Tom-

I am shocked at this outburst of yours. Refusing Mark would mean the lost 
of $300 a year instructor fee, the $1200 crossover fee plus the much 
needed $450 per year injection into the liability fund.

Please reconsider the dramatic financial implications of your decision! 
Has the board of directors been notified of the impact this will have on 
the bottom line?? 

   Jim

Sender: Tom Mount  Date: 8/18/99 11:24 AM

>Mark
>
>Having had the description of your dive read to me over the phone I would
>like to offer the following comments:
>
>1. First the dive sounded like the biggest screw up I have ever seen
>published. You were obviously out of it, lets see blind, overinflation of =
BC
>to the point of rupturing the bladder, estimates of 130 meter/min ascent
>rate due to loss of buoyancy control. etc etc.
>
>2. It sounds like you are damn lucky to be alive and that if anything this
>should have taught you the reason to avoid ultra deep air divers rather th=
an
>have a desire to teach it to 70 meters.
>
>3. That your mental frame of mind as to the approach to do deep dives is
>outdated by 30 years or so and numerous deaths are proof of this outdated
>mind set
>
>4. You must be unaware that IANTD only offers air diving courses to a max
>depth of 51 meters and that a sister program to this course is Normoxic
>Trimix
>which is essentially the same program except all divers deeper than 40
>meters are made on trimix and it will allow dives to 60 m. With your goal =
to
>teach deep air to 70 + meters you certainly do not need an affiliation wit=
h
>IANTD where this practice is expressively FORBIDDEN
>
>5. After completing the dive you did and still wish to promote this type o=
f
>activity as such you would represent everything IANTD is trying to
>discourage and avoid, thus you crossing over to IANTD is a little absurd.
>
>6.  While if you had learned from this experience and god knows you had so=
me
>good clues dropped to you on the dangers of this type of activity
>A. Blind at 100 m (but you continued the dive to 158m) time for a sanity
>check,
>B. explosive ascent due to loss of control for whatever reason
>C. The need to do a omitted deco procedure because you could not recover
>your buoyancy on the dive and various other comments you made concerning t=
he
>dive.
>
>As stated if you had learned instead of being intrigued by that dive, you
>may have had good rational to share with divers about avoiding ultra deep
>air diving but it seems your primary goal is to teach air diving to depths
>that exceed accepted oxygen and nitrogen limits, Sorry that is something
>that will not be done under the IANTD umbrella. I recommend you stick with
>your present training agencies maybe they will allow this but we will not.
>
>7. While I agree with your statement on the rights of an individual to tak=
e
>risk on a personal level I cannot share your enthusiasm about wanting to
>encourage others to do this type (ultra deep air)activity. Plus I find it
>difficult to see your logic in wishing to do a 158 m air dive in the first
>place when there are other ways to have adventure and take risk that are n=
ot
>proven both in theory and in practice physiologically insane endeavors.
>
>8.All you proved is for some reason on this one day, you as one person,
>survived a dive to 158 m. I hope you at least picked up enough warnings fr=
om
>the events that happened to you to avoid this kind of a dive in the future=

--
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]