No Oriskany this summer

[Tom Smedley]

Well - any time that the government gets involved in something it turns out to cost ten times more and takes ten times longer than it would otherwise. We have to realize that - in the words of Shrimp Boat Hodagg - "The only solution for pollution is dilution." But that doesn't suit the agenda of the beauracrat.

If another Ivan comes this summer she might be a permanent fixture of historic Palifox Street. Then what?

This reminds me of the ship that a typhoon put ashore on popular Gab-Gab beach in Guam. It sat there until the coral started to grow on the hull because some salvage company in Hawaii claimed it. Finally the Navy brought in one of those huge salvage ships that just knelt down and picked the hull up. They claimed to be carrying it to its rightful owner in Hawaii but somehow dropped it right in the middle of the Marianna Trench. Then they sent the "rightful owners" a message that included the coordinates of the "accident" and told them that they were welcome to come try and salvage it.

The Mighty O served her country proudly and effectively. Now is the time to lay her to rest with dignity. She's here - she's ready - just sink the dang thing.

 

[darcy]

They (the coast guard) approved it because in high winds hurricane force (120+ mph) the ship could break free of the pier and crash into other piers or vessles, or flip, etc. Or it could break free and "wander" into the main channel of the port, sink and block the channel.

The coast guard has authority over the port for such decisions that might be saftey concerns.

I understand why they would want to secure the ship, I wondered HOW they would secure it. If there was a hurricane coming do they keep the ships in port or take them out to sea?

SBM I hope for you It "wanders" slightly off shore!

 

[mike_s]

I understand why they would want to secure the ship, I wondered HOW they would secure it. If there was a hurricane coming do they keep the ships in port or take them out to sea?

SBM I hope for you It "wanders" slightly off shore!

Typically, during a hurricane, the US Navy will put it's ships out to sea to "escape" the worst of the storm and to ride it out at sea.

However in this case, the Oriskany isn't in any condidtion to "go to sea". It was towed from texas by a sea going tug and pushed in place by other tugs. It doesn't have a working propulsion system, saftey systems, etc. Heck the toliets most likely don't even work. So she'll stay in port. They just don't want it to damage the port or sink in place.

If this was going to be her permanent home (at the pier), they would most likely take steps to secure it permantely like they have with other ships. For example to help hurricane-proof the USS Alabama, which is permantly moored in Mobile, the ship was "run aground" in high tide until she stopped. Then they pumped sand all around the hull. The water depth around the ship is only 4 to 6 feet in some places instead of 20+ feet of draft the boat has.

 

[deepstops]

They would partially sink it at the dock and refloat it once the 'cane has passed. They already have the procedures drawn up (so I'm told).

 

[jlayman800]

Does this really surprise anyone?? It would have been cheaper to "accidentally" sink her & pay the stupid fines than to go thru the stupid EPA red tape BS. ... Check you common sense at the door, the government is here to protect us from ourselves.

I have never been for sinking it in 212 feet of water, as planned. Too many people are going to die being stupid. Maybe the government means for it to "accidently" break free from the peir and sink a little way off shore. That would be my preference. Sink her in 80 feet of water with a bunch of the superstructure sticking out of the water for us to tie up to. Now that would be a good dive spot. Ever hear ot the Boston Tea Party. Meet you in Pensacola tomorrow afternoon. I'll bring the axe for the lines and you all bring some boats to tow her out to sea. [For the stupid-***** government worker reading this, I'm just jokeing] With the deck at 110 feet, I'm not going anyway.

 

[mike_s]

I have never been for sinking it in 212 feet of water, as planned. Too many people are going to die being stupid. Maybe the government means for it to "accidently" break free from the peir and sink a little way off shore. That would be my preference. Sink her in 80 feet of water with a bunch of the superstructure sticking out of the water for us to tie up to. Now that would be a good dive spot. Ever hear ot the Boston Tea Party. Meet you in Pensacola tomorrow afternoon. I'll bring the axe for the lines and you all bring some boats to tow her out to sea. [For the stupid-***** government worker reading this, I'm just jokeing] With the deck at 110 feet, I'm not going anyway.

While they might be telling about the fact you can dive it, this wreck isn't being sunk for divers... it's being sunk for fishermen. Destin (and Pensacola) isn't a huge diving destination, but it is a huge fisherman and charterboat (fishing) destination. That's why it's being sunk. Divers don't "pay the bills" down there. Fishermen do. Fiherman charters outnumber dive charters at least 20 to 1 in that part of Florida.

Of course fishermen and dive boats usually don't get along, because they can't fish where they want when the dive flag is showing with divers-down. So how do you keep divers from staying on it "24 hours a day" since it's the next "big new wreck?"
you sink it where most divers can't dive on it. 212 feet of water.

sucks, but that's the way it is....

 

[SuPrBuGmAn]

The way I understand it, they are sinking it at 212' so the superstructure doesn't come within like 50-60' of the surface, which is some navigational hazard or something...

What has a 50' draft? No idea...

 

[mike_s]

The way I understand it, they are sinking it at 212' so the superstructure doesn't come within like 50-60' of the surface, which is some navigational hazard or something...

What has a 50' draft? No idea...

The permit they got requires either 60 or 65 feet (I can't remember which) clearance in order to sink it. That is one of the major reasons they had to sink it that deep. They did remove the mast and part of the tower in order to clear that also. IF they had left it in place (the mast, etc) then the boat would have stuck up out of the water. I think it's overall height from keel to top was something like 235 feet.
I've got an email somewhere from the person who got the permit who told me the depth required, etc...

The only way you could sink it shallower and meet the requirements of the permit would most likely be to sink it on it's side, which even then might require the removal of the angled flight deck. If we want to sink it on it's side, the Keys already has a group of people trained to do that.

I still think though that it's being sunk more for fisherman than divers, but if they sunk it off Miami or Key Largo, I don't think they could go much shallower. It's just too darn big. (or they would have to remove the entire tower superstructure almost).

 

[deepstops]

The way I understand it, they are sinking it at 212' so the superstructure doesn't come within like 50-60' of the surface, which is some navigational hazard or something...

What has a 50' draft? No idea...

Supertankers carry up to an 80' draft.
http://seagoing.narod.ru/html/descript.html

 

[mike_s]

Supertankers carry up to an 80' draft.
http://seagoing.narod.ru/html/descript.html

A guarentee you that a tanker with a draft that deep will pay close attention of the depth of the water they are in and any noted "underwater obstructions" noted on the charts.

NOAA does bottom scanning of the sea floor to make charts and notes an object and it's depth on charts. They assign each obstruction a number and put it in a database. There is even an online version of the database on NOAA's website that we on land can search for obstruction and find out information about it like what it is. It's pretty interestging to look at.


Looking at the URL you posted above. I noticed a ship that big only had one screw. (Is that typical?).

also interesting is any vessel that measures it's fuel consumption in mt/day (metric tons per day)

T