Andrew,

Planing a 250 FSW dive on a 17% O2 mix IS a violation of the standards.
The point, with regard to redundant boyancy, is that it violates the
"standards of the comunity".  I know of no compedent instructor that does
not require redundent flotation at that level of certification.  The
paragraph you cut reads in full:

>Forth from the information you presented this class was being conducted
out of standards.  A 17% mix at >250' gives a 1.47PpO2. for the bottom mix.
 If memory serves me IANTD limits PpO2 for bottom gas to 1.40 >ata.
Therefore,  the dive was NOT "in compliance with IANTD (International
Association Nitrox and >Technical Divers) standards".  And the "facts"
presented in the "press release" are FALSE!!!  The gas >choice for this
profile is suspect at best.

From the full quote it is clear what I said and what I ment by it.  Please
do not quote me out of context.  No where in my post did I clame, contend
or imply that redundent flotation was or is an IANTD standard (but perhaps
it should be).

Also if memory serves me the standards and procedures manual has been
updated TWICE since June 15, 1995.  Maybe only once.  But in eather event
it has been updated.  If you are an instructor you should be aware of that.
 You should also have the current standards ( but we won't go there).

At 12:47 AM 1/20/98 -0000, andrew wrote:
>
>
>On Monday, January 19, 1998 7:28 PM, Bill (aquadart) Bott 
>[SMTP:aquadart@ix*.ne*.co*] wrote:
>[snip]
>> Therefore,
>> the dive was NOT "in compliance with IANTD (International Association
>> Nitrox and Technical Divers) standards".  And the "facts" presented in 
>the
>> "press release" are FALSE!!!  The gas choice for this profile is suspect 
>at
>> best.
>
>[snip]
>
>> What we know for fact from this incident (note: I don't call it an
>> accident.  That is yet to be determined.) is that:
>> 2) Buoyancy problems due to lack of redundancy IS a contributing factor
>
>This got me thinking, so I whipped out the old IANTD Standards & Procedures 
>Manual, and checked up on the standards for the Trimix class, and lookie 
>what I found:
>
>E.  EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
>     2.  A primary BC and a backup BC are recommended.  If dry suits are 
>used the dry suit may be considered the back up.
>
>That came from page 55 of the June 15, 1995 edition of the IANTD Standards 
>and Procedures Manual.
>
>OK, so it only says _recommended_.  Odd.  Well, here is another point where 
>standards were violated.  Happy diving...
>
>Andrew
>andrew@ce*.co*.jp*
>--
>Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
>Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>
>
Bill (aquadart) Bott
--
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]