The Great Travis Traverse

[mkiiisupra89]

If survey data is accurate as far as heading/depth I can easily create a 3D map of the line from the data.

That is a goal. I want to work out accurate underwater survey techniques. I know, I could take a class, but what fun is that!

Also, that suggests a possible research application of this project. If, in a few locations we can sink stakes to hard bottom or rock (could be a LONG way) we can accurately track how fast silt is accumulating over a year or 2. If someone cared, divers could maintain the line and continue the measurements in the future. Since silting of man made damns is a relatively hot topic in the damn world, I wonder if someone at the USGS might be interested in the data? I'll have to email a friend there and ask.

 

[LVX]

There is another possibility! I've got a welder (as I'm sure many people here do). With some rebar (cheap) and some scrap 1" or 2" flat plat (also cheap) and an afternoon we could make something as good or better. Maybe just use them every other or every 4th spot. In any case, that would be simple. And even if the cost 2 or 3 bucks, that is reasonable.

So, who in Houston has a welder? I've got to borrow my dads (3 hours away)? I've got a chop saw if you don't (although, if you have a welder, I'm guessing you have a chop saw).

Now you are thinking.... we have done that as well.

 

[tlessard]

Check the aerial (photo 4)...the line team will hit the opposite former river bank well before they play out the remainder of a mile of line. I would suspect you were very close @ 500ft out. You'll then have what I would guesstimate to be about a 20-70ft rise in depth...then a very gradual slope up to the west bank...

 

[mkiiisupra89]

Check the aerial (photo 4)...the line team will hit the opposite former river bank well before they play out the remainder of a mile of line. I would suspect you were very close @ 500ft out. You'll then have what I would guesstimate to be about a 20-70ft rise in depth...then a very gradual slope up to the west bank...

My estimates from topo maps were about 500 in the river bed, so that seems reasonable. I plan on running line on the other side until whatever depth we decide is a reasonable stopping point. Probably 40' below conservation pool as it would still have been submerged last yet (barely).

 

[mkiiisupra89]

... You'll then have what I would guesstimate to be about a 20-70ft rise in depth...then a very gradual slope up to the west bank...

So the profile is going to be 160' for 20m + 90' for 20m + 70' for 20m + 50' for 20m + considerable deco the rest of the way (and probably before that - I'll have to run it on VPlanner at some point).

 

[FIXXERVI6]

So the profile is going to be 160' for 20m + 90' for 20m + 70' for 20m + 50' for 20m + considerable deco the rest of the way (and probably before that - I'll have to run it on VPlanner at some point).

I was seeing depths of 168 feet on the line last time I was out there (last weekend)

 

[LVX]

Sorry, wrong area. I edited it out....

 

[mkiiisupra89]

I was seeing depths of 168 feet on the line last time I was out there (last weekend)

I hit 163 last time, but I was skimming the bottom. Assuming 10+ feet of vis, at least for planning 160 is probably reasonable. When I do the traverse I can tell you, I'm NOT going to be doing my normal "watch me not silt 1/2" from the bottom" routine.

Who knows... The lake may be 10' higher or 10'(40') lower then also

 

[tlessard]

I was seeing depths of 168 feet on the line last time I was out there (last weekend)

Yep, I think the lake is about 5ft overfull right now...my depth showed 169ft when I dropped it to the silt layer. That's 174ffw...

 

[texdiveguy]

Yep, I think the lake is about 5ft overfull right now...my depth showed 169ft when I dropped it to the silt layer. That's 174ffw...

Were you diving mix as a bg....?