DIR Experts - Question
NeedaHoliday
number of exercises and one in particular is causing problems due to
my gear configuration. I use a customized backplate and Diverite Rec
wings, long hose (7') and harness and crotch strap. The exercise in
question requires that my buddy remove my equipment during the rescue
attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from the
first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
for a second time up to the mouth. I use a Sherwood Maximus reg that
is an under arm setup. I also have the Octo hanging off around my
neck. My buddy had a hell of a time getting my gear off.
Any recommendations on an easy quick removal of gear to help the
situation.
I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
clasps at the same time. Any comments.
And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
Thanks in advance
mjbl...@my-deja.com
in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
In article <jjsdgskl3g62o2rf4...@4ax.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Iain Smith
I'm not a DIR expert, however I have to do dekitting drills all the time
as an instructor. So, here goes:
> question requires that my buddy remove my equipment during the rescue
> attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from the
> first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
> for a second time up to the mouth.
Suggest you change the hose routing. AFAICS, routing it under your arm the
second time loses the instant-deployability benefit of the long hose. I
would suggest running the hose under the R arm, tucking a loop under your
belt (NOT fastening the belt through it!), then having it coming up, round
the back of your neck (from L-R) and into your mouth from the R. There's a
picture of this somewhere on www.halcyon.net
That's one compication removed. However, you need to brief your buddy,
that when dekitting, he should take the second stage, unwind it from your
head and pull it away to your R side (I ask my students to place it in my
R hand, to avoid them standing on it!)
> I use a Sherwood Maximus reg that is an under arm setup. I also have
> the Octo hanging off around my neck. My buddy had a hell of a time
> getting my gear off.
My necklace is tubing with overlapped ends. This means that the second
stage can be pulled out if necessary. Otherwise your buddy needs to be
briefed to take the necklace off you...(which isn't hard, but even having
been briefed, most people forget about it!)
> I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
> on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
> weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
> If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
> clasps at the same time. Any comments.
I'll leave this to those who have used this system, but it appears to make
sense to me...
> And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
> remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
Agreed. I recently had a play with an Oceanic dragonfly wing (The new
one. Think it's called the Isla) I left the chest strap undone, to see if
it would matter. It didn't. Equally no BCD or wing that I've used
previously (ancient Mares, Buddy Commando TD, Buddy Trident, backplate +
single piece harness, and others) has needed one. In my experience,
they're just another clip for people to forget to undo (esp. if it's
upper-chest/lower neck!)
Hope this helps.
Iain
mike_...@my-deja.com
trying to bash DIR becasue some of its proponents hurt your feelings,
that you can't give a little advice. Maybe your too scared to actually
make a comment as to diving procedures because every time you do, your
stupidity is pointed out.
Needaholiday, I don't claim to be a DIR Expert, but I will give some
input that may help. The long hose should not be double rapped. If
you are using a 2nd stage that requires that, then I would get a
different 2nd stage. If the back up reg. is properly attached with the
necklace, it will simply pull loose with the gear.
In other words, I think the answer lies in your config. not your
buddy's technique in removing the gear. Of course, I haven't seen your
buddy's technique, so that could be contributing as well. What did
your instructor say?
I have been teaching PADI Rescue for years while diving a DIR rig. and
never had a problem with the hose routings, or other eq. removal. I
hope this helps.
Mike
In article <8e6ud5$35l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
> in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
> life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
>
> In article <jjsdgskl3g62o2rf4...@4ax.com>,
> NeedaHoliday wrote:
> > I am currently taking the Naui Rescue Course. We have been doing a
> > number of exercises and one in particular is causing problems due to
> > my gear configuration. I use a customized backplate and Diverite
Rec
> > wings, long hose (7') and harness and crotch strap. The exercise
in
> > question requires that my buddy remove my equipment during the
rescue
> > attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from
the
> > first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
> > for a second time up to the mouth. I use a Sherwood Maximus reg
that
> > is an under arm setup. I also have the Octo hanging off around my
> > neck. My buddy had a hell of a time getting my gear off.
> >
> > Any recommendations on an easy quick removal of gear to help the
> > situation.
> >
> > I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put
it
> > on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
> > weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
> > If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
> > clasps at the same time. Any comments.
> >
> > And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
> > remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
> >
mjbl...@my-deja.com
I chuckle every time someone comes along with an honest post about
the fallibility of your system. You'd better have a look at the
Realities of GUE thread now. MJB
In article <8e701k$507$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Michael J. Blitch
>I am currently taking the Naui Rescue Course. We have been doing a
>number of exercises and one in particular is causing problems due to
>my gear configuration. I use a customized backplate and Diverite Rec
>wings, long hose (7') and harness and crotch strap. The exercise in
>question requires that my buddy remove my equipment during the rescue
>attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from the
>first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
>for a second time up to the mouth. I use a Sherwood Maximus reg that
>is an under arm setup. I also have the Octo hanging off around my
>neck. My buddy had a hell of a time getting my gear off.
The one real piece of equipment that I require of my rescue students
is a pair of rescue shears. I can effectively demonstrate how to get
you out of that webbing in 3 seconds, but you might be slightly upset.
<G> I had the same system on when I was doing my IDC and the other IDC
candidates had a hell of a time. We found that it helps to undo the
crotch strap and then from the head of the victim, pull them up and
push the tank down. You have to slide the shoulder straps off the
shoulder first, but it seems to work as long as the rig is not too
tight. With the long hose, I suggest putting in a pair of EMT rescue
shears on your right hip webbing and loop the hose under that. With
the 5 foot hose, I would loop it under the arm and then around once.
Looping around twice seems to be such a hassle as it may keep floating
in front of you.
>I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
>on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
>weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
>If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
>clasps at the same time. Any comments.
If I need weight, then I am now using the Halcyon weight pockets.
previously, however, I would place the weight belt under the crotch
strap with the buckle end on the slightly to the *left* side of the
crotch strap. The reason for this is that if you need to dump the
weights, all you need is to release the buckle and the free strap end
of the belt should slide easily under the harness.
>And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
>remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
I agree with this. I haven't bothered to cut off the chest strap from
my Zeagle rig, but if you have the webbing threaded correctly, then
there should not be any difficult on keeping the rig in place. I have
heard, but not read, that there are studies that show that the chest
compression can be restrictive to breathing. This could simply mean
that under laboratory conditions you can measure something or other,
but I don't know anything else about it.
BTW, I tried sending this by e-mail and got a bounce. If you want
help, then I often suggest providing a real address.
NeedaHoliday
>DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
>in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
>life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
>
Thank you very much for your words of wisdom. As usual, they make no
sense. I have tried to adapt a method that seems safer and more
reliable and you turn it into sounding like, what a moron this guy is.
If you don't have any good advice, keep your stupid F.... comments to
yourself. The instructor was very appreciative towards my setup as
it gave the class a different perspective on gear configuration. He
had some constructive citicism about the setup but nothing major.
I thinks it's time you crawl back under your rock!!!
>In article <jjsdgskl3g62o2rf4...@4ax.com>,
> NeedaHoliday wrote:
>> I am currently taking the Naui Rescue Course. We have been doing a
>> number of exercises and one in particular is causing problems due to
>> my gear configuration. I use a customized backplate and Diverite Rec
>> wings, long hose (7') and harness and crotch strap. The exercise in
>> question requires that my buddy remove my equipment during the rescue
>> attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from the
>> first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
>> for a second time up to the mouth. I use a Sherwood Maximus reg that
>> is an under arm setup. I also have the Octo hanging off around my
>> neck. My buddy had a hell of a time getting my gear off.
>>
>> Any recommendations on an easy quick removal of gear to help the
>> situation.
>>
>> I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
>> on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
>> weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
>> If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
>> clasps at the same time. Any comments.
>>
>> And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
>> remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
>>
Trace Malinowski
>DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
>in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
>life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
Scenario: You are inside the hull of a sunken U-boat. The passage is too narrow
to allow two divers to pass side by side. One of you bumps your first stage A
connection against the hull suffering a catastrophic air failure. In the intial
shock of being without air, the out of air diver manages to create a silt out.
You manage to buddy up and share air with an additional second stage, but now
how do you extract from the wreck? Can you see how DIR configurations can help
prevent this situation and also allow for a safe exit?
1) DIR wouldn't use A connections which can be jarred loose on impact.
2) With DIR the 7 foot hose would allow tandem swimming to extract should an
out of air situation somehow occur.
3) With DIR the equipment configuration is so streamlined that it will reduce
the risk of entanglement on various pipes, wires, and objects found in the hull
of the wreck.
4) If the panicked out of air diver grabbed the primary regulator hose, he or
she will then have the exact hose he or she is supposed to use when in an out
of air situation. The donor then is able to quickly locate the necklaced
secondary regulator which is hung around the neck.
5) If needed, both divers know exactly where one another's gear is located by
feel in the "dark" of the silt out.
6) Both divers can easily and calmly maneuver along their penetration line to
the exit point.
Does this make sense?
Trace Malinowski
PDIC Instructor #2075
http://hometown.aol.com/tracemalin/
Mask... $60
Long blade fins... $150
Wetsuit... $200
Weight belt... $25
Expression on a SCUBA diver's face as you wave to him at 120 feet without a
tank... PRICELESS!
Ross Bagley
>>DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
>>in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
>>life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
>Scenario: You are inside the hull of a sunken U-boat. The passage is
>too narrow to allow two divers to pass side by side. One of you bumps
>your first stage A connection against the hull suffering a
>catastrophic air failure. In the intial shock of being without air,
>the out of air diver manages to create a silt out.
Trace,
He refuses to understand and is proud of his ignorance.
Trace Malinkowski, meet the anonymous poster who signs his emails
"Michael J. Black M.D." Flame bait, meet Trace.
MJBMD has a serious credibility issue since he doesn't appear to
actually be the real Michael J. Black M.D. At one point, he bragged
about his running ability with some REALLY impressive numbers, not
noticing that the races he was getting those numbers from were cross
country skiing races. To me that was a dead giveaway, someone who had
actually been in those races would not have made that mistake.
Regards,
Ross
-- Ross Bagley & Associates http://www.rossbagley.com
"We don't write your software, we help you write your software better!"
mike_...@my-deja.com
discredit DIR. Fortunately the truth can never be changed, not even by
your unending stream of bullshit.
An honest post? I assumed this was the case and gave an honest
response. As for the fallability of DIR, once again you display your
stupidity. A double rapped Sherwood Maximus is NOT DIR, you idiot.
Mike
In article <8e7158$6dj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
> > > in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A
real-
> > > life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
> > >
mjbl...@my-deja.com
NeedaHoliday wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:28:10 GMT, mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> I have tried to adapt a method that seems safer and more reliable
Bingo, you said the key word, "seems." You are learning that DIR
is no safer and no more reliable than any other system. It was
developed by cavers, and that's where it should stay. The system
not only sucks in the real world, truth be told you never see it,
thank god. MJB
mjbl...@my-deja.com
The long hose concept is Hogarthian, not unique to DIR. Streamlining
is also not unique to DIR. The only thing unique to DIR is the typical
ranting bullshit it has come to stand for.
