Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Louisiana Team Finds Arc Royal

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the watch-for-it-on-history-channel dept.

index72 writes "The aircraft carrier responsible for sinking the infamous German Battleship Bismark was found in the Mediterranean by a Lafayette, Louisiana team working with the BBC. The article includes a picture of the really cool looking AUV."

15 comments

  1. First Post by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

    Very kewl. I wonder what we'll learn from the new found wreckage.

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  2. Ironic... by MacAndrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...that the famous victor should be found at the bottom of the sea -- sunk perhasp unawares by a sneaky U-boat. So what was in turn the fate of U-81? Almost certainly it was sunk. Once the Allies figured out submarine warfare the U-boat was the last place you'd want to be. There was one peak year for U-boats -- 1943? -- followed by disaster.

    Note that the Ark Royal played a role in sinking the Bismarck, by its aircraft crippling it. An assist?

    It is a very odd thing for Americans to think of U-boats sunk nearby off the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. We're not used to war at our shores. There is an excellent semi-children's book The Cay that turns in part on U-boats off Venezuela attempting to stop shipment of oil. Hemingway's Islands in the Stream (I think) and Hemingway's To Have and Have Not refer to it as well. I recently visited one of the pillboxes near SF built to help repel the Japanese naval assault that never came, although reportedly a couple of submarines did lob a few shells at the coast.

    Just some musings I hope are of interest. :)

  3. Ah, the internet... U-81 sank indeed by MacAndrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I forgot that trivia fans have everything out there, some of it accurate.

    The U-81

    Note that it came up again, too!

  4. ARC Royal by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

    The Arc Royal, England's answer to the Arc D'Triomph and the Brandenburg Gate! I think this was built according to the proportions specified by the Golden Mean - unlike the Golden Hinde, which was constructed according to Goedel's Mean.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:ARC Royal by RobotWisdom · · Score: 3, Funny

      We Americans just call it the 'Quarter Pounder'.

  5. It's ARK. not ARC ! by belroth · · Score: 2

    Please correct the article.

    --
    I hereby inform you that I have NOT been required to provide any decryption keys.
  6. One last bit by MacAndrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The captain of U-81 responsible for sinking the Ark Royal, Herr Guggenberger, did not perish with it; he was transferred to another U-boat before its sinking, then badly wounded and taken prisoner by the Americans. He later escaped and fled through Arizona, to be recaptured. He died in 1988 in Germany when he simply disappeared in the woods.

    I also am surprised at the idea of German POW running loose in the continental US.

    1. Re:One last bit by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      Well, with the Geneva convention, it is a prisoners DUTY to attempt escape. And since he is a foreigner, I'm surprised he made it to Arizona before being re-captured. He wouldn't have gone un-re-captured for long, though.

      Also, an interesting tid-bit I learned while watching the History Channel a couple months back. The Japanese techinically invaded America. Granted it was one or two of the Alleutian Islands, but none the less...it takes some balls to capture and hold two American islands for nearly an entire year.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    2. Re:One last bit by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      I don't think the Convention imposes a duty to escape. :) It does recognize that most nations expect escape attempts of their soldiers. "The Geneva Convention recognized that a POW may have the duty to attempt escape. In fact, the Geneva Convention prohibits a captor nation from executing a POW simply for attempt escape. Under the authority of the senior official (often called the senior ranking officer, or "SRO") a POW must be prepared to escape whenever the opportunity presents itself. In a POW compound, the senior POW must consider the welfare of those remaining behind after an escape. However, as a matter of conscious determination, a POW must plan to escape, try to escape, and assist others to escape."

      He was imprisoned in Phoenix, so he didn't have far to go to reach Arizona. If you look at the link he almost made in to Mexico. One lesser known detail of the war is that the Japanese had been making overtures to the Mexican gov't -- I think they went went with the U.S.

      Yeah, I've heard about the Aleutians -- but does it count? Alaska wasn't even a state. Also, did we ever challenge them? I imagine we had more pressing concerns, like gaining territory we could use to launch bombing raids Japan. The Japanese invaded various U.S. possessions (and a lot of other stuff) in the Pacific, too. (What were the Phillipines at that point? MacArthur was already there when they invaded.)

