Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
--=====================_8713118==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:10 AM 8/30/01 -0400, you wrote: > >Trey: >So do you personally advocate overfilling AL80's by about 17%, or is >overfilling an official GUE policy? If it is GUE policy, how do they hope >to avoid a lawsuit when the one and a million tank blows? How about one "in a million"? > Also, when >advertising as the only agency from whom one can learn to tech dive safely, >how do they justify teaching such strokery as consistantly overfilling AL >tanks? W/ steel it's fine, but aluminum does not have the elasticity of the >steel. > >I think this is one of those cases where common practice does not match the >published standards. A gentleman would simply acknowledge that and give a >recommendation on whether the standard needs to be changed or the practice >of using the AL80's should be discontinued. Personally, I'd recomend >changing the standard to specify steel for drysuit or cave divers >(assumption there, I'm not a cave diver so I may be wrong) and Aluminum for >wetsuit divers. Guess what, the standard is already al tanks only when diving wet suits, steel tanks allowed when diving dry. Note that this is allowed, not required as certain applications benefit from al tanks even if diving dry suits. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Trey" <trey@ne*.co*> >To: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Paul M. Deniston" ><pdeniston@me*.ne*> >Cc: <techdiver@aquanaut.com>; "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>; "Steve >Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry michael" ><OEA51@go*.co*>; "Rocky" <rocdiver@be*.ne*> >Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:50 AM >Subject: RE: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > > > Actually , 80's at 3500 are about 95 cu feet. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: marv [mailto:ajmarve@op*.ne*] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:59 PM > > To: Paul M. Deniston > > Cc: Trey; techdiver@aquanaut.com; Jim Cobb; Steve Schultz; terry > > michael; Rocky > > Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > > > > > well if you want to split hairs it says: > > > > "students are required to use a manifold assembly with twin tanks, each > > with an individual capacity of 95ft" > > > > It might be read to state that the tanks need not be 95's, but the > > manifold assembly must have at least 95 cuft. i.e. no oms double 46's or > > ancient usd double 38's or whatever you can get at the back table of the > > divers flea market. > > > > or it could mean you have to have back mounted quads. > > > > or it could be about selling 104's < who would do such a thing?> > > > > hmmm, i wonder which it could be..................... > > > > marv > > > > > > Paul M. Deniston wrote: > > > > > Trey, > > > > > > Actually it is possible. Please see page 5 of 6, section H, sub >paragraph > > A > > > of the GUE Tech I Standards and Procedures PDF file that is listed at >the > > > following link. > > > > > > http://www.gue.com/classroom/standards/student_courses.shtml > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Trey" <trey@ne*.co*> > > > To: "Paul M. Deniston" <pdeniston@me*.ne*>; "Rocky" > > > <rocdiver@be*.ne*>; "Steve Schultz" > > > <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry michael" <OEA51@go*.co*> > > > Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>; > > > <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:04 PM > > > Subject: RE: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > > > > > > > >> Not possible. You are thinking of IANTD. > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Paul M. Deniston [mailto:pdeniston@me*.ne*] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:37 AM > > >> To: Rocky; Steve Schultz; terry michael > > >> Cc: marv; Jim Cobb; techdiver@aquanaut.com > > >> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >> > > >> > > >> I believe if you look at the required equipment for tech I section of >the > > >> GUE web page, they specify 95's or larger. > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Rocky" <rocdiver@be*.ne*> > > >> To: "Steve Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry >michael" > > >> <OEA51@go*.co*> > > >> Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb" ><cobber@ci*.co*>; > > >> <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 6:23 PM > > >> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >> > > >> > > >>> Who told you GUE Tech 1 requires twin 95s? If diving wet, as most do > > >> > > > for > > > > > >>> Tech 1, twin 80s are the norm . . . > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> From: "Steve Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*> > > >>> To: "terry michael" <OEA51@go*.co*> > > >>> Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb" ><cobber@ci*.co*>; > > >>> <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > > >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:59 PM > > >>> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> I own double 80's and double 104's. The 80's are feather light, and > > >>> > > > the > > > > > >>> 104's aren't bad, but I'm in the gym every day. > > >>> > > >>>> I dive cold water and need a ton of lead with my 80's. I wear no >lead > > >>> > > >>> with my 104's (and alum backplate) > > >>> > > >>>> I feel like I have better trim with my 104's than my 80's. It's > > >>> > > >> probably > > >> > > >>> in my head. The 104's feel better on my back (subjective I