The Cellar Image of the Day

Now this is ingenuity: 12 Cubans were detained and sent back to Cuba after piloting this thing towards the US last week. They actually attached a propeller to the drive shaft and got about 8 MPH out of it. It's all held afloat by empty 55-gallon drums.

Trouble is, it's too big. It was spotted 40 miles south of Key West, which means they only made it about halfway before being picked up and sent back.

You can't stay in the US at all unless you actually make it to shore. But this level of thinking and effort should be rewarded... I say this is exactly the kind of immigrant we want, and they should have been allowed to stay.

Did you happen to see how the Coast Guard disposed of the truck? I saw news footage of them using the machine gun to blow it up! Pretty cool! You could hear all of the crewmen yelling "Whoa!" when it exploded on the water and then sank to the bottom.

I'm with you, Griff. It looked like a lot of careful planning went into the effort with life jackets and everything. I think it's a shame to blow up that rig. Hell it's a shame to even stop them. If they can cross 90 miles of open ocean then they're smart enough to be an asset to us, or is that U.S..

You're probably right there. I doubt that you'd use much highly reflective tape if you didn't want to be seen.

Thank god they weren't on their way to Australia, we have enough of that happening over here. But I like their idea, couldn't part with the car hey!.

I wonder if the truck would have been drivable? Were they just using it to float over on or did they hook up a propellar to the drive shaft.

Too bad they didn't have AAA!

Rules are for other people...we're Americans, damn it, and we run the planet...ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....!

Come to think of it, I'd like an answer to that as well. I thought you could run a floating whorehouse with impunity in international waters.

By what rule of law was their vehicle seized?

If they were 40-50 miles from either shore, they were in international waters. I think it is a fine truck. Since when did people lose the right to cruise international waters in their choice of water craft? I might even go so far as to understand telling them to turn back, but destroying the truck was uncalled for. Just the feds out of control again.

If you dare to exist in this world in a way that is outside the expectations of the US government, then they will sink your sorry ass. Your tax dollars at work.

...whereas if they sink it, it's not going to get hit.

Also, I think a whale is probably not as hard as a 1951 Chevy Truck.

Of course it makes sense to get rid of it somehow. I'm not sure destroying it was the best thing to do, but I'm not a mariner.

As far as the damage the truck could inflict on a boat, it would depend on the size of the boat. It could probably take out a pontoon or a motorboat...maybe a cutter? But a huge merchant ship? I doubt it.

And I don't think the "hardness" of a whale would necessarily matter. If a deer can total a car, imagine what a whale could do to a boat or ship.

[beavis and butthead snickering]

He said "Moby."

[/beavis and butthead snickering]

This was posted today on CNN's Offbeat News site:

"The Cubans who converted a 1951 Chevy pickup into a boat and sailed it to within 40 miles (65 kilometers) of Florida last week got another truck and drove it to the U.S. Interests Section on Wednesday to try a new -- and legal -- bid to go to the United States."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

-Alex

This is a rather interesting topic if you think about it. What exactly would be the violation here? Let's assume they actually made it into waters where America legally had a prayer, because what they did is outright wrong. You cannot board, sink, or capture some other craft in international waters just because you feel like it. Danger or no, it's not your property, you have no legal right to capture, board, or do shit, to anything in international waters.

But let's assume they actualy were in "our coastal waters". (Some one needs to pay attention here, 40 miles out is NOT "our coastal waters".)

1) What right does the coast guard / navy have when it comes to randomly boarding vessels? Can they just because they feel like it?

2) Equate this to a boatload of Canadians tooling around in a vessel. Who says they can't hit port and put around whatever town they like? Are you required to immediately visit the customs office or something, just because you happen to have entered port?

3) What consists of a viable sea-worthy vessel? Who gets to decide that I can't float my Ford pickup around? People make rafts out of all kinds of shit. If I tie a bunch of logs together, that's fine for me to cruise around with, but if I use a Ford, I can't?

I still say there's no way in hell that that would fly were they to do it to some rich American who had lawyers. So if you're bored, rich American, grab a pickup and some oil drums, tow it 40 miles out, turn around and head towards shore and let me know what happens.

Quzah.

