Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Jason, >I think it only works when there is a commitment on the part of both >(all) members of the buddy team to make it work. That in my mind Agreed. >maeans some level of prior practice with each other. Practice as an on Areed... But, you haven't said anything that's not true of ANY buddy or team environment. >going event, and in the water a commitment to spend a large part of >the dive *closely* monitoring the other diver/s. By large I mean >something like two thirds of the time. I also think that a buddy team Nope - sorry, I don't buy this. If you're diving a preplanned dive and you are familiar with your buddy, it will click. For anyone to devote *2/3* of the dive time to monitoring their buddy WOULD make it useless IMO. I would expect this would be a background task that would take no more than a max of 20% of my attention... (this should draw some controversy!!!) >needs to stay in constant contact with each other. Not continual >contact, *constant*. They need to be in touching distance, or >connected by a buddy line. I again disagree - they need to be within a reasonable distance based on the parameters of the dive. If they're inside a wreck with a chance of silting, touching or buddy line is good, but outside a wreck taking a tour with no intention of penetration/etc some reasonable distance would be fine... It just really depends on how in tune the two of you are. >I don't think the nature of OW trimix diving is condusive to this type >of close buddy team work. Cave diving on the other hand, may be another >matter. From what I've seen posted by the WKPP (George in particuar) >they seem to fill all the requirements of a buddy team "doing it right". Again - disagree - wreck penetration could be very much likened to cave diving - similar types of hazards - siltout/etc - similar environment. You have to work as a *team* in both environments - assuming you're *attemping* the OW buddy stuff Jason :^) Now, I'm *NOT* saying tha there aren't some *environments* in which a team MAY not be practical, but I'd need a lot of convincing - more than Jason will need until he trys a manifold though :^) >Ok I'll pay that one, the drag bit was dumb Yes, it was and I wasn't going to buy that one for on second :^) So, let's move on... >>But, you later admit to a lower task loading with a manifold. That >>*is* a useful function IMNSHO. >Only a lower task loading during "normal" diving. During an emergency, >when seconds count, the manifold will use up plenty of them (seconds >that is, and gas with them) First of all, isn't MOST diving "normal" diving? We could discuss whether raising the task loading on ALL of your diving is worth a raising the task loading on a very small percentage of problems? And, this is *only* during an emergency *with the manifold or reg you're breathing * - and as has been demonstrated, these are FEW and far between. I'd argue that the manifold makes dealing with OTHER problems easier... Has this been beaten to death yet? Others have said that they can reach their manifold in a VERY few seconds. Now, manifolds are starting to look pretty damn good... Ready yet Jason :^) >>Shit - I don't know about you, but when I bump something, I mean, even >>*touch* it I notice. Bumping something hard enough to TURN a handle >>on an isolation manifold - come on now Jason, who do you think you're >>kidding on THAT one!!! >This one I stand by. The "reg failure" I mentioned before, was due >to me turning off the valve for that cylinder due to contact with the >roof. It took me a couple of minutes to twig that was the problem. >I was more interested in getting out! And you didn't notice hitting the roof? - WOW, maybe I'm just a sensitvie guy :^) but when anything EVER touches something that's not part of my setup I notice it. >>Yep I think you are right on this. I think he got over task loaded. >>Which sort of backs me up on my feeling that manifolds have a lower >>task loading normally, and a higher task loading in an emergency. >>IMO, lower task loading is great. That gives the manifolded diver a >>better chance at dealing with OTHER emergencies that might crop up. >>Now, if we could quantitatively assess those others in real >>probabilistic terms, we might be able to show how manifolds have a >>distinct advantage!!! >Shit, I'm gona get myself talked into manifolds if this keeps up! >However, the "task load" of an inde system, is the reg swap. These >can always be delayed (a bit) if things go really wrong. Also if Not if it's something that goes wrong with the reg you're breathing. After all, the manifold allows you to forget about reg swaps except for a problem with the reg you're breathing or the other side of the manifold. Seems like it's pretty similar to the independant case, except for the higher task loading associated with switching gasses. >things go really wrong, then you are turning the dive, right? The >whole idea of an inde system is that *any cylinder will get you >back from any point in the dive*. So if the shit hits the fan, >then you *don't need* to swap regs again! Pretty much the same for a manifold. You either stick with the reg you're on OR you switch *once* - nothing different here. >Phew! Thought I might have to lash out on a manifold there, but >I've escaped again. Nope - you're trapped - what was your VISA number :^) I believe Sea Elite is the one that George prefers... >>The point is though, that the manifolded diver only had to deal with >>the SAME task loading as an independant diver and he screwed up... >>What else was involved here, because if a mix certified diver screws >>up on a SIMPLE thing like this, either we're not getting the whole >>story (Jason said in another postthat he had a *couple* of oher gear >>related problems to deal with!!!)... On a dive like this, if someone >>has a *couple* of problems and doesn't abort the dive, what does this >>say about him??? >I disagree that it was the same task load as an inependents diver. >The reg swap would have been done *before* the cylinder he was >breathing was out. If he couldn't do the swap, he would turn the But, you're assuming a manifold failure so I'm assuming tha the reg you're on is failing - same issue. >dive, and exit safely on the gas in the first cylinder. Oh, and >yes you aren't getting the full story, Sorry. Come on Jason - change the names to protect the stroke, but give us the full poop... :^) >>By the way, I'm just playing devils advocate, I see positives and .>negatives to both sides... But, without a manifold, how do you carry >>the twin tanks P:^) >Isn't that what girlfriends are for? Better not tell my wife then :^) -Carl-
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]