Wrecks

[gcbryan]

The recent post regarding an attempt on the Governor left me wanting more...

I read several comments stating something to the effect that diving the Capilano was a great experience. Granted I'm not all that into wrecks but I can appreciate that it might be more interesting to dive an actual wreck rather than one sunk as an artificial reef but can those of you who have done more of the wrecks in the PNW post basic info and why you liked one vs the other?

In particular since I have done the Capilano and didn't find it particularly impressive...what am I missing? Granted, it's been awhile since I read the history of the Capilano.

Also, for what it's worth (not much) I do find the trip reports which involve technical diving to be much more interesting than posts involving the process/procedures/equipment of technical diving.

[spatman]

aside from the Honey Bear and the cruiser at Three Tree, i haven't dived any wrecks, but scott boyd has compiled an excellent website as well as a book on PNW wrecks.

[Pez7378]

From my limited experience with wrecks (All recreational) it makes no difference to me if it is artificially placed, or not. My first real wreck was the Cape Breton, then the Saskatchewan. Both were sunk by the ARSBC and they were very impressive wrecks to dive.

As far as wrecks with some historical significance, I've dived some WWII Wrecks in Coron Philippines. They were interesting in the sense that you could actually see the damage to the structure by the bombs, and the explosions, and there was still some cargo in the holds. Reading about how they got there, and the history behind the attack was exciting, but it didn't really have the WOW factor I thought it would. Perhaps it was the crappy visibility, perhaps I was just too overwhelmed to really focus on what I was seeing.

For me, what I like is the ability to actually see the wreck, and have a clear vision of how it rests on the bottom, and what it might have looked like on the surface. Canada provided that kind of visibility for the Sas. and the CB. Coron did not for the 8 or so ships I saw.

[LCF]

I have found that diving wrecks with a history makes it more interesting, although I'm still far more interested in what lives on or in them than in the wreck itself. It doesn't help that I don't know enough about ships to recognize what the parts are I'm looking at, unless they are large guns . . .

[Maverick]

It doesn't help that I don't know enough about ships to recognize what the parts are I'm looking at, unless they are large guns . . .

Or a deck, railing, mask, window, port hole, cabin, steering wheel, cleat, anchor, chain, Bow, stern, dishes, silverware, wine bottles, brass, etc. . . . .

[rjw]

scott boyd has compiled an excellent website as well as a book on PNW wrecks.

This along with Dan Warter's site http://www.dcsfilms.com/Site_4/DCS_Website.html
Both sites have excellent historical info.

[Raydar]

The recent post regarding an attempt on the Governor left me wanting more...

I read several comments stating something to the effect that diving the Capilano was a great experience. Granted I'm not all that into wrecks but I can appreciate that it might be more interesting to dive an actual wreck rather than one sunk as an artificial reef but can those of you who have done more of the wrecks in the PNW post basic info and why you liked one vs the other?

In particular since I have done the Capilano and didn't find it particularly impressive...what am I missing? Granted, it's been awhile since I read the history of the Capilano.

What I liked about the Capilano was the great viz. Dropping down with the entire wreck opening up in front of me was incredible. Because it is wide open, it was fun to poke around inside and see if there was anything interesting. Then trying to visualize what it looked like back then.

What I like about 'natural' wrecks is that there is a human element to them. There is generally some sign that a real person was onboard that ship or plane. Something that personalizes the wreck. Peering through the window of the cockpit of the PB4Y and seeing a mapcase, for instance.

There is also a sense of 'wrongness', I suppose you could call it. Hard to describe, but the wreck isn't supposed to be down there, so that adds to the allure of the site.

I've done the Columbia in Campbell River a couple times and it doesn't do anything for me. Maybe it's too intact and as it breaks down it will become interesting. A large part of it is that it's too clean, too sterile. There's no human element. You don't see stuff laying around. There's no air of mystery.

A lot of the wrecks in Lake Washington were scuttled deliberately, but I still find them interesting. The Fresno is just a burned out hulk with ribs sticking up. Still was a fun exploratory dive. The Dawn is also fun.

