Talk:Fort Morgan (Alabama)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 00:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Ref: Schooner Rachel
The Schooner Rachel was build by the John De Angelo and Sons Shipyard at Moss Point, MS in 1919 and was burned in the Gulf in 1933. The Fort Morgan wreck matches the drawing (1918) of the Rachel. The frame design and spacing, the keel, the sister keels, and overall length (132 feet at the keel) all match the drawing. The wreck has no boiler or related materials, as did the civil war ship. The pipes in the photos were installed to drain water from inside the hull. The material that pipes are assembled from a type dating much later than the 1800's. Some appear to be galvanized. The largest metal parts in the wreck are the windless and a hatch cover. All the rigging observed are post 1880. The rings from around the mast are 30 inches across inches. Although, none are present now there were three rings earlier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.120.100.113 (talk) 23:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

In October, 2006, the wreckage of a 136 ft long ship, whose identity is still unknown, was uncovered by beach erosion near Fort Morgan. It was covered again by natural forces by December 2006. In September 2008, in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike, it was uncovered again. A marine archaeologist with the Museum of Mobile determined that it is most likely the remains of the Monticello, a two-masted schooner that attempted to run the U.S. Navy blockade on June 26, 1862, but ran aground and burned. It had been sailing from Havana to Mobile. However, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers made a determination in 2000 that the ship in question was most likely the Rachel, a schooner built in 1919 that ran aground near Fort Morgan in 1933.

The schooner Rachel was build by the John De Angelo and Sons Shipyard at Moss Point, MS in 1919 and was burned in the Gulf in 1933. The Fort Morgan wreck matches the drawing (1918) of the Rachel. The frame design and spacing, the keel, the sister keels, and overall length (132 feet at the keel) all match the drawing. The wreck has no boiler or related materials. The pipes in the photos were installed to drain water from inside the hull. The material that pipes are assembled from date much later than those of the 1800's. Some appear to be galvanized. The largest metal parts in the wreck are the windless and a hatch cover. All the rigging observed are post 1880. The rings from around the mast are 30 inches. Although, none are present now there were three earlier. (one for each mast)
 * I'm moving all of this to the talk page, the article is about Fort Morgan itself, whatever wreck this may be, it wasn't discovered inside or right outside of the fort. I think this has gotten way off topic.  If someone wants to write an article on the schooner Rachel, have at it.   Altairisfar talk  04:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Architectural significance
This may well be "one of the finest examples of military architecture in the" USA, but surely not in the New World. There are substantial Portuguese and Spanish fortifications in central and South America which are both larger and older, and as well preserved, and must therefore be finer examples.203.184.41.226 (talk) 23:02, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The fort is known for its bomb-proof arches. -Stiabhna (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Morgan (Alabama). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080111143447/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=70&ResourceType=Building to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=70&ResourceType=Building

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)