Archaeologists scramble to 3-D map Civil War shipwreck off Galveston

tmh10

Major
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Location
Pipestem,WV
Alerted to changing conditions by a Houston photographer, an archaeology team is working against the clock off Galveston to get a 3-D record of the remains of the Hatteras, an iron-hulled Union gunboat sunk by the South on Jan. 11, 1863.

The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration is leading the charge and credits underwater photographer and journalist Jesse Cancelmo for sparking the expedition after recent storm activity uncovered the shipwreck from silt and sand about 20 miles off the Texas Coast.
The U.S. Navy ship is “largely intact” at 57 feet below the surface, NOAA says on its website.
Working from a NOAA research vessel and two private craft, the divers plan to deploy high-resolution mapping sonar to create 3-D photomosaics of the Hatteras for research, education, and outreach purposes during the two-day mission.​
The team was to begin sonar mapping work Monday.
“This will create a detailed visual representation of a long buried wreck in murky waters that we can share with the public while also using it to plan for USS Hatteras’ long term protection as an archaeological site and war grave,” says James Delgado, director of maritime heritage for NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement notes the USS Hatteras is the only Union shipwreck off Texas.
Federal officials note that the shipwreck is protected by the Sunken Military Craft Act as a war grave because the remains of two crew members are believed to be inside the hull.
The 210-foot Hatteras had carried out raids and fought the CSS Mobile in an “inconclusive action,” the Texas State Historical Association says. Under a new commander, Capt. Homer C. Blake, a few months later, the crew of 125 faced the CSS Alabama and Capt. Raphael Semmes about 3 p.m. Jan. 11, 1863.

Plans call for the first public display of the mapping mission in January during Galveston events marking the battle’s 150th anniversary.

http://blog.sfgate.com/hottopics/20...to-3-d-map-civil-war-shipwreck-off-galveston/
 
There was both an AP photographer and AP reporter out with the group yesterday, so I'm looking forward to a lot more press in the next day or so, depending on what other stories happen to compete for space.
 
There was both an AP photographer and AP reporter out with the group yesterday, so I'm looking forward to a lot more press in the next day or so, depending on what other stories happen to compete for space.
Sorry about that, Andy. I was getting ready for work and missed your thread when I ran accross the story I posted. Ted
 
This is exciting news! I would be very interested in reading more about the findings of this study of the Hatteras off Galveston. Hopping forward a bit I recently delivered a boat I sold to Indian River Inlet in Delaware and when I passed Cape Henlopen and turned south real sudden like I passed a few old WWII vintage coast watching towers. These towers were built during the war and used to scan the waters for U-boats. Long ago I tended bar in one of the nearby beach towns one summer and heard the rumor that in WWII the German U-Boats landed 30 spies along the Delaware coast and 27 were captured. There was a filling station in one of the beach towns owned by a man with a German name and people used to joke that he was one of the three spies that was never captured.

I hadn't thought about those stories in many years but they came back clear as a bell when I spotted the old towers running down the Delaware coast. The interesting thing is those towers only exist in Delaware and not in Maryland. I wonder if they were also in Maryland but were destroyed post war by developers? I mean why would the Germans land spies on the beaches they likely knew were guarded with manned observation towers when they could just go farther south and the coast had no observation towers? Surely there was something about the southern cosast of Delaware that was attractive to the Germans for inserting spies. Then again I have never researched these stories bantered about by college kids but I did talk to locals who said what the concrete cylinder style military looking towers were and what their purpose was.

Back to the Hatteras does anyone know what the visability and the depth is in the waters where she rests is? Also does anyone know if any pictures of the Hatteras exist?
 
Back to the Hatteras does anyone know what the visability and the depth is in the waters where she rests is? Also does anyone know if any pictures of the Hatteras exist?
Hatteras lies in about 60 feet of water. The visibility there is usually only "fair" by Texas coast standards, which is not all that great until you get a long distance offshore. As I understand from the divers, the visibility Monday was a little better than average, at about 5 feet. Several divers were bitten by triggerfish, and others got spiny urchin jabs. Occupational hazards, really.

airpump.jpg

There is an UW photo and (very incorrect) rough site plan here:

http://www.gomr.boemre.gov/homepg/regulate/environ/archaeological/civil_war_shipwrecks.html

It's believed the ship is largely intact but, as usually happens in this area, has settled into the sand. The sidewheel flanges, shafts, and a bit of machinery are exposed, as well as some hull plating at one end.