MJB
In article <20000426111413...@ng-ci1.aol.com>,
trace...@aol.com (Trace Malinowski) wrote:
> mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
> >in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
> >life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
>
> Scenario: You are inside the hull of a sunken U-boat. The passage is
too narrow
> to allow two divers to pass side by side. One of you bumps your first
stage A
> connection against the hull suffering a catastrophic air failure. In
the intial
> shock of being without air, the out of air diver manages to create a
silt out.
ash
between and lo and behold, Quack Black, the biggest loser in
diving is still bleating like a lost little lamb.
Black, what will it take for you to offer a safe and
constructive suggestion on this NG?
What is your ideal gear config?
Why is it better than DIR?
Do you actually dive this config?
Do you actually dive?
Why is being to lazy to select the correct gas for a given dive
profile considered safe by yourself?
Why would you use a PO2 of 1.9 in an emergency situation?
The only fallibility in any system discussed here is the
inadequate training available from some agencies. You couldnt
cut it in a GUE course so you stand in the background and whine.
Please go away.
Ashley
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
mike_...@my-deja.com
attribute the inappropriate use of the long hose as fallability in
DIR. You really are hypocritical.
Mike
In article <8e73eu$91u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Iain Smith
> I chuckle every time someone comes along with an honest post about
> the fallibility of your system. You'd better have a look at the
> Realities of GUE thread now. MJB
Mike,
Step 1) Go and read what the original poster said about his config
Step 2) Compare that with the DIR setup
Step 3) Post an apology for confusing the two
Step 4) Read Rich L.'s post about the Realities of GUE and comment
objectively
Step 5) Answer the question I've been asking you for months: What is wrong
with the DIR system/config/mindset, leaving aside the continuing
personality conflict with its proponents?
Result - you will instantly regain a degree of credibility, and might open
up some valid areas for discussion.
Iain
RAL2OOO
>is no safer and no more reliable than any other system. It was
>developed by cavers, and that's where it should stay. The system
>not only sucks in the real world, truth be told you never see it,
>thank god. MJB
If you never see it in the "real world" why are your panties all wadded up?
mike_...@my-deja.com
posts on this thread and read the posts of others. Who has given
Needaholiday real input and who has been ranting? It's obvious, Black,
you are the problem. Let's hear your bona fide contribution.
Mike
In article <8e72tu$8e4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <5q0egsog0k8otqv4o...@4ax.com>,
> NeedaHoliday wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:28:10 GMT, mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > I have tried to adapt a method that seems safer and more reliable
>
> Bingo, you said the key word, "seems." You are learning that DIR
> is no safer and no more reliable than any other system. It was
> developed by cavers, and that's where it should stay. The system
> not only sucks in the real world, truth be told you never see it,
> thank god. MJB
>
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
>It's the silk purse from a sow's ear story with you DIR gods, and
>I chuckle every time someone comes along with an honest post about
>the fallibility of your system.
Except that the person who made the "honest post" was NOT rigged DIR.
He only THOUGHT he was.
-JimG
--
Jim Greenlee (j...@cc.gatech.edu) There were bugs in the code, but I
Instructor, College of Computing never saw them hiding. No, I never
Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332 saw them at all, `til there was Foo
mjbl...@my-deja.com
crawling all over rec.scuba but don't appear to exist in the real
world. I return from Fiji with a post about Marlin Bay Resort
(knowing that someone is interested) and who responds but the same
ol' DIR scum-sacks like you. Pack up and leave, like good garbage.
You have no place in the real world, so why should you be so numerous
here. MJB
In article <8e76e3$ci6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Perry Armor
Bullshit. I see a pretty fair amount of DIR rigs (and I mean correct DIR
rigs) even here on the West Coast. Thank God. The system works quite
well in the real world -- Cave, ocean, warm water, cold... What kind of
gear do you use? That is, if you actually dive? I've yet to be convinced
of that "fact".
Perry
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e72tu$8e4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
mike_...@my-deja.com
Your continual zero substance posts and name calling make this point
obvious.
I read your post on Marlin Bay Resort, I am not critisizing your input
as it pertains to travel iteneraries, but your dogma regarding diving
practices and equipment configurations needs to stop.
I do exist in the real world and I doubt if you ever see me you will
call me a scum-sack to my face you coward.
Mike
In article <8e77c9$du3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> No, scum-sack, you and your DIR types are the problem, and you're
> crawling all over rec.scuba but don't appear to exist in the real
> world. I return from Fiji with a post about Marlin Bay Resort
> (knowing that someone is interested) and who responds but the same
> ol' DIR scum-sacks like you. Pack up and leave, like good garbage.
> You have no place in the real world, so why should you be so numerous
> here. MJB
>
> In article <8e76e3$ci6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Black, seriously, you constantly say the DIR croud rants. Read your
> > posts on this thread and read the posts of others. Who has given
> > Needaholiday real input and who has been ranting? It's obvious,
> > Black,
> > you are the problem. Let's hear your bona fide contribution.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > In article <8e72tu$8e4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
Bob D.
Hey, brain surgeon..... long hose use and the "wrap" were around before the
term "Hogarthian" was even coined.
Oh, BTW, there was nothing at all DIR nor Hogarthian about the configuration
described by the original poster.
Robert (Bob) Decker
PADI./NAUI Inst.
Morehead City, NC
<A HREF="http://www.sportdiverhq.com">SportDiverHQ</A>
<A HREF="http://www.OlympusDiving.com">OlympusDiving</A>
(remove "NoSpam" to reply)
Bob D.
First, based on your post, the hose is wrapped improperly.
Regardless of the "system" involved (DIR, Hogarthian US Deep Wreck Team, etc,
etc, etc.) the correct routing is down your right side behind the back, the
length of hose between the valve (RH on doubles) and waistband held secure by
1) looping under a knive sheath, 2) looping in the waistband, 3) looping under
a light batter canister.. for the RH waist band it crosses the chest, over the
LH shoulder around the back of the neck and into the mouth. If, due to your
body type, this still leaves you with excess hose, use a 5 foot hose instead.
You describe a "modified DiveRite backplate." What modifications does that
include. Has the harness been re-routed so the shoulder straps do not cross
behind the head? (If so, lose the chest strap). Is it a multipeice or single
peice harness? Does the crotch strap use the standard quick release snap or
has it been modified "DIR" style to be a loop that fits onto the waist strap?
(With quick release there's a much bigger chance of the weightbelt catching
when released... using a QR, weight belt over strap may be preferred.)
MHK
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e72tu$8e4
You are learning that DIR
> is no safer and no more reliable than any other system. It was
> developed by cavers, and that's where it should stay.
OK BLACK, here we go... Lent is over, you are still an asshole, and you
still contribute NOTHING to the NG...
You sniveling, .lieing bullshit artist.. You have been challenged
repeatedly by me and others to dive, to add something of value to the list,
to post so form of diving credentials, to shut up, to listen, to get a clue
and many other things that you are incapable of doing...
BTW, whether a system was developed by cavers or not, either way it doesn't
provide for a 1.9 mix as a bailout because you are too lazy to change your
gas between dives...
The BLACK way to dive... Let's see, I'm a fucking idiot but I play a doctor
on a NG, so unless you have 1,000 + dives just do as I do.. OK let's plan
our dive... Don't bother analyzing your gas, that takes atleast 30 seconds,
just jump in and follwo the quack... But when the quack seizes, just stand
aside and do NOTHING because somewhere in that fried brain of his he
believes he has an understanding of Oxygen Toxicity so all will be fine...
But when he get's lost in the wreck and runs OOA all will be fine because
the idiot has a pony with some unknown mix from a dive he made 5 months ago
( wouldn't want to go through all the trouble of using the appropriate gas
for a dive )
Then if you somehow miraculously survive the BLACK school of stupidity, you
need to logon and pontificate to those that actually know what they are
doing, and tell them how your convuluted bullshit is better than a
streamilned, team approach. Ignore the fact that others have set world
records and have enlightened the masses and changed the way many divers look
at the sport. Forget the fact that they have challenged the establishment
and exposed the agencies and manufactureres..
BLACK, since you refuse to answer the 1.9 question I'll through another one
your way and see how long you avoid it..
Name ONE thing that your system does that is better than DIR...
Anything, name something that your lazy, carefree attitude and approach does
better than DIR.
DIR -v- BLACK This has pay per view potential...
OK idiot it's your turn...
mike_...@my-deja.com
Better yet, how about Celebrity Death Match.
Mike
tleemay
Iain Smith wrote:
> > It's the silk purse from a sow's ear story with you DIR gods, and
> > I chuckle every time someone comes along with an honest post about
> > the fallibility of your system. You'd better have a look at the
> > Realities of GUE thread now. MJB
>
> Mike,
>
> Step 1) Go and read what the original poster said about his config
> Step 2) Compare that with the DIR setup
> Step 3) Post an apology for confusing the two
> Step 4) Read Rich L.'s post about the Realities of GUE and comment
> objectively
> Step 5) Answer the question I've been asking you for months: What is wrong
> with the DIR system/config/mindset, leaving aside the continuing
> personality conflict with its proponents?
>
> Result - you will instantly regain a degree of credibility, and might open
> up some valid areas for discussion.
Don't hold your breath Iain, we are still waiting for the 'why target a 1.9
ppo2 exposure' question to be answered first. His initial (pp) 'I never
change my 40% pony bottle gas to safely comply with my overhead/depths because
I don't have to' answer was as lame as it gets... and constantly gets laughed
at.
NeedaHoliday
First and foremost, thanks for your input. When I started this
thread, I only wanted advice not war. I am not going to add my
opinions on Mr. Black as it is a waste of time.
I change the long hose wrapping based on the Sherwood Maximus.
It runs under the right arm. I started with the proper technique,
wrapping under the right side, under the knife, up around the neck and
in mouth. Found it to come loose when diving. The instructor
suggested that I surgical tie it on the tank with a QR. Not sure if
I like this. I am in the Ottawa area and DIR is non-existant. I find
most post educational and that's why I posted this question.
As for the weight belt. Crotch strap through webbing. If I
release both buckles, weight belt will fall. I guess my concern was to
lose my BC.
As for chest strap, I think I am going to remove it. I found
this to be a dangerous point.
I really need some suggestions on the neck loop. I am using
bungy cord and I think this is probably wrong.
Thanks for the advice.
Please omit REMOVE to email
Iain Smith
> It runs under the right arm. I started with the proper technique,
> wrapping under the right side, under the knife, up around the neck and
> in mouth. Found it to come loose when diving. The instructor
> suggested that I surgical tie it on the tank with a QR. Not sure if
> I like this.
I came up with this solution once upon a time. It almost worked. I could
sometimes clip it back in place after deployment. (BTW, when you say a
quick release, is this one that requires you to actively do something
(which strikes me as less than ideal, as it means a buddy doesn't have
guaranteed access to the full length), or will it rip out if you tug the
hose hard enough (I did this for a while...but it can be difficult to
replace, and wrapping works much better for me)) If it is coming loose
from the knife, putting a loop under the belt ought to sort you out.
