Karl_in_Calif
Banned
270 ft is definitely too deep to dive it solo.
You have to draw the line somewhere.
UB-88 found-Dive Report
- Thread starter Kendall Raine
- 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
270 ft is definitely too deep to dive it solo.
You have to draw the line somewhere.
OP
Kendall Raine
Contributor
Otter;
I understand your perspective. Here are some thoughts.
1. The location isn't mine to disclose. I didn't find the wreck, as the website makes clear, and my participation on this, and other projects past and, hopefully, future, is conditioned on my promise to keep my yap shut.
2. As Rich has pointed out, there are hazards known and surmised about this wreck. While disclosing the location may not generate legal liability to the team, none of us wants to see anyone get hurt, much less in connection with any action on our part. I have done body recoveries and it's no fun.
3. We are at the early stages of documenting the wreck. Crowbars, Broco's and power tools often interfere with that process. There are those who would be more than happy to rip everything possible off the thing and stuff it in their garage. We believe that allowing the documentation process to continue undisturbed will allow far more people to enjoy the wreck through photographs and video than if we were to disclose its location and see it picked apart.
4. As for sharing the facts of discovery and documentary work without going all the way and disclosing the location, many people are interested in this stuff. I like reading about dives in Wakulla even though, not being a member of WKPP, I can't dive there. "See what I found but you can't have any" isn't the motivation. If you knew me you would know that. Since you don't you'll either take my word for it or you won't.
These points drive from philosophical perspective. They are what they are and there's not much utility in debate, at least with me. I hope this answers your question.
I understand your perspective. Here are some thoughts.
1. The location isn't mine to disclose. I didn't find the wreck, as the website makes clear, and my participation on this, and other projects past and, hopefully, future, is conditioned on my promise to keep my yap shut.
2. As Rich has pointed out, there are hazards known and surmised about this wreck. While disclosing the location may not generate legal liability to the team, none of us wants to see anyone get hurt, much less in connection with any action on our part. I have done body recoveries and it's no fun.
3. We are at the early stages of documenting the wreck. Crowbars, Broco's and power tools often interfere with that process. There are those who would be more than happy to rip everything possible off the thing and stuff it in their garage. We believe that allowing the documentation process to continue undisturbed will allow far more people to enjoy the wreck through photographs and video than if we were to disclose its location and see it picked apart.
4. As for sharing the facts of discovery and documentary work without going all the way and disclosing the location, many people are interested in this stuff. I like reading about dives in Wakulla even though, not being a member of WKPP, I can't dive there. "See what I found but you can't have any" isn't the motivation. If you knew me you would know that. Since you don't you'll either take my word for it or you won't.
These points drive from philosophical perspective. They are what they are and there's not much utility in debate, at least with me. I hope this answers your question.
270 ft Solo........hmmm sounds fun.....:egrin:
Aw heck, I'm just jealous, plain and simple. But of course the ordinance thing has something to do with it (on the surface). I'm not sure if it was always the concern with the "stuff" off the East coast??
Also you just KNOW every Amerrrricun wants to pillage the thing to nothingness......(And a few Canadians I know of
)
The history thing only goes so far, and I suspect a few have used that arguement to further their own exclusiveness to the wreck. (I'm thinking of a specific Canadian waters wreck) I truly think the guy did squat for 6 years before "we" got access to it.
It will be found out soon enough.
And then it will be.............
Let the pillaging begin
Aw heck, I'm just jealous, plain and simple. But of course the ordinance thing has something to do with it (on the surface). I'm not sure if it was always the concern with the "stuff" off the East coast??
Also you just KNOW every Amerrrricun wants to pillage the thing to nothingness......(And a few Canadians I know of
)The history thing only goes so far, and I suspect a few have used that arguement to further their own exclusiveness to the wreck. (I'm thinking of a specific Canadian waters wreck) I truly think the guy did squat for 6 years before "we" got access to it.
It will be found out soon enough.
And then it will be.............
Let the pillaging begin I am a pillager.
I have found a few small wrecks in my short time, nothing as significant as a u-boat though. I would never tell a soul about my wreck until I found anything I believed was significant like plaques or bells I understand where you all are coming from.
I have found a few small wrecks in my short time, nothing as significant as a u-boat though. I would never tell a soul about my wreck until I found anything I believed was significant like plaques or bells I understand where you all are coming from.
I understand 1, 3 and 4. I am a proponet of Darwin and figure that if one is STUPID enough to do things like that, one deserves what once gets......but I certainly understand your desire not to be party to it. I guess in retrospect, I really didn't think that #3 would be a REAL concern....but then I read the posts following yours and have decided that I was being naive.
Since I didn't say it before, and should have, thanks for the post and the website, it would have been a shame to not know about the find and not get a peek.
RichLockyer
Guest
Unfortunately, when the moron blows himself up, he's going to take half the wreck with him, which brings us back to #3.
RichLockyer
Guest
BTW: Good presentation tonight Kendall!
Let's go do the dive on air and see how cool the growth looks
Let's go do the dive on air and see how cool the growth looks
True. But from a very selfish perspective, its a little like the "..if a tree falls the in woods" scenario or the constant balance trying to be achieved in the National Park Systems -- the best way to ensure that the Parks will be around for future generations is to not let anyone use them...but then again, why do we have National Parks?
I really do understand, maybe I am just singing the blues because I live on the West Coast and would like to be able to see it...not that I would do that anytime soon because (1) I am not a trained and (2) I am not a moron (although my teenage son may have a different opinion of me).
Cheers
OP
Kendall Raine
Contributor
Otter;
Have you checked out the website? We really tried to make it worth a visit. People seem to think so. 33,000 hits in first 48 hours.
Have you checked out the website? We really tried to make it worth a visit. People seem to think so. 33,000 hits in first 48 hours.
Oh yes....I am sure many of those 33K hits are mine
Similar threads
