Bob3
Contributor
I hope they have a decent engineer & crew do the scutteling, that puppy isn't going to roll back over easily. :tease:
Oriskany Vote Taken - Pensacola!
- Thread starter Genesis
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Man... ain't that the truth Bob, I didn't fully realize how much of a difference the angle a wreck sits at makes until I dove the Grove... I'd rather do the Duane anyday (although that could also be because of the size).
Hey Karl, will you let me on your boat even if I'm not DIR? :ducks:
Ben
Hey Karl, will you let me on your boat even if I'm not DIR? :ducks:
Ben
OBG, I ain't DIR either, and DIR divers would have some problems on my boat, since they'd have to BYOB (buddy, not beer!) as I doubt they could find anyone on the boat to buddy with.
Most of us just splash when we want to, dive as we want to, and climb aboard when we're done
Yeah, come on up when the carrier is down and ready.
One only hopes they "get it right" and sink her upright this time.
Most of us just splash when we want to, dive as we want to, and climb aboard when we're done
Yeah, come on up when the carrier is down and ready.
One only hopes they "get it right" and sink her upright this time.
Alright man, I'm going to hold you to that.
If it does end up in P-cola I wonder who they're (who is "they" anyway?) are going to hire to do it, I thought the Miami Bomb Squad put down the Grove and one other ship (Bibb?). Honestly, putting something as big as the Grove down correctly would be hard enough, I can't imagine what a Carrier will be like, but I'd bet if it did turtle it'd be more of a flop (haha) than the Grove.
Ben
If it does end up in P-cola I wonder who they're (who is "they" anyway?) are going to hire to do it, I thought the Miami Bomb Squad put down the Grove and one other ship (Bibb?). Honestly, putting something as big as the Grove down correctly would be hard enough, I can't imagine what a Carrier will be like, but I'd bet if it did turtle it'd be more of a flop (haha) than the Grove.
Ben
I hope that whoever sinks the Oriskany, gets it right. The Grove is OK, but I hate that she's laying on her side. If upright, I think she would be a much better dive. I also think the Duane is a better dive I will dive the Oriskany wherever it's put down, the only other carrier I know of one can dive is the Saratoga in Bikini Lagoon. I going to do that dive in the next couple of years, but the Oriskany will do for now, after all, it has some history behind it also. :tree: Bob
As much as I'd like to see it settle upright (in Pennsicola) of course, I'm thinking that the way the deck is so wide it would have to lean to the side. I hope not, but however she ends up sitting, it should be a GREAT dive
I think it goes without saying that they hope to scuttle her upright. Sure would be sweet! As for the ride out........average ride to a New Jersey wreck is 1.5- 2 hr ride plus. I'd get spoiled with anything shorter !! LOL!
aue-mike
Contributor
Hi Genesis-
While there was definitely some interesting politics going on, I am fairly certain that the siting of the carrier off Pensacola is not the best option for divers. The Escambia crew basically washed their hands of the diving aspects for the carrier, and are pushing this as an artificial reef for fishing. They could care less about divers, and instead only see the carrier as a red snapper producing machine for their fishing community. They contorted DAN data in regards to safety, and did not mention that some of the local charter vessels only have a 20-mile ticket, and thus could not currently run to the site, which is 23 miles from Pensacola Pass, and 33 miles from Destin Pass. Having conducted some very remote dives, some as far as 140 miles offshore, the siting off Pensacola does not bother me personally in the least. However, your average diver, or novice diver, will be impacted by the roughly two-hour trip, especially on a slow, rolling cattle boat. What bothers me is the lack of good charter operations in the area.
Having tried to charter numerous boats to conduct dives off the Panhandle, it is obvious that the infrastructure is not very strong, and the dive operations not very receptive to modern diving practices (i.e., technical diving). In fact, one operation basically stated at the FMRI meeting that they would limit divers to 100fsw and keep divers on the carrier island.
