G. Irvine wrote: > > Thomas A. Easop wrote: > > Tom, then if you can swim them ( yuor steels) up , you do not need the > double bc. At the end of the bottom time, when your cylanders and mine are lightest, if I still had to rely on just my suit for bouyancy, and/or fin to ascend, a cascade of other problems would begin. For one, my RMV would be increased due to the finning and so I would consume more gas than I had planned. And I plan my pp02 in deco gases for resting deco, not swimming deco. I don't know I want to chance that. Also, when I've had to use my suit for bouyancy it felt like I was being lynched. The suit pushed up on my neck while all my equipment pulled down on my shoulders. Having another bladder in the BCD would have been appreciated. I'm also thinking if such a strain could have predisposed me to DCI (I did not have any), and what if my neck seal failed with all that "stress" on it? > If we want to do somethning cold or longer or deeper , drysuit with > 104's would be the correct choice. Dry suit diving is what I was refering to. I would like to know where "Tom's article" which we refer to is published and I would like to get the entire thread so I have all the facts. > Convoluteing the rig wtih doubole > bc's is a dangerous choise and implies not doing it right to start with, > as Bill Mee suggested. We get lots of chances to try everything with the > wyear round diving we have, and we have tried every stupid think you can > think of, and already know it is a cluster. I know you would consider the added bladder uneeded and the additional low preasure hose a failure point but please explain to me how a charlie foxtrot arises from this. Tom -- 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]