News: In June 1557 Edmund Allin, his wife and five others were burnt at the stake, where Drakes pub now stands in Fairmeadow, Maidstone, for refusing to accept Catholicism.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Author Topic: SS Richard Montgomery  (Read 200535 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Twyfordbridge

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Appreciation 0
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #223 on: June 27, 2018, 17:05:47 »
The Captain of the SS Richard Montgomery.

According to Wikipedia, various websites and the Southend Dept of Trade & Industry lengthy document included in this post by Kyn, the Captain was a Charles Wilkie.

According to a book by Greg Williams, Liberty Ships of WW II, the Captain was actually Frederick Willecke, born in Bremen Germany on 19 Jan 1890, later becoming a US citizen. After the Montgomery incident he remained here and traveled back to USA from Southampton on the John Ericsson departing Nov 30 and arriving home in New York on 12 Dec 1944.

Meanwhile, whilst still here in UK he probably had a few drinks in the Southend Masonic Hall where he was made an Honorary Member on 31 Oct 1944.

I donít know, but would imagine that he preferred to be known as Captain Wilkie as a shortened version rather than Captain Willecke... which when pronounced correctly would have sounded ĎVilleckeí, maybe just a bit too German sounding in the circumstances.

Online MartinR

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
  • Appreciation 4
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #222 on: December 20, 2017, 23:11:27 »
Quote
If I'm honest I've never actually SEEN the wreck itself (even from a safe distance) but I've heard (and read) a lot about it.

To be honest there's not a lot to see.  Four decent sized buoys including an unusual yellow cone and yellow can, and a string of small orange ones surrounding the prohibited area.  Three barnacled masts with peeling warning boards and that's your lot.  I've never been closer than half a cable from it, but even with binoculars it's a case of oo ah, seen that, move on.  No 1, The Thames (aka Grain Tower) is far more interesting if you're in that area.

Offline Derek45

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Appreciation 0
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #221 on: December 20, 2017, 12:46:05 »
Two photos I took in the sixties from The Silver Star, which was owned by Reg Carter, a Maidstone and District bus driver.

Offline conan

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1097
  • Appreciation 78
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #220 on: December 04, 2017, 23:14:57 »
There's some good stuff on the ship here, including this sonar image




http://www.bobleroi.co.uk/ScrapBook/SSRichardMontgomery/SSRichardMontgomery.html

To remain ignorant of what happened before you were born is to remain a child......Cicero

Offline 80sChild

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 56
  • Appreciation 3
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #219 on: April 18, 2016, 13:10:05 »
I saw a programme last night on Channel 4 called Hidden Britain by Drone, and it was hosted by Tony Robinson.
In it they travelled around the country visiting various points of historical interest, and used the Drones to film great arial shots of the landmarks.

And last night they explored this wreck. They explained the history of the American ship, how it got marooned off the coast of Sheerness (they showed radar images of it having broken in half), and it's possible future (there's still a strong debate going on as what's to be done with I t- many have voiced concerns about the inherent danger of hundreds of tons of ammunition that could go off and cause vast damage, whilst others have said any attempts to intervene could prove disastrous).

If I'm honest I've never actually SEEN the wreck itself (even from a safe distance) but I've heard (and read) a lot about it.

Offline Nemo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Appreciation 16
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #218 on: December 24, 2015, 17:21:45 »
Thanks a bunch Bilgerat! It's Christmas Eve, the presents are purchased, I still have all my internal organs, and no.1 granddaughter visits tomorrow. And then in the same post you put 'Government with unlimited resources' and 'do something'.

I said to the man who stood at the gate of the year
Give me a light that I may safely tread
And he replied, Neem, that light of which you spoke
Is the sign of a government, felt obliged to have a poke!

 :)

Offline Bilgerat

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Appreciation 264
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #217 on: December 24, 2015, 12:48:27 »
Maybe I'm being a little naive here, though I do try to take Government assurances about things with a bucketful of salt. I would like to think that if the Monty is that dangerous and that given the potential consequences of getting it wrong, that the Government with all the practically unlimited resources available to them would have done something about it by now.
"I did not say that the French will not come, I said they will not come by sea" - Lord St Vincent

Offline Sentinel S4

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • Appreciation 167
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #216 on: December 24, 2015, 09:10:24 »
A few years ago Terry Smith wrote a rubbish (my opinion) book about a bunch of Middle Eastern terrorists doing this very thing with the Monty. I still have the book on my Kindle, it really is bad but it did highlight a problem. I pretty well upset Ronangel and the buffoon (MBE) by giving away the ending of the tome, I think they might have been consulted by Mr T Smith during the research. The truth is that the book actually gives a stage by stage way of detonating the Monty, if you can get the correct gear together. SPOILER ALERT! The plot fails by some good luck and a little effort from the hero. At the end it does highlight that the LNG tankers could do far more damage than the Monty ever could, they are the equivalent of the Hiroshima bomb floating around in a narrow channel.

However let me ask this of you: The IRA were far more inventive than ISIL, during their campaign Chatham was a 'legitimate military target' so why the hell did they not blow her up? I really think that we do not have much to worry about, it must really be a slow news season or the buffoon (MBE) is running out of beer tokens, this is scare mongering at its lowest form and I for one am sick to the back teeth of the hype...

S4.
A day without learning something is a day lost and my brain is hungry. Feed me please.

Offline peterchall

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3620
  • Appreciation 186
  • 25.06.1929 - 12.03.2016
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #215 on: December 23, 2015, 22:39:19 »
Who can doubt that ISIL would blow it up if they could? Whether or not they actually could Iím not qualified to say.

But if the paper is quoting a transport minister and the security services correctly,.they consider it enough of a threat to do something about it.
It's no use getting old if you don't get artful

Offline grandarog

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Appreciation 103
  • RAF Halton 1957-1960

Offline Nemo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Appreciation 16
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #213 on: December 22, 2015, 21:32:55 »
I suppose anything is possible but I have difficulty in picturing a group of terrorists brain-storming things to blow up on a wet and windy Tuesday night using whatever the £1.03 in the kitty will buy and coming up with "the Messines Ridge, only underwater this time - the Montgomery". I think it gives terrorists a bad name and whatever adjectives you apply to them, 'stupid' isn't one.  I'd be more worried if a post-it sticker was found affixed to the masts saying "we've cracked it and tomorrow is boom-time!"

Offline helcion

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 261
  • Appreciation 29
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #212 on: December 21, 2015, 22:43:58 »
I wondered how long it would take before he surfaced . . . . .

Offline davpott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Appreciation 46
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #211 on: December 21, 2015, 21:48:38 »
Another chance for Ronangel to spread alarm with his links.Scroll down the comments he's right there.Mike Barker must be too busy with his job as Father Christmas to comment.  :)

I did notice somewhere recently that it was a terrorist target. I didn't bother read the details as I immediately gathered the source of the story.

Offline grandarog

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Appreciation 103
  • RAF Halton 1957-1960
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #210 on: December 21, 2015, 20:31:24 »
Another chance for Ronangel to spread alarm with his links.Scroll down the comments he's right there.Mike Barker must be too busy with his job as Father Christmas to comment.  :)

Offline helcion

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 261
  • Appreciation 29
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #209 on: December 21, 2015, 08:15:05 »
Interesting report with an excellent sonar scan of the wreck   -

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbourne/news/bomb-ship-is-cracking-up-48058/

 

BloQcs design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.11 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines