Just a question??

[faye]

I was just wondering what the GUE stance is on redundant bouyancy while diving wet.
Are they in for stacking bladders or what. I haven't really heard it being discussed on the board.
And please, please, please DON"T anyone else come on this thread and turn it into a damb debate over DIR. :upset:
I want to hear from the GUE guys, as a prospective student:)

[MASS-Diver]

I don't think DIR allows for multiple bladders in any situations.

I would think that by diving with the right cylinders and having a balanced rig, redunant bouyancy would not be necessary if diving wet, although a 100light bag is always a good thing to carry.

I'm not sure though, maybe one the GUE trainined divers on the board can confirm this.

[MrBlue]

The GUE/DIR stance is that if you 'balance' your dive rig, you will not need a redundant source of buoyancy, as you will be able to 'swim' the rig up to the surface at any point.

This is why AL80's are recommended if diving the ocean in a wetsuit, as they are less negative than a set of steels. The cannister light can be used as ditchable weight (although with a helios setup, you aren't ditching much weight), and it would be a might expensive ditch too :-) Of course a weightbelt would be ditchable weight too.

You should only be negative by the amount of gas in your tanks when weighted properly, more or less. If you can hold neutral with 500psi in your tanks at 15 or 20 fsw and no gas in your wing, you are where you want to be.

You don't need redundant buoyancy (2 wings etc) if you are weighted appropriately.

--Blue

[detroit diver]

MrBlue once bubbled...
The GUE/DIR stance is that if you 'balance' your dive rig, you will not need a redundant source of buoyancy, as you will be able to 'swim' the rig up to the surface at any point.

This is why AL80's are recommended if diving the ocean in a wetsuit, as they are less negative than a set of steels. The cannister light can be used as ditchable weight (although with a helios setup, you aren't ditching much weight), and it would be a might expensive ditch too :-) Of course a weightbelt would be ditchable weight too.

You should only be negative by the amount of gas in your tanks when weighted properly, more or less. If you can hold neutral with 500psi in your tanks at 15 or 20 fsw and no gas in your wing, you are where you want to be.

You don't need redundant buoyancy (2 wings etc) if you are weighted appropriately.

--Blue


Well, that answer came right out of the blue :D

Welcome to the board!

[daylight]

Mr Blue has the party line correct.
What I still would like to know is what are you supposed to do if you have a decompression obligation? Riding your lift bag gets unrealistic.

DSAO,
Larry

[MrBlue]

daylight once bubbled...
Mr Blue has the party line correct.
What I still would like to know is what are you supposed to do if you have a decompression obligation? Riding your lift bag gets unrealistic.

DSAO,
Larry

How does having a deco obligation affect anything? If your wing catastrophicaly(sp) fails, you abort the dive. So, your deco obligation is going to be less, most likely.

For sake of agrument, let's say the wing fails at your planned bottom time, so you have a deco obligation. You are diving a balanced rig, and you are X number of pounds lighter as you've breathed down your backgas, you're also ascending so you're getting back some bouyancy from your wetsuit (less pressure, less compression, more bouyancy). You also have the option of dropping some or all of your ditchable weight.

You already know that you could swim the entire rig up with full tanks and you can hold 20ft with an empty wing and 500psi in your tanks.

Sure, deco may not be as pretty and effortless, but you are going to be able do deco in that condition.

Finally, what are the chances that a wing will fail so terribly that you can't trap air somewhere in the cell by positioning your body? This will help with added bouyancy.

I carry the party line because it makes sense to me. And, the question was decidedly asked what the party line was....

[detroit diver]

daylight once bubbled...
Mr Blue has the party line correct.
What I still would like to know is what are you supposed to do if you have a decompression obligation? Riding your lift bag gets unrealistic.

DSAO,
Larry

BTW, we don't "ride" lift bags. They're for lifting. And SMB's are for marking.

[padiscubapro]

MrBlue once bubbled...


How does having a deco obligation affect anything? If your wing catastrophicaly(sp) fails, you abort the dive. So, your deco obligation is going to be less, most likely.

