SS Richard Montgomery

[Sway]

Suppose this is the best place for this topic, it is boat related!

Watched Coast a couple of nights ago, and they spoke about the SS Richard Montgomery that sunk delivering munitions near Sheerness.

Still full of a ridiculous amount of explosives, decaying, and it seems the Department of Transport decided a few years ago that 'leaving it is no longer an option'.

Now, it seems that if it did go up, then a fairly substantial amount of damage will be caused, so a controlled explosion is out.

A ROV or manual recovery of the munitions is clearly going to be a mammoth task, and one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness.

So, wise people of PH, how would you sort it?

(and nuking it from orbit, whilst the only way to be sure, is not an option!)

[dr_gn]

Sway said:

Suppose this is the best place for this topic, it is boat related!

Watched Coast a couple of nights ago, and they spoke about the SS Richard Montgomery that sunk delivering munitions near Sheerness.

Still full of a ridiculous amount of explosives, decaying, and it seems the Department of Transport decided a few years ago that 'leaving it is no longer an option'.

Now, it seems that if it did go up, then a fairly substantial amount of damage will be caused, so a controlled explosion is out.

A ROV or manual recovery of the munitions is clearly going to be a mammoth task, and one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness.

So, wise people of PH, how would you sort it?

(and nuking it from orbit, whilst the only way to be sure, is not an option!)

I heard about that too:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Don't suppose there's anything you could do (otherwise "they'd" have already done it).

[Sway]

dr_gn said:

Sway said:

Suppose this is the best place for this topic, it is boat related!

Watched Coast a couple of nights ago, and they spoke about the SS Richard Montgomery that sunk delivering munitions near Sheerness.

Still full of a ridiculous amount of explosives, decaying, and it seems the Department of Transport decided a few years ago that 'leaving it is no longer an option'.

Now, it seems that if it did go up, then a fairly substantial amount of damage will be caused, so a controlled explosion is out.

A ROV or manual recovery of the munitions is clearly going to be a mammoth task, and one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness.

So, wise people of PH, how would you sort it?

(and nuking it from orbit, whilst the only way to be sure, is not an option!)

I heard about that too:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Don't suppose there's anything you could do (otherwise "they'd" have already done it).

Ah, tried the search but could't find anything.

It's a divide by zero moment really isn't it?

Can't do anything, but doing nothing is not an option...

[williamp]

I'd let it blow. It would mean untold improvemnets to Sheerness and the Isle of Sheppy

Did you know there are some inhabitants who have never been accross the bridge onto the mainland!!

[dr_gn]

Sway said:

dr_gn said:

Sway said:

Suppose this is the best place for this topic, it is boat related!

Watched Coast a couple of nights ago, and they spoke about the SS Richard Montgomery that sunk delivering munitions near Sheerness.

Still full of a ridiculous amount of explosives, decaying, and it seems the Department of Transport decided a few years ago that 'leaving it is no longer an option'.

Now, it seems that if it did go up, then a fairly substantial amount of damage will be caused, so a controlled explosion is out.

A ROV or manual recovery of the munitions is clearly going to be a mammoth task, and one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness.

So, wise people of PH, how would you sort it?

(and nuking it from orbit, whilst the only way to be sure, is not an option!)

I heard about that too:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Don't suppose there's anything you could do (otherwise "they'd" have already done it).

Ah, tried the search but could't find anything.

It's a divide by zero moment really isn't it?

Can't do anything, but doing nothing is not an option...

Suppose you could evacuate a 2 mile radius and bomb the crap out of it (I'm assuming things would go a bit better to plan than with the Torrey Canyon). At least it puts someone in some control of what happens.

[Simpo Two]

Sway said:

one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness

Seems fair to me. Carry on Number One.





Can't believe it would do that much damage; water absorbs a lot of energy.

[anonymous-user]

I went down to Sheerness a couple of years ago to see if I could see the ship, agree with the above comments.

[Sway]

Simpo Two said:

Sway said:

one wrong move and it's bye bye Sheerness

Seems fair to me. Carry on Number One.

[red oktober] Aye Aye Cap'n.

Load tubes 1 + 4,10° down bubble [/red oktober]

[FourWheelDrift]

HMS Bulwark magazines (12" and 6" ammunition) exploded whilst ammunition was being loaded at Sheerness in 1914, total loss of life was 738. Didn't do much damage to Sheerness and that was moored close by. Not sure how 1000 tons of WWI era explosive shells compares with 1,400 tons of WWII era TNT though.

[Denis O]

williamp said:

I'd let it blow. It would mean untold improvemnets to Sheerness and the Isle of Sheppy

Did you know there are some inhabitants who have never been accross the bridge onto the mainland!!

Having lived on the Island for a couple of years in the mid 70's I have to agree that many places are like a scene from Deliverance. The sale of banjos per capita is amongst the highest outside of Norfolk.

The sheep can be particularly nervous.

As for the impact of the wreck going bang it was widely believed, by those in the know, that it might take a few windows out but nothing like the devastation that is often forecast. Pity but that's the way of things I'm afraid.

Edited by Denis O on Saturday 18th September 08:52