• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

"Rare" German U-Boat Discovered off the coast of NS

I have been watching this story with interest. Apparently there is talk on making it a war grave but I always thought any ship sunk in action no matter what nationality with personnel still on board was always a war grave. Either way, RIP German Submariners your resting place has been found and maybe your families can have some closure.
 
Personally, I think it should just be left alone. We found one, great, but now.. let's just leave it be. It's been there for over fifty years, and let's not forget people died there. I certainly don't want to start seeing crazy ideas like recovering her, bringing her to the surface, etc. etc. Can't we just leave it alone?
 
Ryoshi said:
Personally, I think it should just be left alone. We found one, great, but now.. let's just leave it be. It's been there for over fifty years, and let's not forget people died there. I certainly don't want to start seeing crazy ideas like recovering her, bringing her to the surface, etc. etc. Can't we just leave it alone?

Thats what a war grave means.
 
Even though it's in Canadian waters it is property of the German government and it's basically up to the Germans what to do with it.
 
Is there a set time after which a sunken warship or the like no longer belongs to the original government/nation? Or does that "ownership" never change, for so long as the wreck remains?
 
Actually atticus you are correct up to a point, since it lays in Canadian waters the Canadian goverment does have a say (a big one) in what happens to it. Ryoshi the submarine itself will always belong to the German goverment.
 
Why is it German property?  It was sunk during a war in another nation's waters.

Not intended to be inflammatory here, this is a genuine question because I am completely ignorant of these types of rules/laws.

Thanks!
 
No worries never thought you were being inflamatory. Its the Law of the Sea...just like the Athabaskan is still Canadian even though it was sunk in French waters.
 
I wonder how long it will be before treasure hunters start to pillage it? I can see the need to discover and catalogue undersea hazards for cable laying ships and whatnot, but I don't see the need to go and find old wrecks where people died just for the hell of it.
 
t? I can see the need to discover and catalogue undersea hazards for cable laying ships and whatnot, but I don't see the need to go and find old wrecks where people died just for the heck of it.
History. This U-boat is of geat historical value for Germans and Canadians alike. Wonder if this boat was laying mines in Canadian waters, or if it was just moving down towards the US coast.  

Anyone know what the Germans have done in the past in a situation like this? Will they leave it rest, or do they normally feel it is important to recover any remains for burial back home?
 
According to Germany Navy records its mission was to mine Boston harbour but the CO came across a convoy sank one ship and then got depth charged.

Historically the Germans are like us and leave well enough alone unless otherwise requested.
 
Casing said:
nULL said:
...where people died just for the heck of it.

I'm sure the families of the German sailors will appreciate your comment.

Read what I said again. For you though, I'll dumb it down. I can see the use in finding these sorts of things for the purpose of safe sea navigation and whatnot, but to purposely look for something like this, knowing full well that the site stands a good chance of being desecrated by treasure hunters (who wouldn't want some authentic U-Boat off E-Bay?) seems somewhat...wrong. I've never lost anyone whose body wasn't recovered, but in a case like this, I don't think I'd want the final resting place of a family member lit up by television cameras and prodded at by divers.

Guess it's a moot point though. 
 
nULL, sorry, the meaning didn't come across clearly.  It could have been interpreted as either "the sailors died for nothing" or "locating the wrecks just for the sake of it (exploiting them)".  I interpreted it as the former and you obviously meant the latter.  My apologies for the comment I made.
 
Here is another article on this: http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/07/13/canada/Uboat_040713
 
Boys, it's in 90m of water, that's almost 300ft deep.  A little on the deep side for wreck divers and treasure hunters.
 
Casing, think nothing of it; I've made my share of stupid comments on these boards.

As for it being too deep, that's not necessarily true. The Titanic (it comes to mind) has been victom to some pretty severe robbing.



Titanic artifacts may have been plundered
By MARC DAVIS , The Virginian-Pilot
© March 23, 2003

NORFOLK - A pirate ship from England may have plundered the Titanic in violation of a Norfolk court order.
Rumors of the illegal salvage operation surfaced in November in Norfolk's federal court. Since then, a Portsmouth maritime lawyer has investigated the rumors and concluded they may be true.