For sake of agrument, let's say the wing fails at your planned bottom time, so you have a deco obligation. You are diving a balanced rig, and you are X number of pounds lighter as you've breathed down your backgas, you're also ascending so you're getting back some bouyancy from your wetsuit (less pressure, less compression, more bouyancy). You also have the option of dropping some or all of your ditchable weight.

You already know that you could swim the entire rig up with full tanks and you can hold 20ft with an empty wing and 500psi in your tanks.

Sure, deco may not be as pretty and effortless, but you are going to be able do deco in that condition.

Finally, what are the chances that a wing will fail so terribly that you can't trap air somewhere in the cell by positioning your body? This will help with added bouyancy.

I carry the party line because it makes sense to me. And, the question was decidedly asked what the party line was....

Not to sound agressive but how deep have you gone in a wetsuit?? a 3mm by 200fsw is basically a skin near ZERO buoyancy. granted you didn't need much extra weight to get you down.. no change that to a 7mm farmer john, again very little bouyancy on bottom, if you are on a drop off you have a serious decision to make.. if I don't drop my wight I'm gonna sink.. if I do drop my weight I'm screwed once I get shallow..

If you dive a Shell type dry suit, buoyancy is pretty consitant throught the dive, if you dive a neoprene dry suit, you need even more lead at the surface than a wet suit diver, if you try and put enough gas in your drysuit to control your buoyancy one wrong position the gas goes out your neck or wrist seals.

Its easy to rig a redundant bladder without any extra failure points.. just don't hook up an inflator... it adds almost no additional drag, and if the SH*t hits the fan just unclip you lp hose and move it to the other bladder... no emergency..

I would NEVER dive steels with a wetsuit without some type of redundant buoyancy..


Swimming up a righ with full tanks depends on what depth you are doing it from.. are you going to test yourself from 250 and see if you can do it?? its one thing trying it at 100, but a different animal deeper.. a 7mm wetsuit is less than 2 mm at 100 fsw by 200 its 1mm... You have half the buoyancy you had at 100 fsw from your suit.. couple this with your BODY being compressed (its not drastic but its measurable) and displacing less water its even worse..

[MrBlue]

To answer the first question. Not that deep. 160ish in a 3mm with twin AL80's, is where I'm at right now. Although 90% of my diving is Northeast drysuit with steel twins.

I'm still not completely following your logic though. If you dive a balanced rig and you have thought out failure scenarios, how does depth make a difference on this topic?

With your example of a 7mm suit, it would require me to wear additional weight on a belt in addition to my cannister light. This gives me the ability to shed part of weight in order to become less negative and stop from plummeting to the depths. As I ascend and the suit 'de-compresses' *grin* the weight that I kept on my body would allow me to at least maintain some negative buoyancy and not rocket to the surface, blowing my deco stops.

But, in all honesty, I wouldn't be diving a 7mm suit and would opt for a drysuit and be diving double steels (as that added weight is needed to offset the positive bouyancy of the drysuit and undergarmet).

In any case, If you are diving a balanced rig with your ditchable weight properly distributed, I can't imagine not being able to either a) be able to swimg the entire rig up to a point where the suit is more buoyant or b) drop a portion of the ditchable weight to allow you to swim up. But, I'm a drysuit diver and a weenie tech diver.

It's difficult to take one piece of the DIR system and make a decision on it's merits; such as redundant wings. As the DIR system is whole approach. In this case (buoyancy and gear conifguration) being able to swim up a rig when you have a wing failure, takes many things into account. Proper weighting before the dive, not being overweighted, having proper ditchable weight, knowing how much of buoyancy swing your backgas is going to have, knowing how much 'non-ditchable' weight you need, knowing how much or how little your suit is going to shift in buoyancy, deciding on the most appropriate exposure protection in regards to bouyancy shift, etc... If that makes sense.

I think what you touch on re the 7mm wetsuit, brings up the whole neoprene (7mm) drysuit and the issues with that and why the DIR system says that a shell suit is more appropriate.

I guess what I am saying is that you have to look at the whole setup as the 'pieces' make the puzzle fit together and make sense. looking at the individual 'pieces' of the system just doesn't make any sense. At least that's how I see it.

