Captivating Abandoned Ships 

Today's my birthday

Hi Mike, I was just wondering if you have a video about the RMS Carpathia sinking in 1918? I’m writing a book series about ship sinkings in the 20th-21st Century it and I need as many facts as possible :)

​@@jamiedoherty308HAPPY BIRTHDAY YA SALTY DOG O/

2:57 come on, man.... No one has spoken to them, and they had no contact with other islands.. Why make a narrative that they are wary of people because of WWII or whatever? They are just violent. Which is a smart way to be... But it's not OUR fault.

*crews Thank you, dictation. -_-

I think the fact they were being economically strangled and desperate for any sort of win also helped. Plus, risky or not, perhaps the honor of crewing and attacking with the first ship of its kind was also tempting.

“Like new, lightly used, minor water damage.” Lol

@@nephthysnyx CORRECT 💯

@@nephthysnyx all crews of the Hunley were volunteers.

ㅓ

The candle Part is in the movie you should check it out it's good

No. Please. No one else come to Charleston.

@@jonbar140what

@@snjert8406 Those of use that live here are sick and tired of all the traffic because people keep moving here. We are FULL. Come and visit but leave.

@@dav8388 I mean yeah, the comment is about visiting the museum. Not about staying.

You should check the movie out it's good

You should check the movie out it's good

I just wonder how they found it the first two times without sonar.

"Given how Hunley was an almost unmitigated disaster, it’s kind of surprising it didn’t effectively kill the sub concept altogether." 1. It was a mere footnote in the history of the American Civil War. Few saw it as a headline disaster. 2. By this time different European nations had already taken the concept of the sub further. Take the French submarine Plongeur for instance. It was designed *before* the Hunley, used a reciprocating engine powered by compressed air to propel itself forward (the Hunley was hand-cranked by humans), had a displacement of 420 tons and was 45 meters long (146 feet). Hunley by comparison was 6,8 tons and 12 meters long (40 feet). While never used in wars it worked in testing, and above all didn't flood and kill its crew. While on display Plongeur actually inspired Jules Verne to write "Twenty Thousands Leagues under the Seas. 3. Different engineers and inventors worked *independently* from each other in different countries. All of them had their own studies and followed their own research along the lines of others before them. The Hunley was just another tangent or blind sidetrack and certainly wasn't the end of the line station. Several parallel projects existed before, during and after the Hunley. "it’s kind of surprising it didn’t effectively kill the sub concept altogether." Not at all. When it comes to inventions there is always new inventors and pioneers willing to develop a concept further. When has a failure of one party *ever* held others back from trying to do better?

​@@McLarenMercedesI tend to agree with this. The thing about the Hunley is it proved that underwater warfare was indeed possible. The Germans took what Hunley and those that came before him did and perfected this technology, and put it to good use during the first world war👌

Correction: Submarines were part of warfare as early as 1776, with the submarine “Turtle”. It was built for the future US Navy during the American Revolution, but never saw combat: she was destroyed after sea trials due to the risk of capture. Turtle probably would have been safer than the H.L. Hunley, oddly enough: she was controlled entirely using just three hand cranks and a rudder. One crank propelled the ship forward and backwards, one was used to take her underwater (she was slightly buoyant due to her design), and a third screwed a rudimentary form of mine into the hull of the enemy vessel. Turtle would then have backed off and triggered the mine from a distance by use of a pull-cord attached to the hull (the sub’s own momentum being what pulled the cord). (Interestingly, this also means the Turtle had no ballast tanks: she relied entirely on downward propulsion to remain submerged.) Additionally, as mentioned by others, France was experimenting with submarines extensively at this time, for a variety of purposes: research, warfare, and even salvage operations. In my opinion, Hunley was actually a success: she completed her mission, despite an untrained crew, and they were only killed by something that science didn’t understand at the time. Sinking the Housatonic proved submarine warfare was practical: if a bunch of untrained rebels could sink a full-blown warship with something like Hunley, then what a genuine military could do was limited only by imagination.

That men could outlive the burning of a candle is not as surprising as it might seem. In server (computer) farms, which are installed in windowless secure rooms, they don't typically use normal water sprinkler fire suppression, as water on electronic devices just makes fires worse. Instead they use gas fire suppression. Gas fire suppression relies on the fact that the human body keeps its blood at saturation oxygen levels at all times, therefore breathing depth cannot be controlled from oxygen level. Instead, the body adjusts breathing based on the blood carbon dioxide level, which is normally very low, as is the level of CO2 in the atmosphere - its basically only a trace. This means that you can halve the level of oxygen in the room, and provided you double the concentration of CO2, everybody breathes just fine, though their ability to perform intense exercise would be diminished. But at half oxygen level, most flames go out. I once witnessed a test gas dump in a computer room. I did not have any discomfort, though I did automatically breath a bit deeper. A similar system is used to put out flightdeck electrical fires in aircraft. People have trouble on high mountains where the oxygen pressure is reduced, because the CO2 level is also reduced, so the body exhales CO2 more easily, and thus compensates in the wrong direction and blood oxygen level falls.

@@keithammleter3824 Yes, except you are speaking of a sudden displacement of oxygen. This was gradual, so the oxygen levels in the men's blood would be lowered. Being in a machine room during a fire event is still a very bad idea in general. While toxic Halon is no longer in use, you can still get injured from the suppressive gas as it comes out of the vents extremely cold. You can get cold burns. Perhaps mild frostbite.

@@MGower4465 You are right about the gas coming out cold, but there is not much if any risk of frostbite, as this system is used in rooms containing racks of computers/servers. These both put out lots of heat, typically 1000 watts/sq metre, normally removed by high capacity airconditioning, and comprising lots of metal, about 200 - 500 kg/metre, which acts as heat storage. Usually, some racks house the back up batteries, which have a specific heat about 80% of their volume in water. Also, air normally contains about 80% nitrogen and only 20% oxygen. CO2 is only a trace. To get the oxygen pressure halved, you only need to add inert gas to add about 10% of the total room volume. So the cold is swamped out anyway. Say the gas comes out the vents at 0 C that would lower the room from a typical 25 C to 22.5 C even if the room was empty. The reason why we stayed comfortable was not because it was a sudden dump of gas into the room. It was because human blood is normally saturated with oxygen, and the gas dump includes additional CO2 to make you breath deeper. As we were expecting it, we did notice we breathed deeper, but no discomfort. Human lung capacity is sufficient for vigorous exercise (say walking up an average hill), way greater than needed for just sitting or standing around.

She was also known as the CSS Hunley…

Yeah, there's a lot of confusion about that point. I've seen it written down on both ways. I think the Hunley museum doesn't call it the "CSS" at the moment, but for many years I think people called it that, so there's a lot of momentum to that name, even if it's true that it wasn't called that during its actual existence.

This is not correct. The Hunley was built by a Confederate officer, and funded by the Confederate government. It was very much a Confederate ship. What is going on here is that people are trying to dissociate the Confederacy’s achievements from the Confederacy itself. The same thing goes on when people call CSS Virginia “the Merrimack” or fail to mention CSS Alabama’s achievements but never fail to mention that she was sunk by the USS Kearsarge.

Lol @ dimply.

@@robertgarrard8868 Nope. The Hunley was built by a private individuals and commandeered by the Confederate Army it was never commissioned into the Confederate Navy. Wikipedia is not that hard to use.

You should check the hunley movie out

If all you do is go to school,, your break is the final exams.

Also, I believe there is a photo floating around of both America (Alfredoss) and Mediterranean Sky laid up together in Eleusis Bay