In letters to Norfolk's federal court, lawyer Mark S. Davis said evidence suggests that a Florida company may have used a ship from England and a submarine from France to salvage pieces of the Titanic in November and December.

That would be illegal. In 1994, Norfolk's federal court awarded sole salvage rights to R.M.S. Titanic Inc., currently based in Atlanta. Those salvage rights are supposed to be recognized worldwide.

But there are no shipwreck police in the North Atlantic, where the Titanic lies, about 400 miles off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada, and Titanic artifacts are worth millions of dollars. The Titanic sank on its maiden voyage in 1912 after hitting an iceberg, killing 1,500 passengers and crewmen.

Four nations - the United States, Canada, Britain and France - have tried to outlaw the Titanic's salvage, but an international agreement is still unsigned. The Titanic was discovered in 1985 by a joint American-French expedition.

Last year, R.M.S. Titanic announced that it wants to give up its salvage rights, but has not yet done so. Meanwhile, Norfolk's federal judges warned the company in November that it must protect the Titanic from pirates until the court relieves the company of that responsibility.

That warning led Davis, the company's attorney, to investigate rumors of a pirate expedition. He reported his findings in recent letters to the court.

According to the letters, the company that may have illegally salvaged the Titanic is Ocean Resources Inc., based in Palm Beach, Fla. Its president, Graham Jessop, is former salvage master of R.M.S. Titanic. He could not be reached for comment.

There is no proof that anyone plundered the Titanic, but several pieces of evidence supplied by Davis in his letters point in that direction:

Two e-mails from France confirm thata submarine was at the Titanic site this fall. A French company, L.D. TravOcean Ltd., owns a small unmanned submarine that is capable of reaching the Titanic, which lies 2.5 miles under the ocean surface. Only a few subs worldwide have such capabilities.

In one e-mail, TravOcean executive Jean Michel Berud acknowledged to an R.M.S. Titanic stockholder that the French sub had visited the Titanic from October to December, but he did not indicate whether any salvage was conducted.

In another, more recent email exchange, Davis asked Berud whether the French submarine had dived to the Titanic. Berud's cryptic e-mail reply: ''We've confidential agreement, we'll not be able to tell you anything on this subject.''

Davis concluded, in a letter to the court, ''This e-mail suggests there may be something to the rumors we have heard.'' Davis tracked the English ship, the Northern Horizon, through port calls in England, Canada and Bermuda in November and December.

He concluded, ''There may be a possibility that the vessel visited the wreck site, but the time frames are very tight. .. particularly given the weather in the North Atlantic.''

A government satellite photo shows a ship at the Titanic site sometime in the fall of 2002.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration does not know whether the ship was just passing through or was stationary over the shipwreck. The agency is trying to find more information, Davis told the court. Davis said he received unspecified information that suggested the Northern Horizon was at the Titanic wreck site sometime from October to December.

''The rumor also suggested that salvage may have taken place in the bow of the wreck using a remotely operated vehicle,'' Davis wrote.

Finally, Davis reported last month that recent reports suggest the Northern Horizon may be planning a visit to the Titanic in March.

That is now unlikely. British marshals seized the ship on Feb. 27 over a disputed debt. No arrangements have been made for the ship's release, Davis reported.

Davis said earlier this month that he was still investigating the rumors of illegal salvaging. His last report to the court was on March 11. ''I've told the court whatI know,'' Davis said.

If the pirate ship really did salvage the Titanic, Norfolk's federal judges probably will be angry. They warned R.M.S. Titanic in November that the company will be held responsible for policing the wreck.

The judges' anger is likely to be compounded if Ocean Resources - which is run by former colleagues of R.M.S. Titanic President Arnie Geller - was the salvor. The court has not released R.M.S. Titanic ''of its responsibility as sole salvor-in-possession,'' U.S. District Judge J. Calvitt Clarke Jr. warned company officials on Nov. 25.

''We do understand the court's concern,'' Davis replied. ''We have the same concern.''

 
Back
Top