wreck penetrable or not????

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by MHK on August 02, 2000 at 16:07:07:

In Reply to: Re: CLOSE CALL ON YUKON posted by JR Gordon on August 02, 2000 at 13:27:31:

I agree that while the intention was to have a *diver friendly* wreck, the positioning of the wreck does provide for a less than friendly experience. Now that being said, I still believe this wreck can be dove without getting people killed. And it seems to me that there is going to be a somewhat added burden on the shops/boats that provide access to this wreck. Sadly, boats/shops often times need to fill the boat and thus may, on occasion, allow a less than qualified diver to make up the shortfall. This could result in a very dangerous precedent.

The intention of this wreck was to complimemt wreck alley, increase business [ and conversely diver's ] but things did not go acording to plan. It is therefore incumbant upon the boats/shops that will benefit from this wreck to resist temptation, restrict access and turn a negative into a positive.

I suggest that rather than view this wreck as an * everybody can dive it wreck*, that they promote this as a wreck that after appropriate training is a wreck that you can build up too..

While clearly this wreck isn't the magnatude of a Andrea Doria, Lusitania, Britanic or Empress of Ireland it does nonetheless present a challenging dive that should be approached in such a fashion.

Nitrox should be used, lines should be used, NO solo diving should be allowed, advanced or overhead certifications should be required and the less is more mentality should be adopted. If that means that they need to charge more and be more selective in there approach so be it. It does not mean they should charge more and take any Tom, Dick or Harry with a C-card.

I recognize that shops/boats need to run at profit levels but there needs to be a balance before we wind up with some bullshit government intervention or oversight..

In terms of permanent safety bottles I would argue against it. In many respect I share Terry's view. I believe than it would be too easy for someone to rely more on safety bottles and less on pre-dive planning. Anyone going inot this wreck without an understanding of the rule of thirds is asking for trouble. Without a proper mind set they should stay off the wreck.

In comparison, my [ aborted ] trip to the Andrea Doria last week I did plan on leaving 2 safety bottles and a permanent line in the wreck for the duration of our time there. My decision was based on several factors, including the fact that I had a very experienced team with me that I was comfortable with and that I was well aware would not have planned on using the safeties in any other cirucmstances but for a real emergency. Moreover, the Andrea Doria sits in 240', is sunstantially larger, has limited exit and entry points, has a long history of divers getting disoriented and dieing. Furthermore, I had a difficult time with the captain about my decision to run my trip, my way. We were [ save for John Delaney ;-) ] all DIR compliant and were determined to run our trip according to our protocol.. But as a permanent practice respecting the Yukon I still have some reservations. I would prefer to see the bar get raised in terms of access and not helping otherwise unqualified divers gain access to a situation that they should not attempt.


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]