[faye]

Well I am trying to look at bouyancy and how the system deals with this issue, and my situation.
I am diving twin al80
I am diving in a 3 mil, Very little change in boyancy.
Tanks add 6lbs when full
they lessen 6lbs when empty
I need to add six lbs of weight for the end of the dive
I cruise down at the beggining of the dive 12lbs neg.
BOOM
a sword fish makes a wrong turn into my bladder
I am now 12 pounds heavy and have to abort
I CAN swim up 12lbs...I think...I hope...

Half way through the dive
BOOM
My buddy spontaniously becomes - magnatized, and his knife is + charged. My bladder absorbes the projectile.
I am -6lbs

I thinks I could handle a DECO at -6 pounds

Is the second bladder worth the -6lbs DECO???

Correct me if my thinking is off... ussually is though

by the way does the GUE trainning go over diving wet, I would really be interested in "the doing it right" answer?

[MikeFerrara]

I dive a dry suit and I can get back with that. However even with a balanced rig you can be negative. I wonder how it would be trying to get a couple thousand feet out of a cave if you were even 6 or 8 pounds heavy. I'll bet it could be pretty tough. I guess you could rock climb out but you might be in Zero vis. The silt could be several feet deep on the floor. Divers would be complaining about the mess you made of the cave for years to come. The line might be 20 ft off the bottom and that would make line contact a little hard.

Just thinking out loud...

[MrBlue]

faye once bubbled...
**snip**
a sword fish makes a wrong turn into my bladder
I am now 12 pounds heavy and have to abort
I CAN swim up 12lbs...I think...I hope...

Half way through the dive
BOOM
My buddy spontaniously becomes - magnatized, and his knife is + charged. My bladder absorbes the projectile.
I am -6lbs
**snip**

by the way does the GUE trainning go over diving wet, I would really be interested in "the doing it right" answer?

Yes, Gue training does go over diving wet. My Tech 1 course was done diving wet with AL80's in Ft Lauderdale, and have since gone gas diving with the GUE guy in the caymans.

As for your examples. YOu have 6lbs of ditchable weight to dump in the first example. This leaves -6 which *could* be reduced by bleeding off backgass right?

Since you would immediately end the dive, your deco is going minimal to non-existant. YOu get to 70ft or your first gas switch (70ft most likely in Tech1 depth ranges). Now you *could* bleed off backgas to get yourself more positive if needed.

From your example I take away that because of the gas 'swing' and because you can hold 20fsw with 500psi or so in your backgas you need -6 at 20fsw to hold a stop (your ditchable weight). Well, you're there with full tanks and dumping the 6lbs of ditchable weight (-6 of backgas is the same as -6 of lead and empty tanks).

For your second example. You're really not -6 lbs overweighted, you've aded positive buoyancy to your rig with the depletion of backgas.

That is the beauty of a balanced rig.

[padiscubapro]

[QUOTE]MrBlue once bubbled...
[B]I'm still not completely following your logic though. If you dive a balanced rig and you have thought out failure scenarios, how does depth make a difference on this topic?

QUOTE]

depth affect buoyancy, the deeper you go the less you have..whats balanced at one depth is overweighted at another depth..


80s aren't bad, but lets say you have 4 80s, thats 16-20 lbs negative at the start, plus your light thats another few pounds.. we will assume you CANT ditch it beacuse you need the light..
your regs are at least 2 lbs negative each thats another 8 lbs, we will assume an alum backplate thats 3-4 lbs.. 1 dive reel another 1lb or two..if you use brass guages add another couple of pounds.. this all adds up and so far none of it is ditchable because you need it.. thats at least 36 lbs negative.. your suit at depth will give you little help until you get shallower, can you do your deep stops, are you going to have enough gas because you are working all the way up, not an easy ascent..

its all about contingency planning.. I rather be prepared.. the odds are my bladder is going to be fine but murphy is always lurking around the corner..

I don't have anything against DIR but it leave no room for individual customization for enviromental conditions and concerns.. you dive it the standard way or you are a stroke..