*shrug* YMMV, TANSTAAFL, etc

[gcbryan]

The recent post regarding an attempt on the Governor left me wanting more...

I read several comments stating something to the effect that diving the Capilano was a great experience. Granted I'm not all that into wrecks but I can appreciate that it might be more interesting to dive an actual wreck rather than one sunk as an artificial reef but can those of you who have done more of the wrecks in the PNW post basic info and why you liked one vs the other?

In particular since I have done the Capilano and didn't find it particularly impressive...what am I missing? Granted, it's been awhile since I read the history of the Capilano.

What I liked about the Capilano was the great viz. Dropping down with the entire wreck opening up in front of me was incredible. Because it is wide open, it was fun to poke around inside and see if there was anything interesting. Then trying to visualize what it looked like back then.

What I like about 'natural' wrecks is that there is a human element to them. There is generally some sign that a real person was onboard that ship or plane. Something that personalizes the wreck. Peering through the window of the cockpit of the PB4Y and seeing a mapcase, for instance.

There is also a sense of 'wrongness', I suppose you could call it. Hard to describe, but the wreck isn't supposed to be down there, so that adds to the allure of the site.





I've done the Columbia in Campbell River a couple times and it doesn't do anything for me. Maybe it's too intact and as it breaks down it will become interesting. A large part of it is that it's too clean, too sterile. There's no human element. You don't see stuff laying around. There's no air of mystery.

A lot of the wrecks in Lake Washington were scuttled deliberately, but I still find them interesting. The Fresno is just a burned out hulk with ribs sticking up. Still was a fun exploratory dive. The Dawn is also fun.

*shrug* YMMV, TANSTAAFL, etc

Thanks for your perspective. Yes, the viz was great on the Capalano when I was there as well but what I remember most was the vix and 30 or so circling dogfish rather than the wreck! I can also see that looking in and seeing a map case would add more to a wreck. The wrecks at Nanaimo don't have any of that although there is quite a bit of life on the wrecks now.

Thanks for addressing the Capilano!

[BDub]

Ditto on the Capilano I. We had great vis, it was a "natural" wreck and had a great time scootering it. On our ascent we could still see it at our 70' stop. It made for an enjoyable ascent.

I've done all the articial reefs in BC, and I do enjoy them all. They are all impressive wrecks. However, to me, they're kind of like what Ray said....sterile. Lots of life, of course, but just too "clean".

The MV Gulfstream totally blew me away for a couple of reasons. First, it was a "natural" wreck, and it took a few lives with her, so there's the drama and history. Second, I really had no idea what to expect, and when we were descending, and she came in to view, the huge gash in her hull, where she hit Dinner Rock, was so violent. It really made you think and wonder about what happened that night. The chaos and tragedy.

Same with the U352 and the Papoose off North Carolina. You can't help but think about the events that sank them. While I did enjoy the Spar and the USS Aeolus (artifical reefs) they just didn't do the same for me as the U-boat and the Papoose.

Of course the articial reefs have a history as well, and I do find myself thinking about the history of them when I'm on them, but the natural wrecks are more "in your face". You can't help but think about their sinkings.

I also really enjoy the research aspect of it as well. Digging for information on its life, the events leading up to its sinking, the human element, etc.

[dsteding]

I've done all the articial reefs in BC, and I do enjoy them all. They are all impressive wrecks. However, to me, they're kind of like what Ray said....sterile. Lots of life, of course, but just too "clean".

I enjoyed the Capilano--and am looking forward to the Gulfstream.

As for the artificial wrecks, I feel somewhat the same way. That being said, the dive we did on the Chaud was fun--especially because it was off our boats, was a "on the way home" thing, and because we dipped down below the bow to around 140. Looking up from under the bow was just majestic, with it framed by sunlight and with ridiculous vis. I also like putting my face in the water before descending and seeing all of you clearly on top of the wreck at ~80-90 fsw scootering around like a bunch of playful seals.

