Palau Diving

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8fb7380b.0410131558.7c7a6687@posting.google.c om...

> There ain't no such thing as a "free lunch", nor "free booze", but AFAIK
> the are "free" on the Aggressor and Peter Hughes Fleets. Since I don't
> drink, your "free booze" was subsized by me.

If that's your way of getting out of buying me a drink, I don't accept. LAX
on Saturday afternoon work for you? I'm on the way to Kona to test drive
the new Sheraton.

> New vs old.




>
>> Perhaps few
>> people have been on both, but when you hear complaints on one side versus
>> nothing but praise on the other, it doesn't take a doctor of statistics
>> to
>> draw a conclusion.
>
> True. But what about DIVING?
>
> From what I heard from those who dived the Thorfinn, they dived the
> "best" wrecks in Chuuk, and cover an extensive collection of the wrecks.

> Neither Nigel nor you said anything about the QUALITY of the wrecks
> and the diving, other than Nigel saying "the Odyssay goes everywhere".

According to thorfinn.net, the Thorfinn does 30 wrecks in a week. At five
dives a day times six diving days (which I doubt they actually do), that's
exactly one dive per wreck. Some of these wrecks are 500' long with
multiple decks and cargo holds to explore. And they are deep, so bottom
time is limited even for amphibians like you. On the Odyssey, we did up to
four dives on the more interesting wrecks (2 divers per was the average).
However, the wreck selection was ultimately left up to the divers - Lenny
and Cara made it clear from the initial briefing that they would be
responsive to requests, and many times the boat is chartered by tech divers
concentrating on the even deeper stuff like the San Francisco Maru.

> Some avid divers would go for the quality of the DIVES and are willing
> to forego some luxury living and boozing. That's why I questioned
> Nigel's extravagent claims with little or no information to back
> himself up.

I don't see how the dives could be any better off the Thorfinn vs. the
Odyssey except for the Thorfinn's claim that they only put 6 divers on each
wreck at a time. Yes, that might make the wrecks less crowded than the 15
max per wreck that we 'endured', but again, these are really big wrecks.
There were barely a handful of incidents where I might have preferred fewer
people, mainly because of silt, but the creature comforts of the Odyssey
more than made up for them.

> As such, only those who have been on BOTH vessels can give credible
> and informative comparison of the diving aspects of them.

On the Odyssey, diving occurs directly off the stern of the boat. There is
no need to transfer to a separate skiff. Even on the Aggressors where the
boat is lowered into the water, it's still an extra step and additional time
spent getting ready to dive (or post dive). On the Odyssey, I'd simply
follow the line back to the hang bar at the stern (complete with tank and
reg), climb the ladder after my stop, doff my gear and suit, shower, towel
off, and eat. The Thorfinners would still be on their skiff riding back to
the mothership while I'd be in a dry T-shirt downloading my photos. Again,
the Thorfinn might be able to offer fewer divers per wreck, but I can
imagine that just fine without having to actually spend a week on the junk
heap.

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
: Since I don't
: drink, your "free booze" was subsized by me.

Thank you very much indeed.

Dan Bracuk
Is it my imagination, or do Buffalo Wings taste like chicken?
The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

> I'll be dry till some diving in Nassau and the Caribbean in a couple
> of weeks. I am a confirmed Warm Water Wimp, and am pretty choosy
> on where I dive, even in warm water -- as I mentioned in a
> different thread, I'll skip the diving in Barbados even though
> I'll have all my dive gears. Reason? Lousy warm water diving
> there.
>
>
>Enjoy your trip.
I plan to go to Cuba next May. Gotta see the place before Fidel departs the scene.

Seadeuce

"Greg Mossman" <mossman@qnet.com> wrote in message news:<416ea7ea$0$104$6c56adcd@news.qnet.com>...
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8fb7380b.0410131558.7c7a6687@posting.google.c om...
>
> > There ain't no such thing as a "free lunch", nor "free booze", but AFAIK
> > the are "free" on the Aggressor and Peter Hughes Fleets. Since I don't
> > drink, your "free booze" was subsized by me.
>
> If that's your way of getting out of buying me a drink, I don't accept. LAX
> on Saturday afternoon work for you? I'm on the way to Kona to test drive
> the new Sheraton.

