U-550 was sunk in a known position a few thousand yards/meters from where she herself torpedoed the "Pan Pennsylvania". About a dozen survivors were rescued and placed in POW canps.
Would divers (or explorers with side-scan sonar or ROVs) going to U-550 correctly be called "finding U-550" or "going back to where everyone knew U-550 was"? I would be entirely happy with the phrase "divers establishing the exact location and condition of U-550". Sorry, I don't mean to be a curmudgeon or nitpicker here, but it seems that the word "found" should be reserved for something that was truly lost with nobody knowing where it was.

And while I am wearing my slightly skeptical (aye, even curmudgeonly) hat here, is there anyone else who is fully expecting the "U-boot" in the Canadian river to be actually a 1910's river coal barge that capsized and sank in a storm with a "streamlined" lower keel now uppermost, presenting a sonar outline that looks like a submarine??????

While I deeply respect the underwater work of divers like Innes McCartney and the scholarly research of people like Axel Niestle, I take a slightly dim view of "discoveries" that turn out to be nothing like that at all.