Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Gentlemen, doing a dive on air because trimix is not available is weak. This is not good planning, again, the "Flawed Concept". The dives will still be there, but will you be there to do them ? See the WKPP web page "History" section where Parker Turner discusses how we came to gas. I remember asking him, "Parker, what would you do in that situation?". He said, "Easy, man, you don't". CHKBOONE@ao*.co* wrote: > > >> George, > >> > >> > Everyone knows that narcosis exists, so there is really no reason to > >> >intentionally subject oneself to it as a matter of a course in > >> >"technical diving", since the reason we are taking courses in technical > >> >diving is so we do not have to dive deep on air. > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------- > >> I agree that this should be unnecessary but there is a huge contingent of > non > >> believers out there. <snip> > > >Chuck, > > >They're already taking the class, at that point selling IT shouldn't be > >necessary. > > ----------------------------- > Granted! You're absolutely right on this. But the divers I spoke of on the > expedition boat diving air to 240 were both trimix divers diving air because > trimix was not available. > > ----------------------------- > >> Within only a few weeks I happened to be diving with two new open water > >> divers off the northern Gulf. Both were appalled to realize that they > were > >> just following my lead .... > > >I doubt that appalled is the correct word here. This is just an > >assumption but maybe "clueless" would be more apt (This is NOT meant to > >demean their good sense in following your lead.) > > >Shaun > > --------------------------------- > I should clarify that I was not leading them; both were simply dive partners. > I was on a computer and they were not. Neither one realized how little > air they had left or how much time had passed and if you had seen their faces > when I looked at their gauges and then they looked you would agree that they > were appalled but not too clueless to realize what they had done. > > These were both 70 to 80 foot dives on recreational wrecks. I was diving > with strokes in violation of rule no 1 but was at least not in any way > dependent on them. > I had every reason to expect them to be able to keep track of their time and > air and notify me if any problems arose on such a routine dive. They were > just having a good old time expecting me to make sure everything was ok when > I was expecting them to act like certified divers. Well ! I suppose they > were. > > It is only because I checked their status myself when I suspected that they > should be getting close to the limits of air and time that everything came > off without a hitch. > > Chuck -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]