A close sister to Hatteras was the former Ella and Annie, U.S.S Malvern. There were some differences, but Malvern gives you the general idea:

Expired Image Removed
 

Attachments

  • airpump.jpg
    airpump.jpg
    10.6 KB · Views: 27
Additional photos from the AP:

Expired Image Removed
Project coordinator Emma Hickerson, left, marine archeologist Christopher Horrell, center, and Capt. Darrell Walker look at a sonar image as they search for the wreckage of the USS Hatteras in the Gulf of Mexico off the Texas Coast Monday, Sept. 10, 2012. The Hatteras was sunk in 1863 during the Civil War by the CSS Alabama. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)

Expired Image Removed
Aboard the RV Manta, Father Stephen Duncan, left, conducts a memorial service in the Gulf of Mexico off the Texas Coast Monday, Sept. 10, 2012, for the two men who died aboard the USS Hatteras in 1863 during the Civil War. The service was held at the site of the shipwreck where researchers are making a 3-D map using sonar equipment. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)

Expired Image Removed
A diver plots out the spots on the wreck of the USS Hatteras where sonar images will be taken during a mapping expedition in the Gulf of Mexico off the Texas Coast Monday, Sept. 10, 2012. The Hatteras was sunk in 1863 during a battle with the CSS Alabama. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)

Expired Image Removed
Hydrographer James Glaeser, front right, points out to divers Monday, Sept. 10, 2012, the approximate location where they will begin mapping the wreck of the USS Hatteras in the Gulf of Mexico about 20 miles from Galveston, Texas. The Hatteras was sunk by a Confederate ship in 1863 during the Civil War. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)
 
Thanks Andy Hall I appreciate that. I envy those folks who get to dive on the Hatteras despite the less than perfect visability. Sixty feet isn't a bad dive either. Sea urchin spines can be quite painfull though. I have never known trigger fish to be aggressive but I have never shared the sea with a Texas triggerfish either.

The sand isn't that hard to remove with the right equipment and money of course but I am sure everyone is concerned about preserving the site. Sand can come back pretty fast also. One of the unique features of the Hatteras was her iron hull and I can imagine that would get swallowed up by the sand quickly. Yes the sistership gives me a great idea of what the Hatteras looked like thanks again.
 
Yes, there are ways to remove lots of sand (e.g., mailboxes), but that was a non-starter in this case; this was going to be a non-disturbance project or not at all. It sounds like the trigger fish Monday were more aggressive than the divers (from lots of different areas and backgrounds) had dealt with before. They drew blood multiple times.
 
Obviously Confederate trigger fish! Darn sharpshooters...


ETA: Hm, think I had them confused with something else... but interesting-sounding (albeit aggressive) fish, anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigger_fish

Chuckle........I guess I never violated thier nesting space although I have seen many triggerfish when scuba diving. I have been attacked by Damsel fish which are small black reef fish with a well earned reputation for being territorial. I remember telling some divers once that the only reason I survived the attack is the Damsel fish were only 3 or 4 inches long.<g> I imagine a triggerfish being a shell cruncher would deliver a painfull bite especially if it managed to gain purchase on a finger like the link showed. Reduced visability is bad enough but suffering attacks by determined triggerfish would definitely take away from an exciting dive on a ACW wreck.
 
Watchtowers - during WWII they were used to look for submarines - the only hostile craft operating off our coast - but they were actually built to control the heavy guns - up to 16" - positioned at Fort Miles, just inland. This is why you have two towers only about 100 yards apart - you're not going to spot any more ships than you would with just one, but by triangulating the bearings from two sites you can fix a target's range and position. Essentially they form a giant range finder; in the days before radar it was the best available gunfire control system.

Although the prospect of hostile warships approaching our coastline seems odd today, it was a danger that had to be considered in the early 1900s. In earlier times, key harbors had been protected by forts like Sumter or McHenry in their immediate approaches, but as the range of guns increased, it became possible to cover wider areas like the entrance to Delaware Bay. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 made available some of the most powerful guns in the world*, 16"/50 caliber weapons intended for battleships and battle cruisers cancelled by the treaty. In land mounts these had a range of 44,000 yards. Plunging fire at long range was a particular danger since most battleships at that time had relatively little deck protection.

* the only more powerful were three 18"/40s which had been briefly mounted in British warships during WWI.
 
Watchtowers - during WWII they were used to look for submarines - the only hostile craft operating off our coast - but they were actually built to control the heavy guns - up to 16" - positioned at Fort Miles, just inland. This is why you have two towers only about 100 yards apart - you're not going to spot any more ships than you would with just one, but by triangulating the bearings from two sites you can fix a target's range and position. Essentially they form a giant range finder; in the days before radar it was the best available gunfire control system.

Although the prospect of hostile warships approaching our coastline seems odd today, it was a danger that had to be considered in the early 1900s. In earlier times, key harbors had been protected by forts like Sumter or McHenry in their immediate approaches, but as the range of guns increased, it became possible to cover wider areas like the entrance to Delaware Bay. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 made available some of the most powerful guns in the world*, 16"/50 caliber weapons intended for battleships and battle cruisers cancelled by the treaty. In land mounts these had a range of 44,000 yards. Plunging fire at long range was a particular danger since most battleships at that time had relatively little deck protection.

* the only more powerful were three 18"/40s which had been briefly mounted in British warships during WWI.

Now that is interesting and something I never heard about the watchtowers on the Delaware coast. Thanks.
 
