|
RL - Happy to have been of service. My last job before I retired was writing the new SF Maritime Operations Manual. (FM3-05.212 replaces TC31-25) That gave me a unique perspective on your question. Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed diving at gov't expense since 79, but there really aren't very many reasons to do it. What makes it worse is there aren't many commanders who understand the capabilities and limitations. With proper mission planning the only people who should get wet are (maybe) two scout swimmers reconning the BLS - and they can usually surface swim. (Damn - I'm going to be burned as a heretic!) The S(qu)EALs still have an underwater mission but they're also throwing money at the tech side of the underwater nav problem (with mixed success). Everything that goes on a dive mission must be considered expendable and the current "Buck Rogers" stuff is way too expensive for that. The most cost effective solution right now is underwater GPS but that still requires floating an antenna which is a compromise risk. There are some other minor details but none important here. Bottom line - proper mission planning will probably show that underwater ops have a very limited utility. 95+ % of missions assigned to SCUBA teams can probably be done with standard MAROPS techniques and nobody has to breath compressed air (for anything except the lobster dive - after all, got to party when the mission is done). Just my soapbox. Peregrino
|