> I really need some suggestions on the neck loop. I am using
> bungy cord and I think this is probably wrong.
It sounds OK. Tod Leonard did a website which he included pictures of a
bungee cord under a mouthpiece. I don't know the URL, but there's a link
to it from www.uk.rec.scuba under "Links" then "Tekkie's
Corner". I think there are also pictures on www.gasdiving.co.uk
under "Configuration". Certainly two of my buddies (inc. one WKPP
diver) use bungee cord. I prefer to use overlapped ends of surgical
tubing, because (as an instructor) I need to be able to demonstrate reg
recovery, which isn't easy with a long hose (because it's damn difficult
to loose the thing in the first place!)
Shame you posted a sensible question the day that Black got back!
Again, hope this helps.
Iain
mjbl...@my-deja.com
rdeck...@aol.comNoSpam (Bob D.) wrote:
> Hey, brain surgeon..... long hose use and the "wrap" were around
> before the
> term "Hogarthian" was even coined.
Corrections:
1) I'm an eye surgeon, not a brain surgeon
2) Sure the long-hose concept was around before Bill Hogarth Main
adopted the "wrap-around" method used by Sheck Exley, but the wrap
has been coined Hogarthian.
3) The rig described by NeedaHoliday sure sounds DIR to me. Lose
one wrap, and he's still an accident waiting to happen (or should I
say a rescue waiting to screw-up).
> Oh, BTW, there was nothing at all DIR nor Hogarthian about the
> configuration described by the original poster.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Scott
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e72tu$8e4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Bingo, you said the key word, "seems." You are learning that DIR
> is no safer and no more reliable than any other system. It was
> not only sucks in the real world, truth be told you never see it,
> thank god. MJB
How the *fuck* would you know anything about DIR, where it belongs,or how it
is to dive it?
This is like asking a blind man for his opinion on the color of the car he
cant drive.
Its simply amazing, Black, your stupidity knows no limit.
Scott
Bob D.
>It runs under the right arm. I started with the proper technique,
>wrapping under the right side, under the knife, up around the neck and
>in mouth. Found it to come loose when diving.
Needa,
Unless the hose is one with a tendency to float (and there are some
out there), it should tend to stay in place even if it slips out of the catch
point. The easiest solution to the problem might be to go with a 5 foot
instead of 7 foot hose. Unless you're doing a lot of overhead environment
diving where the passage ways are too narrow for side by side navigation, the 5
foot hose should be quite sufficient.
The key factor is the ability to deploy the hose quickly. Anything that
complicates that practice simply voids the advantage of the long hose in the
first place. Frankly, I'd rather see a diver using a 39 to 40 inch octo hose
and donating the primary quikcly for recreational diving, than one using a 7
foot hose that was wrapped in a manner to make deployment a problem.
>The instructor
>suggested that I surgical tie it on the tank with a QR. Not sure if
>I like this.
Simply another case of complicating something that doesn't need to be
complicated. The simplest answer is to select a hose length that will work
with your body type and regulator choice or, if the choice of regulator is
truely the problem, acquire a regulator more compatable with the technique.
>As for the weight belt. Crotch strap through webbing. If I
>release both buckles, weight belt will fall. I guess my concern was to
>lose my BC.
>
Good deal.
>As for chest strap, I think I am going to remove it. I found
>this to be a dangerous point.
If you have your harness configured like an alpine pack (shoulder straps
straight over the each shoulder) you won't miss it. If, on the other hand, the
harness is crossed behind the shoulders as is/was common on many backplates,
removal of the chest strap my prove problematic.
>I really need some suggestions on the neck loop. I am using
>bungy cord and I think this is probably wrong.
Bungee or surgical tubing both work well. A keypoint being not to use a
loop constructed of very large diameter material. 1/4 to 5/16 inch diameter is
about right. The DIR approach tends to be to have the necklace securely
attached to the reg. Those of us that may be a bit less than DIR tend to
fashion a loop that will slip on and off the reg. (Overlap the two ends of the
bungee/tubing then secure them in a manner that leaves a small opening or loop
to fit the mouthpeice through).
Good luck,
Jammer Six
wrote:
>€ Better yet, how about Celebrity Death Match.
"DIR SMACKDOWN"!
--
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly
n9spx
at all the bullshit I very seldom post but when
someone wants some advice to a simple problem
people bash the poster and the advice I can only
hope that after reading all this you have not grown
tired and read only half the bullshit and used common
since in your judgment.
using the DIR method work's fine for most diving
as I have taught stress rescue with students that dive
the so called DIR way and if in fact your diving with a knife
on your side you should be able to get it from under the knife
and under your left arm pit and around you neck and into place
that way. also as you weight belt problem take another buckle
and slide in front of the weights as this will keep them from falling
like some folks do with there light canister.
hope this help's and just remember you are the one diving your config
your the one thinking for you self and above all your the one with the mind
to it all
--
safe diving
pat
<NeedaHoliday> wrote in message
news:idbegss7uurqhndmb...@4ax.com...
> Bob,
>
> First and foremost, thanks for your input. When I started this
> thread, I only wanted advice not war. I am not going to add my
> opinions on Mr. Black as it is a waste of time.
>
> I change the long hose wrapping based on the Sherwood Maximus.
> It runs under the right arm. I started with the proper technique,
> wrapping under the right side, under the knife, up around the neck and
> in mouth. Found it to come loose when diving. The instructor
> suggested that I surgical tie it on the tank with a QR. Not sure if
> I like this. I am in the Ottawa area and DIR is non-existant. I find
> most post educational and that's why I posted this question.
>
> As for the weight belt. Crotch strap through webbing. If I
> release both buckles, weight belt will fall. I guess my concern was to
> lose my BC.
>
> As for chest strap, I think I am going to remove it. I found
> this to be a dangerous point.
>
> I really need some suggestions on the neck loop. I am using
> bungy cord and I think this is probably wrong.
>
>
Scott
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e7iat$r3l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Corrections:
> 1) I'm an eye surgeon, not a brain surgeon
1) No, you are a complete tool.
Why the crusade against the *real* Dr. Black?
Did he hose your boyfriend?
Your Lord and Master,
Scott
JGreene
I asked a month or two ago for your help. Specifically, I asked for some
info that would give me rational reasons to distrust DIR practices. You were
probably too busy to answer back then, but I see you have lots of time to
post now. So, what should I know to make an objective evaluation and some
wise choices when I start buying gear?
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e7158$6dj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> It's the silk purse from a sow's ear story with you DIR gods, and
> I chuckle every time someone comes along with an honest post about
> the fallibility of your system. You'd better have a look at the
> Realities of GUE thread now. MJB
>
> In article <8e701k$507$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > That was real helpful, Black. What's the matter? Are you too busy
> > trying to bash DIR becasue some of its proponents hurt your feelings,
> > that you can't give a little advice. Maybe your too scared to
> actually
> > make a comment as to diving procedures because every time you do, your
> > stupidity is pointed out.
> >
> > Needaholiday, I don't claim to be a DIR Expert, but I will give some
> > input that may help. The long hose should not be double rapped. If
> > you are using a 2nd stage that requires that, then I would get a
> > different 2nd stage. If the back up reg. is properly attached with
> the
> > necklace, it will simply pull loose with the gear.
> >
> > In other words, I think the answer lies in your config. not your
> > buddy's technique in removing the gear. Of course, I haven't seen
> your
> > buddy's technique, so that could be contributing as well. What did
> > your instructor say?
> >
> > I have been teaching PADI Rescue for years while diving a DIR rig. and
> > never had a problem with the hose routings, or other eq. removal. I
> > hope this helps.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > In article <8e6ud5$35l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > DIR Expert is an oxymoron. You sound like a tangled-up rat's nest
> > > in your DIR rig. I'll bet your NAUI instructor is amused. A real-
> > > life scenario might not be so amusing. MJB
> > >
Bob D.
>not a brain surgeon
Obviously.
> Sure the long-hose concept was around before Bill Hogarth Main
>adopted the "wrap-around" method used by Sheck Exley, but the wrap
>has been coined Hogarthian.
No, a complete approach was coined Hogarthian, the wrap just happened to be
one feature adopted by that system.
>3) The rig described by NeedaHoliday sure sounds DIR to me.
In that case, perhaps you should educate yourself concerning DIR before
sounding its death toll.
>Lose
>one wrap, and he's still an accident waiting to happen (or should I
>say a rescue waiting to screw-up).
Not even worth the time to argue.
Kevlar
shoulder harness. The system I use is very similar
to a backplate/harness but has quick release
buckles on each shoulder and across the chest
and at the waist for a crotch strap. Removing
the kit above or below water is a snap, done in
seconds. I usually use dbl steel 95's and even on
shore dives where I have to walk a good distance
the quick release has never been an issue. It
bears the weight easily above water and below water
it isn't even an issue. Donning on a boat is even
easier, just release the buckles, sit back into the
tanks, snap in shoulders and chest, stand up,
snap in waist and crotch, tighten where needed.
The shoulder straps are very similar to an alice
pack in the army, without the padding.
Heavy duty plastic construction.
>I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
>on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
>weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
>If it needs to be removed, pull both the harness and weight belt
>clasps at the same time. Any comments.
This sounds like a very silly thing to do, I would not want anything
in the way of my weight belt releasing. The belts are not going to
release by accident, the lock is very strong. Why would you want
to release your harness in an emergency? This sounds like you are
adding too many complications to something that should be as simple
as possible in case of an emergency. If the crotch strap is in the way
I suggest going with one that is not as thick as the rest of the harness.
It is not there for load bearing purposes, only for stability, it does not
need to be strong. Get one that your weight belt will comfortably and
easily go OVER.
>And lastly, I was told that if I did not need the chest strap to
>remove it from the harness. Any comments on this.
Again the chest strap is more for stability than any load bearing. Go with
a less thick strap than the rest of the harness, considerably less thick.
-K
BTW I am not DIR or an expert, I just dive.
Pete Young
>attempt. I have the long hose wrapped twice around me, going from the
>first stage under my right arm, around the neck, under my right arm
>for a second time up to the mouth.
As others have observed, this doesn't help. Using a hogarthian hose
routing does make life simpler for the long hose.
>Any recommendations on an easy quick removal of gear to help the
>situation.
You need to be prepared to cut one or both shoulder straps.
This is easy to practise but somewhat destructive, even if webbing
is comparatively cheap! It does remove most of the argument for adding
quick-release clips to the harness, which will negate the point of
having a one-piece harness in the first place.
>I also was wondering about my weight belt removal. I currently put it
>on under the crotch strap. I was told that it was safer in case the
>weight belt comes off. It will get caught up on the crotch strap.
I'd agree with this. Far more people get into trouble through
weight belts falling off than have problems dumping weight, and this
is even more of a problem if one is diving with a neoprene suit (I don't)
and is using a lot of weight on the weight belt. The BSAC incident
reports are full of incidents caused by inadvertent weight releases.
--
____________________________________________________________________
Pete Young pe...@antipope.org
"Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life"
Rich Lesperance
Kevlar <ksu...@mindspring.com> wrote
> This sounds like a very silly thing to do, I would not want anything
> in the way of my weight belt releasing. The belts are not going to
> release by accident, the lock is very strong.
I have seen _many_ basic dive students accidentally drop their weightbelt,
and lose bouyancy control because of it. I have heard of zero accidents
where the diver's weight belt got hung up, and he was unable to ditch it.
Face it - how many dives have you done on a popular reef, where you find a
weightbelt on the bottom? I've recovered several, and I don't OW dive a
helluva lot (not for lack of desire...).
> Why would you want
> to release your harness in an emergency? This sounds like you are
> adding too many complications to something that should be as simple
> as possible in case of an emergency
Exactly my rationale for not going with a quick release on the harness, like
you prefer. In a true emergency, the harness can be quickly cut off the
victim, like MJB (no, the _other_ one. The smart one) has mentioned.
Rich L
Kevlar
> and lose bouyancy control because of it. I have heard of zero accidents
> where the diver's weight belt got hung up, and he was unable to ditch it.
This sounds more like a training/experience issue than a fault in the equipment.
The weights are going to fall when released, if a new diver is not experienced
enough to hold onto them then he deserves to lose it.
As far as accidents due to divers weight belts being hung up I have heard of
2 deaths where non-ditchable or not easily ditchable weights may have been
a contributing factor. They are of course not the primary factor because something
else must have already gone wrong for the diver to have a need to ditch weights
in the first place.
> Face it - how many dives have you done on a popular reef, where you find a
> weightbelt on the bottom? I've recovered several, and I don't OW dive a
> helluva lot (not for lack of desire...).
I have seen a few also, although I would attribute it more to a panic attack or
careless divers than to equipment failure. They probably tried to remove the
belt to be able to climb back on board the boat easier and lost their grip. At
depth it should not be too hard to stay down just by kicking if you happen to
lose your grip on your weights. The only time I think benefit would be gained
from having more secure weights would be if you are diving double aluminum
tanks with a wet suit and need about 30lbs of weight to counter the bouyancy.
Then again if this were the case I would want some of that weight (at least half)
to be non-ditchable. SS Backplate and a V weight would do that trick and
still leave enough room for ditchable weight in an emergency.
> Exactly my rationale for not going with a quick release on the harness, like
> you prefer. In a true emergency, the harness can be quickly cut off the
> victim, like MJB (no, the _other_ one. The smart one) has mentioned.
I would rather take the rare chance of losing 10 lbs of lead and having a shortened
dive than to take a chance of not being able to ditch my weights the instant I felt a
need to do so. I would also like to have my harness and tanks secure to my person
after I ditch my weights. If I need to ditch my entire kit and make an emergency ascent
I like to have that option available too. That is one of the reasons I like having quick
release buckles. That and it makes donning and removing my gear very easy requiring
no assistance.
Being in an overhead environment ditchable weights don't really do a whole lot to help
either way, I guess it would be better to be stuck on the floor than on the ceiling, but in
open water I want to be able to release as easily as possible.
-K
Rich Lesperance
<Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote
>
> There was a fatality off the NC coast last year that was partially
> attributed to the diver's weight belt being under the harness, making
> it impossible to ditch.
>
> Of course, the guy was also wearing steel doubles with a wetsuit, and
> jumped in the water without turning on his air ...
>
Oh. Him.
Was his belt buckle released, but caught up on his harness?
Rich L
Rich Lesperance
Kevlar <ksu...@mindspring.com> wrote
> This sounds more like a training/experience issue than a fault in the
equipment.
> The weights are going to fall when released, if a new diver is not
experienced
> enough to hold onto them then he deserves to lose it.
Kevlar, I agree that training and experience go a long way to preventing an
accidental release from happening. That logic can be applied to alot of gear
choices, though, and I think we should think through gear choices without
discarding one because "an experienced diver would _never_ do that!".
Mistakes and accidents _do_ happen.
>
> As far as accidents due to divers weight belts being hung up I have heard
of
> 2 deaths where non-ditchable or not easily ditchable weights may have been
> a contributing factor. They are of course not the primary factor because
something
> else must have already gone wrong for the diver to have a need to ditch
weights
> in the first place.
I've heard about _several_ where an overweighted diver who didn't have
ditchable weight at all died, but I do not believe this was due to a weight
belt strap routed underneath the harness, but due to a diver simply not
attempting to release it at all. Are you sure about those cases you
mentioned, being due to weight belts routed this way? Jim Greenlee posted
about the rather infamous one, also, but I asked him to clarify about the
same thing.
If true, I may re-think my stance on this matter.
> I have seen a few also, although I would attribute it more to a panic
attack or
> careless divers than to equipment failure.
This is probably true in a large number. I'm not speaking of equipment
failure, though, but of a diver accidentally bumping the buckle open
(although, I suppose you could term that failure....)
> They probably tried to remove the
> belt to be able to climb back on board the boat easier and lost their
grip.
In which case, having the weight belt routed underneath the harness would
have prevented them from losing it. Of course, though, what happens to the
gear out of the water (or getting out) is not sufficient grounds here. I
think both of us agree that gear must be optimized for in-water use <g>.
> At
> depth it should not be too hard to stay down just by kicking if you happen
to
> lose your grip on your weights.
You can use the same argument in reverse - if a diver loses bouyancy, and
has to drop his weightbelt, he can kick _upwards_ for the few seconds it
takes to reach down & give the buckle a flip past the harness (to release it
after the buckle has been 'opened'). Of course, here we have a choice
between fighting to stay down, or fighting to stay up <g>. Either can be
deadly in different circumstances.
>The only time I think benefit would be gained
> from having more secure weights would be if you are diving double aluminum
> tanks with a wet suit and need about 30lbs of weight to counter the
bouyancy.
> Then again if this were the case I would want some of that weight (at
least half)
> to be non-ditchable. SS Backplate and a V weight would do that trick and
> still leave enough room for ditchable weight in an emergency.
Agreed.
>
> > Exactly my rationale for not going with a quick release on the harness,
like
> > you prefer. In a true emergency, the harness can be quickly cut off the
> > victim, like MJB (no, the _other_ one. The smart one) has mentioned.
>
> I would rather take the rare chance of losing 10 lbs of lead and having a
shortened
> dive than to take a chance of not being able to ditch my weights the
instant I felt a
> need to do so
Sorry, perhaps I misinterpreted you, but I thought your 'quick release'
statement that I replied to, above, was about the _harness_ straps, not the
weight belt itself.
I'd be interested in finding out if those casualties did )try_ to drop their
belts, but the belts hung up for whatever reason. If so, that would cause me
to re-think my routing.
Interestingly enough, when I was first trained in the military, using a
harness-like BC (horse collar, Don't ask <g>), and weight belts, it was a
cardinal sin to have your weight belt routed underneath the crotch strap.
You got a "Major Safety Violation" for it. More than one safety violation
could get you kicked out of the course <g>. So it was quite a stretch for me
to start routing the belt underneath at first....
Rich L
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
>
>I would suggest adding quick release clips to your shoulder harness.
I would suggest NOT doing that. I quick release is an unnecessary
point of potential failure. If the backplate is webbed properly (with
a single 2" piece of regular weight belt webbing, not crossed behind
the neck), then there is no problem getting in or out.
>Again the chest strap is more for stability than any load bearing. Go with
>a less thick strap than the rest of the harness, considerably less thick.
I don't use a chest strap on my doubles (104s), and have never felt
the need for "more stability". The system is rock solid on my back,
both in and out of the water.
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
>
>I have seen _many_ basic dive students accidentally drop their weightbelt,
>and lose bouyancy control because of it. I have heard of zero accidents
>where the diver's weight belt got hung up, and he was unable to ditch it.
There was a fatality off the NC coast last year that was partially
attributed to the diver's weight belt being under the harness, making
it impossible to ditch.
Of course, the guy was also wearing steel doubles with a wetsuit, and
jumped in the water without turning on his air ...
-JimG
Dan Bracuk
" I have seen _many_ basic dive students accidentally drop their
weightbelt, and lose bouyancy control because of it. "
This happened on one of my cert dives. I was able to grab it and put
it back on though.
Dan Bracuk
Toronto, Canada
It's bad luck to be superstitious.
rec.scuba faq http://scifi.squawk.com/scuba.html
Dan Bracuk
"how many dives have you done on a popular reef, where you find a
weightbelt on the bottom? "
Twice.
Both times it was my belt, and both times it came off when I jumped
into the water.
Miranda Alldritt
Really, if you're diving a decent gear config, you should never be THAT
negative. I guess the only exception would be a 7mm wetsuit and then
only if you were doing a deepish dive.
The only time I could see wanting to ditch weight would be at the
surface if I needed mobility to help someone else. I think I'd be very
inclined to just ditch everything in that case.
What other realistic scenarios can people think of?
Miranda
Rich Lesperance wrote:
>
> <Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote
> >
> > There was a fatality off the NC coast last year that was partially
> > attributed to the diver's weight belt being under the harness, making
> > it impossible to ditch.
> >
> > Of course, the guy was also wearing steel doubles with a wetsuit, and
> > jumped in the water without turning on his air ...
> >
>
> Oh. Him.
>
> Was his belt buckle released, but caught up on his harness?
>
> Rich L
--
"...the sea has no compassion, no faith, no law, no memory.
Its fickleness is to be held true to men's purposes only by an
undaunted resolution and by a sleepless, armed, jealous
vigilance...."
Kevlar
>Kevlar, I agree that training and experience go a long way to preventing an
>accidental release from happening. That logic can be applied to alot of gear
>choices, though, and I think we should think through gear choices without
>discarding one because "an experienced diver would _never_ do that!".
>Mistakes and accidents _do_ happen.
I agree whole heartedly Rich, my point is that I would rather take the risk
of losing my belt (retails about 9.99 and the lead is what .50c/lb?) than
to risk not being able to get it off when I need it off. Not saying I will never
lose it but in my risk assesment I would rather do it this way.
>I've heard about _several_ where an overweighted diver who didn't have
>ditchable weight at all died, but I do not believe this was due to a weight
>belt strap routed underneath the harness, but due to a diver simply not
>attempting to release it at all. Are you sure about those cases you
>mentioned, being due to weight belts routed this way? Jim Greenlee posted
>about the rather infamous one, also, but I asked him to clarify about the
>same thing.
Yeah Jim was right on the money with that one, the other I read about was
some type of harness thing that just sounded silly in the first place. I think
the harness may have been what actually caused the death in that case.
>You can use the same argument in reverse - if a diver loses bouyancy, and
>has to drop his weightbelt, he can kick _upwards_ for the few seconds it
>takes to reach down & give the buckle a flip past the harness (to release it
>after the buckle has been 'opened'). Of course, here we have a choice
>between fighting to stay down, or fighting to stay up <g>. Either can be
>deadly in different circumstances.
