DOCSLIB.ORG

The Historic Combat Between US Navy Blimp K-74 and U-Boat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Historic Combat Between US Navy Blimp K-74 and U-Boat Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 7-23-2003 An incident at sea: The historic combat between U.S. Navy Blimp K-74 and U-Boat 134 Anthony Atwood Florida International University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Atwood, Anthony, "An incident at sea: The historic combat between U.S. Navy Blimp K-74 and U-Boat 134" (2003). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 12. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/12 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida AN INCIDENT AT SEA: THE HISTORIC COMBAT BETWEEN U.S. NAVY BLIMP K-74 AND U-BOAT 134 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in HISTORY by Anthony Dewey Atwood 2003 To: Dean Arthur W. Herriott College of Arts and Sciences This thesis, written by Anthony Dewey Atwood, and entitled: An Incident at Sea: The Historic Combat between U.S. Navy Blimp K-74 and U-boat 134, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgment. We have read this thesis and recommend that it be approved. ____________________________________ Ralph S. Clem ____________________________________ William O. Walker III ____________________________________ Darden A. Pyron, Major Professor Date of Defense: July 23, 2003 The thesis of Anthony Dewey Atwood is approved. ____________________________________ Dean Arthur W. Herriott College of Arts and Sciences ____________________________________ Dean Douglas Wartzok University Graduate School Florida International University, 2003 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to gratefully acknowledge the kind assistance of Lothar E. Zeidler, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of the Linguistics Department at Rutgers University for his invaluable help in translating the radio transmissions of the U-134. His encouragement was important to this work. Equally important to this work have been the K-74 survivors Nelson G. Grills, Robert Herbert Bourne, John Schmidt and John F. Rice. Likewise the scholarly help of Professor Michael Gannon, Professor Gwyn Davies, Al Cope, Richard Collins, Max May, Peter W. Soverel, Tim Nininger of the National Archives, and my thesis committee-members, Professors Darden A. Pyron, William O. Walker III and Ralph Clem were vital. This work could not have been done without the help of German U-boat historians Professor Doctor Jurgen Rohwer, Horst Bredow and Franz Selinger. iii ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS AN INCIDENT AT SEA: THE HISTORIC COMBAT BETWEEN U.S. NAVY BLIMP K-74 AND U-BOAT 134 by Anthony Dewey Atwood Florida International University, 2004 Miami, Florida Professor Darden A. Pyron, Major Professor This thesis studies the historic encounter between United States Navy airship K- 74 and Nazi submarine U-134 in World War II. The Battle of the Atlantic is examined through case study of this one U-boat and its voyage. In all things except her fight with the American blimp, the patrol was perfectly typical. Looked at from start to finish, both her reports and the reports of the Allies encountered, many realities of the war can be studied. U-134 sailed to attack shipping between Florida and Cuba. She was challenged by the attack of United States Navy airship K-74 over the Florida Straits. It is the only documented instance of battle between two such combatants in history. That merits attention. Thesis finding disprove historian William Eliot Morison’s contention that the K- 74 airship bombs were not dropped and did not damage the U-boat Study of this U-boat and its antagonist broadens our understanding of the Battle of the Atlantic. It is a contribution to our knowledge of military, naval, aviation, and local history. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................. 1 II. THE ATLANTIC BATTLEFIELD ........................................................................ 6 The German Navy/U-boat Successes.................................................................. 7 German Command/Surface Fleet Defeats .......................................................... 10 Supply Ships and Raiders ................................................................................... 12 The Panay Incident ............................................................................................. 14 The Atlantic Neutrality Patrol............................................................................. 16 Ships for Bases/ABC Talks/Lend Lease............................................................. 17 The Navy Armed Guard/First Attacks................................................................ 22 The Hooligan Navy/The Civil Air Patrol............................................................ 28 Queen ships/Milk Cows/Wizard War ................................................................. 30 Enter the Blimps ................................................................................................ 36 III. THE PATROL OF THE U-134 ............................................................................. 39 U-134 ordered to sea......................................................................................... 44 Heading – outbound.......................................................................................... 46 Sighting report .................................................................................................. 47 Communications signal..................................................................................... 47 Refueling operations in mid-Atlantic................................................................ 48 Heading – to combat zone................................................................................. 51 Communications signal..................................................................................... 52 Orders to attack Florida and Cuba .................................................................... 52 Action report: combat against Seaplane ........................................................... 53 Action report: combat off the Isle of Pines....................................................... 56 IV. BATTLE AGAINST NAVY BLIMP K-74 ......................................................... 