Sharing air to extend bottom time

[RTee]

Andy, what I am advocating is that folks open up their minds and be allowed to think and decide. It is not because something is being taught to get a diver out of a precarious situation that it cannot be used for other things as long as folks have tought about it and discuss it between themselves. Your preference might be quite different from mine and ...I accept that. Looking at the previous posts, there are folks who are not only quite vocal about their own preference but rather quick at ....judging the preference of others.

I have already provided my opinions in two or three posts already.

1) between two consenting adults who have thought about it and discuss it, I personally see nothing wrong if the environment permits a safe way to do so.

2) Between a DM and a gaggle...it is not the best idea as now one is not free to keep an holistic view of the group as he or she is already personally involved with one member but;

3) Between a DM and an inexperienced diver as part of a group of very experienced diver, I could not care less because all other members of the group can take care of themselves individually and in pairs. Ideally, an inexperienced diver should not necessarily be part of such a group but if it happens, then I have no problem for the DM to have that peace of mind.

That's it

 

[Fish-R-Man]

Are you suggesting that "air-sharing for bottom time" is likely to become a common-place scuba technique, taught and advocated by the scuba industry/community?

I think that the reality of the idea of air sharing is more prevalent than most people think. I believe that using a long hose and air sharing will become more common place. Manufacturers are already supplying equipment for it. In the latest Scuba magazine they have a Scubapro C200 octo that states "The extra-long hose makes for easy air sharing with a dive buddy" It has a 39" hose and a dive/predive switch to tune the reg to prevent free flows.... Why they chose that length instead of a standard 40" I have wonder. Maybe to make sure that it maintains its emergency only status.....

 

[DevonDiver]

I think that the reality of the idea of air sharing is more prevalent than most people think. I believe that using a long hose and air sharing will become more common place.

I'd absolutely disagree - but maybe it's a 'regional thing'. I've never seen air-sharing for bottom time used in 20 years, diving in Europe, Middle East or Asia.

I'd also disagree that it will become common place - at least in respect of taught/advocated agency syllabus.... and if it isn't formally approved/advocated by the major agencies, then it will remain off-limits to those dive operations that represent them. Hence, it won't catch on.

Nitrox, trimix, tech etc... were concepts that needed scientific testing before agencies could pass the 'liability threshold' and adopt them as standard. I can't see that any agency would disregard liability, beyond current advice to (1) dive within the limits of the gas you carry and/or carry sufficient personal gas for the dive you plan.

 

[Tigerman]

Ive seen it in the middle east and whats worse what I saw was a DM sharing air with one of many guests, making himself unavailable to everyone else.
This was in the red sea - shark & jolanda at ras mohammed for one and the current was NOT good that day. Cant recall what dive shop though, but it wasnt the one I use fortunately..

 

[halocline]

Are you suggesting that "air-sharing for bottom time" is likely to become a common-place scuba technique, taught and advocated by the scuba industry/community?

Not unless they find a way to make some money off it! Then it will magically become a great idea....

 

[Zieg]

Is it much different than this?

Brownie's Tooka Diving Gallery

Just asking.

 

[DevonDiver]

Not unless they find a way to make some money off it! Then it will magically become a great idea....

If we're very cynical and actually believed that... it'd still have to be balanced against potential liability pay-outs, should the practice be advocated/formalized and subsequently lead to legal action, where the plaintiff could allege that it was a dangerous practice. So no, I don't see this as lucrative for the agencies. That said, I'm not so cynical to think that any agency, even PADI, would advocate a practice they considered dangerous, simply for profit.

Burden of liability is typically passed upwards. Instructor to Agency. Agency to 'Regulatory Body'... i.e. WRSTC / ISO etc... or to a credible scientific source that shows an act to be reasonable...

Ive seen it in the middle east and whats worse what I saw was a DM sharing air with one of many guests, making himself unavailable to everyone else.

Only talking about the issue of 'mutually consenting' divers, of sufficient experience and competence, sharing air as part of a pre-planned strategy for extending bottom time (as described already in the thread).... not the practice of DMs forcing noobies onto their octo for convenience (which has been unilaterally condemned on the thread thus far).

 

[Ironmike515]

I went through the same experiance in Mexico last December, I also found it to be a bit strange seen as it was never discussed in the pre dive plan.

 

[halocline]

If we're very cynical and actually believed that... That said, I'm not so cynical to think that any agency, even PADI, would advocate a practice they considered dangerous, simply for profit.

It was a joke, maybe you're taking this topic (and PADI, for that matter) a bit too seriously.

Then again, they sure considered nitrox dangerous until they learned to profit from it. Now it's practically a necessity!

 

[diverrex]

Considering that it often gets just a little attention in OW and AOW I could actually imagine a "gas planning" specialty. Besides the land calculations part you could do dives where every 5-10 minutes you need to tell your instructor how much air you have left before looking at your SPG and other stuff like that. Seems like it would be more useful than something like a boat diving specialty.