This is what I think about, if there is no problem and I lose my belt no biggie,
I will try and recover it. If I can't then no big loss, I will control my ascent as
well as I can and dive some other day. On the other hand, if I have a real
emergency I dont want to have to spend the extra time to ditch the weight.
You also suggested cutting away the webbing if need be, that would entail
spending time finding my knife/shears and actually cutting away, crucial
minutes in an emergency situation. All hypothetical of course but not worth
the benefit of saving myself 10-15 dollars in weights IMHO. Of course the
quick release on my BC makes this a moot point, it would only take me
a fraction of a second to release that along with the belt, I just dont want to
have to think about any more than neccesary in this type of situation.
>I'd be interested in finding out if those casualties did )try_ to drop their
>belts, but the belts hung up for whatever reason. If so, that would cause me
>to re-think my routing.
Me too, pardon me if I sound calous but the guy from last year almost sounded
like a suicide.
>Interestingly enough, when I was first trained in the military, using a
>harness-like BC (horse collar, Don't ask <g>), and weight belts, it was a
>cardinal sin to have your weight belt routed underneath the crotch strap.
>You got a "Major Safety Violation" for it. More than one safety violation
>could get you kicked out of the course <g>. So it was quite a stretch for me
>to start routing the belt underneath at first....
I never dove in the service, just jumped, but my instructor was very demanding
when it came to my weights in basic open water. I guess he rubbed off on me
a bit. Any problems, drop em and figure out what went wrong back on the boat.
-K
Kevlar
>The only time I could see wanting to ditch weight would be at the
>surface if I needed mobility to help someone else. I think I'd be very
>inclined to just ditch everything in that case.
>What other realistic scenarios can people think of?
I would think any out of air emergency, be it a catastrophic first stage
failure or just a stuck pressure gauge/empty tank would require ditching
and going up as fast as possible, you are not going to get much more into
your BC than what is already in it, and all the air in your lungs is going to
be needed for the emergency ascent. Then again your buddy should be
your first option, but for some of us same ocean types (shhhhh) you don't
always have a buddy in range.
-K
Kevlar
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu wrote in message <8easc2$d...@catapult.gatech.edu>...
>ksu...@mindspring.com stopped playing nethack just long enough to say:
>>
>>I would suggest adding quick release clips to your shoulder harness.
>
>I would suggest NOT doing that. I quick release is an unnecessary
>point of potential failure. If the backplate is webbed properly (with
>a single 2" piece of regular weight belt webbing, not crossed behind
>the neck), then there is no problem getting in or out.
Just a suggestion for someone who was obviously having problems. As far
as a potential failure point, it may have a slightly higher chance to fail than
just the webbing, but if it does fail it will be above the surface where gravity
actually matters. Once in the water I would say its failure potential is
practically nil. The benefits (ease of donning/removing above and below the
water with little or no assistance) outweigh the danger of me having to abort
a dive do to a clip failing.
>I don't use a chest strap on my doubles (104s), and have never felt
>the need for "more stability". The system is rock solid on my back,
>both in and out of the water.
My BC is a softpack with wings, not as stable as a backplate by any means.
The chest strap makes a noticeable difference in stability for me. I will
eventually upgrade to a backplate but I see no need to do so until I change the
type of diving I do or my BC becomes unserviceable.
-K
Iain Smith
> your first option, but for some of us same ocean types (shhhhh) you don't
> always have a buddy in range.
Why not?
Iain (an ocean-type!)
(Have I just been trolled?)
Dan Volker
every single point along the way. George has always said we should not try
to "teach pigs to sing...it just annoys the pigs"...and I think you
demonstrate this quite well.
Still, its amazing to me that with all the discussion on DIR you would not
IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that this guy was NOT DIR with his hose config---DIR
would NEVER wrap the hose around the way he did. This guy needs help, like a
few others have provided, not the swill from your trough.
--
Dan Volker
South Florida Dive Journal
http://www.sfdj.com/
The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote in message <8e72tu$8e4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <5q0egsog0k8otqv4o...@4ax.com>,
> NeedaHoliday wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:28:10 GMT, mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> I have tried to adapt a method that seems safer and more reliable
mjbl...@my-deja.com
"Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
> Still, its amazing to me that with all the discussion on DIR you
> would not IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that this guy was NOT DIR with his
> hose config---DIR would NEVER wrap the hose around the way he did.
> This guy needs help, like a few others have provided, not the swill
> from your trough.
No argument with you, this guy needs help and would be better off not
wrapping the hose at all. IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that I don't give a
shit where or how he wraps it, he's trying to learn a system that
belongs in another forum, alt.cults.DIR. Say hello to Jim for me.
He may not remember me but he'll surely remember captaining the 3
Little Devils boat at Sailfish Marina. MJB
mike_...@my-deja.com
Should it be stuffed? Should it just "flap in the Breeze"? Please
explain to me a better storage method.
Also, in preparation for the fact that what you probably intended to
say that the hose should not be that long, can you also please explain
why a short hose would be better and how much shorter?
Thanks,
Mike
In article <8ed122$rvd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com
the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-inch
octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
In article <8ed1qt$smc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Bob Crownfield
>
> If the hose isn't wrapped then what should be done with it, Black?
> Should it be stuffed?
And he knows exactly where he can stuff it.
--
Bob Crownfield, Crown...@Home.com
Photography, Flying, Delphi Rad Addict
Now diving the Pacific in the LA Area.
"Protect freedoms before they become extinct."
mike_...@my-deja.com
going to go back to check, but I don't think there was a wreck
specification. Perhaps there was. So when I asked my question, I was
assuming open water.
I do still have a question though regarding your wreck diving
procedure. Unfortunately there are not many penetrable wrecks in my
area and therefore I am not experienced at such, but I would think that
a 40" hose is way too short. Most people I have witnessed, have
trouble managing this in a calm, controlled, nonrestricted space type
of situation.
As for stuffing the hose...is this really less of an entanglement
hazard? When my 7' hose is "stored" and I am breathing from it, it
hugs my body all the way around. If it were stuffed behind me, it can
snagg and even if it doesn't entangle me at that point, it can be
pulled free, in part or in whole. I may or may not know that this is
happened, but now it certainly is an entanglement hazard. Also, what
happens when the time comes to re-stow the long hose?
One more question, when you have the long hose stuffed, are you
breathing from it, or is it the back up? I like knowing I am handing
the OOA diver a working reg.
Mike
In article <8ed5nb$12h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
> the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
> the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
> I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
> entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
> bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-inch
> octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
> in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
> business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
> and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
>
> In article <8ed1qt$smc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > If the hose isn't wrapped then what should be done with it, Black?
> > Should it be stuffed? Should it just "flap in the Breeze"? Please
mike_...@my-deja.com
Crown...@Home.com wrote:
> And he knows exactly where he can stuff it.
I think the place you are suggesting would definitely not be an
entanglement hazard.<G>
Perry Armor
Why would a 5-7 ft. represent an entanglement hazard? If stowed
correctly (under a light, knife, or belt-mounted pocket), a 7-ft.hose is
clean & out of the way. It certainly makes for easier air-sharing if need
be than a 40" hose. With a long hose bungied to your tank(s), what happens
if it inadvertently comes loose? Doesn't that create a bit of an
entanglement hazard? How do you re-stow it?
BTW, thanks for posting a bit about your gear choices, etc. as opposed to
just calling everyone names. "Progress, however slight, is still
progress..."
Thanks,
Perry
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ed5nb$12h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Dan Volker
Jim Abernethy has absolutely no idea who you are. After he reads a few of
your posts, he probably would not want you on his boat. I could be a good
Samaritan and print a bunch of MJB's best posts for him, this would clearly
remove you from any potential danger you could cause divers on his boat.
--
Dan Volker
South Florida Dive Journal
http://www.sfdj.com/
The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote in message <8ed122$rvd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
Dan Volker
kill new divers with. And the man would have us believe he took an oath to
"help" people.
Dan Volker
>Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
>the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
>the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
>I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
>entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
>bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-inch
>octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
>in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
>business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
>and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
>
>In article <8ed1qt$smc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> If the hose isn't wrapped then what should be done with it, Black?
>> Should it be stuffed? Should it just "flap in the Breeze"? Please
>> explain to me a better storage method.
>>
>> Also, in preparation for the fact that what you probably intended to
>> say that the hose should not be that long, can you also please explain
>> why a short hose would be better and how much shorter?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> In article <8ed122$rvd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
Bob Crownfield
>
> In article <390A16...@Home.com>,
> Crown...@Home.com wrote:
> > And he knows exactly where he can stuff it.
>
> I think the place you are suggesting would definitely not be an
> entanglement hazard.<G>
It would seem to have more than enough room.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Iain Smith
reservations about DIR. I see where you are coming from, but use a
different approach myself. If you would be interested in a constructive
discussion about the respective merits of our approaches, then I would be
keen to do so.
Regards,
Iain
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
> > >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Iain
----------
Iain Smith
Diving Officer,
Cambridge University Underwater Exploration Group
email: im...@cam.ac.uk phone: 07790 415 344
Randy Milak
>
> Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
> the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
> the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing.
If you have not dived, nor intend to dive Hogarthian I would humbly
suggest you discuss 'your' configuration and philosophy -- even if it
follows traditional recreational guidelines. Its something you
understand and can defend much better.
> In wrecks,
> I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
> entanglement hazard.
"length of hose" ... Do you know why a diver employs a long hose?
Michael, can you think of any reasons why a longer hose, i.e. 7' would
be advantageous in the tight confines of a wreck as opposed to a short
hose? What would the advantages in open water be?
> I prefer a 40-inch primary hose,
What could possibly be the advantage to a 40" primary hose? Are you
aware that the standard secondary regulator hose length is 39"; and that
the standard primary regulator hose length is 28"? A 40" hose is not
off the shelf, its custom. Do you know how far away from your body a
40" hose would protrude from the first stage to your mouth? Thats why
the standard primary hose lengths are 28". Why a custom 40" hose? Oh,
and do you know why a secondary hose length standard in recreational
diving is 39"?
> and recommend bungying your long octo to your tank(s),
Do you not think that a probable entanglement area would be made if a
diver wraps a bungy cord around his tanks, and then simply "stuffs" the
hose in it? How will the hose be deployed?
Try it.
Wrap some bungy around a tank.
Stuff a hose in it. Long, short and anything in between.
Now, pull it out as if you needed to deploy it to an OOA diver.
What happens to the bungy?
What happens to the hose?
Want to discuss an improved methodology perhaps?
> or even diving with a 40-inch
> octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
> in an air-sharing emergency.
Its called piggy-backing. Have you ever tried it? It sucks when you're
in tight corridors and its even worse when the two of you have to go
through that little ass door isn't it? Hmmm, can you think of anything
that a diver could employ that would avoid those problems?
> Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
> business regardless of your system,
Yup, it sure is. That's WHY it's so important to be configured
appropriately for an environment in which a diver 'ups' their risk 10
fold. That's a very good reason WHY you keep getting flamed in this NG
-- divers should take wreck penetration very seriously -- some folks
think that you're rather complacent in fact.
> and I will not penetrate until I
> and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
That's probably semi-bad advice. Simply because, I don't believe you
understand what you are saying as it applies to overhead environment
diving.
1. Define "comfortable" in the context you state.
2. Familiarity is NOT the major priority to safely executing a wreck
penetration dive. Do you know what the priorities are, in order
and exactly how many? If so, please list; or, do you Need help?
If you can not list, it proves three things:
a) You have not thought this type of diving through -- period.
b) You should not be penetrating wrecks -- period.
c) You should not be giving advice on penetration diving -- period.
But, I'm sure you can come up with a good list. You have 20 years of
diving experience right? :-)
No flames (for a change) on my part here either Michael, just looking
for honest discussion.
Looking forward to your response.
--
Randy F. Milak
Windsor, Ontario
~rec.scuba madness takes its toll. Please have exact change!~
John Lechmanik
news:8eble7$v7n$2...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
> Just a suggestion for someone who was obviously having problems. As far
> as a potential failure point, it may have a slightly higher chance to fail
than
> just the webbing, but if it does fail it will be above the surface where
gravity
> actually matters. Once in the water I would say its failure potential is
> practically nil. The benefits (ease of donning/removing above and below
the
> water with little or no assistance) outweigh the danger of me having to
abort
> a dive do to a clip failing.
I always find this entertaining also. I would imagine the 3 inch buckles
have a very low percentage of failure underwater. Personally I have never
seen it or heard of it. I would think the nylon rubbing across a 1/4 inch
section of SS or aluminum a MUCH larger failure point over time (nylon vs.
metal, bad combination).
Granted you can drop a tank on a buckle and damage it, but I HOPE people
inspect their gear. I used to rock climb and got in the habit of inspecting
every inch of the rope when finished for the day. I would hope people look
over their gear between dives, or at least dive trips.
But if people don't want buckles or do want buckles, that should be their
choice. I wouldn't think it should be that big of an issue....
--
John Lechmanik
http://members.home.net/johnhl
To Reply directly put "johnhl" where it belongs
Scott
1) In the garage, carrying the dubs out to the truck, as he passed his new
$40,000 Buick, the release went allowing the LP95's to swing down and put a
$3,000 dent/scratch in the front fender.
2) Climbing a ladder after a dive. The release went, allowed the doubles,
with argon bottle to wing off to one side, peeling the diver off the ladder,
wasting his knee, and the other diver that was below, but off to the side.
You don't *need* QR's, why have them?
Scott
"John Lechmanik" <put-my-n...@home.com> wrote in message
news:5QGO4.38236$k5.10...@news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com...
Michael J. Blitch
>In article <8ecsks$2062$2...@news.gate.net>,
> "Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
>> Still, its amazing to me that with all the discussion on DIR you
>> would not IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that this guy was NOT DIR with his
>> hose config---DIR would NEVER wrap the hose around the way he did.
>> This guy needs help, like a few others have provided, not the swill
>> from your trough.
>
>No argument with you, this guy needs help and would be better off not
>wrapping the hose at all. IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that I don't give a
>shit where or how he wraps it, he's trying to learn a system that
>belongs in another forum, alt.cults.DIR. Say hello to Jim for me.
>He may not remember me but he'll surely remember captaining the 3
>Little Devils boat at Sailfish Marina. MJB
Jim Abernathy? You claimed previously that you two knew each other
quite well, but from what I hear Jim has no clue as to who you are.
Caught in another lie. What a blemish you are to any professional as
you lack all the tact, sensitivity, or sympathy of any medical doctor.
mjbl...@my-deja.com
I'm beginning to think you might have a credibility problem too.
How many wrecks have you penetrated? Let me guess, 1000's (just
like your pussy-lying DIR colleague Scott). Someone once said
to Trey that he should stick to diving holes in the ground, and
maybe you should too. A Best of Dan Volker could be my next
revealing project, are you in the mood to die like Scott ("Hello
all, My name is Scott Koplin. I have 15 logged dives, and about
30 unlogged dives..." Nov. 4, 1997).
MJB
In article <8ed9c3$1jn0$2...@news.gate.net>,
"Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
> This needs to go into the "Best of MJB" collection. More dangerous
> advice to
> kill new divers with. And the man would have us believe he took an
> oath to
> "help" people.
>
> Dan Volker
>
> >Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
> >the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
> >the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
> >I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
> >entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
> >bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-
> >inch
> >octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
> >in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
> >business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
> >and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
> >
> >In article <8ed1qt$smc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >> If the hose isn't wrapped then what should be done with it, Black?
> >> Should it be stuffed? Should it just "flap in the Breeze"? Please
> >> explain to me a better storage method.
> >>
> >> Also, in preparation for the fact that what you probably intended
> >> to
> >> say that the hose should not be that long, can you also please
> >> explain
> >> why a short hose would be better and how much shorter?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Mike
Michael J. Blitch
>Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
>the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
>the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
>I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
>entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
>bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-inch
>octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
>in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
>business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
>and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
Since you, for some reason, appear to be interested in describing the
pros/cons system, I will be happy to reply in kind.
While the 5/7 foot hose is not 'required' in OW (even decompression
diving), it is required for any overhead environment. Unless you limit
yourself to open cargo holds, there can be grave difficult in sharing
air with a 3.3' hose through a hatch or doorway where only one diver
can pass at a time, unless you both happen to be midgets. If someone
is entangled and out of air, sharing with a 5/7 foot hose will allow
you to work at the entanglement much more efficiently than if you
tried to share air with a hose that is so short your masks are almost
touching. You may think that with experience you can maintain great
buoyancy and control, but it is a lot more hard than you think. Just
watch a cavern class do their air sharing drills in open water while
following the line and sharing with a short hose. Currently, you may
by thinking that in air sharing, you can just easily swim out with the
buddy, but once you get into the cluster of total gas failure in an
overhead, your vis is almost guaranteed to be destroyed. If you have
been on many wrecks, you know that anything kicked up will stay in the
water column for a long time. you do not have the advantage of the
springing action of a cave to move the silt. On the flip side is that
you can swim out of the silt cloud into relatively clear water on a
wreck, while exiting the cave can have the silt following you out.
Swimming so close together while trying to both follow the line (you
did take in a reel, right?) is just task loading in its extreme.
Remember, both people need to have contact with the line. You can
misread a lead, lose the line on a tie-off, or have it slip out of the
grasp of the one diver, essentially screwing you both.
Besides the replacing the hose aspect of bungeeing to the tank, there
is a potential entanglement hazard. Theoretically, something can get
caught at the tail end of the loop. The bungee itself can get caught
on something. This could either catch the hose in case it is needed in
an emergency, snap the bungees leaving you with a floating hose, or
get you caught on the wreck with little maneuverability or access.
I agree, making sure both parties are experienced and comfortable is
paramount to having a safe dive. When in doubt, envoke Rule #1, even
it means calling the entire dive at the dock.
Remember, as a side note, metal-to-metal connections are a major
no-no. This includes D-rings on the bottom of your tanks held in place
by a large pipe clamp. I have heard of divers having something like a
piece of rebar slide into the D-ring and essentially trap the person
until they could back-out.
Next time you end the dive in a wreck, try exiting the entire way by
sharing air on your 40" hose. Try exiting on the next dive with a 5/7
foot hose and I will bet this is a lot safer, easier, and comfortable.
This exercise is required in a cave class and should be SOP for anyone
that considers penetration. This kind of skill is hard to visualize
and must be practiced. While at deco sometimes, I will (without
warning) give my buddy the out-of-air to test their response and
believe they should do the same to me.
mjbl...@my-deja.com
Get your facts straight, you typical DIR obfuscater. First of all
his name is Jim AbernEthy. Secondly, I said he may not remember me
(by name, but he remembered my face when I last dived on his boat
two years ago), and I never said we knew each other quite well (your
inference). He used to captain the 3 Little Devils boat out of
Sailfish Marina, many years ago when I often vacationed in the Palm
Beach area. I'll bet it just bugs the shit out of you when an
out-of-stater like me describes your back yard (and I don't even
have to do an internet search like you did).
Still waiting for your "smart bomb", you pervert.
MJB
In article <gk5pgsollpofb04ah...@4ax.com>,
Michael J. Blitch <mbli...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 21:49:59 GMT, mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <8ecsks$2062$2...@news.gate.net>,
> > "Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
> >> Still, its amazing to me that with all the discussion on DIR you
> >> would not IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that this guy was NOT DIR with his
> >> hose config---DIR would NEVER wrap the hose around the way he did.
> >> This guy needs help, like a few others have provided, not the swill
> >> from your trough.
> >
> >No argument with you, this guy needs help and would be better off not
> >wrapping the hose at all. IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that I don't give a
> >shit where or how he wraps it, he's trying to learn a system that
> >belongs in another forum, alt.cults.DIR. Say hello to Jim for me.
> >He may not remember me but he'll surely remember captaining the 3
> >Little Devils boat at Sailfish Marina. MJB
>
> Jim Abernathy? You claimed previously that you two knew each other
> quite well, but from what I hear Jim has no clue as to who you are.
> Caught in another lie. What a blemish you are to any professional as
> you lack all the tact, sensitivity, or sympathy of any medical doctor.
>
Kevlar
garage, so #1 can be ruled out rather easily.
As for number 2 the guy sounds like a weakling, maybe he should have a gear
line in the water if he is too weak to handle his doubles. If he lost his balance
that bad I would think he would let go and just fall back into the water rather
than try to fight and suffer serious injury. Then again this whole thing sounds
a bit contrived, I guess the guy with the 40k buick had no insurance and couldn't
claim it happened while he was parked at the local Wal Mart?
>You don't *need* QR's, why have them?
Because they make life a hell of a lot easier. Then again
comfort and conveniance are anti-dir so I don't expect you
to understand.
-K
Dan Volker
I was certified in 1972, NAUI.
I was penetrating wrecks throughout the 80's, and in 89 started doing
technical dives with George Irvine and Bill Mee. These were typically
shipwrecks in the 225 to 300 foot depth rage. I would spearfish on most of
these dives, and my penetrations were done to follow large fish which would
hide in some of the interior chambers---but these were not big
penetrations. Occasionally, I would follow George and Bill in one of their
deep penetrations, but these were usually less stimulating for me, since
deep in the ship we rarely found any big fish I could shoot :-)
Throughout the 90's, I enjoyed hundreds of tek dives, certainly plenty of
penetrations which would be of sufficient severity to qualify me as a "wreck
diver" :-)
If you want to get the "scoop" on my diving, visit South Florida and dive
with me as a 3rd buddy. You shouldn't be "guessing" about something which
is too easy to "know".
Since you claim to be a Doctor, I'm sure you can afford the trip. And if
you make the trip here, I'll make sure you get good dives and a good time,
and that your questions are answered well without the attitudes we see here
on rec.scuba. If you like, I'm sure we can get MHK to show for this, and I
can certainly get George and Bill if you'd like to get more information from
the source.
