Posted on 11/01/2002 6:42:37 AM PST by stainlessbanner
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has begun an investigation of how to save the remains of the sunken confederate warship CSS Georgia.
What is left of the boat now lies in the path of a planned $200 million expansion of Savannah Harbor. The cost of excavating its remains, salvage artifacts and stabilize whatever archaeologists leave on the bottom of the Savannah River could run as high as $13.4 million.
The wreck lies in 35 feet of water downstream from Savannah. Sonar readings have shown the ironclad is collapsing and might be slowly sliding into the ship channel.
"Basically, we want to have a plan for the CSS Georgia," said Col. Roger Gerber, the corps' Savannah district commander. The study began this week. "We want to know what we need to do to preserve her and how best to get it done."
Using sonar and other devices, archaeologists from the corps, the National Park Service and the U.S. Navy's Naval Historical Center hope in the next few months to piece together the first accurate picture of the wreckage.
"They won't be excavating, but there will be a lot of mapping and probing," corps archaeologist Judy Wood says. "If the harbor-deepening project goes forward, we could be working on the Georgia for the next five or six years."
The Georgia effort follows the raising of the Confederate submarine H.L. Hunley two years ago from Charleston harbor. The turret of the USS Monitor was recovered off Cape Hatteras this summer.
The Georgia was one of three Confederate ironclads built in Savannah after the battle between the Monitor and the Merrimack, off Hampton Roads, Va., in 1862.
The ship originally was a U.S. revenue cutter that had been seized at the start of the war. Local carpenters and railroad workers rebuilt it and armored it with 500 tons of iron.
On its maiden voyage, it ran aground three miles downstream and remained there for the rest of the war.
ROTFL.
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
until the Virginia was re-built, NOBODY had ever built/re-built an armoured ship.
too bad we didn't have more nautical expertise/money/factories, as by the time the lads learned to build the better ironclads, the war was lost.
our small, flegling CSN had nothing to hang their heads about. the old boys did WELL!
free dixie,sw
I'm no naval expert, but can't "Old Ironsides" built in 1797, be considered and "armoured" vessel?
Check your timeline there, sw. Wait, I know that you hate it when I say that. Sorry.
The first armored warship was actually the river gunboats built by Simon Eads from a design by Samuel M. Pook. Four ironclads, the USS Essex, USS Cincinnati, USS Carondelet, and USS St. Louis, were involved in the capture of Fort Donaldson a couple of months before the Monitor and the Merrimack fought.
Raymond Burr, on the other hand.....
;-)
free dixie,sw
the book A PICTORAL HISTORY OF NAVAL WARFARE says the Virginia was FIRST.
as you can tell, i'm not an expert on ships.
free dixie,sw
If my memory serves, I think he's right in saying that the VIRGINIA was the first vessel on which armoured construction was initiated.
You are correct in noting that the Eads ironclads were the first in battle, but I believe that their construction began well after construction on the VIRGINIA commenced. Again, if my memory serves, their construction was done very quickly (along the lines of the speed of construction of the MONITOR) and they were afloat and in battle before the VIRGINIA. Again, though, I believe that their actual construction occurred after VIRGINIA's.
A carrier? No. But there is one class of ship deserving of the Sink Emperor's moniker ...
perhaps that's the cause of the confusion???
free dixie,sw
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.