[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Complaints about submersibles visiting the Titanic
Hi all, been away for a long time but just catching up on some of the latest
posts.
though i would throw my tuppence worth in before this link dies...
almost 20 years ago Ballard discovered the titanic's resting place and
through stupidity (for want of a better word)he didn't claim salvage rights
to the wreck. obviously this enabled others to exploit the wreck.
It is my belief that, as ballard stated we should be able to look but not
touch.
it is a great feat of modern engineering that we can go that deep at all but
in the end if the wreck is going to fall to pieces soon anyway, why
shouldn't people be able to see 1st hand although the pillaging of the wreck
and landing on it's deck is unforgivable, it is still a grave site afterall.
Personally it tops my ambition list, closely followed by piloting a sub to
the wreck of the Britannic.
strange that everybody seems to forget the sister ships.
I saw a presentation a while back about a group of technical divers who
dived the Britannic.
An almost identical ship in better condition. 2 mins on the wreck and 7
hours decompression make it a little difficult for regular diving but
wouldn't it be a better option for the archaeologists to study?
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
[mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org]On Behalf Of Erik Muller
Sent: 16 November 2004 10:39
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Complaints about submersibles visiting the
Titanic
People who vandalize, and people who let people vandalize, don't have
rights to monuments.
I personally don't feel that the titanic falls under this category, but
there are plenty who do.
The bottom line: people who can't appreciate it dont get to see it.
deal.
Coalbunny wrote:
> Did you know that if we did exactly what most arceologists I know
> wanted us to do, we wouldn't have any use of public lands. Because of
> the multitude of potential dig sites, and the multitude of current
> sites that are constantly vandalized. In essence we should lose our
> rights in order to protect some goon's occupation or hobby.
>
> It doesn't matter if it's underwater or on dry land- in America if
> it's older than 50 years, even mere garbage is considered historic-
> history is all around us and there is no way we can successfully
> protect all of it. There will always be morons that steal, vandalize,
> and what have you. And it's not right to place restrictions on the
> majority because of the acts of a very very few.
> Carl
>
>
> Steven Mills wrote:
>
>>
>> Carsten,
>>
>> On the whole, I do not disagree with you. However,
>> in a broader sense, how will this affect us
>> civilian-builders-explorers in the future. There
>> is a public perception out there that we are 'nuts'
>> [ and perhaps we are : )) ] and also we are
>> perceived as a liability and safety risk. The
>> Reuters' article doesn't help the general sub-
>> builders community.
>>
>> On another note. I have come across papers
>> [ which I haven't organized or posted yet ] on
>> archaeological forensics. With the new analysis
>> software and current computer technology, it's
>> amazing what can be reconstructed from a few
>> artifacts and a debris field from an ancient
>> wreck, which, in some instances, does not have
>> archival data, blueprints...etc., to lend
>> historical support. At least, in this case, these
>> sites should not be disturbed..."hands-off"..*until*
>> the site has been thoroughly researched, documented
>> and reconstructed.
>>
>> There is also group of archaeologist [ albeit small for now ]
>> whose primary study and research are the time-degradation
>> effects of shipwrecks. Some of the conditions can be
>> recreated in a laboratory, but the random effects of
>> underwater meteorlogy and environmental changes cannot
>> be modelled or predicted with accuracy.
>>
>> Nonetheless, our concern should be how restrictive will
>> it become for us with future legislation.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> --Steve
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:43:34 +0100, Carsten Standfuss
>> <MerlinSub@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Ian, my fife cents - Titanic is made from mild steel and will be
>>> gone in
>>> 50-100 years completly - with or without submersibles..
>>>
>>> Better they visit them now and so often they can - make pictures,
>>> videos
>>> and raise something for public museum porpose before she is a debris
>>> field of flat plates.
>>>
>>> I can not believe that a submersible touch the deck with almost zero
>>> bouancy can badly damage a stable wreck - and a unstable wreck will go
>>> in a couple of years anyway.
>>>
>>> In the baltic sea - now virtual every wreck in german waters is protect
>>> by law for archelogical reason - even the newer ones.. :-0
>>>
>>> I don't agree that wrecks of ships were we have all informations from -
>>> including the logs, blueprints, building pictures, private and offical
>>> reports should be special protect - there is no lost information on
>>> board of the Titanic make it worth to special-protect this wreck so
>>> that
>>> only siencetific can visit here. Its great history for shure - but a
>>> archelogical site ?
>>> We can build them new if somebody pay the bill - up to the last rived.
>>>
>>> best regards Carsten
>>>
>>> Ian Roxborough schrieb:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not good news for submarsibles/p-subs in general:
>>>>
http://reuters.excite.com/article/20041115/2004-11-15T140317Z_01_N14187528_R
TRIDST_0_ODD-SCIENCE-TITANIC-DC.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Although must of people on the list won't get a drive a submarine
>>>> to see the Titanic, this is a high profile monument and when people
>>>> claim that it's damaged by submersibles, it gives all submersibles
>>>> a bad name...
>>>>
>>>> Ian.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ************************************************************************
>> ************************************************************************
>> ************************************************************************
>> The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal
>> CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database
>> because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages
>> from our organization.
>>
>> If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
>> link below or send a blank email message to:
>> removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
>>
>> Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an
>> automated process and should be complete within five minutes of receipt
>> of your request.
>>
>> mailto:removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
>>
>> PSUBS.ORG
>> PO Box 311
>> Weare, NH 03281
>> 603-529-1100
>> ************************************************************************
>> ************************************************************************
>> ************************************************************************
>>
>>
>
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal
CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database
because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages
from our organization.
If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
link below or send a blank email message to:
removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an
automated process and should be complete within five minutes of receipt
of your request.
mailto:removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
PSUBS.ORG
PO Box 311
Weare, NH 03281
603-529-1100
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.3 - Release Date: 26/11/2004
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.3 - Release Date: 26/11/2004
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal
CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database
because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages
from our organization.
If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
link below or send a blank email message to:
removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an
automated process and should be complete within five minutes of receipt
of your request.
mailto:removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
PSUBS.ORG
PO Box 311
Weare, NH 03281
603-529-1100
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************