 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / March 2004Divers sue Uwatec
Interesting article from 10/2003 http://www.divernet.com/news/stories/vytec231003.shtml Another reason to know your dive tables & the basics and use a computer as a guide, not the rule... >Interesting article from 10/2003 > >http://www.divernet.com/news/stories/vytec231003.shtml --- Remove x's to send. > Another reason to know your dive tables & the basics and use a computer as a > guide, not the rule... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > --- > Remove x's to send. It's a good idea to know tables as a backup but if you do multilevel diving there is not way to judge from your tables if your computer is off or not. Nor can you apply tables well to multilevel diving. A better idea is to compare two computers--the results should not be grossly off. Adam > It's a good idea to know tables as a backup but if you do multilevel diving there is not > way to judge from your tables if your computer is off or not. Nor can you apply tables > well to multilevel diving. > > A better idea is to compare two computers--the results should not be grossly off. Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts your ascent on gas or NDL turnaround, and locks in your stops. Bet if you rode a Harley, it would have 3 wheels. Curtis > > It's a good idea to know tables as a backup but if you do multilevel > diving there is not [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Curtis Actually that is a good idea as a safety device. The computer knows your depth and rate of change so if it detects depth dropping too deep too fast it can inflate the BC to slow down descent. If it detects rise too fast it could dump air to slow ascent. Of course you could overide it manually but it could function as an autopilot safety device. Skydivers have long used an auto activation device that senses altitude and rate of change. If it senses that you are too low and too fast it automtically activates the chute. On another issue, I believe a mandatory safety diving device should be a beacon locator that every diver must carry to allow others to locate him/her. Adam "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :On another issue, I believe a mandatory safety diving device should be a beacon locator :that every diver must carry to allow others to locate him/her. What model did you carry on your last dive? Dan Bracuk If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. > The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ I don't have one yet. But I read a common thread in many dive accidents: a diver gets lost and cannot be found until it's too late. I bet a locator would prevent many fatal dive accidents. Adam "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :I don't have one yet. What model are you thinking of buying? Dan Bracuk If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- Have not looked into it yet. Do you have one you recommend? "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :Have not looked into it yet. Do you have one you recommend? No I don't. I also don't think they should be mandatory equipment. Dan Bracuk If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ > > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > and cannot be found until it's too late. I bet a locator would prevent many fatal dive > accidents. Heck, I can do better than that. I've read losts of accident reports and, in every case, the victim of diving accidents was diving. No more diving, no more accidents. Easy. There are radio beacons on the market. You want one, buy and use one. Don't get carried away with suggesting that everybody should be required to carry one . . . or anything else, for that matter. Lee > > I don't have one yet. But I read a common thread in many dive accidents: a > diver gets lost [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Don't get carried away with suggesting that everybody should be required to > carry one . . . or anything else, for that matter. But, but, but . . .then we won't be safe!! ;^) > > > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > > > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Lee It's somewhat like the requirements for seat belt use and helmets on motorcycles. If it's found that something can reduce deaths, but it only works when used by everyone. The odd thing about scuba diving is there seem to be no laws dealing with it. It's a sport regulated by the diving industry. Adam > It's somewhat like the requirements for seat belt use and helmets on motorcycles. If it's > found that something can reduce deaths, but it only works when used by everyone. > > The odd thing about scuba diving is there seem to be no laws dealing with it. It's a sport > regulated by the diving industry. And I suppose you think that is a bad thing? Gad, 60 days for complete idiocy. > > It's somewhat like the requirements for seat belt use and helmets on > motorcycles. If it's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > And I suppose you think that is a bad thing? The diving industry has it's own interests to protect--namely to get as many people into diving, then churn them through as many expensive courses as possible and sell as much gear as possible. That may not provide for optimal safety. > > > The odd thing about scuba diving is there seem to be no laws dealing with > > it. It's a sport [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > diving, then churn them through as many expensive courses as possible and sell as much > gear as possible. That may not provide for optimal safety. Really???!! Aren't you one of them? I'd swear you were a PADI fast-tracker. New DM or something. Since you seem to know so much about what we should be doing and how we should be protecting