I think most everyone missed the point on Hendrick's article. This is more than likely a result of a recreational dive magazine printing his response to a question without providing appropriate background info, either to him on the context his article would be used or to you concerning his actual (not simulated) experiences. Butch teaches courses targeted to professional rescue and recovery divers, not weekend patch club members or amateur sport diving enthusiasts. These divers are typically members of local emergency rescue units and are not generally technical or cave divers. The standardization of dive equipment is an important issue for working divers operating within defined parameters, parameters learned through his courses and based on *_actual_* rescue and recovery diving experiences. Frankly, I'd trust a professional over an amateur any day of the week and twice on Sundays when it comes to developing standardized procedures, implementing those procedures with the emergency response units, and performing the rescue or recovery. Another point to consider: How many of you are regulated by OSHA on your dives? Better yet, how many of you criticizing this guy regularly perform rescue or recovery dives? Ever been diggin around your local no-vis deep puddle feeling around for evidence or a body? The number of amateurs whom I have met and who I would trust with any segment of a rescue or recovery I can count on one hand while still leaving a few choice signalling fingers left over. my $0.02, John (and I am not Lifeguard Systems representative or customer) p.s. I would, however, be willing to trade a set of 80s for 104s. That is because I am cave diver and not a paid rescue or recovery diver. >I ran across this gem of advice published on the Scuba Times home page. You >can find the article yourself at >http://www.scubatimes.com/scubatim/eqp496.html I guess I'm using all the >wrong gear. Anyone want to trade me some aluminum 80s for my 104s? > >-Kent > >------------------begin attached file----------------- > >Butch Hendrick, >Lifeguard Systems, >Hurley, New York > We train divers for some of the harshest conditions on earth, extremely >cold water, ice diving and very strong current conditions. We train a lot of >public safety and rescue dive teams to deal with harsh conditions and hostile >environments. > We recommend that all divers use single aluminum 80-cubic-foot cylinders >unless they are diving extremely deep. If a diver is going to go deep under >harsh conditions, we prefer a surface-supplied air source. There are some >limited conditions where dual 80-cubic-foot cylinders are acceptable, but as a >rule this is not our preferred configuration. I prefer aluminum over steel >simply because it is so widely available. I am more concerned with the volume >of gas than the container it is in. If all my divers use aluminum, then I >don't have to worry about reworking their weightbelts and personal ballast >systems as they switch between steel and aluminum. > As for gas reserves, we require all divers to be back on deck or the >beach with 1,000 psi of gas. Since we recommend only aluminum 80s, we know >that they will all have the same amount of reserve (about 27 cubic feet). >Additionally we require a detachable pony bottle system with a minimum of 19 >cubic feet of reserve. One of our greatest concerns is diver entanglement. If >a diver becomes severely entangled, they must rely on their dive buddy to free >them. This cannot always be accomplished on a single dive, so the detachable >pony bottle is left behind while the buddy goes for further assistance. On >dives deeper than 40 feet or under ice, we like to see that pony bottle >increased to 30 cubic feet. >-- >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@terra.net'. >Send subscription/archive requests to `techdiver-request@terra.net'. > >
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]