There have been other successful training methodologies.. when GUE (or any other agency) can claim one thing that only ANDI can claim.. ANDI has NEVER had an insurance claim in its history and thats since 1988 and encompases 100M training on OC and closed ckt.. As far as I know the longest any other agency has gone is 4 years.. I also don't know Of any training accidents period.. Everyone always says how hard its to become an instructor with GUE, ANDI is probably the most difficult to become an IT, ANDI only makes about 7 ITS a year.. and you bust your as* to get it.. The quality and safety is there EVERY SINGLE tech student gets a detailed questioneer, so any person who shortcuts is taken care of.. I don;t think I have ever see GI3 rant about ANDI..
That training accident that GUE had with a diver that toxed (but was saved due to instructor skill), Its an ANDI training violation if all gas is not analyzed.. No matter who blended it(in the prev case the toxed diver blended the gas)... We are required to have every student sign off on every gas they get.. we also go through a detailed gas switch protocol..

I have had only 1 bladder failure in 15 years, I didn't have a redundant bladder (plus I was in a wetsuit)I had to swim my twin 95s up(and stages)it wasn't pleasant, and the deeper deco stops were terrible.. since then I have never dove without a redundant bladder.. it would have been easier in a drsuit but would have been quite unconfortable..
I learned from my mistake.. luckily I was able to overcome it..
The faliure couldn't be avoided, the elbow just seperated from the bladder.. it held no air..

I am also required that all students above the entry level tech class have a redundant buoyancy source whether a second wing or second cell within the same wing.

Sorry for the rant..... I have been holding that in way to long....

[faye]

Rant away!!!

Mabey it would be safe to say that the idea of having a single bladder is limited to open water diving (ie: no overhead) without substantial DECO??

It think it would be safe to say that if you have a considerable DECO obligation, a redundant form of boyancy would be in your best interest?? yes...no...mabey so

Does GUE say that you must use a drysuit for the above situations??? PSP has a point about carrying 4 cylinders. That is a lot of weight to balance a rig with while diving wet.

Diving dry for the soul reason of having no other alternative for bouyancy compensation due to its percived risk seems....well....

Again I have to reiterate, this is not an attack on GUE. I just want to hear some opinions.:)

[MrBlue]

PSP,

Rant away, this is how everyone learns.

In your example. Why can't you drop your cannister light? You're in open ocean, and you have an emergency. If diving DIR (and that is what we are debating), your buddy knows there's a problem already (that's one of the first things that is going to happen). Even if we add now, that you have many many stage/deco bottles, and it's now a night dive, your buddy know's there's a problem with your wing and you have an issue.

In your gear configuration you have brass gauges on your stage bottles, that's a no-no in DIR land. You should have light weight plastic gauges. In any case, your wing fails. You dump any ditchable weight (including pricey canister light). You also dump any stages you don't need (which are neutral to positve anyway, if you are diving luxfer 80's with He), as you don't need anymore bottom gas...you are now heading up. How can you be now 36lbs negative? You should have some deco gas (1 or 2 stages) and your backgas nothing more.

Anyone can add extraneous gear to make a point, but that distracts from the DIR balanced rig argument. I could easily say my 300+ foot dive was to recover an anchor and my wing fails and I'm 200+lbs negative with the anchor, how do I survive? That's just not fair.

In your case, with multiple stages, what do I need them for? I'm not extending my bottom time, I'm aborting the dive....why not dump them. If I'm truly diving a DIR system, I have alternatives, deco'ing on back gas deco'ing via buddy breathing, having a support diver provide the needed gas. Taking into account DIR which was the root of the question, we are also limiting ocean dives to 90 minutes total runtimes (that's a DIR thing too). So, why would you have 3 or 4 bottles AL80's on you?

You mention your personal experience of a wing failure, you were diving steel doubles (95's I think). That in itself goes against the DIR standards (no steel doubles with a wetsuit).

I still fail to see in a truly 'DIR system' and adhering to DIR/GUE standards where a wing failure is going to cause such a problem where a redundant wing is the solution.

Believe it or not, I'm all for adopting/modifying my gear rigging and philosphy if and when it makes sense. But at this point, I've not been convinced that when diving a true DIR/GUE system any modification is required.