    3. Re:One last bit by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      Well, still. POW escapes ARE expected and discussed in the Convention.

      *L* No, he didn't. ;-)

      Well, from Arizona to Mexico ISN'T that big of a jump.

      Oh? That is true. Wasn't it a territory at the time, though?

      Possession does not equal state or territory but I see your point.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    4. Re:One last bit by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      Possession does not equal state or territory

      But what does equal what, or how is it different? Puerto Rico is a territory or commonwealth, Guam is a possession, the Virgin Islands are something else... I have no idea of the definitions. They are all subject to U.S. law, more or less, but not all pay taxes. (The people who claim taxes are a hoax appear to seize on these non-distinctions.)

    5. Re:One last bit by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Puerto Rico is a territory. All the benefits (e.g. ruled by a territorial governor under US law, welfare, etc.), none of the drawbacks (taxes, etc).

      I think the possesions only benefit from having military protection (even if no actual military base exists).

      My opinion on the matter:

      Next time Puerto Rico votes to become a state (they have to do so every so often to remain a territory I believe), if they vote to not become a state, we need to drop them as a territory. They are nothing but a tax drain. As for the possesions, they should be returned to the original government or become a state.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    6. Re:One last bit by MacAndrew · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Since 1950 Puerto Rico is a commonwealth -- not a territory, although it is a territory for certain purposes and a state for others. I can't find a definitive reference fast enough. CIA Factbook

      More:
      Interesting Facts:
      The term "United States" when used in a geographical sense on official documents, acts and/or laws; includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

      The U.S. has twelve unincorporated territories, also known as possessions, and two commonwealths. The major possessions are American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. All of these have a non-voting representative in the U.S. Congress. The major commonwealths are Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas. Commonwealths have their own constitutions and greater autonomy than possessions, and Guam is currently in the process of moving from the status of unincorporated territory to commonwealth. The residents of all of these places are full U.S. citizens, with the exception of those on American Samoa who are U.S. nationals, but not citizens. (U.S. Commonwealths/Territories: American Samao, Baker Island, Howland Island, Guam, Jarvis Island, Kingman Reef, Midway Islands, Navassa Island, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Palmyra Atoll, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands (St. Croix, St. John and St. Thomas), and Wake Island).

      Puerto Rico has its own Olympic team and competes in the Miss Universe pageant as an independent nation.

      I think Virginia and Massachusetts also refer to themselves as commonwealth. I don't know the significance if any.

      As for statehood, PR should be accorded self-determination, as was every present state in the union. I assume our territories would have remained territories had they so chosen. Personally I would make statehood or somethinghood for DC a greater priority. DC residents do pay fed taxes, yet are like PR disenfranchised (remember the old "not taxation without representation" jingle? :). I live across the river from DC and am more aware of their plight.

      I don't think we should dump PR merely on revenue grounds. Think of the precedent. We'd have to dump Iowa, too! (Farm subsidies) (Just kidding -- some of the poorest states must be a net drain, though)
    7. Re:One last bit by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      The thing is, Puerto Rico has voted several times on whether or not to become a full state, and each time they have voted to remain as they are.

      They should have self-determination, but only for so long.

      Personally, if the next election they had over statehood didn't make them a state, I'd dump them asap. Politically, my career would be over, but at least that issue would be settled.

      As for the other commonwealths/territories/possessions, the same should go for them, as well.

      As for already established voting states, I don't think it'd be that bad if we dumped a few.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  7. Corrections by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's HMS Ark Royal (not Arc).

    She didnt sink the Bismarck. Rather the Fairy Swordfish torpedo bombers she carried torpedoed the Bismarck, scoring 2 hits, one of which caused no damage however the other caused her rudder to jam. 4 other battleships, HMS Rodney, King George, Dorsetshire and Norfolk closed in and pounded the Bismarck till it sank.

    http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/history/

    HMS Ark Royal is also famous for launching several, mostly unsuccesful but daring, raids on Italian warships moored at harbours. Most famously on Taranto.

    --
    I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.