ss richard montgomery matter

What do you really do before departing

  • Full safety briefing to ALL crew

    Votes: 1 3.2%

  • Safety breiefing only to those new to your boat

    Votes: 8 25.8%

  • Stwo everything in proper plkace BEFORE departure

    Votes: 3 9.7%

  • Leave crew / SWMBO to stow while you depart

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Everyone out for departure - then they stow gear

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Worry about sorting beer / wine and rest is later after depart

    Votes: 5 16.1%

  • Make all sails / gear ready before departure so can hoist easy later

    Votes: 6 19.4%

  • Sails etc. readiness left till after departure - to give crew something to do

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • No real system - check fuel, start engine and go ...

    Votes: 6 19.4%
  • Total voters
    31
ronangel

ronangel

Member
Joined
17 Jan 2006
Messages
32
Location
london uk
www.ssrichardmontgomery.com
The SS Richard Montgomery is a time-bomb waiting for a terrorist to give Britain its first real tsunami and, maybe, worse. This film shows what can happen when a government conceals something very dangerous from its own people.

Fact: The US explosives carrier Richard Montgomery sank in the Thames Estuary in August 1944. It was loaded with 15000 tons of explosive munitions. The Admiralty decided to leave the wreck and its dangerous cargo undisturbed. The wreck lies just a few hundred yards offshore between an oil refinery and the several towns. Southend on Sea is just a couple of miles away on the other side of the Thames estuary. Rumours about the ship and its cargo have circulated in these towns ever since. Denials have been issued by ministers in the House of Commons in response to MPs questions about the presence on board of biological, chemical and gas warheads. Nevertheless, rumours persist that the real reason the wreck was not made safe was because of the existence of ‘dirty weapons’ on board.
http://www.ssrichardmontgomery.com
(copy and paste into your browser)
 
Lets assume the government of the day and subsequent governments (that receive no benifit) are not lying. Then what we do know is that a wreck full of explosives is rusting away on the bottom.

I am not an expert in this but believe old exposives can become unstable if handled but if left undisturbed underwater I have never heard of any cases of spontaneous combustion. It has been standard practice for years for old explosives/shells to be dumped at sea. Admiralty charts are marked with many dumping grounds. Can anyone confirm any cases of spontaneous underwater explosions of old shells?

I notice this is your 1st posting, your bio is a little light, are you an active sailor or a concerned person who wishes to share his concerns. If it is a tempting terrorist target are you doing anyone any favours giving it the air of publicity?
 
There was an article in the Sunday Times magazine last year 1 week after I had sailed past it delivering a yacht to Queensborough. I saw the wreck as I came down the channel and was curious enough to go around it for a good look !! You can imagine my nerves a week later when I found out just how much ammunition and shells are in there.

Anyway the article said that once a year divers go down into the murk and feel their way around the wreck to check its integrity. The main concern being that if the ships sides rot away the shells will roll out and the fishermen will have great fun scooping them up. ( I jest)

The most important part of the article IMHO stated that the American goverment routinely offers to clear the wreck but that the British goverment will not give them permission. So, the question you must ask yourself is WHY NOT? Conspirator theorists now step forward ...
 
Follow the link and what do you get........
This is nothing more than an advert for a film script for sale!

Quite a larf really especially when you get to the cast list.....I think we could cast this film from members of the forum.

I shall skip over who would be best for the part of the young prostitutes!
 
The most important part of the article IMHO stated that the American goverment routinely offers to clear the wreck but that the British goverment will not give them permission. So, the question you must ask yourself is WHY NOT? Conspirator theorists now step forward ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never yet read any newspaper article about any event (where I did know the facts) to be accurate. Newspaper articles are there to create sales.

Now obviously the UK government hid a flying saucer on this ship and don't want the USA to find out about it and the USA believe there are dirty dangerous weapons on board and want to sacrifice the lives of their own servicemen in diving on the wreck as they otherwise would have no knowlege of biological warfare. Its all as credible as looking for the island that Buddy Holly and Elvis are hiding on.

Any clues anyone?
 
There have been numerous sympathetic explosions underwater caused by the military dropping bombs, depth charges and anti-submarine weapons into explosive dumps.

Off Portland there is one area where many of them have occurred and also off Harwich.
 
Having sailed from the Medway for many years I have always been alarmed at the state of the Richard Montgomery.
The Isle of Sheppey and Canvey Island are the cradles of modern civilisation, because in ancient times evolved a race of man called Homo Sheppiensis, who only had a right eye.
Quite by chance another race called Homo canveyensis, spontaneously evolved with only a left eye. Several million years later the two races accidently met during a rum smuggling enterprise, interbred and produced modern man ..
Homo tescoensis.
The idea that the ship may blow up and obliterate the cradle of modern man is quite preposterous. Write to your MP!
 
