developing mechanical powered submarines.

So the Hunley seems to have appeared at the right time in history to give it the notoriety of being the Grandfather of modern military submarines.

GrauGeist said:

Well...here we go again!

I came across more "history" in the comments section of an article about "Secret Nazi Weapons".

Amazing stuff, really...



I learned a great deal from this post...who knew Hydrogen Peroxide was such a dangerous fuel. And Brigadier General Fueher Von Braun, what an awesome title (rank?) - is that like a fire general or something?


This person needs to stop watching those vampire shows on TV...


As for the rest of these...I'm really not sure what to think...

Click to expand...

I am truly embarrassed for the future of mankind.

This is just terrible. Funny, but terrible.

The Huntley was not sunk in the attack but rather sunk on the way back from the attack. Wile traveling with the hatch open it was swamped by a wave and sunk with all hands. I read this in a book by Clive Cussler the man who found the wreck of the Huntley.

Powered by human muscles with lighting by candles which, of course consumed oxygen. That's why the hatches were open

Looks fun! Sign me up

Cheers

Steve

Not likely.....

Any boat designed to sink jut can't be right ..............

Airframes said:

Any boat designed to sink jut can't be right ..............

Click to expand...

Any boat can be a submarine.

Once...

Yea well that one sank 3 times. When my college football stadium was being torn down to be rebuilt they discovered a number of Civil War Era graves and the crew to the 2nd time it sank was still buried there. The museum where the Hunley resides at has done a really nice job. I donated a Civil War newspaper that talked about the final attack though the boat was not named.

As a submarine, the Hunley was an excellent sinker it just wasn't proficient at returning to the surface. The Hunley turned out to be an excellent UNION weapon. It killed 21 Confederates for the 5 who died on the Housatonic.
Five members of the first crew died in August 1863 when it accidentally dived while its hatches apparently were open. The second crew's eight members succumbed in October when the Hunley failed to return to the surface. The Confederate commander of Charleston, concerned about the loss of life and the expense of recovering the Hunley, ordered that any attack be made on the surface. Thus the Hunley was not submerged as it approached the Husatonic and a lookout aboard the Union Navy's Housatonic spotted something moving in the chilly waters. There had been talk of a Confederate secret weapon, so alarms went out on the Housatonic, which carried 12 guns.
The Hunley was too close and low to be hit by artillery fire, so crew and officers of the Union ship fired small arms, rifles and even a shotgun at the approaching menace.
Once in place, a submarine crew member managed to pull the lanyard for the 135-pound torpedo, attached to a 16-foot spar that was still connected to the Hunley's bow.
The Housatonic sank within minutes.
Five members of the Union vessel died; 150 others were rescued.
A Union sailor who climbed to the Housatonic's rigging and a Confederate observer on the shore reported seeing a blue light emanating from the Hunley, signaling mission accomplished. But researchers have been unable to precisely pinpoint the source of the light -- whether it came from a lantern or pyrotechnic device that sent out various signal colors. And it's possible the light came from Union rescuers. Experts looked at the Hunley's lantern, but found no evidence of blue glass.
The return of the Hunley remains a mystery. One scenario holds that the Hunley was swamped by or struck by a Union vessel. Or that it plunged to the sea floor to avoid detection, and never made it back up. A latch on the forward conning tower was found to be not properly locked. Then there's the spar torpedo itself.
Until now, the conventional wisdom had been that the Hunley would ram the spar torpedo into her target and then back away, causing the torpedo to slip off the spar and then detonate. Instead, research showed the submarine was less than 20 feet from her torpedo when it exploded. It's possible that the force of the explosion incapacitated the crew, eventually causing the sub to slide down into the chilly depths. Even a small hole or holes could have allowed water to seep or pour in.
Researchers at the lab, while excavating the sub's interior silt that held the human remains, found that the eight Hunley crew members were still at or near their stations, despite an unsealed forward hatch. There was no evidence that anyone tried to get out of the submarine. This would seem to indicate something catastrophic occurred or they died with a certain amount of resignation.
Detailed examinations of the well-preserved remains of the crew looked for the tiniest of fractures or evidence of concussion. Researchers did not find any unhealed injuries to their skeletons so the mystery remains.

I always suspected that the shockwave from the torpedo's proximity may have stunned them.

It's construction was similar to that of a boiler and thus had relatively thin walls compared to more modern submarines. Add to that, the cramped confines of the interior and that would be enough to knock anyone for a loop.

Good info Mike.
Given the info regarding possible distance when the torpedo detonated, it's very likely the crew were incapacitated - literally knocked unconscious - or even killed outright, by the concussion.

