lincolnwood
Member
Did anybody catch John's reference in todays forecast?
42 years ago
- Thread starter lincolnwood
- Start date
srt20
Active member
garyl62
Active member
Here is an interesting commentary by Mike Rowe recorded last year. Worth 6 minutes of your time for a listen.
http://thewayiheardit.rsvmedia.com/episode-58-a-lesser-known-vessel
http://thewayiheardit.rsvmedia.com/episode-58-a-lesser-known-vessel
Here's another link of a short documentary I've never seen before. Good stuff!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAyD3dg23s0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAyD3dg23s0
snobuilder
Well-known member
Is Mike R the new Paul Harvey?
Pretty good analogy from Nash. If they tell you it can't happen...it probably will.
A couple of years ago I attended a presentation on the subject and a pair of take-a-ways I came away with were the following;
1. The Fitz was actually longer than the lake is deep at the location of the wreck. 729' vs 537' so in theory you could stand the ship on it's nose and there would be 200' of her stern still sticking out of the water.
2. A little known fact is that there is a huge trench on the lake bottom adjacent to the wreckage. Some would have us believe that the ship taking on water and riding low would have eventually taken a dive to the bottom with the bow creating the trench and with all the torquing she broke in half coming to rest on the bottom as she is today. This kind of ties in with the documentary when they say the waves had been breaking over the deck and crashing in to the rear of the wheelhouse pushing her still lower into the water.
Just a theory but something to think about 42 years after the fact.
Gary
A couple of years ago I attended a presentation on the subject and a pair of take-a-ways I came away with were the following;
1. The Fitz was actually longer than the lake is deep at the location of the wreck. 729' vs 537' so in theory you could stand the ship on it's nose and there would be 200' of her stern still sticking out of the water.
2. A little known fact is that there is a huge trench on the lake bottom adjacent to the wreckage. Some would have us believe that the ship taking on water and riding low would have eventually taken a dive to the bottom with the bow creating the trench and with all the torquing she broke in half coming to rest on the bottom as she is today. This kind of ties in with the documentary when they say the waves had been breaking over the deck and crashing in to the rear of the wheelhouse pushing her still lower into the water.
Just a theory but something to think about 42 years after the fact.
Gary
If memory serves me right, the big ship had many "stress" issues/repairs over her time. Perhaps due to her size??? Still many theories on her going down to this day. I still remember as I listened to the news of her wreck. At the time, and at my age, I thought that it was somewhat odd of a ship wreck on Superior. I still listen to every word of Gordon Lightfoot's song when ever I hear it to this day!!! A real tragedy for sure.
sweeperguy
Active member
I don't know if I still have it. But at the time I cut out every newspaper story I came across, and kept it in a scrap book. The most informative stories came out of The Detroit Free Press, the small paper in the Soo, The Evening News. Had stories but not in depth as the big paper.
My Dad has moved a couple times since I moved out, so not sure if it still exists.
I collected everything I could, as I was out in that storm playing. I was 12 or so at the time. I lived in the Soo, 30ish miles from the wreck site.
My Dad has moved a couple times since I moved out, so not sure if it still exists.
I collected everything I could, as I was out in that storm playing. I was 12 or so at the time. I lived in the Soo, 30ish miles from the wreck site.
Last edited:
Sweeperguy. I was born and raised In the Soo. Grew up on 5 mile rd before moving to Wisconsin in '93. My dad worked at the locks before retiring in '84. He was working that night and they listened to the whole thing on the radio. My junior High science teacher, Tom Farnquist was a big part of getting the Whitefish Bay lighthouse museum started along with the unmanned sub dives.
I'm not sure what you meant with that, perhaps that there was something odd about the Fitzgerald shipwreck in particular?
There sure is nothing "odd" about shipwrecks on Superior in general:
"My" odd frnash, was the fact at that time I was not a where of the amount of ship wrecks on the big lakes. I did not realize how the extreme weather could turn them into such very "violent seas". It was something I had missed some how growing up, as I was always intrigued with history. I have since looked at a lot of Superior's history due to weather.
G
G
Guest
I pulled up a bunch of the links. It seems like the Fitz really was the Pride of The American Side. When it was new. 17 years of use and abuse and Coast Guard approved overloading beyond design limits combined with some faulty hatches made it an accident waiting to happen. It was 10 times as long as it was wide. Imagine the stress on the center (where it snapped) plus ad in 26 foot waves crashing on top of the deck. McSorley himself had called it a used up boat. Former sailers called it a "wet boat". It flexed from front to back even in normal seas. It was really nothing more than a motorized barge. There were many who were not surprised when it went down. This does not diminish the loss of life which was and is terrible. It was really big. It hauled a lot of taconite. And it went many miles in its life. It seems a little like when Airplanes go down. It is usually not just one factor. A bunch of circumstances ad together to create disaster. After reading everything I think the three rogue waves washed over the stern and then crashed on to the deck. The deck could not shed the water quickly enough and the weight of the water snapped the boat and that was it. That is why there were no distress calls or survivors. It just happened really fast. They were 'holding their own' according to McSorleys last radio transmission. Just a theory. Feel free to tear me up.
I think we can all agree it happened fast and most experts believe that it did not break up on the surface. That, based upon the location and array of the wreckage. My best guess in all of this is that she was taking on water throughout the day, most likely from loose hatch covers or faulty seals. The fence rail was down due to the flexing that Grub noted above. As the taconite became saturated she rode lower and lower with even more water entering through the hatches and she finely sank bow first with the huge waves over her deck and wheelhouse. As the bow hits bottom all that momentum and weight causes her to break apart in the middle with the stern landing inverted on the lake bottom.
So, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
So, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
G
G
Guest
Wind can do weird things to big stretches of water. Although nowhere close to the size of Superior, Big Traverse Bay on Lake of the Woods can get really whipped up if there is a strong NW wind. The lake is only 35 or so feet deep. There are people that have lived on the lake all their lives that swear they have been caught out on the lake in a big wind and the wave action was so powerful that they actually saw the lake bottom in the bottom of a trough. That is when you put your life jacket on. Mother nature is boss.
Gary, perhaps your theory could explain the trench/ditch on the lake bottom.???
Exactly. I think she took a quick dive to the bottom and broke apart creating the debris field, the inverted stern and the upright bow.
chords
Active member
I thought someone may have hacked into the JD forecast text to insert their beliefs or religious quote knowing full well its against all rules but they could get the word out. I didn't get the context of it.