Boatnerd Discussion Forum

On the stern are the deckhouses crushed or just buried in the mud? I've always imagined the stack was crushed flat but have never seen any good pictures of that area to assess the condition of the aft deckhouses.

The weight of the stern end of the hull would have obliterated anything under it. So nothing is left

I've always believed she nosedived either because she suddenly lost buoyancy or due to being previously damaged and then later hit by an absolutely massive amount of water. I just don't buy the surface break up, I would think she would of sank more gradually in that case and thus have far less damage.

On the stern are the deckhouses crushed or just buried in the mud? I've always imagined the stack was crushed flat but have never seen any good pictures of that area to assess the condition of the aft deckhouses.

Yes, in some pictures I've seen, there is a large amount of wire off the forward starboard winch. In one picture it looks like the end of the wire has been put through the forward, starboard Port Colborne fairlead.

Wasn't it discovered that some cable had been ran out on the deck windlass? If I remember correctly this could only be done purposely so it generated some speculation as to why the cable would have been ran out during the transit across the lake.

I have been in the holds as well during heavy weather and seen fully clamped hatches leak. I went down there because I wanted to see having actually thought this to myself. The water leaking was minimal and the hatches were beat up a bit as it was on a straight decker. I am also the one who posted having been on several ships of her vintage. But I did forget to mention my thoughts on the caved in hatch covers. I believe that there is more than one cover caved inward, and the evidence appears that many of the windows and port holes show evidence of being caved inward. This lends some truth and evidence to the theory that whether she was riding very low in the water, or not she took a large amount of water onto her forward end near hatches one and two. The hatches are designed not to fall into the cargo hold under normal AND most abnormal circumstances. They are longer and wider by a couple of inches than each opening. Each coaming has a 2 inch lip on each side which provides the clamping surface and each corner has a pinning hole to line the hatch up properly to allow the clamps to fit and tighten properly. Deformation of the coaming and bending of the hatch due to damage causes these not to fit properly but only in certain areas. The rest of the hatch and clamps will fit normally. Looking at the photos of the weather deck and the caved in hatches, look at the coamings, they don't look bad, and they definitely don't look damaged at least from the very few angles I can see of the forward two hatches. But there is a visible sign there that is crucial, in the photo posted from Dive Detectives showing the number one hatch, the hatch is not only bent in the middle, it is also badly deformed and bent at the forward leading edge of the hatch. That hatch is over half an inch thick, solid steel plate with steel I beam supports underneath and steel angle brackets also. This proves conclusively that the hatch was not blown out or off, it was pushed in by a massive force, namely the water. Which could be from the dive down to the bottom, or it could be the main cause for her taking the nose dive, taking a series of large waves onto the deck, then rolling forward and hitting the aft side of the forward cabins and having no where to go, perhaps while it drained away as fast as it could, another wave piled up onto the deck and the forward hatches gave out under the heavy load of tons of water washing around on deck that it was never designed to hold, and collapsed in, sending the ship into an uncontrolled dive to the bottom, the prop still turning her going down at full speed, the mid section collapses and crumples, the torque of the propeller shearing off the stern and flipping it over. Seeing the damage to the forward cabins and the blowouts where the air escaped, and then the impact damage shows that she went down extremely fast, not filling up slowly then breaking up on the surface, she broke up down below and slammed hard into the bottom, everything on the wheel house roof is bent backwards, even things one wouldn't expect to be bent backwards. The mast is still in good shape, the main support pedastals for the radars, antennae are still upright, but the radio antennae are bent back, as they are light and flimsy, the steering pole is ripped out of its upright cradle and pushed back, not turned. The Radio Direction Finder antenna is very surprisingly flattened backwards, even though its made of steel tubing and firmly attached to the pillar. Then if I saw correctly inside the wheel house the wheel stand railing was ripped out of the floor and up ended and now faces upside down and backwards....the pilot house doors are oddly not dogged down, but in fact open and the latches and dogs do not appear bent or damaged....but the really interesting part to me still is the condition of the coamings and hatch cover, and watching the video from 1994, it also appears that the deck inbetween hatches one and two is heavily deformed as if it buckled from massive weight, though it could be damage from the impact as a great deal of the forward end is heavily damaged from the impact as is shown by the ships hull being heavily listed to port on the bottom, but the wheel house and texas cabin seem almost upright, due to the starboard side of the guest lounge aft and side being heavily damaged and collapsed. Just my opinion from my experience, common sense and what I can see...SH

Jared wrote:I would put a little more consideration in the failure of hatch covers. The Morrell and Bradley lost theirs in the sinking and were made of steel and clamped shut.

