One of the prolems of being an old fart is that sometimes you rely on a memory that is 30years old or more, I know that James was not on the throne in 1578 but it never crossed my mind until you brought it up so I dusted off my acient books and re-looked the whole thing up again and here is the confusing answer.
You are correct in that you say that Bourne's boat was never built but the idea was there and was perhaps sound. In "Submarines, the history and evolution of underwater fighting vessels" (Anthony Preston 1975) and "Undersea Warfare"(Richard Humble 1981) Bournes boat was 1578 and Van Drebbel some 40 years later and HE was supposed to have taken James 1 (1556 -1625) on a trip from Wesminster to Greenwich (about 15 miles) at a depth of 12-15 Feet) as it was man powered it seems unlikely.
A dutchman named DeSonne built a submersable in 1653 to have a go at the Brits (everyone wants to have a go at the Brits) and an Italian (Borelli) also built a sub in 1747 although I have little information on that one. I cant find my refference books on Simon Day but I think that was around 1650 ish. Whatever-- your claim that Bushnell was the inventor of the submarine is a bit off the mark, however it was the first sub to attack a warship (Brits again--see what I mean)and given a decent Black and Decker
he might even have succeeded. You have to admire these guys, it took over 300 years for a submarine to look practical yet they kept on trying. Just as a byline I would suggest that in fact the worlds first practical and what I would call a submarine
was probably H.L.Hunley.
Keep up the good work and I will look forward to seeing your Turtle as and when its finished.
Regards
RonP




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks