Disregard this paragraph, its here just to fool the server. It thinks I'm trying to subscribe or something. The good stuff starts below. Dan Volker wrote: > Jane was in a dry suit. Another area Wrolf is clearly not competent to make > "educated" guesses. > When she ascended from 40 to 30 feet, her drysuit began to gain positive > lift, along with her BC, so she vented her dry suit. having only done 2 dry > suit dives before, her saftey margin in operating her dry suit in a 300 foot > water collumn was similar to allowing a Wrolf to land a 747 jumbo jet with > two flying lessons----chances for catastrophic errors were enormous. The > instructor who allowed either scenario would need to be held criminally > negligent. Unfortuantely, IANTD does not seem to agree with this, based on > their lack of actions in response to this matter. > > As to the wings---had they been Dive Rite or Halcyon ( non-bondage variety) > , even her operational mistake with the dry suit would have been > correctable. Between her leaky inflator assembly ( which was applying less > air pressure to the wings in response to pressing the inflator button) and > her suicide wings which were wrapped by bungees so tight that they had far > less lift capacity through smaller volume which would stay filled, Jane > began sinking quickly once she got negative, and the only reflex she had > learned was to inflate her BC for lift---relyance on this, particularly > since she was using bondage wings, was the immediate cause of her > re-descent to the bottom. Dan, you and George are panic. Convolution. A favorite term of the Floridacave elite now describes your own logic. Convolution #1 You claim a conclusion that Jane died becuase she had bondage wings. But above you state that she makes mistakes diving: she can't control her own bouyancy since she is using unfamiliar equipment (the dry suit), all while racking up huge deco during a training dive. Yes she went to her wing instinctively, only after she botched her bouyancy with the suit. How come its not the suit's fault? I bet that would be your analysis if she had died using a halcion wing. Why isn't just her fault for being in the class, doing a massive dive, with an unfamiliar suit? Why didn't she just try adding to the suit again? This is all I meant when I said to George, privately by the way, that these deaths are caused by stupidity (or more eloquently, poor judgement), not equipment. Convolution #2 You say its all the instructors fault. If he thought doing this dive using an unfamiliar suit was ok, he is in some trouble legally, and ethically. But it was Jane who was in the best position to ensure her own safety. Shouldn't any diver taking a tech class know better than to learn new skills with already unfamiliar equipment? That is why I said previously tech students are not newbies, should have firm fundamental skills, and instructors are not 100% at fault when a big dive, trraining dive or not, goes south. Convolution #3 You and George point out the Jane's Medical Examiner cites the use of bondage wings as a cause of death. George claims OMS has been named in a suit. And I suppose that the both of you will gleefully testify using the ME report in court. But you have already stated on the list you advised the ME that bondage wings are dangerous in your opinion, and now its her opinion and in her report. Don't you think a jury will see through the official ME report and find its just you and George in a big convoluted self righteoud circle jerk? I do. And you can be sure these emails will be given to "my shithead buddies" at OMS so that their lawyers can counter all your nonsense. Tom The Guns and Armour of Scapa Flow Scotland www.gunsofscapa.demon.co.uk -- 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]