If you want to end this whole ordeal of MJB against the world, this would be
a great way to start.
Or, let us help you book a trip to visit Dr Kevorkian, in an effort to
further your already exceptional career as the most dangerous doctor on
rec.scuba :-)
Hopefully you'll pick diving with us.
--
Dan Volker
South Florida Dive Journal
http://www.sfdj.com/
The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video
mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote in message <8ei7u9$7bd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Hey Diver Dan The Safety Man:
>
>I'm beginning to think you might have a credibility problem too.
>How many wrecks have you penetrated? Let me guess, 1000's (just
>like your pussy-lying DIR colleague Scott). Someone once said
>to Trey that he should stick to diving holes in the ground, and
>maybe you should too. A Best of Dan Volker could be my next
>revealing project, are you in the mood to die like Scott ("Hello
>all, My name is Scott Koplin. I have 15 logged dives, and about
>30 unlogged dives..." Nov. 4, 1997).
>
>MJB
>
>In article <8ed9c3$1jn0$2...@news.gate.net>,
> "Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
>> This needs to go into the "Best of MJB" collection. More dangerous
>> advice to
>> kill new divers with. And the man would have us believe he took an
>> oath to
>> "help" people.
>>
>> Dan Volker
>>
>> >Flaming aside (for a change), if you're going to dive Hogarthian,
>> >the long hose (5 or 7-foot) should go under the right arm and around
>> >the neck. This makes sense in caves, for air sharing. In wrecks,
>> >I have a problem with it in that the length of hose represents an
>> >entanglement hazard. I prefer a 40-inch primary hose, and recommend
>> >bungying your long octo to your tank(s), or even diving with a 40-
>> >inch
>> >octo hose realizing that your buddy's going to have to ride your ass
>> >in an air-sharing emergency. Wreck penetration is a dynamic, tricky
>> >business regardless of your system, and I will not penetrate until I
>> >and my buddy are VERY comfortable and familiar with the wreck. MJB
>> >
>> >In article <8ed1qt$smc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> > mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> >> If the hose isn't wrapped then what should be done with it, Black?
>> >> Should it be stuffed? Should it just "flap in the Breeze"? Please
>> >> explain to me a better storage method.
>> >>
>> >> Also, in preparation for the fact that what you probably intended
>> >> to
>> >> say that the hose should not be that long, can you also please
>> >> explain
>> >> why a short hose would be better and how much shorter?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
NeedaHoliday
boat and the hose kept coming out from under my knife. The DM on the
boat saw this and suggested I wrap in twice around. Not knowing any
better I did. Since then there has been no problem with the
configuration as it solved the problem. Now in the Rescue course and
the problems are starting to show. I am going back to the original
config with a minor change. Tuck any extra under my belt if the hose
is to long. Makes sense when removing gear. One main error is my
neck loop. I have check out the GUE site and many others. I used
bungy cord and it would be hard to get off in an emergency. I am
still looking for the right way to set this up. Instructor frowned at
the idea and I had to hang it off the side for pool exercises.
As for Black, I am ignoring his comments. You guys are in a better
position to handle him.
On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 16:28:22 -0400, "Dan Volker" <d...@gate.net> wrote:
>Black, we keep trying to teach/explain DIR to you, and you keep missing
>every single point along the way. George has always said we should not try
>to "teach pigs to sing...it just annoys the pigs"...and I think you
>demonstrate this quite well.
>
>Still, its amazing to me that with all the discussion on DIR you would not
>IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE that this guy was NOT DIR with his hose config---DIR
>would NEVER wrap the hose around the way he did. This guy needs help, like a
>few others have provided, not the swill from your trough.
REMOVEjam...@pwgsc.gc.ca
Omit REMOVE to email
Scott
> Because they make life a hell of a lot easier. Then again
> comfort and conveniance are anti-dir so I don't expect you
> to understand.
I have dove both, with QR and without, and the QR added nothing but a
failure point. Comfort?? How is a QR any more or less comfortable that a
simple strap?Getting pissy isn't going to change anything.
Tell ya what, hop on over to techdiver and ask for opinions on QR's.
Scott
Iain Smith
> neck loop. I have check out the GUE site and many others. I used
> bungy cord and it would be hard to get off in an emergency. I am
> still looking for the right way to set this up.
Get yourself some rubber or silicon tubing. I use roughly 5mm
diameter. The tube walls are thick enough to avoid accidental breakage.
Overlap the ends, and fix each end to the main part of the other end,
using cable-ties. This gives you a loop to slip over the mouthpiece.
_____|_______
-----|-\ \
\ \_|_____
/\ \------|-------
cable tie
/\
Cable tie
I hope that diagram makes sense. I use this, with the loop tight enough to
avoid the second stage falling out, so that I can demonstrate how much
harder air sharing is with a short hose, than with a long hose. However,
the other DIR divers I dive with use bungee fixed to the second stage (see
http://www.gasdiving.co.uk/images/kit/regdetail.jpg) At the end of the
day, if you pull either of these necklaced second stages hard enough,
they will come away.
Of course, the rescuer could just slip the loop over the casualty's head!
Iain
Dan Volker
My first suggestion is to call Halcyon 954-462-5570 , and have them send
you a waist pocket. You will wear this on the right side of your waist belt,
and route the hose under it as it. The main pocket they sell now will work
very well for this purpose, and have lots of storage room---and still ride
in the slip stream so drag is not the issue it is with Jacket style BCs with
pockets on your chest where drag is worst. If you call Halcyon and ask for
" Lolani " on the phone ( she does custom prototyping) , you can ask her
for the custom pocket prototyped for Dan Volker ( this pocket is
considerably smaller and in my opinion the most perfect for your use. It is
not in mass production yet, but making you one as a custom order is very
easy, and not expensive. She won't know how to price this, but it should be
no more than the full size pocket, even as a custom order. If a few more
people request these, they will go into production and dealers will soon
have them.
If you are unsure of the necklace reg bungee, order one when you call. They
are dirt cheap and very easy to use.
Regards,
Dan Volker
--
Dan Volker
South Florida Dive Journal
http://www.sfdj.com/
The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video
NeedaHoliday wrote in message ...
>The reason I wrapped the hose around twice was because I was on a dive
>boat and the hose kept coming out from under my knife. The DM on the
>boat saw this and suggested I wrap in twice around. Not knowing any
>better I did. Since then there has been no problem with the
>configuration as it solved the problem. Now in the Rescue course and
>the problems are starting to show. I am going back to the original
>config with a minor change. Tuck any extra under my belt if the hose
>is to long. Makes sense when removing gear. One main error is my
>neck loop. I have check out the GUE site and many others. I used
>bungy cord and it would be hard to get off in an emergency. I am
mjbl...@my-deja.com
Man? And you are welcome to attend any of our dive events which can
be found at http://danenet.wicip.org/4lkscuba. I have no interest in
DIR, based on what I have learned from this list and techdiver. If the
people weren't such hostile primadonnas, my opinion would be different.
My tech education will continue with the better agencies, thank you.
MJB
In article <8eirfa$135i$1...@news.gate.net>,
> --
> Dan Volker
> South Florida Dive Journal
> http://www.sfdj.com/
> The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video
> mjbl...@my-deja.com wrote in message <8ei7u9
Bob Crownfield
>
> Did you have a guideline in all those wreck penetrations, Mr. Safety
> Man? And you are welcome to attend any of our dive events which can
> be found at http://danenet.wicip.org/4lkscuba. I have no interest in
> DIR, based on what I have learned from this list and techdiver. If the
> people weren't such hostile primadonnas, my opinion would be different.
So you pick the agency, not on content and effectiveness, but on
niceness?
Hmmmmm.
--
mike_...@my-deja.com
Mike
In article <390DDC...@Home.com>,
Edward Watson
from mjbl...@my-deja.com contains these words:
I have no interest in
> DIR, based on what I have learned from this list and techdiver.
Well what a surprise! I think you can probably delete the word
'learned' from your post, it seems unlikely you have ever learned
anything from any of the lists, DIR or otherwise, just cluttered them
up with complete and utter BS
If the
> people weren't such hostile primadonnas, my opinion would be different.
> My tech education will continue with the better agencies, thank you.
> MJB
You are the one that continues with hostilities etc, if you
repetitively post aggresive ( and dangerous) nonsense, what do you expect?!
Oh, and for your information, you cannot continue ones education
until you have at least started it in the first place!!!!
Fiona
mjbl...@my-deja.com
say that. Give it a rest idiot, tell me what you would breathe in
an unexpected emergency, water? Oh but you've been diving so long,
like Scott, that nothing ever happens outside of your plan. Lemme
guess, you've been diving three years (one more than Scott). MJB
In article <8eknsn$sj8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Kevlar
Scott, excuse my piss-e-ness. I am just so used to people who are going
the dir way being one of the more closed minded groups of scuba divers.
Usually the first word I hear back is something like it wont work, followed
by 'stroke'.
I have only ever encountered 1 person with a dir setup on board an actual
dive boat. Plenty of bondage wings, pony bottles and all sorts of quasi-tech
mass market stuff from the dive industry heavyweights.
I have found most of those people to be very talkative and most have reasons
for the equipment they use. On the other hand, most people dir here are just doing
it because other people have told them it is a better system without them doing
any learning or troubleshooting on their own. Dir mindset is going the wrong
way. People such as the original poster here are going in over their head and having
problems. You can debate over and over about quick releases being a failure point
and not being necessary, but the point is they are convenient and make removing
all your gear much faster.
The comfort level is no better while being worn, that much is apparent. But after a
dive I can sit down, pop 3 buckles and be out of my gear. When kitting up I can
sit back against my gear, fasten 3 buckles and stand up. To me that is much easier
than trying to squirm into a harness holding a pair of heavy doubles. I also don't have
to trouble anyone to hold up my tanks while I try and get them on. I can also very
easily adjust the tension on any strap in the water or out of the water. On deeper
dives with a wet suit I like being able to tighten my straps once the suit gets squeezed
a little.
As for the tech diver list, I view it as a good source of information but too many flame
wars to be worth posting to. There are some great people on that list but enough
bone heads to make it worthless to subscribe. I just check the archives thru aqaunaut
every once in a while.
mjbl...@my-deja.com
Dogmatic Idealist Ranting hostile primadonna (primafiona). MJB
In article <200005012...@zetnet.co.uk>,
Edward Watson <ted.w...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> The message <8eklc7$ppd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> from mjbl...@my-deja.com contains these words:
>
> I have no interest in
> > DIR, based on what I have learned from this list and techdiver.
>
> Well what a surprise! I think you can probably delete the word
> 'learned' from your post, it seems unlikely you have ever learned
> anything from any of the lists, DIR or otherwise, just cluttered them
> up with complete and utter BS
>
> If the
> > people weren't such hostile primadonnas, my opinion would be
> > different.
> > My tech education will continue with the better agencies, thank you.