know). >It's > > >>> easier for gas matching since my buddies also dive 104's (you dive > > >> > > > thirds, > > > > > >>> don't you?) > > >>> > > >>>> It's also a matter of convienience. I fill my 104's to 3000. Last > > >>> > > >>> weekend I did 2 light deco dives in 110'. I got off the boat and did >a > > >>> shore dive with a new diver. He emptied his 80, and I still had gas >in > > >> > > > my > > > > > >>> tanks for another shore dive. I couldn't have done this with 80's. > > >>> > > >>>> For anyone who is considering buying 80's or 104's, I leave you with > > >>> > > >> this > > >> > > >>> thought. They both have good and bad characteristics, but if you are > > >>> planning on GUE training, TECH 1 requires at least twin 95's which >makes > > >>> your twin 80's useless for the course (except as stages) ;-) > > >>> > > >>>> ss > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, terry michael wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Again, I'm losing you here. Could you elaborate on this dive > > >>>> > > > planning > > > > > >>> stuff and exactly how it works. thanks > > >>> > > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>>> From: "marv"<ajmarve@op*.ne*> > > >>>>> To: "terry michael"<OEA51@go*.co*> > > >>>>> Cc: "Jim Cobb"<cobber@ci*.co*>, "MHK"<mhkane@pr*.ne*>, > > >>>> > > >>> "Michael J. Blitch"<mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com > > >>> > > >>>>> Date: Mon Aug 27 23:11:07 PDT 2001 > > >>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> JIm's thing< and its not just Jim, there is a small group now> is > > >>>>> > > >> that > > >> > > >>>>>> the only tanks for drysuit is the double 104's. this is despite > > >>>>>> commentary from George himself that for ocean, you dont need all > > >>>>> > > > that > > > > > >>>>>> gas even in a drysuit and that double 80s should be enuff for most > > >>>>> > > > of > > > > > >>>>>> what one might attempt.< "for ocean the aluminum 80 is the tank of > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> choice"> The rationale seems to be taught by most of your tek > > >>>>> > > >>> agencies > > >>> > > >>>>>> that you can never have enuff gas because "you never know what is > > >>>>> > > >> going > > >> > > >>>>>> to happen" and people find this more comforting to embrace than the > > >>>>> > > >>> fact > > >>> > > >>>>>> that they need to exercise aerobically for diving. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Personally i would suggest that you plan your dive and dive your > > >>>>> > > >> plan, > > >> > > >>>>>> altering the plan only in the direction of being conservative > > >>>>> > > > during > > > > > >> a > > >> > > >>>>>> dive. < i.e. less bottom time>. I would also suggest that if your > > >>>>> > > >> going > > >> > > >>>>>> to carry a major reserve of one dive parameter<gas> you should have > > >>>>>> equvalent supply of any other<scooter/light burn>. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Finally i would suggest that anyone who cant understand why huge > > >>>>> > > >> tanks > > >> > > >>>>>> and a tiny scooter might not be a good idea should reread the last > > >>>>>> paragraph of Gavin's chapter and look in the mirror. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> marv > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> ps i wear dbl 80s, drive a mako and set the treadmill on speed 8 at > > >>>>>> least once a day. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> terry michael wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Are we talking about diving thirds here or what? This is a public > > >>>>>> > > >>> list please explain what you are trying to tell us. > > >>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>>>>> From: "marv"<ajmarve@op*.ne*> > > >>>>>>> To: "Jim Cobb"<cobber@ci*.co*> > > >>>>>>> Cc: "MHK"<mhkane@pr*.ne*>, "terry michael"<OEA51@go*.co*>, > > >>>>>> > > >>> "Michael J. Blitch"<mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com > > >>> > > >>>>>>> Date: Mon Aug 27 10:37:44 PDT 2001 > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> so what are you saying Jim, that you dont plan your dives or > > >>>>>>> > > > dont > > > > > >>> have > > >>> > > >>>>>>>> the discipline to follow that plan ? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> you are on the right track with respect to less is best, you > > >>>>>>> > > > just > > > > > >>> need > > >>> > > >>>>>>>> to take it all the way. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> marv > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Jim Cobb wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Gas=Life. Is that real enough for you? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Jim > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/ > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> From: marv <ajmarve@op*.ne*> > > >>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:11:57 -0400 > > >>>>>>>>>> To: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*> > > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: MHK <mhkane@pr*.ne*>, terry michael <OEA51@go*.co*>, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>> "Michael J. > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Blitch" <mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com > > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> and yet you doggedly defend the concept of carrying three > > >>>>>>>>> > > > times > > > > > >> as > > >> > > >>> much > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> gas as needed for a given dive< see any old dbl 80 vs 104 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >> thread.> > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Marv > > >>>>>>>>>> <keepin' it real, yo> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Jim Cobb wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I would still like something smaller, don't see the point in > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>> carrying 2 > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> hours worth of burn time on a dive were your actual scooting > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >> time > > >> > > >>> is around > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 20 minutes. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. > > >>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> ___________________________________________________ > > >>>>>>> GO.com Mail > > >>>>>>> Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ___________________________________________________ > > >>>>> GO.com Mail > > >>>>> Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.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'. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> 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'. --=====================_8713118==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <html> At 08:10 AM 8/30/01 -0400, you wrote:<br> <blockquote type=cite cite> <br> Trey:<br> So do you personally advocate overfilling AL80's by about 17%, or is<br> overfilling an official GUE policy? If it is GUE policy, how do they hope<br> to avoid a lawsuit when the one and a million tank blows?</blockquote><br> How about one "in a million"?<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <blockquote type=cite cite> Also, when<br> advertising as the only agency from whom one can learn to tech dive safely,<br> how do they justify teaching such strokery as consistantly overfilling AL<br> tanks? W/ steel it's fine, but aluminum does not have the elasticity of the<br> steel.<br> <br> I think this is one of those cases where common practice does not match the<br> published standards. A gentleman would simply acknowledge that and give a<br> recommendation on whether the standard needs to be changed or the practice<br> of using the AL80's should be discontinued. Personally, I'd recomend<br> changing the standard to specify steel for drysuit or cave divers<br> (assumption there, I'm not a cave diver so I may be wrong) and Aluminum for<br> wetsuit divers.</blockquote><br> Guess what, the standard is already al tanks <u>only</u> when diving wet suits, steel tanks <u>allowed</u> when diving dry. Note that this is allowed, not required as certain applications benefit from al tanks even if diving dry suits.<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <blockquote type=cite cite>----- Original Message -----<br> From: "Trey" <trey@ne*.co*><br> To: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Paul M. Deniston"<br> <pdeniston@me*.ne*><br> Cc: <techdiver@aquanaut.com>; "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>; "Steve<br> Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry michael"<br> <OEA51@go*.co*>; "Rocky" <rocdiver@be*.ne*><br> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:50 AM<br> Subject: RE: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> <br> <br> > Actually , 80's at 3500 are about 95 cu feet.<br> ><br> > -----Original Message-----<br> > From: marv [<a href="mailto:ajmarve@op*.ne*" eudora="autourl">mailto:ajmarve@op*.ne*</a>]<br> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:59 PM<br> > To: Paul M. Deniston<br> > Cc: Trey; techdiver@aquanaut.com; Jim Cobb; Steve Schultz; terry<br> > michael; Rocky<br> > Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> ><br> ><br> > well if you want to split hairs it says:<br> ><br> > "students are required to use a manifold assembly with twin tanks, each<br> > with an individual capacity of 95ft"<br> ><br> > It might be read to state that the tanks need not be 95's, but the<br> > manifold assembly must have at least 95 cuft. i.e. no oms double 46's or<br> > ancient usd double 38's or whatever you can get at the back table of the<br> > divers flea market.<br> ><br> > or it could mean you have to have back mounted quads.<br> ><br> > or it could be about selling 104's < who would do such a thing?><br> ><br> > hmmm, i wonder which it could be.....................<br> ><br> > marv<br> ><br> ><br> > Paul M. Deniston wrote:<br> ><br> > > Trey,<br> > ><br> > > Actually it is possible. Please see page 5 of 6, section H, sub<br> paragraph<br> > A<br> > > of the GUE Tech I Standards and Procedures PDF file that is listed at<br> the<br> > > following link.<br> > ><br> > > <a href="http://www.gue.com/classroom/standards/student_courses.shtml" eudora="autourl">http://www.gue.com/classroom/standards/student_courses.shtml< ;/a><br> > ><br> > > ----- Original Message -----<br> > > From: "Trey" <trey@ne*.co*><br> > > To: "Paul M. Deniston" <pdeniston@me*.ne*>; "Rocky"<br> > > <rocdiver@be*.ne*>; "Steve Schultz"<br> > > <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry michael" <OEA51@go*.co*><br> > > Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>;<br> > > <techdiver@aquanaut.com><br> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:04 PM<br> > > Subject: RE: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > ><br> > ><br> > >> Not possible. You are thinking of IANTD.