A new piece today, from the Houston Chronicle:

__________________

Expired Image Removed
Divers Matt Keith and Amana Evans take notes at the the U.S.S Hatteras' paddlewheel in the Gulf of Mexico twenty miles offshore of Galveston on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012. The Hatteras was an iron-hulled warship sunk in 1863 by the Confederate raider C.S.S Alabama. Photo By Jesse Cancelmo/For the Chronicle


GALVESTON - The USS Hatteras gave chase to a sail on the horizon on Jan. 11, 1863, as the rest of the Union fleet bombarded the Confederate Army entrenched on Galveston Island.

The Hatteras, a passenger ferry converted to a gunboat, was about to be sunk by the CSS Alabama, a Confederate commerce raider built for speed and battle.

As the unknown ship hove into view, Acting Master Henry O. Porter asked the captain, "That sir, I think, is the Alabama. What shall we do?" according to an account by Edward Cotham Jr., who has written three books on Civil War history. Lt. Cmdr. Homer C. Blake answered, "If that is the Alabama, we must fight her."

Nearly 150 years later, Cotham accompanied archeologists and technicians aboard three vessels using state-of-the art technology this week to make a three-dimensional image of the Hatteras where she rests beneath 57 feet of water. Those images have offered clues to the only sinking of a Union vessel in the Gulf of Mexico during the Civil War, said James Delgado, maritime heritage director for the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.

"You can actually see how the thing is put together," Delgado said. "It's as if the lights have been turned on in a dark room."

The Hatteras is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is protected by the Sunken Military Craft Act as a war grave. Two of the crew went down with the ship.

The opportunity to deploy high-resolution mapping sonar for the first time on a sunken ship came with the discovery that sands that had buried the Hatteras for many years had shifted to reveal her.

Delgado seized the opportunity to cobble together the expedition that converged on the sunken wreck Monday and Tuesday about 20 miles from Galveston.

80% intact

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration boat Manta joined two private vessels for the $60,000 mission paid for by the Edward E. and Marie L. Matthews Foundation of Wilmington, Del., and the OceanGate Foundation of Seattle. Sonar equipment and manpower were donated by Teledyne BlueView Inc. of Seattle.

The shifting sands revealed a shipwreck in remarkably good condition.

"We thought the Hatteras would be torn up because of shrimp nets," said Craig Howard, OceanGate board chairman. Delgado said about 80 percent of the Hatteras remained intact.

Fifteen divers worked in shifts to maneuver the sonar unit mounted on a tripod on the ocean floor. The sonar head spun for 10 to 13 minutes in one spot before being moved again. The sonar was dropped in 30 locations around the wreck over the two days.

The sonar was linked by cable to a computer that displayed fuzzy images far different from the clear, 3-D final product that will be assembled onshore.

"You have millions of sonar generated points in a cloud that have to be processed," Delgado said.

Those images will aid historians and archeologists and offer a taste of history to the general public, he said. The water is so murky that even the preliminary sonar images revealed parts of the wreck that surprised divers who had been there before.

Bolsters oral accounts

"This technology allows us to virtually raise the Hatteras while leaving her entombed as a war grave." Delgado said. "You can see how the shot went right through the engine room."

An examination of the 3-D images will add a lot of information to the oral accounts of the historic battle, he said.

"Sometimes the stories we learn from them were never in the books," Delgado said. The expedition proved the usefulness of the 3-D sonar that he hopes will be used to explore other wrecks.

The Hatteras' bolted-on armor plate and her four 32-pound cannon were no match for the fleet Alabama and her 110-pound rifled gun. Within 13 minutes, the Hatteras was on its way to the bottom.

The Alabama severely damaged U.S. commerce, capturing and burning dozens of merchant ships before it was sunk by the USS Kearsarge in 1864 off the French coast.
 
This just came across the e-mail, for public release. This is a sector scan sonar image of the Hatteras wreck site put together by Chris Horrell, Federal Preservation Officer/Senior Marine Archaeologist with Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement -- what used to be the Minerals Management Service until recently. Chris is the guy who is going to be all over your case if you drop a gas pipeline across an historic shipwreck in the Gulf of Mexico. And you really don't want that to happen.

Note that this is NOT the BlueView 3D sonar imagery that is the main focus of the mission -- those images have not been released yet. But you can see the sidewheel flanges (here labeled in reverse), and bow and stern areas. Overall distance between feature nos. 1 and 4 is about 200 feet. North is to the lower left of the image.

Expired Image Removed
 
This just came across the e-mail, for public release. This is a sector scan sonar image of the Hatteras wreck site put together by Chris Horrell, Federal Preservation Officer/Senior Marine Archaeologist with Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement -- what used to be the Minerals Management Service until recently. Chris is the guy who is going to be all over your case if you drop a gas pipeline across an historic shipwreck in the Gulf of Mexico. And you really don't want that to happen.

Note that this is NOT the BlueView 3D sonar imagery that is the main focus of the mission -- those images have not been released yet. But you can see the sidewheel flanges (here labeled in reverse), and bow and stern areas. Overall distance between feature nos. 1 and 4 is about 200 feet. North is to the lower left of the image.

Expired Image Removed
That is a good shot, Andy. Looking foward to the 3 d results.
 
Back
Top