Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
On Mon, 17 Jun 1996, TOM MOUNT wrote: > Kevin > With the number of hits by people who have ignored the CNS clock should be > sufficient to warn the more safety aware persons of the risk of ignoring the > CNS clock. Ignoring it is comparable to ignoring dive tables, it can and > will catch up. How many hits at 1.4 or less? Not many. The clock only seems to apply to PO2s that are higher than any of us should be breathing in the first place. Also, I modify my deco tables so much that I am virtually ignoring them anyway. > > Second sat divers are more concerned with pulmonary/whole body toxicity that > CNS problems as they are either in surface supplied or in a habitat where > the cns problem is not a risk. Technical divers however are usually in the > water most often in a mask and regulator thus the CNS problem is by far the > greatest risk. If you chose to ignore the clock that is a personal risk you > accept but please do not try to influence others to be that irresponsiable. > I think "irresponsible" is too strong a word. I could also argue that it is irresponsible to try to convince people to follow an unsubstantiated system such as the CNS% clock (but I won't). You know I'm not stupid, and you know I've done my homework. Compartment-based deco models are bad enoug for the sorts of exposures we're doing. Aloha, Rich
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]