Robert Manning Interview

March 24, 2001

This is an interview which was conducted on March 24, 2001 with Robert Manning, an authority on the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald.  Here are the questions asked, and Mr. Manning's answers. 

Question: How are you associated with the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald?
Answer: Technically, I have no association with EDMUND FITZGERALD, nor with any parties to the tragedy.  Following the tragedy and hearing all of the rumors on why she went down, from superstitious sailors to pundits, and as a sailor in ships and yachts, I felt it a duty to allay many fears and assembled a slide program that I have presented mostly in the Midwest and elsewhere, and once in Perth, Australia.  After a hiatus of nearly ten years, I last presented it in Chicago on November 10, 2000, the day after seeing Dr. Shelley Russell's superb production, "Holdin' Our Own," in Marquette, Michigan.

Question: What is your theory on what happened to the Edmund Fitzgerald on November 10, 1975?
Answer: The operative word is theory, and several sound theories were presented, but much of what the public has heard ranges from flawed theory to preposterous. 
    A combination of problems culminated in her demise on November 10, 1975.  She was probably overloaded.  To be sure, she was loaded to her legal load limits for fall sailing, but those limits were increased a few years earlier and a change in her Plimsoll Mark was authorized to allow but 11.5 ft of freeboard compared to her original fall sailing requirement of 14.75 ft.   The stresses on her hull and the weakening caused by those stresses over a period of time were overwhelming during the period of that November passage.  The time was 1975....pre-loran on the Great Lakes, pre-global positioning satellite systems.  Her method of navigation was radio direction finding, radar, and dead reckoning.  With one of the critical RDF stations out of service at Whitefish Point, she was unable to get accurate radio cross bearings, both her radars were out and dead (from the abbreviation 'ded,' meaning deduced) reckoning is nearly impossible in a blinding gale, her position was often uncertain.   She may have struck a reef between Caribou and Michipicoten Islands, she may have struck a shoal westerly of Caribou Island, we're uncertain if she struck anything at all.  We do not know, nor do I believe we'll ever know in our lifetime, even your lifetime, Tim, what the bottom of the forward section in EDMUND FITZGERALD looks like.  
    What we do know, contrary to another flawed theory that she broke in two on the surface, is that she did take a nose dive to the bottom and in all likelihood broke in two when her stem (bow) struck the hard bottom while her unsupported after section was nearly vertical.  In effect the 729' ship, going down in 530' of water, had 200' of stern in the air.  That much ship, unsupported by water, would have caused her to breakup.   Her breaking up is not what brought her down. 
    Considering the weight of a cargo hatch, many crew in lakes' freighters were often nonchalant about the way the kestner clamps were secured.  Not all of those clamps may have been battened down and considering the "working" of the ship, her cargo hold may have been filling with water through the holidays in the cargo hatch and through the vent pipes carried away during the storm and maybe from a section of hull that was stove in while bottoming.
    The tragedy is the loss of 29 sailors.

Question: Have you worked with freighters like the Fitzgerald before?
Answer: Yes. 

Question: Are you related to anyone onboard the S.S. Edmund Fitzgerald when she sank?
Answer:  No.

Question: When did you first become interested in the tragedy of S.S. EDMUND FITZGERALD?
Answer:  When asked to respond to why I go out in Lake Superior in small craft with the "evidence" that Lake Superior is so dangerous, I felt a need to present the facts and demystify the tragedy.  Lake Superior is not the most dangerous body of water in the world, nor is it even the most dangerous of the Great Lakes.  Opinions vary, however.

Question: What is the one thing most misinterpreted about the wreck, in your opinion?
Answer:  Its all my opinion, Tim.  I love theories about "Three Sisters" or "Seven Sisters" waves.  Also that EDMUND FITZGERALD may have been suspended between two of these giant waves and broke in two while the mid-ship was unsupported by water.  My favorite is the one about a vortex through the earth between the Bermuda Triangle and the Lake Superior Quadrangle that sucked her down.  It's really insulting.  It still leaves me nearly speechless that there are persons who really believe that nonsense.

Question: What do you think the worst thing surrounding the wreck is?
Answer:  Loss of life and exploitation.

Question: Do you think that the wreck is becoming too
commercial.  If so, why?
Answer:  No

Question: What information sources do you recommend regarding the wreck that researchers should look at?
Answer:  Visit the maritime museums at Whitefish Point, MI; Marquette, MI; and Duluth, MN.  Read the books by Frederick Stonehouse and Robert J Hemming.  See the play Holdin' Our Own, by Shelley Russell.  Form your own opinion, but remain skeptical.  Forget aliens, the Bermuda Triangle,  and the Lake Superior Quadrangle.

