
Explorers given approval to retrieve Titanic’s Marconi telegraph - wallflower
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/explorers-can-take-titanics-marconi-telegraph-cutting-into-wreck-for-first-time/2020/05/19/bbe39b70-8a47-11ea-8ac1-bfb250876b7a_story.html
======
simplicio
I guess I'm unsentimental, but I don't really see the point of restricting
access to the wreck. People say it's a grave or memorial, but its not like it
was built for that, its just the ship the people happened to be in when they
died. We generally don't preserve crashed airplanes/trains/etc as memorials to
the people that died in them. And its not like mourning family members or
their descendants can visit it.

If I or one of my family members die in a shipwreck, I can't imagine I'd have
any particular problem with people salvaging from the same. If some future
salvager wants to go salvage an iphone or whatever from the ship, I can't see
why I'd be upset by the fact that my corpse is now resting in a ship with one
less random knicknack in it.

The radio seems like an interesting artifact that people will enjoy seeing,
while at the bottom of the ocean it isn't doing anyone any good. If people
want to bring it to the surface, let them have at it.

~~~
catalogia
> People say it's a grave or memorial, but its not like it was built for that,
> its just the ship the people happened to be in when they died.

 _Obviously_ the shipbuilders never intended for the ship to become a grave,
but that's exactly what it became and the intent of the shipbuilders hardly
seems relevant.

As for plane and train crashes, the discrepancy in treatment is obviously a
matter of tradition. Not all traditions are problematic relics of the past
that need questioning though; particularly not traditions as harmless as
respecting the deceased victims of ship wrecks. And if traditions are to be
challenged, it should be for a better reason than profit. (Historic inquiry is
a better reason to challenge this tradition, but doesn't seem to apply in this
circumstance.)

I think that devaluing harmless traditions like respecting the dead in the
name of utility and profit demeans our society.

~~~
simplicio
Is there a tradition? Salvaging wrecks, with or without human remains, is a
pretty old practice, the law generally seems to support it and I'm not really
aware of any religious or other traditional prohibition against it. There's
certainly efforts made to respect whatever human remains are present, but not
to the extent of a defacto ban on salvage operations.

~~~
catalogia
> _Is there a tradition?_

Obviously yes, otherwise it wouldn't be contentious.

There are many reasons to salvage shipwrecks, some better than others. Wrecks
which pose navigational hazards are obviously removed. Wrecks which contain
hazardous materials (oil, nuclear waste, explosives, etc) may also be
salvaged. Wrecks which contain valuable materials are also sometimes salvaged,
and in rare cases ships may be raised and refurbished to be used again (this
happened to the confederate submarine _Hunley_ twice.) There is no hard and
fast tradition on salvaging ships, it exists on a continuum of necessity to
reviled grave robbery.

Specific instances can be evaluated on that continuum. The K-141 Kursk was
dismantled and partially raised, in large large part because it contained a
nuclear reactor and several nuclear warheads; I think most would agree doing
so was prudent. On the other end of that spectrum, numerous ships sank during
the Battle of the Java Sea have been destroyed for scrap metal, which has been
widely reviled as grave robbery. (The steel of those wrecks has some value
because it dates prior to the nuclear era: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-
background_steel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel)) but _"
it's valuable tho.."_ isn't generally seen as an acceptable reason to molest
these graves.

I think retrieving artifacts from the Titanic to put on display falls closer
to the "grave robbery" end of this spectrum.

------
Stierlitz
“Because of a backlog of personal messages, the wireless operators had ignored
ice warnings from other ships.”

Actually no, ice warnings* were passed onto the Bridge, which the Captain
choose to ignore, as he was endevouring to beat the record for the fastest
crossing on a maiden voyage. The lesson being, don't go full steam ahead into
an ice field, in the middle of the ice season, at night under a moonless
night.

“On the 11th April, she received 6 warnings from ships stopped in, or passing
through, heavy ice, 5 more on the 12th, 3 more on the 13th, and 7 on the
14th.”

[http://www.titanic-titanic.com/the-ice-warnings-received-
by-...](http://www.titanic-titanic.com/the-ice-warnings-received-by-titanic/)

------
catalogia
> _The recovery project has been vociferously opposed by the National Oceanic
> and Atmospheric Administration, whose representatives argued in court that
> the Titanic, sunk about 370 miles off the coast of Newfoundland, should be
> respected as a grave rather than mined as a museum supply._

Frankly I agree. This isn't a scientific mission, or any sort of fact-finding
mission; it's just looting. The plan to make a "wonderful exhibit" sounds like
a cynical business ploy to get the public into museums with sensational
exhibitions. Perhaps getting the public into museums is not such a bad thing,
but is it such a good thing that it justifies this sort of looting? I don't
really see how.

Edit: I should say that I'm not categorically opposed to retrieving items from
shipwrecks, if it's being done respectfully. But this plan with the Titanic
doesn't seem very respectful to me. An example of what I'd consider reasonably
respectful was the retrieval of the bell from the SS Edmund Fitzgerald:

> _The ship 's bell was recovered from the wreck on July 4, 1995. A replica
> engraved with the names of the 29 sailors who lost their lives replaced the
> original on the wreck.[190] A legal document signed by 46 relatives of the
> deceased, officials of the Mariners' Church of Detroit and the Great Lakes
> Shipwreck Historic Society (GLSHS) "donated the custodian and
> conservatorship" of the bell to the GLSHS "to be incorporated in a permanent
> memorial at Whitefish Point, Michigan, to honor the memory of the 29 men of
> the SS Edmund Fitzgerald."[191] The terms of the legal agreement made the
> GLSHS responsible for maintaining the bell, and forbade it from selling or
> moving the bell or using it for commercial purposes. It provided for
> transferring the bell to the Mariners' Church of Detroit if the terms were
> violated.[191]_

Even this though caused some controversy.

~~~
Shivetya
How many generations must pass before such a site passes into being able to be
scavenged for items of interest? There have never been remains found. In some
waters you could find bodies but not where the Titanic sits.

Has it aged enough to fall into the same category we assign Egyptian
artifacts? We have dug up remains of many societies and some are within a few
hundred years of age. So it really comes down to, what is the rule?

To me it should be allowed to retrieve items from the site and if no national
government wants to sponsor it then why not a private organization? if placed
under proper restrictions but not outright confiscation they should be able to
operate as a museum type organization taking their historical artifacts on
tour so others may enjoy them

~~~
dfxm12
Is _“standard off-the-shelf” equipment of the time that has little value
outside the ship_ truly an item of interest?

------
JoeAltmaier
A terrible idea.

    
    
       "... it is conceivable that it could be restored to operable condition,” RMST said"
    

It was a spark-gap transmitter? Which broadcasts noise across the entire radio
spectrum. It would be illegal anywhere in the world to operate it today.

Nonsense like that confirms that this effort is some circus act put together
by a money-making shill of some kind. Not a sincere effort to preserve
history.

~~~
jbay808
Couldn't you build a Faraday cage to operate it inside?

~~~
the-dude
What is the point of putting a transmitter in a Faraday cage?

~~~
bobmcbobface
Then it's not illegal to operate.

