| Tango01 | 17 Sep 2015 10:22 p.m. PST |
"Marine salvage hunters have found the wreckage of an early 20th-century submarine that was once part of the Czarist Russian navy, in waters just a mile and a half off the coast of Sweden. Swedish Armed Forces researchers, who studied video images of the wreck, have determined that the vessel is a Som-class submarine, which was built in Vladivostok in 1904. The sub sank after it collided with a Swedish vessel back in 1916, according to an article in the Swedish-language website Forsvarsmakten The vessel is 66 feet long and about 11 1/2 feet in width. Its hull, emblazoned with Cyrillic characters, apparently is virtually intact, and the craft's hatches are closed, which indicates that the 18-member crew's remains may still be inside, according to The Local, an English-language Swedish news publication…"
Full article here
link Amicalement
Armand |
| Zargon | 18 Sep 2015 6:58 a.m. PST |
|
| wrgmr1 | 18 Sep 2015 9:03 a.m. PST |
|
| Dynaman8789 | 18 Sep 2015 9:23 a.m. PST |
I see no problem with raising the sub to be in a museum as long as the remains are given a proper burial. |
| Tango01 | 18 Sep 2015 10:55 a.m. PST |
|
| inverugie | 18 Sep 2015 2:34 p.m. PST |
'I see no problem with raising the sub to be in a museum as long as the remains are given a proper burial.' Apart from the fact that the highly likely presence of human remains means that this is a war grave and should be left untouched. Anyone up for raising the USS Arizona from Pearl Harbor? No, I didn't think so. |
| Legbiter | 18 Sep 2015 3:49 p.m. PST |
It's not a war grave because Sweden and Russia weren't at war at the time. It's perfectly legitimate therefore to raise the putative submarine: modern accident investigation laws will cover it. |
| Tom Bryant | 18 Sep 2015 7:57 p.m. PST |
I think the idea that it is a grave for these souls is what disturbs many. Yes, they did not die in war, however that doesn't necessarily mean we should raise the vessel. Still, if there are no major complaints and the remains are treated with honor and dignity, and it is technically and financially feasible, then perhaps it could be raised. For me, let sleeping souls ride. |
| inverugie | 19 Sep 2015 6:24 a.m. PST |
And Russia was most certainly at war in 1916, though not with neutral Sweden, so while the incident of the collision resulting in the loss of the submarine may not have been in war conditions, the mission on which the submariners left home was. |
| Rabbit 3 | 19 Sep 2015 9:30 a.m. PST |
What do the Russians themselves think of this?
It might be good to know more of what was going on with this sub and why it was in Swedish territorial waters at the time. |
| Dynaman8789 | 19 Sep 2015 11:44 a.m. PST |
> Apart from the fact that the highly likely presence of human remains means that this is a war grave and should be left untouched. Then why does nobody seem to object to raising the Hunley? It most certainly was a "war grave" under this type of rule. This kind of definition is made up after the fact since grave sites are frequently moved. |
| inverugie | 19 Sep 2015 4:48 p.m. PST |
I have no idea how 'grave sites are frequently moved', or of the legalese of what is internationally recognised and designated as a 'war grave' but any discovery that means those listed as 'missing' can be given closure for family must be a good thing. RIP |
adds a machinegun platoon to his WWI Brits.