Quote:
All rights reserved. No part of this text may be reproduced, except for the purposes of review, without prior written permission from the copyright owners or their appointed agents.



So, would anyone like to review this bit which is from their script?..............



Quote:
Haggar leaves the store looking for Fitzsimmons. He looks around neighbouring street and sees a car similar to Fitzsimmons' leaving the store car-park.

Haggar runs across the road and stops a motorist. He pulls the driver out and pursues the suspect car. He gets close enough to see the suspect car parking near Centre Point (New Oxford Street). He drives into the forecourt in time to see Fitzsimmons entering the building. Haggar parks and runs into the lobby of the building. There is no sign of Fitzsimmons but Haggar sees an company notice board and sees the name of ( associate this name with Fitzsimmons earlier) a safety deposit box company on the penultimate top floor. He goes to the lifts and travels up. When the doors open he sees Fitzsimmons entering a secure area with the bag of diamonds in his hand. Haggar shouts. Fitzsimmons turns, sees Haggar, panics and runs through a door into the emergency stairsace. Hagar pursues. Fitzsimmons produces a gun and begins to shoot back up the stairs at the pursuing Haggar. Haggar shoots back and one of his shots shatters a large glass window on the next landing below Fitzsimmons. Glass falls inside and outside. Fitzsimmons runs down to the next landing, again with Haggar in pursuit, both men firing their guns. Fitzsimmons slips on a piece of broken glass on the landing and drops the bag of diamonds.

Diamonds are scattered. Fitzsimmons scrambles to pick up the bag of diamonds as Haggar leaps down stairs. As Fitzsimmons stands up again, Haggar arrives on the stairs above him. Fitzsimmons raises his gun but Haggar shoots him in the stomach. Fitzsimmons staggers back and falls out through the broken window. He screams as he falls and the diamonds begin to scatter in the air. Haggar walks to the window and looks down. Fitzsimmon's crashes on to the top of a lamp-post over which he stays hanging in the air at the side of Centre Point. There is a scattering of broken glass on the ground already, and a shower of diamonds falls amongst the broken glass. A tramp in a walks over from a nearby doorway, unaware of the body above, and picks up a diamond which he then discards it in favour of a sliver of of glass which he uses to penetrate a (garment or such). The tramp then throws the galss away and walks off.

End of quote.

You may limit your review to one word if you wish /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
 
I used to pass the wreck on a regular basis going to and from the Isle of Grain refinery on tankers of 16,000 to 50,000 tonnes (talking late 60s and 70s). We were told that the explosives were unstable due to deterioration by passage of time and that if interfered with could blow up taking Sheerness and refinery with it. Now that the refinery is gone anyway ............................... /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
 
The main concern being that if the ships sides rot away the shells will roll out and the fishermen will have great fun scooping them up. ( I jest)

This is what is happening in scapa flow here in orkney. the fisherman have been dredging up shells and torpedos from the wars for years.
I'v never known one of explode on its own only when the bomb disposal set them
off.

When you think of it thats a good way of getting rid old wrecks that are in the way.
just tell terrorist there full of explosives and wait and see what happens /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
cheers
 
Tisme..Thank you for your review of our script & for publishing the end of it so as to spoil anyones enjoyment or otherwise of reading it. I would prefer that as you have noted, for reasons of copywrite that you remove our text. you may if you wish & feel strongly that people should read it put a link to it on my site. This is only a synopses & the full script has much more to it & many up to date changes. its present form is only to secure copywrite on the main points.The site has a lot of links and useful factual information about the ss richard montgomery
 
Re: ss richard montgomery matter - not as risky now

One of the risks has long gone - the Isle of Grain Refinery has been shut for decades. Often used to think of how how high and far our remains would be blown when passing very close to the wreck with 25,000 tons of petrol or 250,000 crude under my feet.

When passing in ballast at low water I recall you could see the foremast, bridge etc still intact- has much altered over the years?.
 
Re: ss richard montgomery matter - not as risky now

Me too, and I also used to live in Grain!
Still go past often and not a lot left of the topsides now, when I was young and Dad ran a fishing boat even some of the rigging up to the masts was evident. Always heard so many rumours that its difficult to know whats true.
Live on a boat up the Medway so hope its alright!
 
Re: ss richard montgomery matter - not as risky now

If it had any effect by exploding it could do billions of pounds of improvements to both Canvey and Sheppey.... /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top