Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:28:12 -0400
Subject: Re: H/Y valves, Pony bottles, Invisible demons.
From: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*>
To: Tech Diver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Sure I respect your opinion. Personally I dive rigged the same way north or
south, deep or shallow, and that is with double 104's. I do have a single
tank rig for an occasional Florida rec dive with my wife and for fooling
around in pools but other than that I have not dove a single since I gave up
the H valve.

And please keep in mind that this is "techdiver" and all of my replies are
oriented in that respect. I have seen tiny Pina hop around a boat, seasick
as hell with 104's on her back and not even break a sweat (perhaps because
she had puked out all her bodily fluids [and what a body!]). Therefore I
have no respect whatsoever to those who can't hoist a set of doubles.

But you will have have to explain that part about executing divers who don't
come 'round to your way of thinking, a bit Nazi-ish and Hilter-like if you
ask me. 

Ooops!

   Jim
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
 Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/

> From: RDecker388@ao*.co*
> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:46:12 EDT
> To: cobber@ci*.co*
> Cc: techdiver@aquanaut.com
> Subject: Re: H/Y valves, Pony bottles, Invisible demons.
> 
> In a message dated 7/9/01 8:06:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> cobber@ci*.co* writes:
> 
>> I repeat I have nothing to do with GUE or DIR.
>> 
> Nor do I, but I do have the sense to pay attention to what they have to say
> and at a minimum to give it due consideration.
> 
>>> 1) Smaller profile
>> 
>> To do what, wreck penetrations? And I can also state that a proper set of
>> doubles has less of a horizontal hight than a single any day of the week.
>> 
> 
> Smaller profile as in reduced frontal area, as in a general reduction in
> swimming resistance.
> 
>>> 2) Reduced weight
>> 
>> That's funny when I'm underwater (you do dive don't you?) I cannot seem to
>> tell the difference in weight.
>> 
> 
> The dive begins and ends out of the water.  Weight does become a
> consideration when climbing a pitch, rolling dive boat ladder on a snotty
> day.  While it may be somewhat of a surprise, the majority of divers aren't
> finely tuned atheletes.  Hell, a fair share of them can't stuff themself into
> a XXXL drysuit comfortably.  What's happening inside a diver's body as he
> surfaces and exits the water?  (Here's a clue, tiny bubbles....).  How does
> post dive exertion affect the formulation of bubbles in the diver's body?
> (Another clue, lots of tiny bubbles).  Do you figure some fat slob - shows up
> for a dive once in a great while - computer keyboard dive guru is better off
> from a DCS point of view climbing that pitching, rolling ladder wearing one
> tank or two? (And yes, I do dive.  I did six dives over the weekend, nothing
> too dramatic mind you, but 6 dives just the same: 2 @ 110+, 2 @ 70+, 2 @ 60+,
> 4 involving penetrations, 2 requiring deco.... and you dove what Saturday and
> Sunday?)
> 
>>> 3) Decreased drag
>> 
>> Can you prove this? I doubt the difference is worth noting when you
> consider
>> all the other crap, lights, gear bags, etc.
>> 
> 
> Any difference is worth noting.  Why bother diving a SPG without a boot?
> That's got to present an insignificant contribution to drag.  Why put that
> SPG on a short hose and clip is so the hose runs in line with the flow of
> water?  Couldn't possibly add as much drag as an additional tank.  The
> canister is shielded from flow and potential damage by the shoulder because
> why?
> 
>>> 4) Readily available
>> 
>> I can drive down to the dive shop and purchase a set of doubles right now
> if
>> I want.
>> 
> 
> Now fly down to the Caribbean and rent a set.
> 
>>> 5) Reduced space requirements
>> 
>> So you have 2 tanks separate or together, don't understand your reasoning
>> here. They take up the same room
>> 
> 
> If most divers showed up with one set for two dives, sure.  But they don't.
> Two weenie dives and a set of doubles for each.  That's twice the space and
> wieght for the same diving.
> 
>>> 6) KISS: Keep It Simple, Stupid
>> 
>> My whole point with bagging the H or Y valve.
>> 
> 
> They are no more complex to deal with than an isolation manifold.
> 
>> Good Lord I have not seen such frothing at the mouth since the last time I
>> said that pony bottles were crap. Pony bottles and H/Y valves are
> psudo-tech
>> bullshit and you bone-heads out there need to pull your heads out of your
>> asses and try a set of doubles, you bunch of fucking cheapskates. Doubles
>> are redundant flasks of air connected by an isolator valve. H/Y valves and
>> Pony bottles are just you guys fighting with invisible demons. Preparing
>> most for the disasters that are least likely to happen.
>> 
> 
> If you want to see some real frothing, go look in the mirror.  Speaking of
> cheapskates, wouldn't that be the guy not willing to have all the tools at
> his disposal?  I own singles and doubles, along with several bottles
> dedicated as stages.  Seems to me the tight ass is the fellow diving doubles