57 V. RETREAT FROM BATTLE.................................................................................. 84 Action report: combat against Key West Bomber ............................................ 84 Damage report................................................................................................... 86 Orders to Retreat............................................................................................... 88 Communication signals..................................................................................... 90 Directions for escape via Spain......................................................................... 93 Action report: combat against a Carrier............................................................ 95 U-boat Headquarters assessment ...................................................................... 102 Last action off Spain ......................................................................................... 103 Final log entry................................................................................................... 108 Conclusions....................................................................................................... 109 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND PRIMARY SOURCES.......................................................... 115 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................. 120 v CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The Battle of the Atlantic (September 1939-May 1945) was the defining naval contest of modern times. The German Reich sought to overthrow the existing Anglo- Franco-American global hegemony and replace it with a German world empire. Supremacy over civilization and its produce was the aim of the charismatic Adolf Hitler and under his leadership Germany nearly succeeded in this. The regime crushed Continental opposition and united most of Europe under his new world order. The German challenge to the British Empire and the nascent world-power of the United States was met and fought out on, under, and over the Atlantic Ocean. The Nazi attempt initially focused on a naval blockade of the British Isles. Britain fought to keep her sea lanes open to help from her global commonwealth and escalating United States support. With the German invasion of Russia, combat and naval operations grew exponentially. The entrance of the United States as a belligerent into the war in December 1941 made America the center of re-supply for the Allies. In addition to keeping Britain and Russia supplied to continue fighting, a second war aim of the United States emerged as the movement of vast armed forces to the overseas fronts for the eventual invasion of Europe to defeat the Axis powers. Maritime traffic across the Atlantic Ocean was the only means to make this happen. American entry into the war was precipitated by the surprise attack by Japan
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Summary Justice: the Price of Treason for Eight World War Ii German Prisoners of War
    SUMMARY JUSTICE: THE PRICE OF TREASON FOR EIGHT WORLD WAR II GERMAN PRISONERS OF WAR A Thesis by Mark P. Schock Bachelor of Arts, Kansas Newman College, 1978 Submitted to the Department of History and the faculty of the Graduate School of Wichita State University in partial fulfillment of Master of Arts May 2011 © Copyright 2011 by Mark P. Schock All Rights Reserved SUMMARY JUSTICE: THE PRICE OF TREASON FOR EIGHT WORLD WAR II GERMAN PRISONERS OF WAR The following faculty members have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and content, and recommended that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts with a major in History. ___________________________________ Robert Owens, Committee Chair ___________________________________ Robin Henry, Committee Member ___________________________________ William Woods, Committee Member iii DEDICATION To the memory of my father, Richard Schock, and my uncle Pat Bessette, both of whom encouraged in me a deep love of history and country iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, Dr. Robert Owens, for his incredible patience with an old dog who had such trouble with new tricks. Special thanks go to Dr. Anthony and Dana Gythiel whose generous grant allowed me to travel to the National Archives and thus gain access to many of the original documents pertinent to this story. I’d also like to thank Colonel Jack Bender, U.S.A.F (ret.), for his insight into the workings of military justice. Special thanks are likewise due to Lowell May, author of two books about German POWs incarcerated in Kansas during World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • J. HOWARD MATHEWS Firearms Identification
    • ]. Ho\\'ard Mathc\,-s lrearms • • entl catIon YOL' ". III O,~lph>togr.""".nd_IIIwm...",.,lt.ouJ g''"'" l)oj. "" nll,,~ dwaru-,io'>n of ""nod " ....... 1 ..... ~d ro.rhu.oo" ... r~ ,J" [J,j..wl ,\,,;_ ..; Au.~ [. \\'.,,,,,~-. ........... , M"",~ Sp<ri</i>t. '1"_ 'NJ""'''''''''''' "'-""" (.'~ ... 1.. I><A.trOOJ s.""", .Il.. ~_. WI>;;o,"'fi The "real work" o f this posthumously published third volume was all done by Dr. J. H. Mathews. AU that was necessary at the time of his death was to mount the photographs and complete the editorial work of pulling the book together for publication. The third volume contains additional data for many makes and models for which data on other specimens were given in Volume I. Also, much previously unavailable data on rifles is presented along with data for many handguns not before encountered . Photographs of many previously unphotographed handguns have been included as well as photographs of guns in partially disassembled condition giving a better view of their constructi on and operation. In PART I of Volume Ill , tables are prese nted on rifling characteristics of automatic pistols, revolvers and nonautomatic pistols and rifles. As an aid to identification, material has been organized into tables, arranged by caliber, number of grooves and directi on of twist. Since, as the author pointed out, the firearms examiner may often be concerned with arms of older vintage , there is an extensive discussion in PART II of less well known American made hand guns fr om the peri od 1850 to 19 10. In Section 1 o f PART III are found original pho tographs of automatic pistols, arranged by caliber.
