Andrea Doria Divers

[DA Aquamaster]

I also like to keep my PPO2 lower than what you get at 185.

1.4 is a pretty acceptable PO2 with nitrox, I'm don't understand the concern with having the same PO2 on air at 185 ft.

 

[MikeFerrara]

1.4 is a pretty acceptable PO2 with nitrox, I'm don't understand the concern with having the same PO2 on air at 185 ft.

I don't have a problem with a PPO2 of 1.4 for a recreational dive. If (notice I said If ) we use the NOAA recommended exposure limits it doesn't take much of a technical dive to get you to 100% though. Keeping the PPO lower at depth helps. Also consider that we're spiking to 1.6 at gas switches.

 

[yhuubert]

Here are some of the dives on my dream list:

Estonia

Now for MS Estonia you must keep in mind that many countries (at least Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Denmark, Lithuania, Russia and Great Britain) signed a treaty by which you can get arrested for diving there. As a US citizen, you can get arrested if you dive and try to enter any of those countries after that. The wreck is at a depth of 74-85 meters.

Otherwise the latest cool wreck in the Baltic sea is the Russalka, which sunk in 1893. The wreck is standing on the bottom almost upright, with her bow deep in the mud and the stern rising high up in the length of 33 metres. You can see the pictures showing the position at http://www.tuuker.ee/vaaria_inglish.html. I am not sure how many other wrecks there are in such a position

Jüri

 

[MASS-Diver]

Now for MS Estonia you must keep in mind that many countries (at least Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Denmark, Lithuania, Russia and Great Britain) signed a treaty by which you can get arrested for diving there. As a US citizen, you can get arrested if you dive and try to enter any of those countries after that. The wreck is at a depth of 74-85 meters.

Otherwise the latest cool wreck in the Baltic sea is the Russalka, which sunk in 1893. The wreck is standing on the bottom almost upright, with her bow deep in the mud and the stern rising high up in the length of 33 metres. You can see the pictures showing the position at http://www.tuuker.ee/vaaria_inglish.html. I am not sure how many other wrecks there are in such a position

Jüri

But, you can dive the Estonia right - you just can't return to one of the ports? I thought people dove here quite a bit? I remember something in "Immersed" about her a few years ago.

 

[gentlegiant]

Does anyone know what the legal status of diving on the Britannic is? Last I heard you could only dive there for approved research purposes and had to get approval from the owner (I forget his name, but he is an older gentleman) and the Greek government. I would love to dive the wreck sometime (in 5 years or so when I have the dives and experience).

Here is a question for some of you with a more scientific bent. Does diving on the wreck increase its rate of decay by a large %? My hypothesis is that it does due to several factors, one of which may sound a little strange. Here are the factors I see:
1. Divers knocking around int he structure, prying things loose or cutting holes.
2. Increased water movement through the wreck which may cause protective layers of sediment or coral/animal growth to be dislodged.
3. Air/Nitrox/trimix bubles percolating through the wreck which cause exposure of the metal to higher oxygen concentrations that the surrounding water. This could lead to increased oxidation rates for some metals.

I may be totally off base with the above, but it seems to make sense to me. It seems that the Lusitania and Britannic, both of which sank well before the Doria, are in much better shape that the Doria. The Doria used more modern materials and shipbuilding techniques which should have made it stronger and more resistant, yet it seems to be decomposing much more rapidly than the other ships. I know the Doria is in shallower water, but the differences seem to be much greater than they should be.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

Does anyone know what the legal status of diving on the Britannic is? Last I heard you could only dive there for approved research purposes and had to get approval from the owner (I forget his name, but he is an older gentleman) and the Greek government. I would love to dive the wreck sometime (in 5 years or so when I have the dives and experience).

Here is a question for some of you with a more scientific bent. Does diving on the wreck increase its rate of decay by a large %? My hypothesis is that it does due to several factors, one of which may sound a little strange. Here are the factors I see:
1. Divers knocking around int he structure, prying things loose or cutting holes.
2. Increased water movement through the wreck which may cause protective layers of sediment or coral/animal growth to be dislodged.
3. Air/Nitrox/trimix bubles percolating through the wreck which cause exposure of the metal to higher oxygen concentrations that the surrounding water. This could lead to increased oxidation rates for some metals.