ourselves. Why don't you take a few more dives and get back to us. > > "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> wrote in message > news:yAb5c.806331$X%5.161448@pd7tw2no... [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > how we should be protecting ourselves. Why don't you take a few more dives > and get back to us. I'm waiting to get my gear fixed. In the meantime I'm here to irritate you. > > > The diving industry has it's own interests to protect--namely to get as > > many people into [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I'm waiting to get my gear fixed. In the meantime I'm here to irritate you. :^) It's working. > > I'm waiting to get my gear fixed. In the meantime I'm here to irritate > you. > > :^) It's working. Maybe, but my ribs ain't been so sore since the guy from the little hick town near Keystone Heights was posting. Remember Jason? Curtis > > > I'm waiting to get my gear fixed. In the meantime I'm here to irritate > > you. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Maybe, but my ribs ain't been so sore since the guy from the little hick > town near Keystone Heights was posting. Remember Jason? No, I don't. But I still understand you very well. :^) > > > It's somewhat like the requirements for seat belt use and helmets on > > motorcycles. If it's [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > diving, then churn them through as many expensive courses as possible and sell as much > gear as possible. That may not provide for optimal safety. If customers die, the dive industry loses customers because...well, the divers die,. and thhose thinking about diving get scared off due to the reported deaths, and families have a bad tendency to sue the dive professionals involved, or who even talked to the victim. So your next purchase will be one of those locator beacons? Dennis > > "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> wrote in message > news:yAb5c.806331$X%5.161448@pd7tw2no... [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Dennis The dive industry does have some interest in keeping things safe as you say or people would get too scared off. But as long as the number of accidents is moderately low it's OK. For example, as the guy posting about the PFO issue pointed out, if it was found that PFO was a major risk factor for stroke while diving it would not be in industry interest to point this out in their courses. It's an example of a conflict of interest. My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will actually give mine to her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to get separated from your buddy especially when vis is poor. Adam > > So your next purchase will be one of those locator beacons? > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to get separated > from your buddy especially when vis is poor. The thing you need then, is one of those wrist loop things. One loop goes around the wrist of one buddy and then there is a line running between the first buddy and the second buddy who has the second loop around his/her wrist as well. > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will actually give mine to > her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to get separated > from your buddy especially when vis is poor. Sell you a buddy leash? Curtis, CTMRH > > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will > actually give mine to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Sell you a buddy leash? ahahahahaha, is that what they are called? > > Sell you a buddy leash? > > ahahahahaha, is that what they are called? Yeppers, actually have one......gift from a friend for when I took my son shark's teeth diving off Venice Bch in the Gulf. Never used it, figured correctly I wouldn't lose track of my only son, and didn't want or need to add an entanglement hazard. Curtis > > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will > actually give mine to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Curtis, CTMRH I did a google search for "buddy leash" and all I got was dog sites. >> > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will >> actually give mine to >> > her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to >> get separated >> > from your buddy especially when vis is poor. >I did a google search for "buddy leash" and all I got was dog sites. OMS calls theirs a jon line http://www.omsdive.com/misc.html I've used things like it in low viz when doing coordinated visual searches ... if viz is 20 ft the line would be 30ft so the other diver is out of sight but common lanes have a 10 ft overlap and if you're lazy / lucky the line might snag what you're looking for ref locators : for open water recreational depths / dives (tech / scientific / commerical ahve different criteria) "real" units have interrogators and can ref multiple transponders with relative location and distance ... they also come with a "real" price so the best unit are out of the realm of recreational "nice to have" and the master unit is about the size of a laptop computer. their use for a rescue vs a recovery would only play those odds in a structured environment where people actually pay attention to pre-planned criteria for contact yet were used to not being in visual range. So current sport beacons are used/marketed as a return to a specific point (boat anchor line) or buddy minder. As a buddy minder they have a place ... but you have to be ready for them not to work so you're back to visual rules since dependence on technology is bound to break down. They also have a wide cone and only give you approximate location and distance. Good enough for a buddy minder but not an actual critical safety tool. Consider the events where a rescue would be likely ... for rec diver depths ... I can think of terminal entanglement or loss of consciousness. If the diver "simply" lost sight of their buddy since it's open water they go up if that's the agreed upon action (could have a desire not to surface if boat traffic is an issue) and some folks use a loss of visual on a buddy as a time to finish solo (especially photographers or other task oriented folks) . If they wandered under a hard surface, a beacon to the entry point would be of benefit ... more than a beacon to the buddy since you can't assume the buddy is in open water either. They might have come in to "rescue" and you both end up lost (but together). So being aware of your location and changes in the environment around you and being responsible for your own safety is of more value than thinking technology is the answer, let alone mandated. if a beacon was mandated the issuing organization would then be responsible for the performance of the beacon ... and anyone familiar with underwater acoustics and it's limitations would walk away from considering it as more than a tool to aid in recovery. I love the toys .. but they all need to be placed into proper context with risk / reward for dependance. ref : your concern of separation from your buddy work out your "what if" plans with your buddy and stick to them consider a buddy line, but be ready for snags and restriction of movement. the REAL downside of a buddy line ... if the giant squid grabs your buddy and rockets to the depths ... you're going too :^) - Ed 0 Ed -- refillable drysuit talc bag $9.95 ppd http://www.underwaterusa.com > >> > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will > >> actually give mine to [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > > - Ed Thanks for your reply. The OMS link did not work for me, I'll try later again. I did not really mean that diver locator should be mandated in the same way that seat belts are mandated and you get fined if you don't use them. Rather they can become standard of the industry as the SPG and having an alternate 2nd stage has become standard. Diving without these is now considered unsafe. The idea that once you get separated you surface, is fine, but it assumes both divers are OK but just get separated. If one is having trouble and the other surfaces, it does not work all that well. That's why a way to locate the lost diver underwater is much superior; the other diver can reastablish the buddy system and provide assistance if needed. Adam > The idea that once you get separated you surface, is fine, but it assumes both divers are > OK but just get separated. If one is having trouble and the other surfaces, it does not > work all that well. That's why a way to locate the lost diver underwater is much superior; > the other diver can reastablish the buddy system and provide assistance if needed. Wouldn't better buddy skills be more practical? Just a thought. Curtis > > The idea that once you get separated you surface, is fine, but it assumes > both divers are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Just a thought. Nah, you'd then be spending your money diving instead of buying stuff. Dennis > Curtis > > > "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> wrote in message > > news:yAb5c.806331$X%5.161448@pd7tw2no... [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > PFO was a major risk factor for stroke while diving it would not be in industry interest > to point this out in their courses. It's an example of a conflict of interest. Hi Adam, Apparently you've missed ths story. See, the Attorneys generals of several states sued the tobacco manufacturers for willfully concealing & denying that tobacco is a product that can harm you. The tobacco companies own research chowed this, but they kept lying about it to consumers. The companies lost, and have had to pay billions and billions of dollars. Now, care to reconsider whether it would be in the dive industry's best interest to point out how miuch of a riisk factor a PFO is? Hell, it'd be a REQUIREMENT before taking a course. Do the math. Lets say I train 250 divers over the course of a year for 300 dollars each. 25 of them die or are seriously injured from a DCS related to their having a PFO - which I didn't tell 'em about. I get sued and lose for 4,000,000 dollars each. Because of these and other cases, dive insurance premiums increase dramatically, which in turn the instructors have to pass on to the customer, which raises the cost of the class, costing new customers. > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will actually give mine to > her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to get separated > from your buddy especially when vis is poor. But no emergency locator beacon? And I presume y'all have two computers each now? Dennis > Adam "Dennis (Icarus)" wrote ... > And I presume y'all have two computers each > now? If you're going to be serious about it, you should carry 3 computers... If at least 2 of them don't agree, you abort the mission... At least that is what NASA would do... <grin> Adam Helberg schrieb: > My next purchase will be another dive computer for my buddy (I will actually give mine to > her) so we can dive safely in Eilat. I AM concerned at how easy it is to get separated > from your buddy especially when vis is poor. > > Adam And the 'puter fixes that ? can you recommend me a specific one ? Btw, a major safety item in Eiolat should be a bag with cheese and local bread. saves you from being bitten by nagging fish. Matthias "Dennis (Icarus)" schrieb: > If customers die, the dive industry loses customers because...well, the > divers die,. and thhose thinking about diving get scared off due to the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Dennis Locate what ? Bodies? Lawyers? Both, in this order ? Matthias >>>It's somewhat like the requirements for seat belt use and helmets on >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > diving, then churn them through as many expensive courses as possible and sell as much > gear as possible. That may not provide for optimal safety. so ensure your own safety. or are you an advocate of the "Nanny State"?  SignatureYa can't polish a turd > The odd thing about scuba diving is there seem to be no laws dealing with it. It's a sport > regulated by the diving industry. > > Adam Well, as a pilot who has just started diving, I think that's a great thing. God forbid diving gets something like the FAA to regulate it... Michael > Well, as a pilot who has just started diving, I think that's a great thing. > God forbid diving gets something like the FAA to regulate it... Yep, AL80 would cost $1000... Log books would be required on all equipment with required overhauls yearly or after a certain amount of uses... Tanks valves would need overhauling after so many turns... Fins and masks would have a maximum service life... Yeah, an FAA-type agency sure could screw it up... > > Well, as a pilot who has just started diving, I think that's a great > thing. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > have a maximum service life... Yeah, an FAA-type agency sure could screw it > up... It'd be great for the service monkeys though... :-) > It'd be great for the service monkeys though... :-) Perhaps, but it would require them to go to school for 2 years just so that they could be certified to remove the valve from a tank... <grin> "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :The odd thing about scuba diving is there seem to be no laws dealing with it. It's a sport :regulated by the diving industry. Who would set and enforce these laws you would like to see? Dan Bracuk If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ > Heck, I can do better than that. I've read losts of accident reports and, > in every case, the victim of diving accidents was diving. No more diving, > no more accidents. Easy. Oh, now clever... did you know that most people die at home, in their beds? Perhaps we should be homless and sleep on the street? We'd be a lot safer! /Marcin > a diver gets lost > and cannot be found until it's too late. I bet a locator would prevent many fatal dive > accidents. That's because you don't really understand the process. By the time anyone uses the beacon to find the, they'll already be dead. Of course, it might be a useful recovery tool. SignatureSteve The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable belief that it was intended as a statement of fact. If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address. > > a diver gets lost > > and cannot be found until it's too late. I bet a locator would prevent many fatal dive [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > beacon to find the, they'll already be dead. Of course, it might be a useful recovery > tool. You may be right. The other thing to consider is technology improves with use and demand. The current locators may be bulky and slow but if they were made in quantity these fault may be corrected in time. Adam >> By the time anyone uses the >>beacon to find the, they'll already be dead. Of course, it might be a useful recovery >>tool. > You may be right. Of course, I'm right. > The other thing to consider is technology improves with use and demand. > The current locators may be bulky and slow but if they were made in quantity these fault > may be corrected in time. Probably. If they were the size of a pack of cigaretttes and cost $100 I expect they'd become pretty common, but I don't think their primary use would be to find divers that went missing UW (except when used by dive ops who don't believe divers can be trusted to be responsible for themselves; with those ops you'd be forbidden from making the second dive if you got more than 100 feet from your diveMASTER). More likely they'd be useful for allowing the boats to track drifting divers and to find divers after they surface in 3 and 4' seas. If they were reliable, I'd much rather carry one than tow a surface marker (which are just hell in swim-throughs). Of course, there'd still be the problem of identifying individual units. In a perfect world each unit would be a transceiver, and immersion of one unit would automatically activate all units within perhaps 25 feet (of course, you and your buddy's units would already be set to recognize each other specifically) and they would all individualy recognize the other units. The boat would have a master unit that would trigger an alarm when any of the units it was "responsible" for got too far away ("too far" being a somewhat subjective concept), and it would scream bloody hell when the distance exceeded some greater distance (as an almost foolproof way of preventing the boat from leaving divers behind. Naturally all this capability isn't going to come cheaply in a small package anytime soon. SignatureSteve The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable belief that it was intended as a statement of fact. If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address. Steve schrieb: > divers after they surface in 3 and 4' seas. If they were reliable, I'd much rather > carry one than tow a surface marker (which are just hell in swim-throughs). Try to use _fins_. Try to _use_ fins. Matthias > On another issue, I believe a mandatory safety diving device should be a beacon locator > that every diver must carry to allow others to locate him/her. > > Adam Just tell us where you hide the car keys, and leave yer old ladies phone number.... Signature"There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" > > On another issue, I believe a mandatory safety diving device should be a > > beacon locator [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Just tell us where you hide the car keys, and leave yer old ladies phone > number.... you mean you're noyt going to look for him? >>>On another issue, I believe a mandatory safety diving device should be a >>>beacon locator [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > you mean you're noyt going to look for him? only if he has good gear....and after I am done with my SI SignatureYa can't polish a turd > Just tell us where you hide the car keys, and leave yer old ladies phone > number.... and you think there's not going to be a safety device installed? (Chastity Belt). <very evil grin> Curtis > > Just tell us where you hide the car keys, and leave yer old ladies phone > > number.... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Curtis mandatory aren't they? #"Curtis" <cavey_curtis@yahoo.com> wrote in message #news:aW75c.34358$xL3.34292@bignews1.bellsouth.net... #> "Adam Helberg" wrote #> #> > It's a good idea to know tables as a backup but if you do multilevel #> diving there is not #> > way to judge from your tables if your computer is off or not. Nor can you #> apply tables #> > well to multilevel diving. #> > #> > A better idea is to compare two computers--the results should not be #> grossly off. #> #> Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, #> then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. #> #> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's #> connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts #> your ascent on gas or NDL turnaround, and locks in your stops. #> #> Bet if you rode a Harley, it would have 3 wheels. #> #> Curtis # #Actually that is a good idea as a safety device. Better to be thought a fool..... ... Never mind. >> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's >>connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts >>your ascent on gas or NDL turnaround, and locks in your stops. > Actually that is a good idea as a safety device. The computer knows your depth and rate of > change so if it detects depth dropping too deep too fast it can inflate the BC to slow > down descent. If it detects rise too fast it could dump air to slow ascent. Of course you > could overide it manually but it could function as an autopilot safety device. Will you be caught by surprise when your brand new computer pins you to the ceiling of an overhang on a wall at 85' while bleeding the last of your life-giving air out of the over-pressure valve on your BC? SignatureSteve The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable belief that it was intended as a statement of fact. If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address. > >> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's > >>connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > of an overhang on a wall at 85' while bleeding the last of your life-giving air out > of the over-pressure valve on your BC? If you hit a wall your ascent stops so the computer would not bleed any more air. The computer knows your depth and rate of change of depth. It may even know the amount of air in your BC and the BC's air capacity. You can come up with situations where such an autopilot would be harmful, particularly in situations where you are controlling your depth by fining rather than by buoyancy , also it could fail; that's why there would be a manual override. As an aside such a system could have a neutral buoyancy mode, where you stop fining and the thing inflates the exact amount of air into BC to achieve neutral buoyancy for you. It could even display the amount of buoyancy your BC is providing (by measuring the amount of air in BC) to help optimize your weighting. Adam Adam > > >> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's > > >>connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > could even display the amount of buoyancy your BC is providing (by measuring the amount of > air in BC) to help optimize your weighting. Wy not just dive a couple of times with Popeye, MHK, or a few of the other folks here? The trip would likely cost as much as this system, but you'll have a heck of a lot more fun. Dennis > Adam > > Adam > > > >> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's > > > >>connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Dennis They're probably too elitist to dive with me. Besides I don't use DIR methods. Adam <snip> > > Wy not just dive a couple of times with Popeye, MHK, or a few of the other > > folks here? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > They're probably too elitist to dive with me. Besides I don't use DIR methods. Not at all. And neither does Popeye. Well, he may use DIR methods that he finds useful, but otherwise....:-) The last count I have is that he's dove with 60+ folks from the newsgroup. A good diver & a good friend. Dennis > Adam > <snip> > > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Dennis > > Adam All right. Where do you guys dive? I'm in Orange County, CA. > > <snip> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > All right. Where do you guys dive? I'm in Orange County, CA. I'm in Alabama, Popeye's in GA. There are a few rec.scubans in your general vicinity though. Dennis #"Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message #news:105cmhrrpiq4080@corp.supernews.com... #> "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> wrote in message #> news:5co5c.22825$%06.9196@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... #> > #> > "Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message #> > news:105c17lldgmke6b@corp.supernews.com... #> <snip> #> > > #> > > Wy not just dive a couple of times with Popeye, MHK, or a few of the #> other #> > > folks here? #> > > The trip would likely cost as much as this system, but you'll have a #> heck of #> > > a lot more fun. #> > > #> > > Dennis #> > #> > They're probably too elitist to dive with me. Besides I don't use DIR #> methods. #> #> Not at all. And neither does Popeye. Well, he may use DIR methods that he #> finds useful, but otherwise....:-) The last count I have is that he's dove #> with 60+ folks from the newsgroup. #> #> A good diver & a good friend. #> #> Dennis #> > Adam # #All right. Where do you guys dive? I'm in Orange County, CA. # # # I'm in San Diego. Come on down any time you'd like and I'd be happy to dive with you. Alan > <snip> > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > A good diver & a good friend. I'd love to get an opportunity to dive with him. Unfortuantely, that doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon. :-( C Guynn > If you hit a wall your ascent stops so the computer would not bleed any more air. The > computer knows your depth and rate of change of depth. It may even know the amount of air [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > could even display the amount of buoyancy your BC is providing (by measuring the amount of > air in BC) to help optimize your weighting. But until you can get a BC like that, you are diving a Mares H.U.B., right? > > If you hit a wall your ascent stops so the computer would not bleed any > more air. The [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > But until you can get a BC like that, you are diving a Mares H.U.B., right? Actually I have one of those backplate contraptions, but I can't get the metal parts to fit together properly. Adam > > If you hit a wall your ascent stops so the computer would not bleed any > more air. The [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > But until you can get a BC like that, you are diving a Mares H.U.B., right? The thing does not even have a water bottle holder. Adam > The thing does not even have a water bottle holder. The HUB wouldn't have a water bottle holder, it would have to be integrated into the system like one of those "Camel-Back" devices... "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :As an aside such a system could have a neutral buoyancy mode, where you stop fining and :the thing inflates the exact amount of air into BC to achieve neutral buoyancy for you. It :could even display the amount of buoyancy your BC is providing (by measuring the amount of :air in BC) to help optimize your weighting. Would that be after inhaling or exhaling? Dan Bracuk If at first you don't succeed, you run the risk of failure. The Best of rec.scuba http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/RecScuba/ > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dan Bracuk The buoyancy would be based on the amount of air in the BC. The buoyancy is the weight of the equivalent volume of water--easily calculated. The neutral buoyancy is purely decided by no change in depth and no finning. Adam > > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > The neutral buoyancy is purely decided by no change in depth and no finning. Generally, if I am breathing normaly, my bouyancy goes from slightly negative to slightly bouyant depending on which part of the breathing cycle I am in. Should the BC be constantly adding and venting air to compensate? Talk about going through air in a hurry. > Adam > > > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > > > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > I am in. Should the BC be constantly adding and venting air to compensate? > Talk about going through air in a hurry. In real life what I do at a stop is make myself slightly negative and gently fin and the final fine tuning of depth is controlled by the finning, thus removing the bobbing effect of buyancy change of the lungs. You could do the same with the autopilot as once you assume constant depth it would leave you alone. Also it can be set not to react to small changes in depth-as with any servo mechanism. Adam "Dan Bracuk, CTHD" schrieb: > "Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard > resulting in: > :As an aside such a system could have a neutral buoyancy mode, where you stop fining and > :the thing inflates the exact amount of air into BC to achieve neutral buoyancy for you. Invented here. There is even a safe ascent decompression mode. Matthias > "Dan Bracuk, CTHD" schrieb: > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Matthias And a hover mode to stop at any depth. Makes safety stop a cinch. > > >> Hear a rumor there's another "integrated" model in the works, it's > > >>connected to your BCD inflator and dump valves. It automatically starts [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Adam I think this is called a submarine. you get in it and it does everything for you. > Bet if you rode a Harley, it would have 3 wheels. Curtis, have you seen the deer bones in Pothole? I'm thinking about installing a deer whistle on my scooter. > Curtis, have you seen the deer bones in Pothole? Haven't been in Pothole since I was in training, over 4 years ago. Can't say I remember much past a lost buddy & lost line drill. ;-) > I'm thinking about > installing a deer whistle on my scooter. Don't let Adam see it, I can see a sub alert mounted on every scooter in sight. Curtis > Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, >then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. The Space Shuttle uses three computers. In case of a problem, the computer "vote" on the answer, and uses the majority result. However, since aborting a dive doesn't require a computer to calculate re-entry trajectory, and you probably won't burst into flames if you calulate wrong, 3 computers probably aren't necessary, although it would be nice. This isn't to say that the dive computer manufacturers