    [Show full text]
  • Lighter-Than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications
    Lighter-than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications From the world leaders in the manufacture of aerostats, airships, air cell structures, gas balloons & tethered balloons Aerostats Parachute Training Balloons Airships Nose Docking and PARACHUTE TRAINING BALLOONS Mooring Mast System The airborne Parachute Training Balloon system (PTB) is used to give preliminary training in static line parachute jumping. For this purpose, an Instructor and a number of trainees are carried to the operational height in a balloon car, the winch is stopped, and when certain conditions are satisfied, the trainees are dispatched and make their parachute descent from the balloon car. GA-22 Airship Fully Autonomous AIRSHIPS An airship or dirigible is a type of aerostat or “lighter-than-air aircraft” that can be steered and propelled through the air using rudders and propellers or other thrust mechanisms. Unlike aerodynamic aircraft such as fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, which produce lift by moving a wing through the air, aerostatic aircraft, and unlike hot air balloons, stay aloft by filling a large cavity with a AEROSTATS lifting gas. The main types of airship are non rigid (blimps), semi-rigid and rigid. Non rigid Aerostats are a cost effective and efficient way to raise a payload to a required altitude. airships use a pressure level in excess of the surrounding air pressure to retain Also known as a blimp or kite aerostat, aerostats have been in use since the early 19th century their shape during flight. Unlike the rigid design, the non-rigid airship’s gas for a variety of observation purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • A Kriegsmarine U VII. Osztályú Tengeralattjárói
    Haditechnika-történet Kelecsényi István* – Sárhidai Gyula** Akik majdnem megnyerték az Atlanti csatát – A Kriegsmarine U VII. osztályú tengeralattjárói I. rész 1. ábra. VII. osztályú U-boot bevetésre indul a kikötőből (Festmény) AZ előzmények főleg kereskedelmi hajót süllyesztettek el 199 darabos veszteség ellenében. A német búvárnaszádok a háború Az első világháború után a békefeltételek nem engedték során komoly problémát okoztak az antant hatalmaknak a meg Németországnak a tengeralattjárók hadrendben tartá- nyersanyag utánpótlásában és élelmiszerszállítások bizto- sát. Ennek oka, hogy a Nagy Háborúban több mint 5000, sításában. ÖSSZEFOGLALÁS: A németek közepes méretű tengeralattjáró típusa a VII. ABSTRACT: The Class VII U-boats were the German medium-size submarine osztály volt. A német haditengerészet legnagyobb ászai – Günther Prien type. The greatest aces of the German Navy – Corvette captain Günther Prien, korvettkapitány, Otto Kretschmer fregattkapitány és Joachim Schepke fre- Frigate captain Otto Kretschmer and Frigate captain Joachim Schepke – gattkapitány – ezeken a hajókon szolgáltak. A VII. osztály változatai elsősor- served on these boats. Variants of the Class VII fought mainly in the Atlantic ban az Atlanti-óceánon, a brit utánpótlási vonalak fő hadszínterén harcoltak, Ocean, on the main battlefield of the British supply lines, and between 1941 és 1941 és 1943 között majdnem sikerült kiéheztetniük és térdre kényszerí- and 1943 they almost starved and brought to heels the Great Britain. The teniük Nagy-Britanniát. A németek