There was a thread on this freaky anarchist site which I visit but don't post on. They were fantasizing about buying an oil tanker as an offshore platform for various capitalist gambling and dope growing operations. They were pretty concerned with transport in and out of coastal waters but few of them recognized that they really couldn't set up shop anywhere but way into the Pacific and way off normal traffic routes otherwise they're going down. On the other hand, setting up in such a place might put your operation outside the reach of the RIAA.

It's incredibly cruel to just sink something that someone's obviously put a whole lot of time into.

Saw this in the local news today. Our fair and impartial immigration dept is hard at work!

Two on floating truck get chance for visas
Associated Press

HAVANA -- Two of the people who converted a 1951 Chevy pickup into a boat in a failed bid to reach American shores were granted interviews giving them a chance to get U.S. visas, one of the men said Wednesday.

Ariel Diego and Luis Grass received letters from the U.S. Interests Section inviting them to interviews on Dec. 3. Such interviews do not guarantee being granted a visa.

"At least this is an option we have," Diego told journalists. "The possibility still exists."

The U.S. Coast Guard sent the group back to Cuba in July after a U.S. Customs plane spotted their unusual truck-boat floating south of Key West in the Florida straits. The craft came within 40 miles of the U.S. coast.

Under U.S. immigration policies, Cubans who reach U.S. shores are allowed to stay while those caught at sea are usually returned.

The U.S. Coast Guard (news - web sites) is seen intercepting a group of Cuban migrants sailing towards the Florida Straits on a modified 1959 Buick Tuesday February 3, 2004. The pilots were the same two men who tried to sail a converted 1951 Chevy flatbed truck to the U.S. last year. Nine other migrants, including wives and children. (AP Photo/photo released by CBS4 )

It could be the Vodka, but that BRIGHT GREEN TRUCK floating across the water just rocks! Wouldn't that be a trip to see? Especially high. That'd be great. Sitting on the beach, a bright green truck floats by!

Quzah.

That's too damn funny. Reminds me a lot of a guy in Venice who makes floating cars.

The original Bug floated on it's own. Didn't need to be made out of wood. It's how they were constructed.

They should try that with faster cars.

They only need to go faster than the coast guard.

I doubt that the CG would open fire...well after 9/11 they proably will...still it's worth a shot.

I figure a supercharged ford truck engine or any Hemi could put out enough power to go much much faster.

I don't think so. Not with the drag that something like those floating trucks are going to have compared to the V hulls of the coastguard ships.

they would have made it easily in one of these:

of course, they'd only be able to fit 5 or 6 immigrants, but they could make 2 trips in this little speeder
more on this

I don't believe that they would have time to deply the jets at these short distances.

If the first BIG truck made it 40miles away from the shore at 8mph, think of what it could have done at 40?

You'll say "But 40 is fast for a boat.." Yeah but they can make it fast! They only need to cover ~200 miles on it, if even that. Supercharge it, water cool it, nitro it, rip off the muffler and the cats, floor it. Who cares if the engine only lasts the day? It's like the F1 engines which only last the race..

I would probably guess that they'd do better using a real speed boat though.

Oh and they just need to put up a big US flag and NOT look like Cubans to make it through. Like maybe not take the shortest route and not during the day?

Here is the magic formula:

Dark grey boat. No lights. Night.

The truck made it 40 miles because that's half way and they don't intercept before that. The US is watching ALL the time. Even the drug smugglers in high speed cigarette boats aren't fast enough.

I've hardly been the environmentalist around here, but WTF is with them SINKING the two car/boats that this family had? They couldn't have just sent 'em to a junkyard for crying out loud? For some reason this really pisses me off. Oh, and welcome I guess to the family, if only most americans had that much willpower to get something done....

This thread just won't die!

They are back. This time with a modified taxi.MSNBC Story

If they'd had 70HP/Liter, they'd have made it that last 20 miles before the Coast Guard found them.

What happened was they were just out for a 3 hour tour.... a 3 hour tour.

Skipper: "Holy crap little buddy, we're getting pulled over by the f***ing coast guard!!!"

Gilligan: "I knew we shouldn't have left the island... Skipperrrrrrrr!!!!!"

