Funding for Niku IX

Started by Monty Fowler, March 31, 2016, 04:09:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ric Gillespie

Quote from: Monty Fowler on July 08, 2016, 05:44:22 PM
So only video is going to be considered when planning the underwater search for Niku 2017?

I thought everyone understood that the plan for the Niku IX expedition is to use the two Pisces three-person manned submersibles to conduct a thorough underwater search.  The primary search tool will be the Mark One Eyeball - six of them in each sub to be exact.  Each sub will also be equipped with HD video, forward-looking sonar, and metal detection capability.

Monty Fowler

I understood that just fine - but I was assuming that there would be some attempt to narrow down the search area to the most promising spots, since TIGHAR can't stay at Niku forever and it's a big reef face.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 EC
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016

Ric Gillespie

Quote from: Monty Fowler on July 09, 2016, 05:13:19 PM
I understood that just fine - but I was assuming that there would be some attempt to narrow down the search area to the most promising spots, since TIGHAR can't stay at Niku forever and it's a big reef face?

We'll let everyone know the plan once it's finalized.

Monty Fowler

Quote from: Ric Gillespie on June 28, 2016, 10:08:43 AM
Yes.  Such a review is currently underway.  The organization doing the review would prefer that we not talk about it at this time.

I don't understand why a organization would make that kind of stipulation, especially for something as innocuous as this, reviewing data about a 70-plus-year-old mystery.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 EC
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016

Ric Gillespie

Quote from: Monty Fowler on July 11, 2016, 08:47:33 AM
Quote from: Ric Gillespie on June 28, 2016, 10:08:43 AM
Yes.  Such a review is currently underway.  The organization doing the review would prefer that we not talk about it at this time.

I don't understand why a organization would make that kind of stipulation, especially for something as innocuous as this, reviewing data about a 70-plus-year-old mystery.

I guess you'll just have to add it to the list of things you don't understand.