    [Show full text]
  • KUNGL ÖRLOGSMANNA SÄLLSKAPET N:R 5 1954 253
    KUNGL ÖRLOGSMANNA SÄLLSKAPET N:r 5 1954 253 Kring några nyförvärv i Kungl. Orlogs- 111annasällskapets bibliotek Av Kommendörkapten GEORG HAFSTRöM. Bland äldre böcker, som_ under de senare åren tillförts Sällskapets bibliotek befinner sig fyra handskrivna volym_er, mottagna såsom gåva från ett sterbhus. Två av dessa här• stammar från slutet av 1700-talet och två från förra hälften av 1800-talet. De är skrivna av tvenne sjöofficerare, resp. far och son, nämligen fänriken vid amiralitetet Michael J a­ rislaf von Bord-. och premiärlöjtnanten vid Kungl. Maj :ts flotta J o han August von Borclc Som de inte sakna sitt in­ tresse vid studiet av förhållandena inom flottan under an­ förda tid utan fastmera bidrager att i sin mån berika vår kännedom om vissa delar av tjänsten och livet inom sjövap• net, må några ord om desamma här vara på sin plats. Först några orienterande data om herrarna von Borclc De tillhör de en gammal pommersk adelssläkt, som under svensktiden såg flera av sina söner ägna sig åt krigaryrket. Ej mindre än 6 von Borekar tillhörde sålunda armen un­ der Karl XII :s dagat·, samtliga dragonofficerare. Och un­ der m itten och senare delen av 1700-talet var 3 medlemmar av ätten officerare vid det i Siralsund garnisonerade Drott­ ningens livregemente. Förmodligen son till den äldste av dessa sistnämnda föd• des Michael Jarislaf von Borck 1758. Han antogs 1786 till arklintästare vid amiralitetet och utnämndes 1790 till fän• rik, P å hösten 1794 begärde han 3 års permission »för att un­ der sitt nuvarande vistande i England vinna all möjlig för• ~<ovr an i metiern».
    [Show full text]
  • Chapman Law Review
    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
    [Show full text]
  • Type II U-Boat Modifications & Vent Patterns
    Accurate Model Parts Contents Part I Introduction Part II Type IIA Part III Type IIB Part IV Type IIC Part V Type IID Part VI Inside Tower Part VII Other Details Part VIII Tower Styles List Part IX Acknowledgements & Sources Part I – Introduction Type IIs Variant Number of boats Type IIs IIA 6 he Type II U-boat was a small German coastal submarine. IIB 20 T The first sub-variant - the IIA - was modelled after the IIC 8 design export CV-707, which served in the Finnish Navy IID 16 under the name Vesikko. The next variant was the Type IIB, which was longer and heavier than the IIA. Two further variants - the IIC and IID - followed. In total 50 Type IIs served in the German Kriegsmarine prior to and during World War II. Space was very cramped inside these diminutive boats. Due to their small size and tendency to roll, the Type IIs were known as Einbaum - “dug-out canoes” - by their crews. Indeed they only carried six torpedoes, which could only be fired from the bow through three forward torpedo tubes. Range was also limited, meaning that they operated mainly in the North Sea from ports in Germany. Nevertheless a number of Type IIs, with a crew of between 22 and 24, performed well during war patrols. Several very successful commanders - Otto Kretschmer in U 23, Erich Topp in U 57 and Adalbert Schnee in U 6 and U 60 - learned their trade on Type IIs before moving to the larger ocean-going Type VII boats. The Type IIAs, IIBs and IICs were all used during the invasion of Norway, after which the IIAs and IIBs were relegated to training flotillas.