(my gawd, I seem to have lost my mind, hehehe...) -Bloozer-

So I, try, kiss America, Hi,
Drove my Chevy to the levy but the levy was ...dry?
Them good ol' boys were dodging Castro and tides. Sinking?
This'll be the way that I die.
This'll be the way that I die...

obviously you people don't live in Florida. I know this picture was taken a while ago, but immigration is becoming a real problem where i live. it is bringing in gangs, which grafitti everything, and now you can't walk into a gas station w/out worrying about getting shot. and now the neighborhoods are really bad because the cubans are too damn lazy to get jobs, and also because they are illegal.

That's not unique to Florida, xiphos. When we attract illegals from countries where they are not happy, we're also going to attract illegals from countries where they are not wanted.... or should I say are wanted, by the law.
That's the bottom line with illegals, you don't know what you're getting.

I wonder if John Deere thought about sponsoring the '51 Chevy pickup guys for refugee status? With the color of the truck and accessory tarp, it should have been an advertising coup.

"Nothing floats like a Deere..."

There is an argument that 'artificial reefs' only serve to collect fish so they're easier to catch rather than providing new environments for them to live in.

It's a contentious issue atm though. There seems to be equal evidence for both sides of the fence.

Ali, you really piqued my interest on this topic with your counter argument. I have volunteered with these projects several times and know people who work on them well. They all told me the same thing - fish numbers overall increase with the added artificial reef. I understand that they are potentially biased, but I did a little research today as well and the overwhelming evidence points to an increase in both fish populations and in fish species.

Quote:

The Effects of Man Made Structures on Nearby Resident Fish Communities
Researchers: William Alevizon, J.C. Gorham and several graduate research assistants.

Project Number and Duration: R/LR-B-20, 1985 - 1987

Question: The classic debate over artificial reefs is whether the reefs increase fish numbers or merely concentrate fish in one place. Could a carefully controlled study of the impacts of artificial reefs on the fish communities in a Florida marine sanctuary help move this debate in one direction or the other?

Project: Researchers counted and identified the fishes living in a flat, sandy habitat in two six-hectare (14.8 acres) study sites in Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary in the Florida Keys. Next, they built two artificial reef groups, each consisting of 12 small PVC- and concrete blocks, near the sites. They then censused the fishes in the study sites every three months for one year.

Results: Of the five most abundant species - green razorfish, Hemipteronotus splendens, pearly razorfish, H. novacula, rosy rasorfish, H. Martinicensis, slippery dick, Halichoeres bivittatu and the sand seabass, Diplectrum formosum -- researchers saw no change in the total numbers of adult and juvenile fish on the sandy habitat, or in the proportion of one species to another, in the pre- and post-reef censuses. The researchers next took the project a step further, building a large artificial reef at the center of one reef group. Nine months later, numbers of all but one of the most common species had increased 100 percent - yet numbers remained unchanged on the natural reef group. Both the earlier and later results appear to demonstrate that, at least in this case, artificial reefs resulted in an increase in fish stocks rather than a concentration of existing stocks.

Impact: By demonstrating one scenario in which artificial reefs did not have a negative impact on surrounding fish populations, the results provided support to public and private efforts in Florida to develop new artificial reefs and enhance existing ones. Through studies such as this one, artificial reefs are coming to be seen as more than just convenient 'fish attractors' In a report on the project, Alevizon wrote, "...The rational use of manmade reefs may substantially extend our ability to protect natural endangered systems, by providing the option of increasing available suitable habitat."

Quote:

In fact artificial reefs can be created that over time will appear as natural reefs with similar communities of encrusting organisms and bait fish. As various encrusting organisms such as corals and sponges cover the artificial reef material, small animals take up residence. As these small animals become abundant larger animals are attracted and feed upon these. Yet larger fish are attracted to these and so on until a complete reef food web is created. At that point the artificial reef functions as a natural reef.

I know they have dumped a bunch of old NYC train cars off our coast in the past.

Hi Ali,

Pardon me for not responding sooner. I just wanted to say thanks for the welcome

woohoo... now I have 2 posts!!!

The question is, do the reefs increase the fish population or just cause them to gather in one spot, making them easier to catch, rather than being scattered and harder to catch?

The data suggests that initially it draws fish from other areas and over time, as the reefs take hold in the environment, the reefs increase the fish population by creating a new place for smaller organisms and species to live and breed. This works its way up the food chain to larger species and so on.
Personally, it has increased the places to fish in my area - the older spots are still productive, but there are new ones now as well. To me, that indicates increasing populations. Thats the only personal experience I can bring to the issue.