Sorry guys, I'm just now finding this post. I'm still learning how to navigate around.
YES - please pass the release on to, well... E V E R Y O N E!
As for the use of the line "save the Batfish" let me say this now...
Coming from the outside and not having the long history with the boat I am able to see what may not be as visible to those who may be more engrossed with her. Make no mistake - the Batfish is dying.
Take a real good look at her. Her interior is one thing (although is too is riddled with need) - but her superstructure is another. If you've been working on her decks than you would have noticed that her hull is coming apart. The bow has sheets of rust coming off and the torpedo doors and bays - geesh. Areas that were once strong steel are now paper thin and brittle. For example there is NO WAY her current torpedo loading platforms could be used. If I were to sit my big butt on any of them they would collapse - let alone the weight of a torpedo. Loading the new torpedos through the exterior tube doors appears to be the working sollution but man what a challenge!
She is a fire trap (as there is no fire supression system onboard) and her electrical system is the biggest risk for fire more than any other factor. According to standard fire codes, she shouldn't allow visitors. Furthermore, she is encrusted (that's a good word) with lead based paint that is falling off in millions of flakes. Her name is almost unreadable. She once sat on a shield to protect her from the ground, but has refloated TWICE in her stay there making the shield a moot point as sediments would have filled in the void left before she resetlled - at a list I might add. She is close to the water table and lord knows what her underside looks like. From the inside she may appear fine (as far as her lower hull) but when she is inspected for placing her on a cradle, I am very fearful of what we will find.
Work to repair and or restore the above problems like fire suppression and electrical can be done in a way that will still preserve the boat. But if she burns then all bets are off. She isn't a seagoing vessel anymore so the changes I am proposing can be accomplished with little to no impact on her integrity and history.
Lastly, she is an obscure relic that only a handfull are even aware of (10,000 guests a year is a handfull - when other like museums see over 100,000 or more per year) and she is hardly known by those living in Oklahoma. In fact, she was completely left out of the new tourism guide this year. How did that happen?
This is just a fraction of what all is going on. She IS NOT and HAS NOT belonged to a specific group nor is she or her museum facility just a big 'club house'. But her history is plagued with such use and in some cases neglect. I am not saying that there hasn't been thousands of volunteer hours and monies spent, but in her 35+ year history those efforts are only a small percentage of her story and needs. If things were to continue in this pattern based on the past 35+ years, in ten or at most twenty years from now, she would be condemned.
This is how I see her and why I think using language like SAVE the Batfish is important. I'm looking at the BIG PICTURE. Her fate rests in those who are committed to her NOW - not yester year. In the past few years a slew of committed volunteers have swarm to her defense. But what happens when five years pass? Will those same dedicated volunteers be able to do as much then too? What about five years ago? If we are to make a mark and at least preserve her for another 50 years, we have to do some serious work why we have the man power and synergy to do so. She and the overall Memorial park can become something greater than they are and her story - her legacy - and those she represents will be remembered by untold thousands for decades to come.
If I offended any of you with my comments, I apologize, as it was not my intent. But I am very passionate about keeping her around and have been dedicating a lot of effort toward her and the Memorial. Thanks for allowing me a moment on my soapbox.