<br> > >><br> > >> -----Original Message-----<br> > >> From: Paul M. Deniston [<a href="mailto:pdeniston@me*.ne*" eudora="autourl">mailto:pdeniston@me*.ne*</a>]<br> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:37 AM<br> > >> To: Rocky; Steve Schultz; terry michael<br> > >> Cc: marv; Jim Cobb; techdiver@aquanaut.com<br> > >> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >><br> > >><br> > >> I believe if you look at the required equipment for tech I section of<br> the<br> > >> GUE web page, they specify 95's or larger.<br> > >> ----- Original Message -----<br> > >> From: "Rocky" <rocdiver@be*.ne*><br> > >> To: "Steve Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*>; "terry<br> michael"<br> > >> <OEA51@go*.co*><br> > >> Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb"<br> <cobber@ci*.co*>;<br> > >> <techdiver@aquanaut.com><br> > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 6:23 PM<br> > >> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >><br> > >><br> > >>> Who told you GUE Tech 1 requires twin 95s? If diving wet, as most do<br> > >><br> > > for<br> > ><br> > >>> Tech 1, twin 80s are the norm . . .<br> > >>><br> > >>> ----- Original Message -----<br> > >>> From: "Steve Schultz" <se2schul@st*.ma*.uw*.ca*><br> > >>> To: "terry michael" <OEA51@go*.co*><br> > >>> Cc: "marv" <ajmarve@op*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb"<br> <cobber@ci*.co*>;<br> > >>> <techdiver@aquanaut.com><br> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:59 PM<br> > >>> Subject: Re: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >>><br> > >>><br> > >>>> I own double 80's and double 104's. The 80's are feather light, and<br> > >>><br> > > the<br> > ><br> > >>> 104's aren't bad, but I'm in the gym every day.<br> > >>><br> > >>>> I dive cold water and need a ton of lead with my 80's. I wear no<br> lead<br> > >>><br> > >>> with my 104's (and alum backplate)<br> > >>><br> > >>>> I feel like I have better trim with my 104's than my 80's. It's<br> > >>><br> > >> probably<br> > >><br> > >>> in my head. The 104's feel better on my back (subjective I know).<br> It's<br> > >>> easier for gas matching since my buddies also dive 104's (you dive<br> > >><br> > > thirds,<br> > ><br> > >>> don't you?)<br> > >>><br> > >>>> It's also a matter of convienience. I fill my 104's to 3000. Last<br> > >>><br> > >>> weekend I did 2 light deco dives in 110'. I got off the boat and did<br> a<br> > >>> shore dive with a new diver. He emptied his 80, and I still had gas<br> in<br> > >><br> > > my<br> > ><br> > >>> tanks for another shore dive. I couldn't have done this with 80's.<br> > >>><br> > >>>> For anyone who is considering buying 80's or 104's, I leave you with<br> > >>><br> > >> this<br> > >><br> > >>> thought. They both have good and bad characteristics, but if you are<br> > >>> planning on GUE training, TECH 1 requires at least twin 95's which<br> makes<br> > >>> your twin 80's useless for the course (except as stages) ;-)<br> > >>><br> > >>>> ss<br> > >>>><br> > >>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, terry michael wrote:<br> > >>>><br> > >>>>> Again, I'm losing you here. Could you elaborate on this dive<br> > >>>><br> > > planning<br> > ><br> > >>> stuff and exactly how it works. thanks<br> > >>><br> > >>>>> -----Original Message-----<br> > >>>>> From: "marv"<ajmarve@op*.ne*><br> > >>>>> To: "terry michael"<OEA51@go*.co*><br> > >>>>> Cc: "Jim Cobb"<cobber@ci*.co*>, "MHK"<mhkane@pr*.ne*>,<br> > >>>><br> > >>> "Michael J. Blitch"<mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com<br> > >>><br> > >>>>> Date: Mon Aug 27 23:11:07 PDT 2001<br> > >>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >>>>><br> > >>>>>> JIm's thing< and its not just Jim, there is a small group now> is<br> > >>>>><br> > >> that<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> the only tanks for drysuit is the double 104's. this is despite<br> > >>>>>> commentary from George himself that for ocean, you dont need all<br> > >>>>><br> > > that<br> > ><br> > >>>>>> gas even in a drysuit and that double 80s should be enuff for most<br> > >>>>><br> > > of<br> > ><br> > >>>>>> what one might attempt.< "for ocean the aluminum 80 is the tank of<br> > >>>>><br> > >>>>>> choice"> The rationale seems to be taught by most of your tek<br> > >>>>><br> > >>> agencies<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>> that you can never have enuff gas because "you never know what is<br> > >>>>><br> > >> going<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> to happen" and people find this more comforting to embrace than the<br> > >>>>><br> > >>> fact<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>> that they need to exercise aerobically for diving.<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>> Personally i would suggest that you plan your dive and dive your<br> > >>>>><br> > >> plan,<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> altering the plan only in the direction of being conservative<br> > >>>>><br> > > during<br> > ><br> > >> a<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> dive. < i.e. less bottom time>. I would also suggest that if your<br> > >>>>><br> > >> going<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> to carry a major reserve of one dive parameter<gas> you should have<br> > >>>>>> equvalent supply of any other<scooter/light burn>.<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>> Finally i would suggest that anyone who cant understand why huge<br> > >>>>><br> > >> tanks<br> > >><br> > >>>>>> and a tiny scooter might not be a good idea should reread the last<br> > >>>>>> paragraph of Gavin's chapter and look in the mirror.