Condition of the wreck

Dec 2, 2000
Easley South Carolina
Hit by a torpedo, secondary explosion of unknown origin, 88 years on the bottom, during which at one time the wreck was frequently depth charged by the Royal Navy to flush out submarines in wartime...all things considered, it's a wonder there's anything there that's recognizable as a ship.

laurent Gontier-Versailles

Some people tell that she has been used as a depth charges target to wipe out some evidences...
Yes , but which evidences ?

May 3, 2002
Wellington, New Zealand
some ship weather better than others on the bottom of the sea.
Take the Britannic which sank a year after the Lusi. She is in excellent condition. Well as good as a ship can be after it hit the bottom.
I don't know about deliberately depth charging.
I know the Irish had little love for the English but desecrating the grave of so many people from many countries, I don't think so.

The area has strong currents and as the Lusi is now so the Titanic is becomming and the Britannic will become in her time.

May 8, 2001
I had considered the tides in that area as a factor to her disintegration. (As Martin stated above.)
As for the rest of the data, I suppose it will remain safely locked away. :-(

Brian R Peterson

Hi All!

I have also heard that the Lusi was deliberately depth charged, I think the depth charges that hit her here were aimed to flush out German subs hiding near the wreck to avoid detection, yet others say she was used as target practice, although there have been unexploded WWI era depth charges found in the vicinity of the wreck, no one will ever know what really happened so of course, anything is possible.

Sep 22, 2003
Coatesville, PA
Another reason for her bad condition might be the enormous amount of suction that occured when she sunk, this was due to her being in shallow water (still quite deep, though shallow for ocean dephs) and also due to size of the lusitania, though this cant be responsible for all damage, it is certainly responsible for some of it. Diana Preston in her book tries to claim that radar watchers could have mistakened lusitania for a submarine, while it is a possible this might have happened a couple times, i highly doubt that experienced radar watcher/operator would mistakened lusitania for a submarine, take in mind the differences between the two. the lusitania was 785 feet long, most submarines were around 300 feet long, lusitania was 88 feet wide a submarine about 35.
Dec 2, 2000
Easley South Carolina
Why would a radar operator mistake Lusitania for anything? The sensor used for underwater detection is sonar.

And further, why assume anyone made a mistake about anything? The location of the Lusitania's wreck has never been a mystery. The reason for the frequent depth I've been given to two fold;
1)The wreck being easily identified made as handy a target as any to use for ASW training. (It's not as if anyone still aboard would be able to complain about the noise!) and;
2)To discourage hostile submarines from using the wreck as a hiding place.
My Great Grandfathers son, William George Ellason Myers was on that ship, he lived and told his story, the Captain knew they were going to torpedo the ship, but he thought that there might be a chance they will not, so he left the harbor. are people making claims against what happened?

Similar threads