News: Gypsy tart originated from the Isle of Sheppey
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Author Topic: SS Richard Montgomery  (Read 194957 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline MartinR

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
  • 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: 1067
  • Appreciation 76
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: 52
  • 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: 313
  • 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: 1087
  • Appreciation 251
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: 1944
  • 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 I’m 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: 1120
  • Appreciation 102
  • RAF Halton 1957-1960

Offline Nemo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • 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: 300
  • 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: 1120
  • Appreciation 102
  • 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/

Offline kyn

  • Administrator
  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7428
  • Appreciation 419
    • Sheppey History
Re: SS Richard Montgomery
« Reply #208 on: June 09, 2015, 20:24:43 »
Unfortunately the following page is too blurry to read clearly enough to transcribe.

At 10.15 a.m. the “Panther” left the s.s. “Richard Montgomery” proceeded to Stangate Creek and towed the barge “Instow” to the “Yantlet” lying at anchor off the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”.

At 5.50 p.m. stevedores and craft left the s.s. “Richard Montgomery” (Fresh easterly wind and rough sea).  The “Panther” towed the “Capella””, loaded, to Stangate Creek and the “Gondis” towed the “Teak” to Sheerness arriving at 6.20 p.m.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Teak” 140 – 1000-lb. Bombs.
From No. 5 hold to “Capella” 433 – 500-lb. Bombs.


The “Panther” towed the “Teak” to Stangate Creek (loaded).

On Tuesday the 19th September at 7.0 a.m. the s.v. “Yantlet” towed the “Y.C.83” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery” to pump the fore end of the vessel if the hatch coamings came clear.

At 8.15 a.m. two games left Sheerness on the “Gondis” after who had towed the “Capella”, loaded, loaded, to Stangate Creek, and the “Panther” towed barge “Pelton” from stagnate Creek to port side of the s.s. “Richard Montgomery” and towed the “Instow” to starboard side.

On arrival discharge was resumed from Nos. 4 and 5 holds, steam being supplied by the “Gondis”.  The “Panther” towed the “Y.C.83” from the s.v. “Yantlet” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”, and loose water and oil were pumped from cargo in No.4 hold over high water.

At 4.30 p.m. work ceased.  The s.v. “Yantlet” towed the “Y.C.83” and the “Gondis” towed the “Instow” and the “Panther” towed the “Pelton” to Sheerness arriving at 5.0 p.m.

At high water the s.s. “Richard Montgomery’s” stern stands sharply out of the water.  Her propeller and skeg are showing and work in holds is difficult.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Instow” 138 – 1000-lb. Bombs.
From No. 5 hold to “Pelton” 307 – 500-lb. Bombs.

The forward hatch coaming showed 4-ins. above water at low water today, and the pumping operation was postponed until the higher spring tides beginning on the 1st October.

On Wednesday the 20th September at 8.15 a.m. two gangs left Sheerness on the “Gondis” which towed the “Instow” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”, the “Panther” towing the “Pelton” and s.v. “Yantlet” towing “Y.C.83”.

On arrival discharge was resumed from Nos. 4 and 5 holds and oll and water were pumped from No. 4 hold.

At 10.0 a.m. the “Panther” left the s.s. “Richard Montgomery” and proceeded to coal hulk “C.109” in Medway and bunkered, returning to the vessel at 1.0 p.m. when the s.v. “Yantlet” left for Gravesend.

At 6.30 p.m. stevedores left on the “Gondis” which towed the “Instow” to Sheerness.  The “Panther” towed the “Pelton” to Sheerness and later towed the “Instow” (loaded” to Stangate Creek.

At 7.10 p.m. the stevedores landed at Sheerness.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Instow” 16 – 1000-lb. Bombs.
From No. 5 hold to “Pelton” 399 – 500-lb. Bombs.

On Thursday 21st September owing to dense fog two gangs were delayed and left Sheerness at 10. A.m. on the “Gondis” which towed the “Pelton” and the “Y.C.83” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”, and the “Panther” towed the “Didcot”.  On arrival discharge was resumed in Nos. 4 and 5 holds, steam being supplied by the “Gondis”.

Oil and water were pumped from No. 4 hold during high water.  At 6.30 p.m. stevedores and craft left the ship, the “Gondis” towing the “Pelton” and the “Y.C.83” and “Panther” towing the “Didcot” to Sheerness, arriving at 7.15 p.m.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Didcot” 119 – 1000-lb. Bombs
From No. 5 hold to “Pelton” 2 – 500-lb. Bombs, and 3327 fin assembly parts, completing discharge of No. 5 hold except for about 200 fin assembly parts stowed in the fore end of the ‘tween decks.

The “Panther” towed the “Pelton” to Stangate Creek (loaded) and the “Panther” was dispersed with.

On Friday the 22nd September owing to fog one gang was delayed from leaving Sheerness until 9.0 a.m., the “Gondis” towed “Y.C.83” and the “Didcot” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”.

On arrival discharge was resumed from No. 4 hold, steam being supplied by the “Gondis”.

Oil and water were pumped from No. 4 hold.

At 6.15 p.m. discharging ceased for the day and at 6.30 p.m. the “Gondis” towed the “Didcot” and “Y.C.83” to Sheerness, arriving at 7.10 p.m.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Didcot” 120 – 1000-lb. Bombs.

On Saturday 23rd September at 8.10 a.m. the “Gondis” left Sheerness with one gang towing the “Didcot” and “Y.C.83” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”.

On arrival discharge was resumed from No. 4 hold and oil and water pumped out.

At 11.25 a.m. stevedores left the vessel on the “Gondis” which towed the “Didcot” and the Y.C.83” to Sheerness.

Cargo discharged:-

From No. 4 hold to “Didcot” 67 – 1000-lb. Bombs.

The “Gondis” towed the “Didcot” to Stangate Creek (loaded).

On Sunday 24th September during strong wind and sea, one gang left Sheerness on the “Gondis” which towed the “Queenbury”, and the “Y.C.83” to the s.s. “Richard Montgoemry”.  Discharging was resumed from No. 4 hold, on arrival and 175 – 1000-lb. bombs placed in the “Queenbury”.  Oil and water were pumped from No. 4 hold.

At 3.50 p.m. discharging ceased.  The “Gondis” towed the “Queenbury” and the “Y.C.83” to Sheerness arriving at 4.30 p.m.

On Monday the 25th September at *.15 a.m. one gang left Sheerness on the “Gondis” which towed the “Queenbury” and the “Y.C.83” to the s.s. “Richard Montgomery”.

Discharge from No. 4 hold was resumed on arrival and water and oil pumped out as discharge progressed.  At 5.50 p.m. discharge of No. 4 hold was completed and stevedores left the ship returning to Sheerness on “Gondis” which towed the “Queenbury” and the “Y.C.83” to Sheerness, arriving at 6.20 p.m.  The “Gondis” towed the barge “Queenbury” to Standage Creek and was dispensed with.

The total amount of cargo discharged to date is 3,175 tons, today’s discharge from No.4 hold being 124 – 1000-lb. Bombs.

J. W. Edwards
Assistant Mooring & Wreck Raising Officer.
12th October 1944.

 

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