UB-65 mystery

[John Gilinsky]

Can anyone tell us what the latest scientific or academic reasons and histories are for the strange history and eventual fate of UB-65 that apparently blew up near Great Britain in 1918?

Thanks,

John

German sources are fine as well!

[Michael Lowrey]

Accidental loss (diving accident etc., not involving own torpedoes) off Padstow, wreck positively identified. See http://www.uboat.net/wwi/boats/index.html?boat=UB+65

Best wishes,

Michael

[Borden Battery]

Michael Lowrey has an excellent website. I recommend you visit this site for a wealth of information.

Borden Battery

U-Boat

This primary website contains detailed information on the German U-Boat from both the Great War and the Second World War. The site also contains a discussion forum [44,000 posts] and a good source of referenced material and articles. While the site is primarily Second World War, there is a growing commitment to the Great War. Statistics indicate apparently in WWI a total of 375 U boats sank 6596 merchant ships, a total of 12,800,000 tons. The site is operated from Iceland by Gudmundur Helgason with a detailed database being developed by Michael Lowrey. [CEF Study Group - Updated July 2006]

www.uboat.net

[John Gilinsky]

Michael Lowrey has an excellent website. I recommend you visit this site for a wealth of information.

Borden Battery

U-Boat

This primary website contains detailed information on the German U-Boat from both the Great War and the Second World War. The site also contains a discussion forum [44,000 posts] and a good source of referenced material and articles. While the site is primarily Second World War, there is a growing commitment to the Great War. Statistics indicate apparently in WWI a total of 375 U boats sank 6596 merchant ships, a total of 12,800,000 tons. The site is operated from Iceland by Gudmundur Helgason with a detailed database being developed by Michael Lowrey. [CEF Study Group - Updated July 2006]

www.uboat.net

Thanks!

[John Gilinsky]

Accidental loss (diving accident etc., not involving own torpedoes) off Padstow, wreck positively identified. See http://www.uboat.net/wwi/boats/index.html?boat=UB+65

Best wishes,

Michael

Are you saying Michael that the wreck of the UB 65 has been id by divers in modern or recent times? What literature exists at all? I remember reading as a child that an American sub came across in broad daylight an apparently abandoned UB 65 on the surface and the American sub was about to fire at the uboat but it blew up before the American sub commander could fire!

Tx John

[Michael Lowrey]

John,

Correct, found a few years back and then positively IDed by a dive time led by the noted diver Innes McCartney. Dr. Axel Niestlé, who is absolutelt top notch, did the historical research. There was a TV show on it in the UK.

Unfortunately, a number of "traditional" U-boat loss attributions have proven to be false. Basically, the original attributions came from what the RN thought they knew during the war. Unsurprisingly, their knowledge was incomplete. In addition, a sub lost to mine or operational causes is likely to be tagged with the next most plausible loss cause, which was the own torpedo loss as observed by the U.S. submarine.

Best wishes,

Michael

[John Gilinsky]

John,

Correct, found a few years back and then positively IDed by a dive time led by the noted diver Innes McCartney. Dr. Axel Niestlé, who is absolutelt top notch, did the historical research. There was a TV show on it in the UK.

Unfortunately, a number of "traditional" U-boat loss attributions have proven to be false. Basically, the original attributions came from what the RN thought they knew during the war. Unsurprisingly, their knowledge was incomplete. In addition, a sub lost to mine or operational causes is likely to be tagged with the next most plausible loss cause, which was the own torpedo loss as observed by the U.S. submarine.

Best wishes,

Michael

Thanks again Michael. Checked your web page. ALSO googled and found that the British have officially put as of Nov 1 2006 the wreck of the UB 65 under a protected status under British shipwreck archaeological laws while Allied and other ships with human remains remain unprotected. Care to comment?

ALSO any specific highly recommended literature explaining the "haunting' of this sub and/or its wreck?

John

[Michael Lowrey]

John,

I will specifically recommend absolutely NO literature regarding this boat supposedly being haunted, as it is has demonstratable no basis in fact. That tale, along with a long list of other rather incredible tales involving sea monsters, trucks, and the like all apparently come from the fertile (??) minds of certain 1920s British mass market writers, often in texts that are also somewhat (or even highly) propogandistic in nature. I spend too much time debunking this garbage and I simply hope it goes away.

Yes, UB 65 is a protected site. It's level of classification means that you can dive it only on a look but don't touch basis. There's a higher level of classification which prohibits all diving on a site without a very difficult to obtain permit. One U-boat wreck was recently placed in that status after serious interference with the wreck, and the human remains still on board. Of course, a long list of British warship wrecks also are in one of the two classifications.

Much of the controversy involves members of the public who want even more ships designated (some want vastly more) and some divers who aren't inclined towards wanting to dive wargraves on only a look but don't touch basis, especially German ones. Draw your own inferences on that.

As a practical matter, these schemes are largely symbolic as they apply only to British citizens unless the wreck is in British territorial waters (I believe 12 miles is the limit that applies here). In UB 65's case, as she's only 7 miles off the coast, the look but don't touch restriction is meaningful.

The best book on submarine wrecks around the British Isle is currently being written by Ron Young and Pam Armstrong (full disclosure: I wrote one of the forewords and help Ron and Pam with some of the research). It's in three volumes, the first of which covering much of the North Sea, came out last year.

Best wishes,

Michael

[John Gilinsky]

John,

I will specifically recommend absolutely NO literature regarding this boat supposedly being haunted, as it is has demonstratable no basis in fact. That tale, along with a long list of other rather incredible tales involving sea monsters, trucks, and the like all apparently come from the fertile (??) minds of certain 1920s British mass market writers, often in texts that are also somewhat (or even highly) propogandistic in nature. I spend too much time debunking this garbage and I simply hope it goes away.

Yes, UB 65 is a protected site. It's level of classification means that you can dive it only on a look but don't touch basis. There's a higher level of classification which prohibits all diving on a site without a very difficult to obtain permit. One U-boat wreck was recently placed in that status after serious interference with the wreck, and the human remains still on board. Of course, a long list of British warship wrecks also are in one of the two classifications.

Much of the controversy involves members of the public who want even more ships designated (some want vastly more) and some divers who aren't inclined towards wanting to dive wargraves on only a look but don't touch basis, especially German ones. Draw your own inferences on that.

As a practical matter, these schemes are largely symbolic as they apply only to British citizens unless the wreck is in British territorial waters (I believe 12 miles is the limit that applies here). In UB 65's case, as she's only 7 miles off the coast, the look but don't touch restriction is meaningful.

The best book on submarine wrecks around the British Isle is currently being written by Ron Young and Pam Armstrong (full disclosure: I wrote one of the forewords and help Ron and Pam with some of the research). It's in three volumes, the first of which covering much of the North Sea, came out last year.

Best wishes,

Michael

Again thanks so much Michael for your thoughts and opinions and local updates (from across the big pond these are all helpful!).

Interestingly enough I have researched hospital ships for years and I know that side scan sonar images of sunken hospital ships exist. In fact I just bought a little while ago a great 1916 dated oil painting of the Lanfarnc sunk by a German sub and killing an equal number of British and GERMAN wounded pows. Divers do drive on this wreck off the French coast.

The questions about archaeological sites and human remains I am sure has been done to death in most places. Common sense does not necessarily rule what people do in these situations.

John