I may be totally off base with the above, but it seems to make sense to me. It seems that the Lusitania and Britannic, both of which sank well before the Doria, are in much better shape that the Doria. The Doria used more modern materials and shipbuilding techniques which should have made it stronger and more resistant, yet it seems to be decomposing much more rapidly than the other ships. I know the Doria is in shallower water, but the differences seem to be much greater than they should be.

The Lusitania is in poor shape as well, far worse than the Andrea Doria as it has almost totally collapsed along its beam spilling the decks out onto the sea floor. The Andrea Doria, Britanic, and Lusitania are all on their sides which puts stresses on the ships that they were never designed to experience. However the Andrea Doria and Lusitania are also both in areas where they are subjected to fishing nets being drug over them doing far more damage to the wrecks than even regular visits by divers.

The Britannic is substantially deeper and in shipping lane where fishing would be unlikely. In general, deeper water has lower o2 levels but there are a lot of other confouding variables that affect o2 content in a specific location. Things like water temperature, salinity, currents, the composition of the silt/seabed, and the presence of major storms in the area also have a major impact on how fast a wreck corrodes and deteriorate.

The Andrea Doria is exposed to substantial currents, is well oxygenated with relatively warm water and exposed to substantial storms and the deep surge that can accompany them on a regular basis. It's in a bad spot to pick if you are a ship looking for a final resting place.

I am also not sure on the construction particulars, but in general, things were over engineered early in the 20th century simply because engineers did not have the experience in metalurgy or the computing power to do as accurate a job of stress analysis and consequently overbuilt their designs. Ships built later in the century were more likley to be adequately strong but not overbuilt.

It was also a British practice to design pre-WWI liners as auxillary cruisers with the ability to mount medium sized guns. The Lusitania was designed to mount twelve 6" quick firing guns and required additional structure to support the gun mounts. (The tactical philosophy of using an unarmored ship in a warship role was a real bust and the practice was not long lived.) I am not sure about the Britannic, but it seems probable that it was built with similar capabilities and similar reinforcement.

 

[WreckWriter]

The Lusitania is in poor shape as well..........(snip)

Excellent explanation! Right on the money!

WW

 

[flw]

Does anyone know what the legal status of diving on the Britannic is? Last I heard you could only dive there for approved research purposes and had to get approval from the owner (I forget his name, but he is an older gentleman) and the Greek government. I would love to dive the wreck sometime (in 5 years or so when I have the dives and experience).

It does have to be and approved expedition, organised well in advance and the required permits are not easy to come by. My buddy was on this years expedition there, and although it had been 2 years in the planning, they still lost a couple of days while legalities were sorted out. I think the film is due on discovery sometime early in the new year.
As far as I'm aware, the only recent permits were 97, Kevin Gurr, 98 Starfish,99 Gue and this year Starfish.

 

[yhuubert]

But, you can dive the Estonia right - you just can't return to one of the ports? I thought people dove here quite a bit? I remember something in "Immersed" about her a few years ago.

The only diving expedition that I know of (after the official accident research) has been by Gregg Bemis:

http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp?id=20000822xx18
http://www.divernet.com/news/items/estonia140900.htm
http://www.divernet.com/news/items/bemis220701.htm

JK

 

[mempilot]

You know what's sad (metaphorically speaking of course, because I don't wish tragedy on anyone) is that with all the modern technology keeping ships aware from each other and out of wx, there may not be any more new victims sent to the bottom for us to explore. After these ladies of the sea are reduced to rubble, the age of exploration on historical shipwrecks will all but come to an end. Sure, there will be the artifical reef program, small pleasure boat accidents, and a few remote location shipwrecks, but there is no job security in shipwreck investigation.

I wish I had gotten into this 20 years ago before the 'currents of time' and the laws of man had made this such a difficult adventure. Oh ya, I guess it is a difficult adventure for a whole other set of reasons.

I envy those of you who pioneered the way. I feel sad for those yet to be born divers who will have very little to see other than the 'petting zoo' ships sunk for reefs.

Now where are my fins, I have some diving to do....