Anker Berg-Sonne wrote:

As I stated to you in private I do not set the standards they are 
reviewed twice each year by our BOA international liceensed 
representatives and then the BOD. Notice on changes are then sent to 
instructors. Each year there are changes that range from minor to 
dropping or creating programs. Ie the last program we dropped was 
technical deep air.

Below is a copy of a letter I sent in private to someone else thart 
explains why we think not teaching deep aoir to the depths we do would 
be totally irresponsible.

Dear name removed,

I have explanined to you why we teach to the depths we do and why I 
personally wil never train a person on mix that does not have dive 
experience to 160 ft. 

You proclaim mix as a solve all problems gas. In fact mix training in 
open water/ wrecks is most likely the most hazzardous divcer education 
program taught. there is far more risk in mix training associated with 
total equipment dependency, more self discipline, and the list could go 
for pages and pages.  Prehaps you should set through a complate ad deep 
air , tech eanx then trimix course I think it would change your mind 
dramticaly about what we do and why we do and why it is neccessary to 
these programs.
Another facet I have pointed out is mix is not available everywhere in 
the world, mix is expensive, in some countries it is illegal to dive 
mix.

Also commercial companies respect mix dives to the point that they 
require chambers on site. There are some seriuous risk which we think in 
our graduated programs we miminumize.

Also the international standard on diving is 50 meters /165 ft not 130 
ft/39m. 

Backgropund at RSMAS we did collectively thousands of dives by resarch 
scientist to depths up to 200 feet each year without one single incident 
 in the ten years we had the program. At the same time all these 
scientist who had a need for deeper research utlized out heliox program 
(we did not use trimix) and made dives to a max of 300 feet/ 91 meters 
also without incident. these same people would opt for air on all there 
work above 190 due to ease of use, logistics and availability.

You will also find people who have been trained to these depths(160 to 
180) are much easier to convert to mix and by that time they have 
devloped the skills to safely make that transcition.

Also you must be aware that almost all divers in areas such as the 
entire east coast of the USA, the Great Lakes etc. do dive deep on air 
with or with out training. Those who do so without training learn by 
survival and thus several things happen, 
  One they keep going deeper and you have the 250 foot air dives taking 
place,

  Two many do not survive this process as they get progressively deeper 

  Three they are at risk due to no knowledge of gas management, improper 
equipment etc.

  Responsible training is the only solution to avoiding these learn by 
survival dives and was the reason we orginally after a couple of years 
of dicussion decided to offer these programs. The courses are structured 
to develop a strong physiology background concering depth and its risk 
on all factors, the influences of all breathing gases and there effects 
are hit strongly. Skills are used to demonstrate that although most 
divers feel normal we can show them the decreased motor skills and it is 
then easy for them to make the mental as well as physcial switch to gas. 

Failure to offer these programs forces divers into the learn by survival 
mode and we feel that is a totally unacceptable situtation . Thus IANTD 
will be a responsible organization and provide the programs most suited 
to the demands and needs of the industry and to the most effective means 
of increasing diver safety.

We think your recommendations of mix at 100 feet would result in a 
return to the old timer learn by survival mode and these people are much 
more difficult to convert to gas diving that properly educated divers.

We deply discourage dives beyond the depths we teach to be be pursued on 
air and from our follow up questionaisre we are around 95 % effective 
and we have also with this approach converted old time deep air "Doria 
divers " etc to mix  . These people would have laughed at the thought of 
mix at 140, just as I would have .

As I have told you earlier for the logistics , cost etc, like of ease of 
bailout, i personally will always opt to dive air to the 180 mark. 


We have already established mix as the safest alternative to deepre 
diving, the need to do this is also one of the other reasons we must 
tech deep air to the depths we do. If we did not we would not reach 80% 
of the divers we do. The majority of students come into the deep air 
programs with no interest in mix, the air programs are effective enough 
that around 95% of these then do go on to get treaining in mix diving. 
Again with out the air dives they simply would not reach ta point of 
interest in gas diving. 

Beleive me insisting on mix at 100 feet will not fly in the industry. 
this past weekend 100's of divers dived between 100 and 160 feet on non 
technical div charters and that is a routine every week end practivce 
and we would rightfully become the laughing stock of the industry if we 
demanded that.

Why don't you ask many in the international community about how 
difficult it is in Some places to get the community ther away from 240 
air dives ,  Telling these people they would have to dive mix at 100 
feet would totally destroy thier and IANTD's creadiability

Respectfully
Tom
> 
> Tom,
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Tom Mount [SMTP:TOM.MOUNT@wo*.at*.ne*]
> Sent:   Wednesday, May 28, 1997 4:47 PM
> To:     gmirvine@sa*.ne*
> Cc:     cavers@ge*.co*; techdiver@aquanaut.com
> Subject:        Re: Standards, Deep Air, Narcotic Mixes - Three Wedings and a
few Funerals
> 
> <snip>
> Again, these are and will remain our standards
> 
> A statement like this is pig-headed and stubborn. You should always be
prepared to review your standards if evidence shows that they may be 
inappropriate. I am
> 
> Tom
> 
> -------------------------
> Anker Berg-Sonne
> (508) 897-1750
> anker@ul*.co*
--
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]