    [Show full text]
  • Seeschlachten Im Atlantik (Zusammenfassung)
    Seeschlachten im Atlantik (Zusammenfassung) U-Boot-Krieg (aus Wikipedia) 07_48/U 995 vom Typ VII C/41, der meistgebauten U-Boot-Klasse im Zweiten Weltkrieg Als U-Boot-Krieg (auch "Unterseebootkrieg") werden Kampfhandlungen zur See bezeichnet, bei denen U-Boote eingesetzt werden, um feindliche Kriegs- und Frachtschiffe zu versenken. Die Bezeichnung "uneingeschränkter U-Boot-Krieg" wird verwendet, wenn Schiffe ohne vorherige Warnung angegriffen werden. Der Einsatz von U-Booten wandelte sich im Laufe der Zeit vom taktischen Blockadebrecher zum strategischen Blockademittel im Rahmen eines Handelskrieges. Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg änderte sich die grundsätzliche Einsatzdoktrin durch die Entwicklung von Raketen tragenden Atom- U-Booten, die als Träger von Kernwaffen eine permanente Bedrohung über den maritimen Bereich hinaus darstellen. Im Gegensatz zum Ersten und Zweiten Weltkrieg fand hier keine völkerrechtliche Weiterentwicklung zum Einsatz von U-Booten statt. Der Begriff wird besonders auf den Ersten und Zweiten Weltkrieg bezogen. Hierbei sind auch völkerrechtliche Rahmenbedingungen von Bedeutung. Anfänge Während des Amerikanischen Bürgerkrieges wurden 1864 mehrere handgetriebene U-Boote gebaut. Am 17. Februar 1864 versenkte die C.S.S. H. L. Hunley durch eine Sprengladung das Kriegsschiff USS Housatonic der Nordstaaten. Es gab 5 Tote auf dem versenkten Schiff. Die Hunley gilt somit als erstes U-Boot der Welt, das ein anderes Schiff zerstört hat. Das U-Boot wurde allerdings bei dem Angriff auf die Housatonic durch die Detonation schwer beschädigt und sank, wobei auch seine achtköpfige Besatzung getötet wurde. Auftrag der Hunley war die Brechung der Blockade des Südstaatenhafens Charleston durch die Nordstaaten. Erster Weltkrieg Die technische Entwicklung der U-Boote bis zum Beginn des Ersten Weltkrieges beschreibt ein Boot, das durch Dampf-, Benzin-, Diesel- oder Petroleummaschinen über Wasser und durch batteriegetriebene Elektromotoren unter Wasser angetrieben wurde.
    [Show full text]
  • Goodyear – Civilian Blimps
    Goodyear – civilian blimps Peter Lobner, 24 August 2021 1. Introduction Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company began their involvement with lighter-than-air (LTA) vehicles in 1912, when the company developed a fabric envelope suitable for use in airships and aerostats. The first blimps manufactured by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company were B-Type blimps ordered by the US Navy in 1917 for convoy escort duty. Goodyear (envelope supplier) and Curtiss Aeroplane (gondola supplier) produced 9 of the 17 B-Type blimps ordered. Goodyear also supplied the envelopes for some of the Navy’s 10 C-Type patrol blimps, which were delivered in 1918, after the end of WW I. Both the B- and C-Type blimps used hydrogen as the lift gas. In 1923, Goodyear teamed with German firm Luftschiffbau Zeppelin and created a new subsidiary, Goodyear Zeppelin Corporation. In June 1925, their Type AD Pilgrim (NC-9A) made its first flight and became Goodyear’s first blimp to use helium lift gas. Pilgrim was certified later in 1925, becoming the first US commercial airship. Goodyear Zeppelin Corporation filed a patent application for a nonrigid airship in September 1929, describing the objectives of their invention as follows: “This invention relates to non-rigid airships, and it has particular relation to the suspension of pilot cars or gondolas from the envelopes of non-rigid airships. The principal object of the invention is to provide a non-rigid airship in which the envelope and the pilot car or engine car are so constructed as to offer the minimum air resistance. Another object of the invention is to provide connections between the envelope and pilot car that are not exposed to the airstream for sustaining the weight of the pilot car, as well as stabilizing it against lateral or longitudinal movement.” 1 In patent Figure 1, the pressurized lift gas envelope (10) contains an air ballonet (12, for adjusting airship buoyancy) and a load suspension system for carrying and distributing the weight of the gondola (11) affixed under the envelope and the thrust loads from the with attached engines.
