Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Drone films sub wreck lost for 103 years

It's taken 103 years of searching but the wreck of Australia's first naval submarine has been found.
The HMAS AE-1 was the first Allied submarine lost in World War One.

From CNN by Amanda Coakley

 The wreck of Australia's first submarine has been discovered off the coast of Papua New Guinea after disappearing without a trace 103 years ago.

 Last known position of WW1 sub HMAS AE1, found 300m below the sea's surface.
(AHS nautical chart with the GeoGarage platform)

"Australia's oldest naval mystery has been solved," said Australia's Minister for Defense Marise Payne.
The Royal Australian Navy submarine HMAS AE1, which was carrying 35 crew members from Australia, Britain and New Zealand, sank near Rabaul on the island of New Britain on September 14, 1914.
World War I had begun just a few weeks earlier and the disappearance marked the country's first loss in the conflict.
"This is a great day for Australian maritime history," said Brendan Nelson, director of the Australian War Memorial, in a statement.
"When the AE1 went missing in 1914 it had a profound impact on our young nation," he said. "Now we can properly mourn the deaths of those men who served in AE1, and commemorate their sacrifice in a meaningful and fitting way."
Following the discovery, those on board the survey vessel that found it held a small commemorative service to remember those who lost their lives.
Efforts are being made to find any descendants of the submarine's crew members.

The submarine has been described as "remarkably well preserved."

'Remarkably well preserved'

An expedition set out earlier this week to search the waters near the Duke of York Island group in Papua New Guinea.
The team of maritime surveyors, marine archaeologists and naval historians used a multi-beam echo sounder and side-scan technology in an underwater drone flying 40 meters above the seabed to scour the area.
According to Defense Minister Payne, this was the 13th time a team had set out to search for the missing submarine.
The AE1, Australia's first submarine, was commissioned at the outbreak of World War I. Along with one other submarine (AEII) and several cruisers and destroyers, it was sent to New Guinea -- a German colony at the time -- to serve in operations against the enemy, according to maritime archaeologist Michael McCarthy.

But just six weeks after the start of the war, AE1 mysteriously disappeared while on patrol.
A search for the vessel "was quickly abandoned" when Australian units in the area were required elsewhere, McCarthy wrote in a 2009 essay.
"AEI was then forgotten by all bar a few."
Searches in the late 1970s and 1980s were unsuccessful, as were more recent efforts spearheaded by John Foster, a commander in the Australian Navy, who spent his retirement searching for AE1 but died in 2010.
"When a submarine just disappears, it can be anywhere," Innes McCartney, nautical archaeologist and Leverhulme research fellow at Bournemouth University in the UK, told CNN.
Search teams are often working across a very large area and in very deep water, he explained.
"There are hundreds and hundreds (of submarines) on the bottom of the ocean," McCartney said. "They are generally chance finds."
The first glimmer of hope this week came when the search vessel Fugro Equator identified an "object of interest" 300 meters below the surface.
After producing a three-dimensional rendering of the object, the team dropped a camera to confirm the find.
The vessel seems to be "remarkably well preserved and apparently in one piece," according to the Ministry of Defense

A three-dimensional rendering of an object on the ocean floor suggested the mission had been a success

'Somber' occasion

The cause of the sinking is not yet known.
While some believe the vessel could have struck a reef while moving in poor visibility, others think it was lost in a practice dive.
According to McCartney, there is a "very good chance" that archaeologists will be able to solve the mystery by studying the outer surfaces of the wreck.
These submarines, which were designed and built in Britain, "were successful and they were reliable," said McCartney.
"But submarining is inherently dangerous and submarines hadn't been around that long."
The war was their "first great test."
Mark Sander, president of the Submarine Institute of Australia (SIA), one of the organizations involved in the search, described the discovery as "both a satisfying and somber occasion."
"Australia will never forget the crew of HMAS AE1 who are on eternal patrol," he said in a statement.
A number of groups were involved in the expedition along with the SIA, including the Australian National Maritime Museum, the Silentworld Foundation, Fugro Survey and the Papua New Guinea government as well as the Australian Royal Navy.

