Re: XI-B Revisited - New-Clarifications
Posted by:
Ed Michaud
()
Date: April 29, 2004 01:45PM
Gentlement;
As most of you are aware, I usually make it a practice to not become engaged on forums. However, I feel that I must make an exception to this personal rule at this time in order to clarify my positions on this matter. I would like to note that I have a great deal of respect for the regular contributors to this forum, and applaud its overall benefit to the overall uboat history; Gummi has indeed provided a very valuable service to many of us who regularly review these forum posts. To address the matter at hand: I certainly do not remember stating that I believed that the Type XI hull had been removed by the USN. I do know that this theory was speculated for awhile a couple of years ago by others, but in reality, the wreckage of this hull tends to cover completely with sand inside the massive shoal complex known as 'Orion Shoal', (which is essentially a northerly extension of the Nantucket Shoals). In fact, our firm had to convince the US Navy to leave the area in September of 1997 by re-asserting our US Federal In-Rem Action, and reminding them of same. As for the numerous sidescan images that we do have of this wreck, the structural analysis of all of these scans combined are indeed conclusive of a Type XI-B hull - regardless of what we all my think about the archival record; primarily based on the obvious outward appearance of one 127mm armored turret, (with one barrel missing), the 'Arado' storage-tube cover in the forward section, the armored gun-director on the aft of the Conning Tower, the swing-davit for the 'Arado' on the port side next to the tower, the overall length of the wreck at 115 meters [+/- 3 meters], and the confirmation of all of these details by two of our divers during very limited visibility dives. Due to the sandy bottom and 6+ knot current in the area, dives can be very hazardous and bottom visibility is next to zero at most times...hence the difficulty in obtaining photos, etc. As a result of that bad visibility we rely very heavily on sidscan imagry for the overall dimensions/layout for our structural identifications. Numerous sicescanning & sub-bottom profiling confirms the layout and extent of the wreckage to-date. Needless to say, such operations are very very expensive and I certainly do not see any other party contributing to said expenses, and quite frankly most of these expenses have been coming out of my own pocket lately. Since our own State Department has given our small group a very difficult time over the years, we have elected to remain as quiet as possible, which is the reason we have not updated our web article. In fact, Sub Sea Research maintains that particular web site and I personally have no control over it. As to other 'comments' regarding my personal character, I simply do not give credence to such hearsy, and will just not addrress it any further than just to say its all bunk. On another interesting note, I have just forwarded to Mr. Odenweller our recent survey report on the infamous "Haiti Uboat" off Jeremie, Haiti. Sub Sea Research conducted an extensive survey of this particular wreck in January of this year, at considerable expense I might add, and has confirmed that it is in fact a turn-of-the-century gunboat of approximately 148 feet in length. What everyone thought was a conning tower is in fact the top of a 3-cylinder compound engine block. I urged Mr. Odenweller to forward this to Gummi for his records, and let him know that it would be just fine to share this report with the forum regulars. Now, if you fine gentlemen will forgive me, I will go back to lurking on this forum. Since I have numerous consulting responsibilities it may be some time before I can answer any off-list enquiries. Regards to all.... Ed Michaud
As most of you are aware, I usually make it a practice to not become engaged on forums. However, I feel that I must make an exception to this personal rule at this time in order to clarify my positions on this matter. I would like to note that I have a great deal of respect for the regular contributors to this forum, and applaud its overall benefit to the overall uboat history; Gummi has indeed provided a very valuable service to many of us who regularly review these forum posts. To address the matter at hand: I certainly do not remember stating that I believed that the Type XI hull had been removed by the USN. I do know that this theory was speculated for awhile a couple of years ago by others, but in reality, the wreckage of this hull tends to cover completely with sand inside the massive shoal complex known as 'Orion Shoal', (which is essentially a northerly extension of the Nantucket Shoals). In fact, our firm had to convince the US Navy to leave the area in September of 1997 by re-asserting our US Federal In-Rem Action, and reminding them of same. As for the numerous sidescan images that we do have of this wreck, the structural analysis of all of these scans combined are indeed conclusive of a Type XI-B hull - regardless of what we all my think about the archival record; primarily based on the obvious outward appearance of one 127mm armored turret, (with one barrel missing), the 'Arado' storage-tube cover in the forward section, the armored gun-director on the aft of the Conning Tower, the swing-davit for the 'Arado' on the port side next to the tower, the overall length of the wreck at 115 meters [+/- 3 meters], and the confirmation of all of these details by two of our divers during very limited visibility dives. Due to the sandy bottom and 6+ knot current in the area, dives can be very hazardous and bottom visibility is next to zero at most times...hence the difficulty in obtaining photos, etc. As a result of that bad visibility we rely very heavily on sidscan imagry for the overall dimensions/layout for our structural identifications. Numerous sicescanning & sub-bottom profiling confirms the layout and extent of the wreckage to-date. Needless to say, such operations are very very expensive and I certainly do not see any other party contributing to said expenses, and quite frankly most of these expenses have been coming out of my own pocket lately. Since our own State Department has given our small group a very difficult time over the years, we have elected to remain as quiet as possible, which is the reason we have not updated our web article. In fact, Sub Sea Research maintains that particular web site and I personally have no control over it. As to other 'comments' regarding my personal character, I simply do not give credence to such hearsy, and will just not addrress it any further than just to say its all bunk. On another interesting note, I have just forwarded to Mr. Odenweller our recent survey report on the infamous "Haiti Uboat" off Jeremie, Haiti. Sub Sea Research conducted an extensive survey of this particular wreck in January of this year, at considerable expense I might add, and has confirmed that it is in fact a turn-of-the-century gunboat of approximately 148 feet in length. What everyone thought was a conning tower is in fact the top of a 3-cylinder compound engine block. I urged Mr. Odenweller to forward this to Gummi for his records, and let him know that it would be just fine to share this report with the forum regulars. Now, if you fine gentlemen will forgive me, I will go back to lurking on this forum. Since I have numerous consulting responsibilities it may be some time before I can answer any off-list enquiries. Regards to all.... Ed Michaud
