Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Steven, I would call this analogous to the captain of a ship at sea. This captain has crewmembers who are slackers and don't go by the book. The captain has written out procedures for his/her crewmembers to follow, but they do not. So the captain is responsible for the consequences, but it is the slacker crewmembers who are at fault. TDI has written a curriculum, and the instructor did not follow it. In my opinion, TDI is responsible, but the instructor is at fault. I say this because I believe, for additional reasons other than stated below, that I received instruction that was better than the curriculum provided by TDI. My instructor was, from what I gathered from your post, better than yours. So I would say the fault lies with your instructor, and not TDI. Chris Brown Suffolk, VA --- "Schultz, Steven" <Steven.Schultz@sp*.gc*.ca*> wrote: > Not TDI's fault!?!? Who do you think certified my > slack-ass instructor?? > > I admit, the instructor for my Nitrox course was > much worse than other TDI > instructors I've had. This guy's idea of a Nitrox > course was reading the > text book to me, then marking my test. I passed. I > got my C-card. > > This guy did not make me do any dives on nitrox. He > did not make me analyze > a mix. It was a short, one evenning course. > > This guy was honestly one of the worst instructors > I've ever had. He even > had trouble doing the basic math involved for the > nitrox course. You know, > solve a 3 variable equation by dividing or > multiplying. That's grade 7 > stuff. > > The instructor was an idiot. I've had a dog that > was smarter than him. You > know who certified him as an instructor... TDI. > Whose fault is it now? > > ss > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Brown > [mailto:hokiediver@ya*.co*] > Sent: October 14, 2000 10:15 PM > To: techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: TDI Nitrox Shingle > > > I can't believe I'm doing this, but I am a person > obsessed with attention to detail, so here goes: > > Steve Schultz wrote: > <snip> > I don't think that the problem is with recreational > nitrox. I think that the problem is the way that it > is taught by the agencies. > <snip> > > I agree that the problem is the way it is taught, > and > that a good instructor can make a bad program > better. > Mr Thomas Tukker's post about this holds true. > > <snip> > I proudly hide my tdi nitrox shingle and hope no one > ever asks to see it. When I took the course, they > said: > -always use a bottom p02 of 1.6 except on unusually > cold or strenuous dives (then use 1.4) > -in this area all dives are cold with current and > you > are used to it so there is no problem always diving > p02 of 1.6 > <snip> > > This is the part where my neck goes on the block. I > too, have a TDI Nitrox shingle. The TDI Nitrox book > says (I'm paraphrasing here) that originally the USN > (1963) and then NOAA (1990) reccomended the max PO2 > of > 1.6 for 45 minutes. TDI is referenceing the USN and > NOAA for this MAXIMUM value. > > The BOOK goes on to say (again paraphrasing) that > 1.4 > should be used for cold/strenuous dives. This is > the > part where the good instructor comes in. MY TDI > instructor told me that it was his opinion that 1.6 > should never be used. He and I had a long > discussion > about this and I used my drift-diving-in-Florida > example (sound familiar Jim Cobb?). My instructor > went on to explain the issues about O2 tox, and > basically told me it was better to be safe than > dead. > He said he personally uses 1.4 as a max. > > I think Mr. Steven Schultz's issues were with the > instructor teaching something contrary to what was > in > the course text. I my opinion, that makes it the > instructor's fault issue and not TDI's. > > I realize that TDI may not be teaching the correct > information in some courses. However, it appears in > this case that TDI has referenced some known > organizations for this material. I am only trying > to > clarify between what is a bad instructor's teaching > and what is the curriculum of the course, written in > black and white. > > Like someone else said...I will now step off the > soapbox and put on my flame retardant suit... > > Chris Brown > Suffolk VA > > > --- "Schultz, Steven" <Steven.Schultz@sp*.gc*.ca*> > wrote: > > Jim, > > > > I don't think that the problem is with > recreational > > nitrox. I think that > > the problem is the way that it is taught by the > > agencies. I proudly hide my > > tdi nitrox shingle and hope no one ever asks to > see > > it. > > > > When I took the course, they said: > > -always use a bottom p02 of 1.6 except on > unusually > > cold or strenuous dives > > (then use 1.4) > > -in this area all dives are cold with current and > > you are used to it, so > > there is no problem always diving p02 of 1.6 > > > > This is too stupid. I didn't realize that at the > > time (I was 17 yrs old). > > That was only a couple problems with the course. > > They also encouraged > > carrying a bottle of ean39 beyond its MOD for use > as > > a bailout gas. Where > > have we heard this crap before??? > > > > Nitrox shouldn't be used to avoid a few minutes of > > deco, but can be used to > > increase safety. A lot of people diving at > altitude > > dive ean as air to > > increase safety on recreational dives. > > > > The problem isn't with an 80 full of nitrox... The > > problem is how the > > industry teaches its use. > > > > ss > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Cobb [mailto:cobber@ci*.co*] > > Sent: October 10, 2000 10:13 PM > > To: klind@al*.ne*; dmdalton > > Cc: dwiden@ho*.co*; donburke56@ne*.ne*; 'Paul > > Braunbehrens'; > > techdiver@aquanaut.com > > Subject: Re: rec trimix > > > > > > Kent- > > > > I guess I was a little obscure. What I am saying > is > > the nitrox presumption > > that you can avoid deco for certain profiles by > > cranking up your PP02 to 1.5 > > or even 1.6. > > > > So I would not agree with the diver who does your > > hypothetical dive who, > > instead of using air and getting out of the water > at > > 20 mins, mixes a 40 > > nitrox to stay in for 40 mins. Personally I would > > prefer do 5 mins of deco > > on 02. This limits your overall exposure to to the > > high PP02's from 40 mins > > at 1.44 to 5 mins at 1.6 while at rest. In tech > > diving reserving your high > > PP02 for deco gives you the opportunity to do air > > breaks and give your lungs > > a rest, something you can't do at the bottom. > > > > Jim > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Learn About Trimix at > > http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/ > > > > > From: "Kent Lind" <klind@al*.ne*> > > > Reply-To: <klind@al*.ne*> > > > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:37:53 -0800 > > > To: <cobber@ci*.co*>, "dmdalton" > > <dmdalton@qu*.ne*> > > > Cc: <dwiden@ho*.co*>, <donburke56@ne*.ne*>, > > "'Paul Braunbehrens'" > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.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]