Hunley Project Update-December 1997

Legacy, Vol. 2, No. 3, December 1997, pp. 22-23.

Hunley Update

By Christopher F. Amer

Underwater view of port side snorkle box.

“Moving forward on the Hunley” read the lead editorial in the November 3 edition of Charleston's Post and Courier newspaper. The South Carolina Hunley Commission met on October 30, 1997 in Charleston. The main item on the agenda was to establish an eleemosynary corporation called “Friends of the Hunley” that will oversee the raising of some $10 million to fund and endow the project. Plans at present are to raise, conserve, and curate/exhibit the submarine. The Commission also discussed various possible locations for a permanent home for the Hunley. Experts agree that the vessel, when raised, should not should not be subjected to excessive transportation that may damage the hull and its contents. To date, both the Patriot's Point Maritime Museum, located near Charleston, and the Charleston Museum have expressed interest in taking on the project. Once the Commission and US. Naval Historical Center agree on a site, the recommendation will be sent to the South Carolina General Assembly for final approval. Senator Glenn McConnell, Chairman of the Hunley Commission, anticipates a decision in the Legislature during the next session.

The Naval Historical Center, the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, and the Hunley Commission are currently working on the scopes of work to set the standards and parameters of future work on the submarine. These documents cover the various stages of the project, and include the archaeology, lifting, and transport to a conservation facility, as well as requirements for the building of a conservation facility, excavation of the interior of the boat (remember, the Hunley appears to be filled with sand), conservation of the hull and contents, appropriate treatment of the remains of the crew, and exhibition and long-term curation of the boat. Requests for proposals will be published in the Federal Register and interested and qualified parties who desire to conduct work on the project may submit proposals.

Currently, the Commission anticipates raising the Hunley at the turn of the millennium. Many factors will come into play to determine when the raising will be undertaken, not the least of which is having the necessary funding available and a conservation facility built and operational prior to the hull being removed from its protected location.

Text Box: Figure 2: Drawing erroneously labeled the Hunley, but is actually the American Diver, McClintock’s second submarine (Courtesy of the US Naval Institute; researched by Mark Ragan).

The Institute has been working with a naval architect to anticipate necessary requirement to safely lift the hull without sustaining damage to either the structure or interior of the boat. Calculations of the combined weight of hull and contents, including the wet sand, range from approximately 21-25 long tons. The low number is based on a 1/4-inch hull plate thickness traditionally used in descriptions of the Hunley. The twenty-five ton figure takes into account a 5/8th-inch thickness of plate. After the Civil War, James McClintock wrote to captains in the Royal Navy in Halifax detailing the measurements and features of his three submarines, the Pioneer, American Diver, and the H.L. Hunley. Evidently McClintock's intent was to garner interest in his work from that quarter. In that letter McClintock states:

I modeled her [Hunley], and built Expressly for hand Power. This Boat was of an Eliptical (sic) Shape, with modeled ends. And looked similar to Surf, or Whale Boats, placed one on top of the other. She was Built of Iron 5/8 inch thick, 40 feet long top and bottom, 42 inches wide in the middle, & 48 inches high, fitted with Cranks Geared to her Propeller, and turned by 8 persons inside of her. And although she was a beautiful Model Boat, and worked to perfection. Yet like her Predecessors, the Power was too uncertain to admit of her Venturing far from Shore. This Boat was taken to Charleston, SC, and destroyed the Sloop-of-war Housatonic, Myself nor the Sub Marine's Gallant Commander, who lost his life in demonstrating, her __________, considered there was any danger in going out and destroying any vessel. But the danger was in having sufficient Power to bring the Boat Back. I would here state I do not believe the Sub Marine Boat was lost in the operation of destroying the Housatonic, But was lost in a storm which occurred a few hours after. I am aware the Federals has made diligent Search for her, And have made three different reports of having found her. Yet no descriptions that I have ever read are correct. [brackets added] (ADM 1/ 6236, Public Records Office, British Admiralty, Surrey, England)

Note-A transcription of the complete text of McClintock's letter will appear in a later update.