South Florida should not necessarily be penalized by having more artificial reefs because they have active reefing programs. In fact, because there are other artificial reefs in the vicinity of the proposed SFL sinking location, it would minimize user conflict with fishermen. Not so for the Pensacola site, and I would expect some serious issues up there. In fact, one of the commissioners stated that "he is tired of seeing divers get all these reefs" and that fisherman pay for licenses while divers don't pay for anything! Expanding on the commissioners, the vote was 4-2; guess where the 4 commissioners that voted for NW Florida hail from...
The bottom line is the commission should have decided what the most important goal of this reef would be -- fishing or diving. If they had done that, the decision would have been simple. Further, if they made the decision to base it on economics, it would have also been simple, as placing it off SFL would have massive economic benefits versus the limited benefits it will produce for SFL. Regarding maritime history -- why does proximity play a role in promoting maritime history? I am sympathetic to Pensacola and the rich heritage it has. However, I would counter that if you really want to educate the public, or for people to learn about the ORISKANY and naval aviation, placing it off SFL would have a much larger impact. With exponentially more divers visiting her off SFl versus NWFL, more people would learn about the vessel and USN aviation. Do you think a fisherman really cares about what they are fishing on as long as it produces fish?
Regardless, this will be the most accessible aircraft carrier dive in the world. It is a shame that the big picture was not looked at, instead of everyone trying to protect their own regional interests.
While there was definitely some interesting politics going on, I am fairly certain that the siting of the carrier off Pensacola is not the best option for divers. The Escambia crew basically washed their hands of the diving aspects for the carrier, and are pushing this as an artificial reef for fishing. They could care less about divers, and instead only see the carrier as a red snapper producing machine for their fishing community. They contorted DAN data in regards to safety, and did not mention that some of the local charter vessels only have a 20-mile ticket, and thus could not currently run to the site, which is 23 miles from Pensacola Pass, and 33 miles from Destin Pass. Having conducted some very remote dives, some as far as 140 miles offshore, the siting off Pensacola does not bother me personally in the least. However, your average diver, or novice diver, will be impacted by the roughly two-hour trip, especially on a slow, rolling cattle boat. What bothers me is the lack of good charter operations in the area.
Having tried to charter numerous boats to conduct dives off the Panhandle, it is obvious that the infrastructure is not very strong, and the dive operations not very receptive to modern diving practices (i.e., technical diving). In fact, one operation basically stated at the FMRI meeting that they would limit divers to 100fsw and keep divers on the carrier island.
South Florida should not necessarily be penalized by having more artificial reefs because they have active reefing programs. In fact, because there are other artificial reefs in the vicinity of the proposed SFL sinking location, it would minimize user conflict with fishermen. Not so for the Pensacola site, and I would expect some serious issues up there. In fact, one of the commissioners stated that "he is tired of seeing divers get all these reefs" and that fisherman pay for licenses while divers don't pay for anything! Expanding on the commissioners, the vote was 4-2; guess where the 4 commissioners that voted for NW Florida hail from...
The bottom line is the commission should have decided what the most important goal of this reef would be -- fishing or diving. If they had done that, the decision would have been simple. Further, if they made the decision to base it on economics, it would have also been simple, as placing it off SFL would have massive economic benefits versus the limited benefits it will produce for SFL. Regarding maritime history -- why does proximity play a role in promoting maritime history? I am sympathetic to Pensacola and the rich heritage it has. However, I would counter that if you really want to educate the public, or for people to learn about the ORISKANY and naval aviation, placing it off SFL would have a much larger impact. With exponentially more divers visiting her off SFl versus NWFL, more people would learn about the vessel and USN aviation. Do you think a fisherman really cares about what they are fishing on as long as it produces fish?
Regardless, this will be the most accessible aircraft carrier dive in the world. It is a shame that the big picture was not looked at, instead of everyone trying to protect their own regional interests.
Similar threads
