It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Evidence of why the Confederate submarine Hunley sank

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 02:01 PM
On Friday scientist of the salvage crew for the CSS Hunley submarine came upon factual evidence of why the submarine sunk almost 140 years ago. This is the only evidence found so far for the reasons of the Hunley sank. Uncovered through an X-ray scan, it shows a possible hatch was open on the night the submarine made it last attack on the Union Navy. It has been 6 years now since the Hunley was recovered near Charleston, SC.
CHARLESTON, S.C. - Scientists say they may have found an important clue in the mystery of why the Confederate submarine Hunley sank 140 years ago after making history by sinking an enemy warship in battle.

Archaeologists and others working to restore the submarine recovered six years ago from the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Sullivans Island have found evidence the forward hatch may have been opened intentionally on the night the sub sank.

The forward hatch was one of two ways crew members got in and out of the sub. It is covered in a thick layer of sand and other ocean debris, but X-rays show the hatch is open about half an inch, according to a news release Friday from the Friends of the Hunley.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The CSS Hunley was found with the hatch door open and from suggesting the reason why the Hunley could have sank. The hatch where is supposedly left open in salvage operation is ran most likely by two men, the events that shadow would suggest an intentional sinking of the submarine. This is a new development for the reasons of the Hunley’s sinking.
The original sinking of the Hunley was to blame for a faulty locking mechanism on the same hatch. Further x-rays show that the hatch was already somewhat open enough to let water inside the submarine, allowing a slow but eventful sinking of the Hunley. The hatch is therefore sabotaged and the crew of the Hunley never knew of it. But other possibilities are still in the air, as if the hatch could have been opened after the Hunley attacked the enemy ship to see for damages, and never fully closed back.

Related News Links:
H.L. Hunley Project

[edit on 15-7-2006 by ragster]

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 03:15 PM
Sabotaged by who exactly , one of the crew ? I saw a very good Documentary of IIRC the BBCs horison science program about the raising , and do not recall sabotage being mentioned .

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 03:19 PM
Yes that is the so called dicussion as of right now, as I said, it could also be a mistake of the one of the crew not shutting the hatch completly, this is where there is confusion, either the hatch was not shut when the sub was diving and this is what may have caused the Hunley to sink.

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 03:43 PM
The faulty latch explains it all. It sunk because of being open, easy as that no conspiracy here. BTW The hunley had a crew of 8 not 2

[edit on 7/16/2006 by shots]

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 04:20 PM
yes I know that, for that hatch though, most likely two men operated, sorry for the confusion.

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 04:39 PM
You cannot rewrite history, it says it had a crew of Eight and the commanding officer made a total of nine.

The resulting explosion that sent Housatonic with five crew members to the bottom of Charleston Harbor also sank Hunley with its crew of eight. H.L. Hunley earned a place in the history of undersea warfare as the first submarine to sink a ship in wartime.

further backed up by other websites listing the actual crew names although all the names are not listed for some reason. They are listed as unknown.

Crew Names

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 04:51 PM
Iam not trying to rewrite history at all, I am just using the current information at hand I had, and therefore about the hatch problem. I am not merely rewritting history but showing others that there could have been more to why the Hunley sank. And as for the crew Iam sorry if it was wrong in any way, I should have been more clear.

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:02 PM
Yes you are trying to rewrite history when you state it had a crew of 8 by saying it had a crew of 2. You are in error on that point alone.

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:04 PM
And why is it taken six years to tell us the hatch was FOUND open?

I voted yes for this submission because the civil war buffs followed the recovery very closely back then. Much discussion on this topic.


Lieutenant George E. Dixon
Arnold Becker
Corporal J. F. Carlsen
Frank Collins
James A. Wicks
Joseph Ridgaway


For a longtime, little was known about members of the final Hunley crew. Since the Hunley was a venture with close ties to the Confederate Secret Service, many records were intentionally destroyed at the end of war to protect the identities of those involved. In 2001, forensic genealogist Linda Abrams began a massive research project to discover as much as possible about the group of submarine pioneers that navigated the Hunley into world history. Her research coupled with the archeological and forensic data is allowing new details about the crew to emerge.

That's eight, including the skipper.

[edit on 16-7-2006 by psyopswatcher]

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:11 PM
I live in SC and have gone to see it when they allow the public.

They are being VERY VERY careful and slow in "cleaning" it up. They are discovering small things over long periods of time.

That would be my guess as to why it is just now coming out.

Good Thread!!


posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:22 PM
Not unlikely. The Hunley itself wasn't really a secret. Confederate deserters had handed the Union a fair amount of information on it. And it had made several previously unsuccessful attempts at attacking blockading ships outside Charleston.


posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:56 PM

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
And why is it taken six years to tell us the hatch was FOUND open?

I voted yes for this submission because we followed the discovery very closely back then.

That's eight, including the skipper.

The majority of those sites I checked stated 9 with the captain/commanding officer. That really makes no big difference though. I was just trying too point out it had a crew of more then two as asserted

[edit on 7/16/2006 by shots]

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 06:02 PM
where in the article does it say the crew wa of only two men, that is why Iam confused, it the whole sentence, the Direct Object was the 2 men who ran the hatch on Hunley, was this what is all about the talk of 8 and 9 and not 2 crew members?

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 06:56 PM
Hey Shots, maybe it was the cow bone they were counting as crew: animal rib from either a cow or hog was found inside the tail section of the submarine which was washed into the site after the sinking of the vessel. It became lodged inside the tail section through the three-foot hole in the rear starboard section.

or maybe not...

While this bone is not related to the crew of the Hunley, it is in good condition considering it was exposed to elements.


new topics

top topics


log in