Both of those vessels had telescoping hatch covers, not the modern one-piece type on the Fitzgerald; different animal.

I would put a little more consideration in the failure of hatch covers. The Morrell and Bradley lost theirs in the sinking and were made of steel and clamped shut.

Lets look at what evidence we have. Over 200 feet of the midsection is a twisted mess, the bow is buried into the bottom and the stern is upside down. Its not a stretch to imagine that the dynamic forces at work that caused the hull damage we can see could have popped the hatch's and caused them to fall into the cargo hold. The damage seen on the forward cabins alone shows the stress that the boat endured as it came in contact with the bottom.

That #1 hatch-cover is collapsed into the cargo hold, with just that end you see sticking up. There was a person on here a few years ago who was on one of the submersibles in the 90s that saw that damage. He also said that the observation windows were smashed inward, as if from some large wave action.

I wasn't disputing the fire hose test. The point I was trying to make was there are a lot more forces at play in a storm than with a fire hose. I also was in enough storms that made you want to quit at the next port.

Hard to say what really took place from the limited view we get in those pictures but from what I see it looks as if only one side of the hatch cover is bent over (up) as if something from inside was the cause. Of course there are only two possible sources. (1) being the taconite pellets or (2) the water she had been taking on prior to the sinking. When she hit the bottom bow first all that cargo had momentum and had to go somewhere. Lets not discount all the air that was in the holds as well.

There is an impressive picture of the Algoport sinking titled "sending a hatch cover through the air".

I have seen similar results to the posted pictures of the bent hatch cover when the boatswain picked up a hatch cover that still had the corner clamps on one end. Bent the hatch cover. We had to have the shipyard fix the damage before we were legal to sail. The captain was not pleased with the boatswain and the boatswain was not pleased with the deckhand who missed the clamps!

The collapsed #1 hatch cover into the cargo hold could be strong evidence that a large wave or series of waves did such damage, perhaps precipitating the Fitz's plunge to the bottom. If the Fitz rolled-over while sinking, then the hatch-cover would have buckled outward and not inward as can be seen in the photo.

What does that collapsed hatch really mean? Would/could that be any indication that she rolled over on the surface, dove inverted, had the hatch cover blasted into that hatch, broke in two, rolled back over & hit the bottom, or is it telling us that a heavy wave did that on the surface?

Scott wrote:I can't seem to locate the photos of the Algoport and other similar sinkings, cansomeone post these or direct me to them? Also, are the two side Scan images of the Fitz on this post the only ones available? To me, it is inconclusive as o if the spar deck has collapsed. I tend to believe that it's still there after all this time. Lake Superior has a way of preserving it's keep.

Just go to the homepage of this site and type in Algoport sinking into the search. Should help.

Guest wrote:Unless the Fitzgerald was different from the boats I sailed on, there is no way shore side unloading equipment could have done any damage to the gaskets. The gaskets went around the entire underside of the hatch. There was no gasket on the coaming itself.
The Huletts and the clamshell-type unloaders did damage to the cargo holds and the coamings. Like I'd mentioned in a previous post, I saw several coamings out of alignment caused by the unloaders.
I don't see anyway possible the hatches being raised by the impact of the waves. There just wasn't any give to the hatch clamps to allow that to happen.
I do agree the boat they did the test on had pretty pristine looking hatches and coamings. I also think a big difference using a fire hose on a boat that was light sitting in the shipyard as opposed to all the forces that were at play the night the Fitzgerald went down. We were about 3 hours ahead of them that night and the weather is something I'll never forget.

Spring of 1977 they did the hose test on the Homer at fit-out. Our hatches were beat up by the buckets at Burns Harbor. I was in the cargo hold with other crew and inspectors and I assure you we did not get enough water in to sink her. That was with the fire pump set at 300 psi for pressure. We also took some wild rides later that year and she rode them out. The stern went up the bow went down and the middle went sideways. Engineers in survival suits in the galley and deck crew running around try to lash everything down. Great life on the great lakes.

Henry SteinBrenner in 55 and Arlington in the 40's. Both in Lake Superior.

Here is a screengrap from the Dive Detectives show, showing the #1 hatch-cover collapsed into the #1 hatch.

The program also showed the rudder deflected to port, perhaps to compensate for a starboard list. Unless the rudder was dislocated during the sinking.

I can't seem to locate the photos of the Algoport and other similar sinkings, cansomeone post these or direct me to them? Also, are the two side Scan images of the Fitz on this post the only ones available? To me, it is inconclusive as o if the spar deck has collapsed. I tend to believe that it's still there after all this time. Lake Superior has a way of preserving it's keep.