> even when they're not called for because he isn't willing to invest in a
> couple of decent singles.
> 
> And talk about fighting with invisible demons, what the hell do you think
> insisting on the level of redundancy provided by a pair of doubles for a
> weenie dive is?  Catastrophic gas loss is so rare as to be virtually a
> non-problem.  If one were to occur, as long as there's a qualified dive
> partner along it's still not much more than an inconvenience.
> 
> There are dives that can be done as well, if not better, using a single tank.
> If one is going to use a single tank then a dual outlet valve simply makes
> sense.  Why in the hell would anyone want to have to change hoses around to
> accomodate the switch between doubles and singles?  How could anyone with any
> brain matter left in their head that hasn't been damaged by incorrect
> stage-decompression and deep air horse pucky not understand that redundant
> regulator systems are superior to betting the entire farm on a single
> first-stage?  Single tank dives happen.  They should happen with a dual
> outlet valve. (Now pony bottles are an entirely different animal and we
> happen to agree on that subject).
> 
> 
>> Reg failures are exceeding rare. Needing more air than you've got all the
>> time. So what do you bozos do? Do nothing about your air supply and strap
> on
>> 2 regulators. That really makes sense. And then you defend this shit to the
>> death.
>> 
> 
> Gas supply is always a finite quantity.  Whether one is wearing a single or a
> set of doubles, there is only so much gas at their disposal.  The answer is
> employing a reasonable gas management scheme, not increasing the gas volume.
> Without proper management the bozos simply push that to close to the edge as
> well.  Want more time underwater, try working on improving RMV.  More volume
> is not the end to all ends.
> 
>> There are always particular circumstances for this or that. Ice diving may
>> be one of them, I don't know as I've never done it. But the point is that
>> putting a H/Y valve or strapping a pony does not a techdiver make.
>> 
> 
> I have done ice dives, and a fair share of dives in near freezing water minus
> the ice.  Perhaps that's part of my partiality towards redundant regualtor
> systems on single tanks, perhaps not.
> 
> An H/Y valve or pony does not a technical diver make.  Nor does diving a set
> of twins.  Technical diving has to do with selecting the correct tools
> (TECHnology) for the job at hand and then employing the right TECHnique.
> It's not about how deep you go, how macho you look with your big, bad doubles
> it's about extending time, depth and/or distance while keeping risk at an
> acceptable level.  There are different levels of technical diving.  Every
> diver isn't making "the big dives."  Fact be known, most of them shouldn't
> be.  For limited penetrations or short, decompressions a large volume single
> with an H/Y valve is sufficient (assuming, of course, the presence of a dive
> partner and the application of gas management rules).  People need to learn
> to walk before they run.  Strap a pair of doubles on their backs and they're
> going to be faced with the temptation to penetrate further, dive deeper and
> stay longer than they're ready for.  Let em dive their singles and build some
> experience for Christ's sake.
> 
>> Doubles are balanced, redundant, comfortable (both on the surface and in
> the
>> water) and anybody who says otherwise has not tried a set of properly setup
>> doubles.
>> 
> 
> Never said they weren't balanced, redundant nor comfortable.  And yes, mine
> are set-up quite properly thank you.
> 
>> And for those of you who travel, simple, don't overhead dive. There is
>> nothing down there worth dieing for, why take the risk?
>> 
> 
> Where's this invisible demon "risk" you keep talking about?  A penetration
> dive properly conducted with a competent, experienced, trained teammate,
> whether using doubles or singles is not particularly laden with risk.  Leave
> out the buddy, ignore gas management, break the rules of accident analysis
> and risk starts getting out of hand, with or without the twin set.
> 
> You're not a bad person, Jim.  Nor are you a dumby.  Our opinions simply
> differ on this topic.  While you're a gifted debater, you're no more likely
> to change my position than I am to change your's.  I'm a minimalist by
> nature.  "Less is more, more is less."  I don't believe in diving a pair of
> 120s when a pair of 80s will do.  I don't lug around an 80 of O2 when all I
> need is a 30.  And I don't strap on a couple hundred cubic feet of gas when
> all I need is 100.  You're welcome to disagree with my thinking, debate my
> logic and express your point of view.  Hopefully you'll respect my right to
> do the same concerning your's.
> 
> Personally, I think this is one dead horse well beaten.  Both sides have been
> expressed, perhaps even eloquently at times.  Maybe it's time to let the
> peanut gallery digest the discussion and draw their own conclusions?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob D.
> www.SportDiverHQ.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]