Yes, high liability and most wreck sites that can be recognized as a wreck site to an average diver are mostly in poor visibility in those areas where SFRX is operating.
There is some real merit in this approach, but there are some issues which are two real drawbacks. The first is what Raider articulated. The divers would not be diving on a site that looked like a "traditional wreck" and the visibility at Melbourne is not for casual divers. ( I might add the insurance issue spoke about is probably a reality too because of the conditions. ) The second is, if a wreck is found, the site will be realized with archaeological norms. These techniques take training.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