<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>> marv<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>> ps i wear dbl 80s, drive a mako and set the treadmill on speed 8 at<br> > >>>>>> least once a day.<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>> terry michael wrote:<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>>> Are we talking about diving thirds here or what? This is a public<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>> list please explain what you are trying to tell us.<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----<br> > >>>>>>> From: "marv"<ajmarve@op*.ne*><br> > >>>>>>> To: "Jim Cobb"<cobber@ci*.co*><br> > >>>>>>> Cc: "MHK"<mhkane@pr*.ne*>, "terry michael"<OEA51@go*.co*>,<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>> "Michael J. Blitch"<mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>> Date: Mon Aug 27 10:37:44 PDT 2001<br> > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>> so what are you saying Jim, that you dont plan your dives or<br> > >>>>>>><br> > > dont<br> > ><br> > >>> have<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>> the discipline to follow that plan ?<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>> you are on the right track with respect to less is best, you<br> > >>>>>>><br> > > just<br> > ><br> > >>> need<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>> to take it all the way.<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>> marv<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>> Jim Cobb wrote:<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>> Gas=Life. Is that real enough for you?<br> > >>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>> Jim<br> > >>>>>>>><br> ><br> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------<br> > >>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>> Learn About Trimix at <a href="http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/" eudora="autourl">http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/</a><br> > >>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>>> From: marv <ajmarve@op*.ne*><br> > >>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:11:57 -0400<br> > >>>>>>>>>> To: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*><br> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: MHK <mhkane@pr*.ne*>, terry michael <OEA51@go*.co*>,<br> > >>>>>>>>><br> > >>> "Michael J.<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>>>> Blitch" <mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com<br> > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor<br> > >>>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>>> and yet you doggedly defend the concept of carrying three<br> > >>>>>>>>><br> > > times<br> > ><br> > >> as<br> > >><br> > >>> much<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>>>> gas as needed for a given dive< see any old dbl 80 vs 104<br> > >>>>>>>>><br> > >> thread.><br> > >><br> > >>>>>>>>>> Marv<br> > >>>>>>>>>> <keepin' it real, yo><br> > >>>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>>> Jim Cobb wrote:<br> > >>>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>>>> I would still like something smaller, don't see the point in<br> > >>>>>>>>>><br> > >>> carrying 2<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>>>>> hours worth of burn time on a dive were your actual scooting<br> > >>>>>>>>>><br> > >> time<br> > >><br> > >>> is around<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>>>>> 20 minutes.<br> > >>>>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>>>> --<br> > >>>>>>>>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>> `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>>>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to<br> > >>>>>>>><br> > >>> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >>><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>> ___________________________________________________<br> > >>>>>>> GO.com Mail<br> > >>>>>>> Get Your Free, Private E-mail at <a href="http://mail.go.com/" eudora="autourl">http://mail.go.com</a><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>>>><br> > >>>>><br> > >>>>> ___________________________________________________<br> > >>>>> GO.com Mail<br> > >>>>> Get Your Free, Private E-mail at <a href="http://mail.go.com/" eudora="autourl">http://mail.go.com</a><br> > >>>>><br> > >>>>><br> > >>>>> --<br> > >>>>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to<br> > >>>><br> > >> `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >><br> > >>>>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to<br> > >>>><br> > >> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >><br> > >>>> --<br> > >>>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to<br> > >>><br> > > `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> > ><br> > >>>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to<br> > >>><br> > > `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.<br> > ><br> > >>><br> > >>> --<br> > >>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to<br> `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to<br> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >><br> > >> --<br> > >> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to<br> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.<br> > >><br> ><br> ><br> <br> --<br> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.<br> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. </blockquote></html> --=====================_8713118==_.ALT-- -- 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]