Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
) Subject: Re: Bret on pPO2 To: "Peter N.R. Heseltine" <heseltin@hs*.us*.ed*> Cc: techdiver@terra.net Peter As you have already pointed out the post of me asking how can you is a fake. But on IANTD and po2 In recreational no stop diving we use the following 1.6 ata is the redline it is a what if depth/mod. In other words if a dive is at a sight with a depth grewater than the planned dive depth that po2 limit is set at 1.6 ata. It is meant to be acheived only by accident iand is used as a cover your ass what if part of the dive plan. light work to moderate allows a po2 of 1.5 and work with cold etcis 1.4 ata. in dives requiring deco stops or extended duration or depth the what if redline is set at 1.5 ata with an operational diving limit of 1.4 ata. example adive to 270 with a what if dive of 330. In this case although the diver does not plan to descend to 330 the dive plan will still be limted to a po2 not to exceed 1.5 in this case that would mean the operational depth po2 would wind up being much less thab the allowable 1.4 ata (dependent on dive and deco duration) Personally I do not even like to use 1.6 on decompression. Tom mount You wrote: > >On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Tom Mount wrote: > >> Peter, how can you post this crap on here? > >Tom, I posted it because it came to me, not just as Bret Gilliam writing >his own opinion, but signed CEO, Uwatec USA "responsible for Uwatec >product in the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean". While I don't expect you >to take responsibility for his (or anyone's) writings, Bret is >representing your industry. Most sport divers, like myself believe that >while there are differences among the various training agencies, it's more >based on geography and personalities than profound differences in basic >physics and safety. > >Bret has published these opinions about O2 toxicity in a nationally read >sport diver newsletter "UnderCurrent", where his opinion was the *only* >one expressed. My guess is that the circulation of UnderCurrent is bigger >than the techdiver thread; I could be wrong. It's certainly less informed >and so more prone to believe the pronouncements of "an industry >spokesman". > >Second, he has included all other "tech agency"/organizations as sharing >his opinion. At least the other training organizations could write to the >newsletter and say he doesn't represent them. > >Besides, I left the real *crap* in the letter out of the post. Among other >crazy stuff, he's convinced that I am plotting to sabotage his >relationship with Uwatec. > >> Pete, you can not teach a pig to sing, and you can not fix stupid. > >I gave up choral when my voice broke, but I still ham it up. I could care >less about changing Bret's views. However, I think that he *will* >influence others, even some who have taken IANTD's course, maybe even some >who teach it, because he is a very well known name and, as he points out, >has 30 years diving experience. He's a name in your field. > >-ph > >
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]