Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Terry, I also responded to you privately. Like Scott, you're welcome to decide for yourself who has a clue and who does not. Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Irvine" <girvine@be*.ne*> To: "terry michael" <OEA51@go*.co*>; "Lee Bell" <leebell@ix*.ne*.co*>; <trey@ne*.co*>; <LouisianaLegal@ao*.co*>; <techdiver@aquanaut.com> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:47 AM Subject: RE: Re: neutral AL 80 > Exactly. If you read all of what this idiot wrote, you can see how totally > full of shit he really is. He does make an extreme effort to make idiocy > sound reasonable, but via his normal method: bullshit, lies, fabrications, > and twisted "facts". This guy is rapidly gaining on the "Village Idiot" > title now held by a few others who occasionally come out from under the rec > scuba rock and take a swing at reality on here. > > -----Original Message----- > From: terry michael [mailto:OEA51@go*.co*] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 12:13 AM > To: Lee Bell; trey@ne*.co*; LouisianaLegal@ao*.co*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: Re: Re: neutral AL 80 > > > Lee, I could care less about the DIR politics. The C80's are too heavy and > the buoyancy change is from negative to negative. The Luxfers are not bottom > heavy (unless you are diving them without the valve). Why would I dive an > aluminum tank that dives like a steal? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Lee Bell"<leebell@ix*.ne*.co*> > To: trey@ne*.co*, LouisianaLegal@ao*.co*, techdiver@aquanaut.com > Date: Sun Jan 06 06:10:23 PST 2002 > Subject: Re: neutral AL 80's > > >George Irvine wrote: > > > >> Idiocy again. You really have no clue what you are talking about, and > that > >> is because you have no real experience with anything but bullshit diving. > >> The fact is that if you are using neutral tanks, they require more gas in > >> the wings when full, thus slowing you down. I really wish you would take > a > >> seat and shut the fuck up. I am so sick of your huge efforts to make > >totally > >> ridiculous things appear to be "clever". Like everything else you say, > >this > >> is pure crap. I guess this is one of the areas you think that DIR is > wrong > >> about? Clearly, you have no clue what DIR is. > > > >Wrong, George. It's not me that lacks a clue. My neutral buoyant aluminum > >tanks do not require more gas in the wings when full. With my plate and > >neutral tanks, I'm flat neutral with no lead at all, just like I said. The > >change in my buoyancy due to gas use is will within my ability to adjust > for > >by changes in breathing patterns alone. In my warm water diving, I wear no > >lead and, generally, carry no gas in my wing at all. As a result, I get no > >buoyancy shift with depth changes either. Surprise, surprise, surprise. > > > >I don't think the letters DIR appeared in the question and I'm pretty sure > >they didn't appear in my answer. Since you brought it up, the answer to > >your question is no, I don't think this is on e of the areas that DIR is > >wrong about. If you had bothered to read, you might have known that > >already. Try again. > > > >> I like three things about my Compact 80s: > >> 1. They are just a bit shorter than a standard 80. At my height (5'8") > >the > >> slight difference in height means I can carry them with straight arms > >versus > >> the bent arm required for standard 80s. The Luxfers are not shorter. > > > >See any DIR issues here? See anything wrong about this statement? > > > >> 2. The neutral buoyancy when empty means I take 4 lbs off my weight belt > >> without adding anything anywhere else. This is the primary reason most > >> people like the tanks and particularly important to me. That 4 lbs just > >> happens to make me perfectly weighted with my stainless plate. I don't > >have > >> to wear any lead, anywhere when diving warm water, which is what I do > >almost > >> exclusively. > > > >Did you fail to read this, George? Would you care to explain why someone > >who is neutrally buoyant needs any gas in their wing, let alone more? See > >any DIR issues here? > > > >> 3. The trim on the Catalinas is good. They're nicely balanced from top > to > >> bottom. I believe the Luxfers are a bit bottom heavy, but don't take my > >> word for it. > > > >Is there something wrong with this statement? Any DIR issues? > > > >> I'm not sure these tanks are the best choice for everyone. If you dive > >wet, > >> I don't think they are any better than some steel tanks. Presumably, > your > >> tanks will never be comletely empty and, therefore, will always be at > >least > >> partly negative. When you twin them up and,. even worse, add stages, > >you're > >> accepting a lot of non ditchable negative buoyancy. If you are > >scootering, > >> they're not going to tow as nicely as the less negative standartd 80s do. > >> For most, I don't think it's a real good idea. > > > >Here's the first statement I made that DIR addresses. I believe DIR says > no > >steel tanks when diving wet, or did I get that wrong too? If steel tanks > >are not a good idea, I assume equally neutral aluminum ones would be a poor > >idea too, just like I said, right? Do or DIR find something wrong with > this > >statement? Doesn't accepting additional negative buoyancy equate to adding > >gas to a wing. Didn't we reach the same conclusion, on the same basis, > >simply expressed differently? > > > >> While I recommend people diving single tanks at least try out the neutral > >> buoyant models, I think buoyant tanks would be a better choice for mutli > >> tank diving, particularly for open water stages. > > > >Do you agree or disagree? Is this consistent with DIR? > > > >> They represent less negative buoyancy and, in a pinch, could actually be > a > >source of > >> positive buoyancy. While it's not a primary issue, it's also nice to > know > >that if I > >> ever had to ditch one, I don't necessarily have to lose it. Open the > >valve > >> and drop the tank and, sooner or later, it will return to the surface on > >its > >> own. If you do this, however, please recover your tank from the surface. > >> I'm not at all fond of the idea of hitting a floating tank with my boat. > > > >If I'm not mistaken, even my humor is on target, right? > > > >Lee > > > >-- > >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 > > > > -- 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]