Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

From: "Paltz, Art" <Art.Paltz@R2*.CO*>
To: Tech Diver <Techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Subject: RE: Lots of deaths
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 18:48:05 -0400
I hope someday the WKPP, JJ or whatever it'll be called classes will be
offered up in the northeast.  Don't know if this will ever happen but
hey, one can hope!  I like reading about cave diving but I have little
interest in doing it myself, don't really like warm water diving either,
(sorry Florida guys, not a flame or a dig).  I know the classes would be
just as applicable to open water as to open ocean.  A class of this
nature, IMHO, should be given in the environment you'll be diving in to
give the most benefit.  A good tech class in the cold dark waters of the
North Atlantic would make my heart sing!  :-)  Naturally a course in
doing it right can't be given in a week.  If most are like me they can't
seem to get away from work long enough to dedicate the weeks for a
proper class.  Have to keep reading, listening to the right people and
doing it myself until qualified training is offered in my area.

Safe diving,
Art.
art.paltz@r2*.co*
Last Dive 9/27/97, The Pinta, NJ, 76ft/50 min bottom time, 67 degrees F,
28% bottom mix


	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Jim Cobb 
	Sent:	Wednesday, October 01, 1997 3:59 PM
	To:	CHKBOONE@ao*.co*; Tech Diver
	Subject:	Re: Lots of deaths

	Great post, Chuck. The problem is that you will never get rid of
the 
	current apparatus. As long as there are enough suckers to cough
up the 
	dough, these agencies will flourish. The only thing we can do is
spread 
	the word, vote with your feet and have a viable alternative,
hopefully 
	JJ's new agency can provide this. 

	One problem though, I don' think that a Doing It Right agency
would ever 
	be a huge money-machine like PADI, because you would have to
wash out too 
	many customers. Plus how much side money can you make selling a
simple 
	hogarth backplate system? Not much.

	I believe that the current tech agencies goal is to run as many
divers 
	through as many courses they can get away with and then hope not
enough 
	of them croak to discourage fresh meat.

	Fortunately for these agencies, off the US coasts you really
have to work 
	to get out to technical depths. Most of the graduates get killed
in wall 
	dives in the Caribbean or European dives where not much fuss is
made. An 
	added bonus to this is that the equipment is rarely recoverable,
keeping 
	new sales stable. I notice that the Aggressor fleet is offering 
	"technical" dives to 220ft on air. Wonder which agency is behind
this one?

	   Jim

	On 10/1/97 11:48 AM CHKBOONE@ao*.co* wrote:

	>
	>All,
	>
	>   Every time I turn around there is another death up here in
the technical
	>community.   George likes to blame most of it on deep air and
maybe he is
	>right, but I think it goes a little deeper.    
	>    When the tech agencies were first getting going everyone
hopped the
	>quality of training would remain high and we could avoid the
kind of
	>reputation the recreational world suffers from.   It appears
that just this
	>year we may well have approached their rate of casualties.
	>    What the hell is going on here ?   Business !   You can not
mix business
	>with training for this kind of endeavor without a strong moral
background
	>influence - such training as true technical diving requires a
mentor /
	>student relationship.   People are being trained to use the
hardware of life
	>support systems by teaching them how to follow a set of
procedures and they
	>are released into the wild without a true understanding and
respect for the
	>actual complexity and scope of what is really required to
survive this stuff
	>outside the training grounds. 
	>    The recreational industry can get away with teaching only
methodology
	>because practiced techniques will usually get you out of
situations
	>encountered within recreational limits - minimum brainers, if
you will.
	>  Also most of these people are actually "taken diving" by
people who have
	>already done the hard part - site evaluation and dive planning
so that there
	>is often little thinking required.
	>   It seems that this same philosophy is being injected into
the technical
	>world - teaching them to use the equipment to get themselves
into situations
	>they are not actually qualified to get themselves out of alive
because
	>technique and methodology is not enough. 
	>   These divers are taught how to plan gas consumption, deco
stops, and
	>partial pressure limits but are not taught how to prepare
applicable
	>contingency plans or to make a realistic evaluation of the
environment,
	>conditions, and risk.   People with no talent for the
organizational,
	>academic, and expeditionary aspects of every single technical
exposure are
	>brought into the fold to try their hand at the frontier without
a clue about
	>what they are actually getting into or what their actual status
is when
	>groping around at 250 feet and then being trapped under a
virtual or actual
	>overhead.
	>   Talent is the key word here !    I could never paint like
Rembrandt (sp)
	>not because I will not work at it but because I just don't have
the right
	>stuff.   The same thing applies to technical diving - you
either got it or
	>you ain't.   Even if you do have a talent for such things it is
a tremendous
	>amount of work just learn enough to be able to figure out what
it is you need
	>to know to handle technical exposures on your own recognizance
in reasonable
	>safety.   You can not afford ignorance here and no amount of
technique or
	>circus tricks ( the kind of thing that works for recreational
diving) will
	>substitute for a deep understanding or at least a suspicion of
what is
	>required to safely plan and execute such exposures for long.
	>   Eventually you will be put to the test and if you have
studied the wrong
	>things or if you can not manage the right things you will fail
and there is
	>no make up test.   The instructor fails his student when he
does not insure
	>that he has studied and mastered the right things.   Yes, there
is an element
	>of Zen to this stuff - recreational diving is a sport, true
technical diving
	>is a discipline. 
	>
	>   Three things need to be done about technical training in
general.   One is
	>that candidates need to be screened and those without the
necessary diving
	>experience and the ability or talent to manage a small
expedition safely
	>should be discouraged from venturing from the training grounds
till they can.
	>  Two is that training needs to focus strongly on a broad range
of aspects of
	>primary and contingency planning rather than just technique.
Three is that
	>some basics of pertinent peripheral disciplines need to be
taught so divers
	>can make informed decisions about equipment suitability,
preparation, and
	>maintenance.   Examples might include some basics about the
nature of metals
	>commonly encountered and some very basic engineering principles
applicable to
	>the type of equipment we deal with / more on the nature of and
dealing with
	>currents in open ocean environments / a little more depth on
the physiology
	>of decompression - even if much of this is only theoretical it
introduces the
	>issues at hand and arms the student to some extent against BS /
crisis
	>management as complicated by time limitations and entrapment /
contingency
	>planning beyond a bailout schedule / . . . .
	>   Yes!  All this would be time consuming but the student needs
to learn it
	>anyway and is much better off if guided through it than picking
it up in the
	>field from charlatans and gypsies - an education tainted by
significant
	>omissions and handed down misconceptions. 
	>
	>   You can not just "train" people like circus animals to do
this stuff the
	>way the recreational agencies do.   A chimpanzee can follow the
procedures
	>and escape most problems within recreational limits - that is
why any idiot
	>off the street can scuba dive and put that stupid license plate
on the front
	>of his car.   Some people actually think of technical diving as
just an
	>extension of recreational diving - Joel Dovenbarger is one of
them.
	>
	>-----------------------------------------
	>Copied from AOL Scuba Forum :
	>
	>Subj:  Re:Dive Fatalities
	>Date:  97-08-27 21:20:01 EDT
	>From:  JDovenbarg   
	>.. . . . . . . . . . .
	>>I have to admit that in the beginning I wanted to list the
tech folks
	>>separately from other recreationals, but was over ruled by
everyone in the
	>>know universe at that time.  In hind sight they were right,
tech diving is
	>>just another level of recreational diving. 
	>---------------------------------------
	>
	>   Perhaps Joel is motivated by the politics of insurance in
this case but
	>this idea is a dangerous one that has obviously spread and even
if such
	>remarks are intended only to be meaningful with respect to
insurance matters
	>they are not likely to be interpreted by the diving public as
such if not
	>qualified when made. 
	>
	>   Because of the reliability of modern equipment and the lack
of a real need
	>to plan dives from start to finish independently divers can
work their way
	>through recreational training and lots of diving then enter the
technical
	>arena having never had to manage a real emergency, never had to
evaluate all
	>the aspects of a dive on their own, and never had to seriously
take or share
	>responsibility for the safety of another being.   Many have
never even seen
	>the scales left behind by the dragon yet they are given the
means to play
	>about the gates of hell - unarmed and unsuspecting.
	>
	>   Is the day of the $99 trimix course coming?   For God's sake
get the
	>destructive elements of commerce, economics, and competition
that has ruined
	>the credibility of recreational credentials out of the
technical training
	>arena.   There is no place for "modular" step by step programs
on video here.
	>   If a student's or instructor's lack of  time to establish
and maintain a
	>mentor relationship is accommodated in the case of a candidate
who needs the
	>exposure and molding then how is the student going to
ultimately approach the
	>diving itself once he is on his own ?   
	>   If an instructor is concerned with losing a student by
telling him how
	>easy it is to get killed doing this, by concentrating heavily
on accident
	>analysis as a teaching tool, or by making it too hard in
general then he has
	>no business trying to prepare humans to survive entrapment in
an alien
	>environment in what amounts to a fallible space suit.   If it
is too much for
	>the student then he should stay in the shallows. 
	>
	>   You can teach a man to drive a ship but if he is ever going
to leave port
	>with reasonable expectations of returning he needs to be a
seaman.   
	>
	>   I feel much better now !
	>
	>Chuck
	> 
	>
	>
	>
	>--
	>Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to
`techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
	>Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to
`techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
	--
	Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to
`techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
	Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to
`techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe 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]