Links :

Monday, February 12, 2018

Germany (BSH) layer update in the GeoGarage platform

80 nautical raster charts updated & 6 new charts added

Norway (NHS) layer update in the GeoGarage platform

131 nautical raster charts updated

Very spectacular is the Atlantic road, running for 8 km almost in the middle of the sea from on island to another, in the western county of Møre og Romsdal

The way the world catches fish defies all economic logic


Industrialization hasn't made fishing more efficient.
(AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)

From Quartz by Gwynn Guilford

It’s often said that there are plenty more fish in the sea.
For most of human history, that was true.
From ancient Minoans to postwar industrial trawl fleets, mankind found wealth from harvesting more and more of the sea’s seemingly endless abundance of creatures.
The more fishermen tried, the more their catches grew, such that, between 1950 and the mid-1990s, global fish landings more than quintupled.

And then, suddenly, that stopped.
Since then, the world has hauled up roughly the same volume of fish out of the ocean each year—about 85 million tonnes, on average.
It’s not hard to guess the culprit: overfishing.
Similarly well-known is that overfishing is a problem of biology: we’re hauling up too many fish, leaving too few adult ones behind to repopulate.

 courtesy of Atlas (data : FAO)

But if fewer and fewer fish are left behind to replace themselves, why have we caught around the same volume of them each year for the last two decades?
The answer, explored in an important new World Bank study, reveals a little-understood dimension of why overfishing is so destructive.
It’s not just biologically unsustainable; our global marine fisheries are also uneconomic.
That’s because we’re pouring more and more effort into fishing, and still getting the same result.

Nowadays, more people are using more boats, more fuel, and more technology to catch sea creatures than ever before in human history.
The global fleet doubled in the last four decades, according to UN FAO data, and the ranks of fishermen has more than tripled.
At the same time, heavy technology investment—in things like more powerful engines, fancier fishing gear and spiffy fish-location devices—likely boosted fishing efficiency of fishing capital and labor, according to 2017 World Bank report, The Sunken Billions Revisited.

 Different fishing techniques inflict a very specific type of environmental damage.

Taken together, global fishing effort has surged at least fourfold in the last 40 years, while the level of catches has not even doubled, says Charlotte de Fontaubert, senior fisheries specialist at the World Bank.
“If we have to fish four times as much in order to catch twice as much fish, the only way to explain that differential between the increase in catching and [the catch levels] is that stocks have declined,” says de Fontaubert, who co-authored The Sunken Billions Revisited.

This is a problem of productivity, the measure of how much value a person creates per hour.
When productivity grows, it means we’re making more with less.
Global marine fisheries are doing something approaching the opposite: making the same with more.
But how has such an unproductive industry been chugging along for so long?

In its fuller picture of the global marine balance sheet, the new World Bank report tallies up not just assets of fisheries, but also costs and subsidies.
The global fishing industry landed $164 billion worth of marine fish in 2014.
However, taking into account labor, capital, and fuel costs and subsidies, global fisheries produced a net loss of $44 billion, according to the World Bank.


By encouraging more fishing than is economical, government subsidies crash the supply of fish all the more, says Glenn-Marie Lange, economist at the World Bank and one of the report’s authors.
“There are too many vessels out there that are not only financially unprofitable but fishing way beyond what can be regenerated by the natural population,” says Lange.

Of course, that’s not true for every country.
Out of 139 countries evaluated, 64 generated profits from their fisheries, even after accounting for subsidies.
But the fisheries of 75 countries aren’t actually generating wealth.


There’s a word for these fisheries: zombies, unprofitable enterprises kept on life support by government subsidies.
One problem with zombies is that they waste resources that could be directed toward productive uses—for example, retraining fishermen to work in other industries.
Another problem is that, freed from suffering the punishing effects of economic logic, they can keep prices low.
That can drive sustainably operating fishermen out of business.

For seafood lovers—at least, the ones who don’t eat exclusively sustainably caught fish—there is a perverse upside to the zombie status quo.
Sushi sure is cheap when it’s bought and paid for by taxpayers.

Links :

Sunday, February 11, 2018