> > MJB
>
> You are the one that continues with hostilities etc, if you
> repetitively post aggresive ( and dangerous) nonsense, what do you
> expect?!
> Oh, and for your information, you cannot continue ones education
> until you have at least started it in the first place!!!!
>
> Fiona
>
>
mike_...@my-deja.com
*unexpected* emergency to a dumb ass like you, Black. I would switch
to another breathing gas appropriate for my depth you idiot. That is
what I practice continually, that is what I teach my students and that
is what I teach my instructor candidates and this is what I have
consistently done for the more than three years I have been diving, you
fool. In other words, I would not be in such a predictable dilemma in
the first place.
Mike
In article <8ekp1t$u00$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com
In article <8ekpkc$ulh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mike_...@my-deja.com
are faced with reason and you can't back up you comments Black. I
tried reasoning with you on another thread and you chose to continue
your name calling rather than answer my reasonable and civil questions
concerning your choice of hose length.
Now this. Care to ellaborate. Care to attempt to point out any
fallacy in my comments or do you want to continue with your juvenile
behavior.
Mike
In article <8ekptj$upd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mjbl...@my-deja.com
that you are a fuckin amateur. Loudmouthed, pretentious DIR scum.
YOU HAVEN'T BEEN DIVING LONG ENOUGH, to make a statement like "in
other words, I would not be in such a predictable dilemma in the
In article <8ekq89$vce$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mike_...@my-deja.com
share this information with the group. Don't forget to also tell them
about the amount of experience gained during this time period, since we
know date of original certification is not the only indicator or diving
ability.
In article <8ekrur$1g6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Michael J. Blitch
>If the
>people weren't such hostile primadonnas, my opinion would be different.
I felt the same way once. It took quite a while before I learned how
to look at the message instead of the way something is being said. If
you want to avoid the flames, then a general rule of thumb that I use
is to delete the first two paragraphs and then read the rest of the
message. I see it too shallow of a personality for me to completely
discount what someone is saying because of the sole reason of the
harsh language being used. You need to learn how to work the system,
and this is done by lurking for a while. If someone tell you that you
are an idiot for wearing a snorkel inside a deep wreck and you don't
know why, don't just use excuses like "well it hasn't killed me yet",
try "well tough guy/girl, why don't you just tell me why not". Most of
the time you'll get flammed even more, but this will come with the
advantage of them answering the question.
Think of it as the organic chemistry of med school. If you can't take
the long lectures, labs, and weekend study sessions for that one
course, then maybe you should not think about med school. When working
on residency, I am quite sure you had days without sleep that pushed
you to your personal limits. Since it would be considered hazing to
make you runs miles in your doubles as a fitness test, this type
information exchange can be the next best thing. This aspect of diving
is not for those that have easily bruised egos or something to prove.
Everyone needs a reality check when even thinking about this since
putting half ass effort will likely get you or someone else killed.
You and I have both probably never served in the military nor ever
will, but ask any member of a combat team about their trial and
tribulations and you might somehow be able to correlate them with your
own med school experiences. If you can handle the pressure of words,
then what makes you think you can handle the pressure of being 2000
feet back in a deep cave with zero visibility and are off the line?
>My tech education will continue with the better agencies, thank you.
How many flamming, condescending, or misinformational posts have you
seen come from any GUE instructor? In fact, how many posts here or on
tech diver that have come from any GUE instructor in the past few
months? Are you going to completely discount and entire organization
because that people, whom have nothing to do with GUE, are flamming
you? Is this the extent of your belief system? If JJ was attacking
everyone whom said something against his organization, then it would
be one thing, but can't even remember seeing a post from him, Cole,
Moon, or any other major instructor from GUE on techdiver nor this
newsgroup. The only group these guys post to is the DIRquest forum
that is available to GUE members only.
Tell you what, join GUE and get access to their forum. They have an
electronic membership for as little as 19 dollars a year
https://www.gue.com/cgi-bin/subscribe. If, after 30 days, you still
feel the organization is not even worth considering or is as bad as
you apparently think now, then I will either send you a personal check
to refund your cost, donate that money to the USC Catalina
Hyperbaric Chamber, or send it to your charity of choice. You have
absolutely nothing to lose. This means no intentional hostile actions
against anyone. If you have genuine questions, I feel confident that
you will get genuine answers.
Rich Lesperance
<mjbl...@my-deja.com>
..
> Won't you be surprised when you learn that an agency actually did
> say that.
Giving the devil his due, someone emailed me privately that breathing EAN 40
as a bail-out gas can be found in a TDI manual. *sigh*
> Give it a rest idiot, tell me what you would breathe in
> an unexpected emergency, water?
No, but one assumes he would go throught the incredible effort to have the
appropriate gas. Unlike.....
Rich L
mike_...@my-deja.com
In article <8ekvcl$4m7o$3...@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu>,
"Rich Lesperance" <ri...@ufl.edu> wrote:
>
> <mjbl...@my-deja.com>
> ..
> > Won't you be surprised when you learn that an agency actually did
> > say that.
>
> Giving the devil his due, someone emailed me privately that breathing
EAN 40
> as a bail-out gas can be found in a TDI manual. *sigh*
>
> > Give it a rest idiot, tell me what you would breathe in
> > an unexpected emergency, water?
>
> No, but one assumes he would go throught the incredible effort to
have the
> appropriate gas. Unlike.....
>
> Rich L
>
>
Bob Crownfield
>
> Won't you be surprised when you learn that an agency actually did
> say that. Give it a rest idiot, tell me what you would breathe in
> an unexpected emergency, water?
that is not the question.
The question is do you select the mix by plan according to the dive,
or by simply being lazy.
Bob Crownfield
>
> The only time I have for an amateur like you Gault is to tell you
> that you are a fuckin amateur. Loudmouthed, pretentious DIR scum.
> YOU HAVEN'T BEEN DIVING LONG ENOUGH, to make a statement like "in
> other words, I would not be in such a predictable dilemma in the
> first place." GROW UP, PUPPY. MJB
The difference is that he does not get into stupid situations.
You said that you did.
He is not stupid.
you on the other hand,.....
Rich Lesperance
<mike_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8el1ke$7o5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> EAN 40 at what depth?
I do not have the exact quote, but the person who quoted it for me indicated
the EAN 40 was for all 'recreational depths', with the caveat that the 1.9
O2 spike would be very brief, and therefore not a concern.
Almost verbatim what Black has used as his justification.
Rich L
MHK
Michael J. Blitch <mbli...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:c7srgs445pe5vokaq...@4ax.com...
. If, after 30 days, you still
> feel the organization is not even worth considering or is as bad as
> you apparently think now, then I will either send you a personal check
> to refund your cost, donate that money to the USC Catalina
> Hyperbaric Chamber, or send it to your charity of choice. You have
> absolutely nothing to lose
I'll match that contribution to the chamber...
Ben Martinez
mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Except that I thaught in Black's case he was doing wreck penetration.
> Exiting a wreck at 1.9 and *then* ascending is a far cry from ascending
> in open water as you are switching to bail out. Although he *may* have
> quoted an agency text, he has missapplied the information. His
> implication that this agency condones this practice is probably a lie,
> but then considering who we are talking about maybe he really just
> didn't get it.
>
> Besides, I still don't believe they said please.<G>
>
> Mike
>
Just to help clear up the he said she said issues here is Black's original
text again along with the text from the diver manual in question. I'll
leave the reader to decide on the differences.
I dive with EAN40 in a 30cf pony on most wreck dives in the Great Lakes,
with air in a 112cf primary. Most of these dives are within 130ffw, and I
don't breathe the EAN40. Some tight
spaces inside these wrecks, and sometimes you have to twist and turn to
get through (streamlining essential, and the smaller the bulk, the
better). The MOD for EAN40 is 102ffw, so it is logical for backup. I do
not dive doubles, because among other things, my boat ladder could break
from the weight, and changing the ladder is not a priority. So in this
diver's opinion, a pony is a viable option. And before anybody attacks
this, first tell me how many dives you have logged so I can gauge your
experience level before responding (if less than 1000 dives, don't
respond). Hope this helps with your future choices. MJB
A small volume scuba cylinder of EAN39 carried with a diver for a
decompression
gas can also be a redundant gas supply. In the event that the primary gas
supply
is exhausted, the diver can switch to EAN39 and make a normal ascent. If
this
emergency occured at 130 fsw, the PO2 for EAN39 would be 1.92 ATA.
Although the
recommended maximum oxygen depth limit for EAN39 is 102 fsw (PO2 1.6 ATA)
the
exposure time for an ascent from 130 fsw to 100 fsw would only be 30
seconds. In
this situation the pony cylinder becomes a "bail-out bottle". The risk for
CNS
O2 toxicity is minimal, especially compared to the alternative of no
bail-out.
In this situation, EAN39 provides operational safety as a bail-out gas
shallower
than 130 fsw without the need for an oxygen clean regulator that is
required for
higher mixes. Thus, when carrying a pony cylinder of EAN39, operational
and
physiological safety is increased.
Ben Martinez
cue...@tamu.edu
mike_...@my-deja.com
Exiting a wreck at 1.9 and *then* ascending is a far cry from ascending
in open water as you are switching to bail out. Although he *may* have
quoted an agency text, he has missapplied the information. His
implication that this agency condones this practice is probably a lie,
but then considering who we are talking about maybe he really just
didn't get it.
Besides, I still don't believe they said please.<G>
Mike
In article <8el78k$3soq$1...@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu>,
mike_...@my-deja.com
his stupidity again. If this is the agancy text he is refering to, and
I think it is, now where does it say or imply EAN 40 should be used in
the manner in which he used it. The text clearly specifies a direct
ascent. Not exiting a wreck. So, just to point out, when exiting a
wreck, not only does it take longer to travel, but unless the wreck is
perfectly vertical with the exit at the shallowest point, you stay at
depth longer.
Another interesting thing about this post is that Black has made my
diving expereince an issue here and he has set 1000 logged dives as a
bench mark for those who he will accept advice from. I stopped logging
around 1000, years ago. What an idiot, but then I guess ya'll already
knew that.
Mike
In article <390E3AD6...@tca.net>,
cuerv...@icqmail.com wrote:
>
>
> mike_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Except that I thaught in Black's case he was doing wreck
penetration.
> > Exiting a wreck at 1.9 and *then* ascending is a far cry from
ascending
> > in open water as you are switching to bail out. Although he *may*
have
> > quoted an agency text, he has missapplied the information. His
> > implication that this agency condones this practice is probably a
lie,
> > but then considering who we are talking about maybe he really just
> > didn't get it.
> >
> > Besides, I still don't believe they said please.<G>
> >
> > Mike
> >
>
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
>
>the 1.9 O2 spike would be very brief,
Well, he's right about that part of it ...
-JimG
--
Jim Greenlee (j...@cc.gatech.edu) There were bugs in the code, but I
Instructor, College of Computing never saw them hiding. No, I never
Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332 saw them at all, `til there was Foo
Perry Armor
Perry
<mjbl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ekptj$upd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...