couldn't make their products more reliable by incorporating three seperate computers and sensors, including three seperate sets of firmware in the case, after all, it's only silicon and software. Terry >> It's a good idea to know tables as a backup but if you do multilevel >diving there is not [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Curtis #> Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, #>then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. #> # #The Space Shuttle uses three computers. In case of a problem, the #computer "vote" on the answer, and uses the majority result. # #However, since aborting a dive doesn't require a computer to calculate #re-entry trajectory, and you probably won't burst into flames if you #calulate wrong, 3 computers probably aren't necessary, although it #would be nice. # #This isn't to say that the dive computer manufacturers couldn't make #their products more reliable by incorporating three seperate computers #and sensors, including three seperate sets of firmware in the case, #after all, it's only silicon and software. # They'd still share a common display and power supply. When you consider that the most common failure modes are dead batteries and user error, having redundancy in the sensors and processors wouldn't do much to improve reliability. > > Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, > >then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Terry My wrist is only so big... where would I put all that crap? > My wrist is only so big... where would I put all that crap? Hmmm... Sounds like there might be a "peanut" comment forthcoming... <snicker> > > > Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". > Damn, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > My wrist is only so big... where would I put all that crap? I've seen divers clip one computer to the HP hose. Adam > I've seen divers clip one computer to the HP hose. But if we're talking about triply redundant systems, it would be more efficient for all of them to be at the same place so that you can compare them to each other in a single glance... > > I've seen divers clip one computer to the HP hose. > > But if we're talking about triply redundant systems, it would be more > efficient for all of them to be at the same place so that you can compare > them to each other in a single glance... Then you need long forearms for all the computers. > > Why not just use 3, then go with the "two out of three's not bad". Damn, > >then you'd have to figure out if you have one bad one or two bad ones. > > The Space Shuttle uses three computers. In case of a problem, the > computer "vote" on the answer, and uses the majority result. Wrong, the Orbiter's Flight Director uses five (5) computers. (When it first flew, they were state-of-the-art 256k RAM systems!) > Another reason to know your dive tables & the basics and use a computer as a > guide, not the rule... Bullshit!! all tables are is a "guide", nothing more! nothing guarantees that if you dive tables you won't get bent. tables are "safer" because they are built around a square profile and nobody dives that way - they have a built in 'fudge' factor, computers don't. if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for negligence. a few quick tests in a chamber would have showed the defect in glaring detail. >if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the >market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for >negligence. a few quick tests in a chamber would have showed the defect >in glaring detail. Really? Explain that in detail please. bullshark >>if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the >>market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > bullshark bark at the moon f.ck off and die >>>if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the >>>market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > bark at the moon f.ck off and die We are all aware that you lack the knowledge, skills, and resources to respond to the inquiry. Redundant proof is not necessary. Mr Tidy Bowl James Connell schrieb: > >>if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the > >>market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > bark at the moon f.ck off and die In which order ? Matthias > > bark at the moon f.ck off and die > > In which order ? Actually, the proper statement should have been, "Eat sh.t, bark at the moon, and die"... Oh well, I guess James was taking some poetic license... <grin> > >if Uwatec had tested their computer properly Before they put it on the > >market this wouldn't have happened - they deserve to be sued for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > bullshark It was MUCH more than negligence. Uwatec had already been fined $1.5 million in 1998 for "conspiracy, slander, and outrage". Uwatec's continued FAILURE to recall the defective computer until 2003 (after 5 lawsuits had been filed, and a class-action suit was threatened) is a case of CONSPIRACY and OUTRAGE! The algorithmic error was FOUND by a Uwatec engineer in 1995. The Uwatec/USA National Sales Manager, Frank Marshall, wanted to issue a recall of the defective computers, in early 1996. Frank was framed and fired instead. The defective units (Aladin Air-X Nitrox, pre-1996 production ones) were presented as court evidence in 1997-8. The model was proven to be defective. The jury awarded the Plaintiffs $2 million USD. The computer should have been recalled in 1998, after the court verdict. It's the SAME computer that resulted in 5 cases of divers suing Uwatec. bullshark, do a groups.google.com search, and you'll find PLENTY of details about that defective computer, which even Uwatec stopped denying that it was defective! -- Bob. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.