Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Never. Used to have a neoprene drysuit and now I have a trilam. I dove down in FL with a drysuit and enjoyed it thoroughly. Although it did get a bit warm on the surface I was glad to have it on the bottom where even in Fl the bottom can be cool at 200'. Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------- Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/ > From: "Patrick Norris" <pbnorris@bi*.co*> > Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:18:35 -0400 > To: "Tech Diver" <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > Subject: Re: H/Y valves, Pony bottles, Invisible demons. > > Jim: > > Do you use double 104's with a wetsuit? > > > Patrick > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*> > To: "Tech Diver" <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 3:28 PM > Subject: Re: H/Y valves, Pony bottles, Invisible demons. > > >> 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'. > > > -- > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.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]