[ljjames]

the "not sure what to expect" was a large part of the excitement of the old days... When we were in some cases the first techreational team on a wreck, with nothing but some old notes from a salvage attempt by commercial team years before... No real idea of orientation, or if we were even hooked on what we hoped... The memory of that adreneline rush when the ghostly shapes emerged from the darkness, "metridium!!! Hot damn! We hooked a wreck, baby!!!" is still fresh some 16 years later... The pure exhileration when we groked what we were seeing... The joy of popping our heads above the water and whooping in delight to the rest of the team about our success... Those experiences last forever, and no one can take that away

[CaptnJack]

with reference to the Capilano I...

I found the fact that there were decent sized cloud and boot sponges on her quite fascinating. And some of the largest yelloweye I have seen. Thinking of her sinking in the dead of night almost 100yrs ago in the middle of the Strait of Georgia added alot to my experience in the ~75ft vis. How the crew watched her go down and rowed to shore back then. And what she has become today.

[Raydar]

is still fresh some 16 years later...

16 years later?????

You're old!

[ljjames]

is still fresh some 16 years later...

16 years later?????

You're old!

Pot, meet kettle

[Joshua Smith]

You kids stay off my lawn!

[gcbryan]

Ditto on the Capilano I. We had great vis, it was a "natural" wreck and had a great time scootering it. On our ascent we could still see it at our 70' stop. It made for an enjoyable ascent.

I've done all the articial reefs in BC, and I do enjoy them all. They are all impressive wrecks. However, to me, they're kind of like what Ray said....sterile. Lots of life, of course, but just too "clean".

The MV Gulfstream totally blew me away for a couple of reasons. First, it was a "natural" wreck, and it took a few lives with her, so there's the drama and history. Second, I really had no idea what to expect, and when we were descending, and she came in to view, the huge gash in her hull, where she hit Dinner Rock, was so violent. It really made you think and wonder about what happened that night. The chaos and tragedy.

Same with the U352 and the Papoose off North Carolina. You can't help but think about the events that sank them. While I did enjoy the Spar and the USS Aeolus (artifical reefs) they just didn't do the same for me as the U-boat and the Papoose.

Of course the articial reefs have a history as well, and I do find myself thinking about the history of them when I'm on them, but the natural wrecks are more "in your face". You can't help but think about their sinkings.

I also really enjoy the research aspect of it as well. Digging for information on its life, the events leading up to its sinking, the human element, etc.

I think you've put your finger on it for me...the wrecks I see don't have a "big gash" so that it's obvious why they sunk. There is no superstructure left on the Capilano just an engine room. I can't tell just from looking why it sank.

I do like the feeling as Doug has mentioned as well of being right on the bottom of the bow and looking straight up (on the Nanaimo wrecks). I like cloud sponges but that's another one of those things I don't truly get. I like them only because I don't see them routinely but they just aren't as interesting to me as they are to many others. I much prefer the colorful sponges found at the same depths on any of the dives on Quadra Island for example.

What depth is the Gulfstream?

[dsteding]

What depth is the Gulfstream?

The bow is 120-130 and the stern is at 170. We'll be on it in a week and two days, weather permitting. I'm excited.

[CaptnJack]

What depth is the Gulfstream?

The bow is 120-130 and the stern is at 170. We'll be on it in a week and two days, weather permitting. I'm excited.

Other way around, bow is at 165 and stern is 120. There's an plaque near the stern commemorating the 3 who died when she ran up on Dinner Rock at 14 knots and the aft cabins quickly flooded. They never found one of the deceased (an infant).

[CaptnJack]

I do like the feeling as Doug has mentioned as well of being right on the bottom of the bow and looking straight up (on the Nanaimo wrecks). I like cloud sponges but that's another one of those things I don't truly get. I like them only because I don't see them routinely but they just aren't as interesting to me as they are to many others. I much prefer the colorful sponges found at the same depths on any of the dives on Quadra Island for example.

I mostly found the sponges interesting because they were fairly large (to me at least) given the ~95yrs the Capilano has been down.