Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
At 10:38 PM 27/05/1998 -0700, John Walker wrote: > (1) As for the cylinder markings: Like I've told many others, I do >like the way WKPP marks their cylinders but I see one problem. For >thoughs how have made comments about the pricy stickers that agencies >sell. The person filling the cylinder (most of the time at a dive shop) >would probably feel more at ease if their were an official type of a >marking stating that the cylinder has been cleaned for O2 service and I >know this is no guarantee that it has been, but anyone could simply >stencil 3" letters onto the sides of a bottle. So, in that case I feel >at least this sticker(or someother official type of marking)would be >appropriate. Anyone can stick a "promise I'm a clean cylinder" sticker on a cylinder. But that's moot. The REAL problem occurs in the water when task-loaded students can't easily and quickly see what's in the cylinder they're breathing off. And when agencies like yours refuse to acknowledge the problem and, in fact, perpetuate it. John, I'd feel better about you if you actually TEACH WKPP bottle marking standards to all of your tech students instead of merely continuing the training agencies' mismanagement of the problem. Anyway, you still didn't answer the question. Here it is again: >>1. What's your honest opinion of IANTD's bottle marking standards? > (2)As for weather or not I think trimix instructors should observe each >student switch gases. I do! And I watch them like a hawk! Remember this, >all instructors are not created equal. No matter what agency your with. I didn't ask if the instructor should observe each student switching gases, I asked if each of the student's gas switches should be observed. The distinction is not trivial since the question requires the instructor to not let a single gas switch go unobserved. Anyway, at least you agree that watching the gas switches is fundamentally important. Yet here we have an instructor who failed to carry out this most basic requirement and duty. Which indicates that someone - an Instructor Trainer no less - has failed to detect and eliminate this dangerously incompetent instructor. This is why I think all of you instructors who are trying to shift responsibility onto the students haven't realised the fundamental idiocy of your position. John, in another post, you wrote: >As a technical instructor myself, I know that every student reads and >signs a statement of understanding acknowledging that they are >participating in a hazardous activity, and they must assume the risks >before starting such a course. These risks include the possibility of >death along with other risks. If a qualified Instructor Trainer who has worked WITH the instructor can't pick him up as dangerously incompetent, you can't in all honesty expect a student to see, know and evaluate the risk. You can't make someone responsible for something they have no knowledge of. Therefore, the student can't be responsible for the outcome of the course. Your arguments about student responsibility are made merely to let you off the hook if a student dies. It seems there is a fundamental problem here. And no amount of swearing and abuse will make it go away. > Also, >why would it make it easier for the newbie student to be less confused >as to which gas they are reaching for by wearing them in this fashion >apposed to wearing them like most agencies promote(higher PO2 towards >the right). Needless to say most newbie techdiver students are neither >riding a scotter or wearing a canister light. Clearly marked cylinders enable divers to notice if other divers are breathing the wrong deco gas. Relying on cylinder placement to ID the gas does not enable divers to notice if other divers are breathing the wrong deco gas. Clearly marked cylinders enable the diver to easily ID the gas he/she is breathing. Relying on cylinder placement to ID the gas does not enable the diver to easily ID the gas he/she is breathing - especially during the switch when they are momentarily busy. How often have you seen preoccupied people confuse left and right? Got it yet? > Whitney or Ian or maybe it was even George said to look this up on >their web page but I haven't found this yet. Why am I not surprised? >(4) There are NOT a bunch of courses to take at the degree you try to >show it. You can take training to what ever degree you would like. And >choose what ever avenue you would like to go. Maybe wrecks, caves, >rebreathers or just plain deep. Would'nt quality diver...etc...etc... Johnny, regarding the rest of your stuff, I couldn't be bothered replying to most of it, but I'd like to say I was appalled by the endless and incoherent catalogue of halfway-to-nowhere IANTD courses you listed. It proves my point perfectly. Here's the REAL learning requirements: Nitrox theory Decompression theory and practice Trimix theory and practice Here's the IANTD hall of mirrors bullshit catalogue: Basic EANx Advanced EANx (with or without Deep Air!) Advanced Deep Air Technical EANx Intermediate Trimix Full Trimix Confuse 'em then soak 'em. It's a total con to try to convince the market that technical diving is oh-so complicated and involved that you'll need to be welded to an IANTD instructor for the next three years. Take trimix for example: To add ONE GAS, IANTD teaches TWO courses! > ...and for thoughs of you that want to conplain to me > about my spelling, FUK U. No, I don't want to complain about your spelling. It's your thinking that's fucked. rgds billyw -- 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]