My own personal theory is that the crew of the Hunley, having been under attack, having blown up the Housatonic and thus attracted the attention of the Union blockade fleet, submerged and attempted to escape underwater. The "blue light" signal observed by two witnesses would seem to indicate the crew survived the concussion. Underwater the cramped confines, men working hard at the crank plus candles for illumination lead to a carbon dioxide build-up and oxygen depletion which rendered the crew unconscious.
The dead men still at their positions and no attempt at escape points to an unconscious crew.
Through moderns forensics meet the crew

Fascinating forensic modeling!

But I still suspect several factors contributed to their demise:
the concussion of the torpedo, the adrenaline of the event, exceptional physical exertion and the poor ventilation

An interesting story for sure, thanks for the insight guys..

And here's more fun!

An article about the XP-83 earned a great deal of "expert" insight in the social-media comments section where it was posted.

First of all, here's the XP-83:


And here's the article:
Late to the Party: The long range escort jet fighter of WWII

The article itself was just the basic info, most of which was copied from another website and not from an original source. I did find the opening statement amusing, however:
"On 24 March 1944, with the war in Europe signalling the need for a long-range escort fighter and the P-51 Mustang not yet proven in this role, the USAAF tasked the builder of the first American jet aircraft to build a larger, longer-legged jet fighter."
The P-51 had proven itself quite capable of long ranges well before this date and in late 1943, it had proven itself capable of the task of long range escort. But this let's not worry about this, let's go to the social-media comments where the real fun is!

We start with Frank...Frank knows quite a bit about the Corsair, which has nothing to do with the XP-83, but Frank had to share his knowledge anyway!

Frank This plane,was and after though, was not a reliable plane,the juggernaut, fighter plane made in Evanston Illinois,is and allways the most expensive plane,too maintain,and the most successful Squadron,the red tails, Tuskegee Airmen,next was Pappy Boyington, where's his corsairs,but they where Limited,as the engine underpowered

Ed Sorry, the F4U Corsair, any model, was not underpowered.

Frank Sorry Ed, they never made any more, bad designs

Rick Tallman Jr. Seriously? Corsairs were getting jet kills over Korea.

Frank Ok ,apple's and oranges,the "THUNERBOLT" P-4U-4, had 2535 hp,and a range,of 19,ooo miles,and the F-4U-4 , 2325 hp,and a range 1000 miles,I stand behind my original statement

Frank Also, last two years the corsair's

Frank Where made ,the US military,didn't purchase any,the only military that did were the French

Click to expand...

Because saying "it's well documented" always makes your comments authoritative:

Robert and lets not forget the jet technology stolen by the Americans from the Brits...... it's well documented.

Click to expand...

And then there's this guy - and the response...

Jack Ok so last research project of "facts I thought I knew", what was the German "Bell" project or Hannebue?

Ron Jack.
Both highly speculative German orojects that have never been totally proven that existed. I believe they did but nothing solid to prove it. The Bell supposedly was captured by the Americans as well as their flying saucer. The round building is prove for me that they had something. Why wire a building that way otherwise. Who knows about the Bell? I think they had something and were working very hard on time travel.
And much speculation that the Germans had been visited by alien life form and thats where they got much of their technology.
Von Braun would never comment on it

Click to expand...

And lastly, we get those occasional expert, in-depth observations. Nevermind that the XP-83 was developed from the P-59, whose first flight (October 1942) came a few months after the Me262's first flight under jet power.
But facts ruin a good conversation

Jerry Gee wonder why it resembles the 262 ?

David Looks very similar to the ME 262

Marc Me 262 copy.

Click to expand...

These people can't even string together an understandable sentence !
Oh, to have the patience, and be bothered in the first place, to reply to these ill-informed, semi-literate idiots, and explain to them just how much b*ll*cks they're all spouting out !

But seriously, Terry, how would you (with a straight face) actually respond to a statement like Franks:
"..."THUNERBOLT" P-4U-4, had 2535 hp,and a range,of 19,ooo miles,and the F-4U-4 , 2325 hp,and a range 1000 miles..."

I mean seriously, the P-4U-4 Thunerbolt? A range of 19,000 miles? Words escape me on that one.

Most of the others can *almost* be argued in a reasonable manner, but sometimes the stupid shines so bright, it's nearly impossible to see the keyboard...

Yeah, you're right.
I suppose the only way to explain to them would be by being totally blunt, something along the lines of "Look, you lot, don't talk b*ll*cks - go and research the subject before posting such utter drivel !"

No wonder history is so screwed up now. Hope these p!$$ maggots aren't teachers.