My offer to buy you a drink at the LAX Hilton is always on. Trouble is,
you're never there when I am at LAX. Looks like your next opportunity
will be Dec 2, when I'll be on my way to Papeete again, for the 3rd time
this year, doing the Moorea, Tuamotu, Nuku Iva, Raiatea, and Bora Bora,
the Marquesas bit for the 2nd time since March because all the dives
are soooooo good, especially the one at Nuku Iva!



> > New vs old.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> Perhaps few
> >> people have been on both, but when you hear complaints on one side versus
> >> nothing but praise on the other, it doesn't take a doctor of statistics
> >> to
> >> draw a conclusion.
> >
> > True. But what about DIVING?
> >
> > From what I heard from those who dived the Thorfinn, they dived the
> > "best" wrecks in Chuuk, and cover an extensive collection of the wrecks.
>
> > Neither Nigel nor you said anything about the QUALITY of the wrecks
> > and the diving, other than Nigel saying "the Odyssay goes everywhere".
>
> According to thorfinn.net, the Thorfinn does 30 wrecks in a week. At five
> dives a day times six diving days (which I doubt they actually do), that's
> exactly one dive per wreck. Some of these wrecks are 500' long with
> multiple decks and cargo holds to explore. And they are deep, so bottom
> time is limited even for amphibians like you.

That sounds about right. That's more dives, especially the DEEP dives
on deep wrecks, than I can handle, or want to handle. But for wreck
junkies, I would say that's the winning ticket, as far as WRECK DIVING
goes.

> On the Odyssey, we did up to
> four dives on the more interesting wrecks (2 divers per was the average).
> However, the wreck selection was ultimately left up to the divers - Lenny
> and Cara made it clear from the initial briefing that they would be
> responsive to requests, and many times the boat is chartered by tech divers
> concentrating on the even deeper stuff like the San Francisco Maru.

But just from the dive schedule and WRECK DIVING itinerary, there ain't
no way the Odyssay can touch the Thorfinn.

> > Some avid divers would go for the quality of the DIVES and are willing
> > to forego some luxury living and boozing. That's why I questioned
> > Nigel's extravagent claims with little or no information to back
> > himself up.
>
> I don't see how the dives could be any better off the Thorfinn vs. the
> Odyssey except for the Thorfinn's claim that they only put 6 divers on each
> wreck at a time. Yes, that might make the wrecks less crowded than the 15
> max per wreck that we 'endured', but again, these are really big wrecks.
> There were barely a handful of incidents where I might have preferred fewer
> people, mainly because of silt, but the creature comforts of the Odyssey
> more than made up for them.

That's where the personal preference and choice comes into play.

Your INFO on both (even though you haven't dived the Thorfinn) is
most useful for this thread, for limited comparison purposes. The
POTENTIAL for diving 30 wrecks (and choosing wrecks from that
menu) is something the Odyssay divers won't have the luxury to
choose from.

As for WHICH of the wrecks are the "better" wrecks to dive, that's
where the personal choice of the "wreck diver" (which I ain't)
comes into play.

>
> > As such, only those who have been on BOTH vessels can give credible
> > and informative comparison of the diving aspects of them.

See my comments above, and your info below.
>
> On the Odyssey, diving occurs directly off the stern of the boat. There is
> no need to transfer to a separate skiff. Even on the Aggressors where the
> boat is lowered into the water, it's still an extra step and additional time
> spent getting ready to dive (or post dive). On the Odyssey, I'd simply
> follow the line back to the hang bar at the stern (complete with tank and
> reg), climb the ladder after my stop, doff my gear and suit, shower, towel
> off, and eat. The Thorfinners would still be on their skiff riding back to
> the mothership while I'd be in a dry T-shirt downloading my photos. Again,
> the Thorfinn might be able to offer fewer divers per wreck, but I can
> imagine that just fine without having to actually spend a week on the junk
> heap.

But wreck junkies might laugh at the "junk" wrecks you dive, while they
rave at the "classic" and well-preserved deep wrecks they go for on
the Thorfinn, foregoing the dry T-shirt and possibly better food
they could get even on days they are not diving.

Wots good for the goose ain't necessarily good for the gander.

One man's meat is another man's poison (or it is poisson? <G>)

But wreck diving is always poison for this poisson.

Da Feeesh et Le Poisson.