Large EOD find

Pigstick down the throat would be my opening gambit...!
Pigstick is an injector - what you really want is an extractor. (I can’t remember the name of it but that thing you stuck under a car boot to propel whatever was in the car boot into the lower atmosphere at a high rate of knots.)
 
They have extracted a great deal of objects inserted in vaginas and anuses. It's common fare for ER workers.They'd prefer to be doing something else,but people keep turning up with things stuck in/through them . Apart from that,they are great fun at parties.
 
Pigstick is an injector - what you really want is an extractor. (I can’t remember the name of it but that thing you stuck under a car boot to propel whatever was in the car boot into the lower atmosphere at a high rate of knots.)

Pawpaw, poplin or proquip
 

Bad Smell

Old-Salt
Pigstick is an injector - what you really want is an extractor. (I can’t remember the name of it but that thing you stuck under a car boot to propel whatever was in the car boot into the lower atmosphere at a high rate of knots.)
The Alford Boot Banger.
 

bentobox

War Hero
I see the SS Richard Montgomery is back in the news, The MOD are going to remove the masts from the ship, but not remove any bombs etc.

Can any EOD folk please explain this, surely removing the masts make the wreck less visible, and more likely to be accidentally hit?
 
I see the SS Richard Montgomery is back in the news, The MOD are going to remove the masts from the ship, but not remove any bombs etc.

Can any EOD folk please explain this, surely removing the masts make the wreck less visible, and more likely to be accidentally hit?
Article said that if or more like when the masts collapse could set the ammo off? Assume the bombs and shells were not fused though?
 

HE117

LE
I see the SS Richard Montgomery is back in the news, The MOD are going to remove the masts from the ship, but not remove any bombs etc.

Can any EOD folk please explain this, surely removing the masts make the wreck less visible, and more likely to be accidentally hit?
Honest answer.. dunno!

Speculative answer.. the masts may have become seriously unstable and are posing an unacceptable risk.. The perspective you need to take with this one is the balance of probability. The RM has been risk assessed to death, and up to this point the received wisdom has been "don't poke the bear".

For this to change, something about the wreck has changed so that the scenario is now "If this goes Pete Tong and you had not done something about something you knew, then you might be blamed".

Forget the actual risk... it is the perceived risk to Government or Ministerial reputation that will be the deciding factor..

Cynical...

Moi..!
 

HE117

LE
Pawpaw, poplin or proquip
... or Hubcap if you really want to get Yarpie about it!

Catweasle's design for an extractor was somewhat "derivative" IMHO...!
 

HE117

LE
Article said that if or more like when the masts collapse could set the ammo off? Assume the bombs and shells were not fused though?
Assume Nothing!
 

HE117

LE
True, what was SOP respect ammo in transit in those days I wonder?
Lots of US ammunition of the day tended to be fuzed, that said, the risk is probably more from sensitised filling.
 
Honest answer.. dunno!

Speculative answer.. the masts may have become seriously unstable and are posing an unacceptable risk.. The perspective you need to take with this one is the balance of probability. The RM has been risk assessed to death, and up to this point the received wisdom has been "don't poke the bear".

For this to change, something about the wreck has changed so that the scenario is now "If this goes Pete Tong and you had not done something about something you knew, then you might be blamed".

Forget the actual risk... it is the perceived risk to Government or Ministerial reputation that will be the deciding factor..

Cynical...

Moi..!
From Wiki, this seems to tie in:

In June 2020, the DfT announced it was looking for a contractor to remove the ship's three masts as they were placing undue strain on the rest of the vessel structure.[21] The Ministry of Defence (MoD) warned that the collapse of a mast could detonate ordnance, and Royal Navy specialists would need to remove them safely. In December 2021 it was reported that a contractor supported by the Navy would remove the ship's masts, starting in June 2022.[22][23]

SS Richard Montgomery - Wikipedia

Useful graphic from the referenced Telegraph article:

1640980584094.png

As you suggested the latest survey showed the masts to have deteriorated to the point where there is concern that they could trigger an explosion of ammunition in the forward holds. A risk assessment says that the nearby gas and oil facilities would be threatened in the event of an explosion. There wouldn't be many windows intact in Sheerness. It could result in a massive column of water 300m wide, debris projected 3000m high and 5m waves.

Mast clearance is expected to take two months, starting in June.

"Bomb disposal experts from the Royal Navy and 29 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Group are working with the MoD’s Salvage and Marine Operations project team to make the wreck safe."

Sunken warship in River Thames with explosives on board could cause ‘mass damage and loss of life’

Navy to dismantle sunken cargo ship on Thames holding unstable explosives
 
I see the SS Richard Montgomery is back in the news, The MOD are going to remove the masts from the ship, but not remove any bombs etc.

Can any EOD folk please explain this, surely removing the masts make the wreck less visible, and more likely to be accidentally hit?

It’s fine.






I don’t live anywhere near it.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top