Question: Do you believe it was a smart thing to do by putting a new bell in place of the old one after removing it from the ship, and if so, why?
Answer: I have considerable respect and admiration for Tom Farnquist.  That they were able to retrieve the ship's bell from EDMUND FITZGERALD and place it in the Whitefish Point Museum is fine.  To replace the original bell with another bell, even inscribed with the names of all hands, strikes me as an incredible waste of energy and resources.  I would have liked to have seen the new bell placed in a separate memorial display near the original bell.  However, what Tom Farnquist and his colleagues have done at the Whitefish Point Museum is quite remarkable and worth a visit by anyone interested in Lake Superior of the loss of S.S. EDMUND FITZGERALD.  Kudos to Tom Farnquist for what he has accomplished at Whitefish Point...and similarly Fred Stonehouse with the Marquette Maritime Museum.
 
Question: Have you been able to attend any memorial services for the Fitz?
Answer: No.
 
Question: Have you met any family members of the crew?

Answer: Yes.
 
Question: What are your feelings on Gordon Lightfoot's song?
Answer: As tragic as was the loss of EDMUND FITZGERALD, the mystique of her demise and the subsequent public clamor to learn why she went missing is wholly, in my opinion, brought about by the haunting words of "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, " written and performed by Gordon Lightfoot.  That, and the immediacy of modern communications, investigative reporting by the media, all wanting to know why.  Had Gordon Lightfoot, or another talented writer, produced a piece about the loss of S.S. CARL D BRADLEY, we'd know more about her loss, too, and the families of her crew would have received much better compensation for their loss.  This was a travesty.  It is a wonderful ballad, however.
    Yes, we are all quite taken by the loss of EDMUND FITZGERALD, and even at the risk of seeming too hardened by this tragedy, in my opinion this was not the most tragic story and may not have been as tragic a story as the loss of the 15,000 ton, 639', S.S. CARL D BRADLEY in Lake Michigan on 18 November 1958.  Of her 35 crew, 25 hailed from Rogers City, MI, several were related, and only two lived outside of Michigan.  Of the 33 men aboard on her final voyage, there were two survivors rescued the next day by USCG Cutter SUNDEW and those two men were able to give a very fine accounting of the ship's demise.  And no song was written.  The subsequent reports of her demise consume less than a 1/2 inch of file space.  I'd like to see a song or a play about the history and loss of CARL D BRADLEY.  I do know the nephew of one of her crew.
    On 29 November 1966, DANIEL J MORRELL is lost in a storm in Lake Huron with the loss of 28 lives.  One crewman survived.  No song of her demise.
    Ironically there was a sister ship to EDMUND FITZGERALD built by Great Lakes Engineering Works.  On April 20, 1960 EDMUND FITZGERALD's sister ship S.S. ARTHUR B HOMER was launched and was decommissioned a few years ago, but I do not know if she's mothballed or has been sent to ship breakers.  ARTHUR B HOMER was the last ship built by this shipyard.
    I really believe that were it not for the haunting words of Gordon Lightfoot's ballad, "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald," S.S. EDMUND FITZGERALD would have just been another of the ship's taken by a mighty Great Lakes' November gale.

Question: If it is possible, do you think that an attempt should be made to salvage the ship?
Answer:  With the technology available in these early days of the 21st Century, EDMUND FITZGERALD could be brought to the surface...but at a cost exceeding the replacement value of the ship and cargo.  But for what purpose?  Leave her alone.  As Fred Stonehouse pointed out, further exploration of EDMUND FITZGERALD should only be for scientific gain and to add to our body of knowledge of why she went down and to prevent such mishaps in the future.  Until there is a vast increase in diving technology for the recreational diver, I believe EDMUND FITZGERALD should be off limits until at least 2025.

Question: All twenty-nine men went down with the ship...why do you think this is?  Was the crew prepared for an emergency situation?
Answer: EDMUND FITZGERALD was lost suddenly.  Not only was there no distress signal sent, and we do not know if the ship's general alarm was sounded, but even if it were, there would have been a very low likelihood of anyone surviving.  However, as a result of the loss of EDMUND FITZGERALD safety standards and training requirements are more stringent and better equipment is available.  Whether it would have helped those 29 men...we'll never really know.