    [Show full text]
  • The Weeping Monument: a Pre and Post Depositional Site
    THE WEEPING MONUMENT: A PRE AND POST DEPOSITIONAL SITE FORMATION STUDY OF THE USS ARIZONA by Valerie Rissel April, 2012 Director of Thesis: Dr. Brad Rodgers Major Department: Program in Maritime History and Archaeology Since its loss on December 7, 1941, the USS Arizona has been slowly leaking over 9 liters of oil per day. This issue has brought about conversations regarding the stability of the wreck, and the possibility of defueling the 500,000 to 600,000 gallons that are likely residing within the wreck. Because of the importance of the wreck site, a decision either way is one which should be carefully researched before any significant changes occur. This research would have to include not only the ship and its deterioration, but also the oil’s effects on the environment. This thesis combines the historical and current data regarding the USS Arizona with case studies of similar situations so a clearer picture of the future of the ship can be obtained. THE WEEPING MONUMENT: A PRE AND POST DEPOSITIONAL SITE FORMATION STUDY OF THE USS ARIZONA Photo courtesy of Battleship Arizona by Paul Stillwell A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Program in Maritime Studies Department of History East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Masters in Maritime History and Archaeology by Valerie Rissel April, 2012 © Valerie Rissel, 2012 THE WEEPING MONUMENT: A PRE AND POST DEPOSITIONAL SITE FORMATION STUDY OF THE USS ARIZONA by Valerie Rissel APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF THESIS______________________________________________________________________ Bradley Rodgers, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER________________________________________________________ Michael Palmer, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Heritage Resources Management Guidance for Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Compliance to National Historic Preservation Act
    Maritime Heritage Resource Management Guidance 2018 for Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Maritime Heritage Resources Management Guidance for Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Compliance to National Historic Preservation Act April 2018 olympiccoast.noaa.gov Maritime Heritage Resource Management Guidance 2018 for Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Cover Photo: Excerpt from the 1853 U.S. Coast Survey reconnaissance of the western coast of the United States from Gray's Harbor to the entrance of Admiralty Inlet. Downloaded from https://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/historicals/preview/image/AR51-00-1853 on December 29, 2016. Page 2 Maritime Heritage Resource Management Guidance 2018 for Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 5 Relationship to OCNMS Management Plan ............................................................................... 5 Scope of Maritime Heritage Resource Management Guidance .................................................. 5 Plans for Section 106 Programmatic Agreement ........................................................................ 6 Background Research ................................................................................................................. 8 Definitions ................................................................................................................................... 8 Historical Context
    [Show full text]
  • Manufacturing Techniques of a Hybrid Airship Prototype
    UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR Engenharia Manufacturing Techniques of a Hybrid Airship Prototype Sara Emília Cruz Claro Dissertação para obtenção do Grau de Mestre em Engenharia Aeronáutica (Ciclo de estudos integrado) Orientador: Prof. Doutor Jorge Miguel Reis Silva, PhD Co-orientador: Prof. Doutor Pedro Vieira Gamboa, PhD Covilhã, outubro de 2015 ii AVISO A presente dissertação foi realizada no âmbito de um projeto de investigação desenvolvido em colaboração entre o Instituto Superior Técnico e a Universidade da Beira Interior e designado genericamente por URBLOG - Dirigível para Logística Urbana. Este projeto produziu novos conceitos aplicáveis a dirigíveis, os quais foram submetidos a processo de proteção de invenção através de um pedido de registo de patente. A equipa de inventores é constituída pelos seguintes elementos: Rosário Macário, Instituto Superior Técnico; Vasco Reis, Instituto Superior Técnico; Jorge Silva, Universidade da Beira Interior; Pedro Gamboa, Universidade da Beira Interior; João Neves, Universidade da Beira Interior. As partes da presente dissertação relevantes para efeitos do processo de proteção de invenção estão devidamente assinaladas através de chamadas de pé de página. As demais partes são da autoria do candidato, as quais foram discutidas e trabalhadas com os orientadores e o grupo de investigadores e inventores supracitados. Assim, o candidato não poderá posteriormente reclamar individualmente a autoria de qualquer das partes. Covilhã e UBI, 1 de Outubro de 2015 _______________________________ (Sara Emília Cruz Claro) iii iv Dedicator I want to dedicate this work to my family who always supported me. To my parents, for all the love, patience and strength that gave me during these five years. To my brother who never stopped believing in me, and has always been my support and my mentor.
    [Show full text]