Maybe a more realistic example can be offered that is within the orginal posters question cam be offered up. This is the only way we all can learn and grow.

[Divesherpa]

Seems like a lot of reasons to dive dual wings to me. If anyone has ever tried to navigate tight cave with many depths changes with multiple bottles using only a drysuit for buoyancy, then they will testify to the unnecessary hardships that arise. I've done it for kicks and it SUCKS!!!
Try holding stops following any bubble model using only a drysuit for buoyancy.


Simple solution: double wing. Doesn't take up much room and the ends definately justify the means.

[padiscubapro]

I never knew GUE had a 90 minute run time limit in open ocean..
Thats some pretty limiting dives.. You keep under this limit, someone with good gas consumption doesn't need more than 3 cylinders.

Run the numbers even in bubble models, deco on hypoxic mixes doesn't go well.. you end up having to share deco gas with your buddy and hopefully enough was planned..


Thats shorter than my run times in the classes I teach...

WHen I say you cant dump your light I'm thinking about either a night dive or limited viz dive.. backup lights don't work very well in low viz and if you somehow get seperated from your buddy you may be in for more of a problem,,

The steels/wet suit was many years ago,, That is definately a no no know...

I also never knew GUE was agains using brass SPGS, I knew no metal to metal which I strongly ageree with... I rather stay with the best eqpt anyway.. Brass guages are much more solid...

[MrBlue]

padiscubapro once bubbled...
I never knew GUE had a 90 minute run time limit in open ocean..

Run the numbers even in bubble models, deco on hypoxic mixes doesn't go well.. you end up having to share deco gas with your buddy and hopefully enough was planned..


Thats shorter than my run times in the classes I teach...

WHen I say you cant dump your light I'm thinking about either a night dive or limited viz dive.. backup lights don't work very well in low viz and if you somehow get seperated from your buddy you may be in for more of a problem,,


I also never knew GUE was agains using brass SPGS, I knew no metal to metal which I strongly ageree with... I rather stay with the best eqpt anyway.. Brass guages are much more solid...

The 90 minute run time is for Ocean dives only, where conditions can change so rapidly that a long deco in bad seas or bad conditions just isn't safe.

I agree that deco on backgas/hypoxic mixes is not feasible most of the time. And, I'm not advocating dumping deco gas to get more neutral, if that was the impression my apologies. When I meant dumping stages, I meant bottomgas stages.

As for the light, I would never want to dump it (a thousand dollar piece of ditchable weight is too much to swallow). But I would if it meant life or death. With a good buddy, it shouldn't be an issue as they are going to be on you like glue if something major happens (wing failure, loss of buoyancy, light loss...etc)

GUE is against the brass gauges for stage/deco bottles. They add extra weight to the nose of the bottle. Plastic are the choice. I'm not so sure that a plastic gauge isn't the best equipment for the job of a stage bottle. It's not getting beat up, or having tanks set down on it, as it's literally tied to the first stage. Maybe I'm wrong here.

[padiscubapro]

MrBlue once bubbled...


The 90 minute run time is for Ocean dives only, where conditions can change so rapidly that a long deco in bad seas or bad conditions just isn't safe.

I agree that deco on backgas/hypoxic mixes is not feasible most of the time. And, I'm not advocating dumping deco gas to get more neutral, if that was the impression my apologies. When I meant dumping stages, I meant bottomgas stages.

As for the light, I would never want to dump it (a thousand dollar piece of ditchable weight is too much to swallow). But I would if it meant life or death. With a good buddy, it shouldn't be an issue as they are going to be on you like glue if something major happens (wing failure, loss of buoyancy, light loss...etc)

GUE is against the brass gauges for stage/deco bottles. They add extra weight to the nose of the bottle. Plastic are the choice. I'm not so sure that a plastic gauge isn't the best equipment for the job of a stage bottle. It's not getting beat up, or having tanks set down on it, as it's literally tied to the first stage. Maybe I'm wrong here.
In my experience I find quite the opposite. many of the boats here put everyones deco bottles together. in rough seas they get beat to hell since they are usually put in bins while the twins are relatively safe.. If I'm traveling I'll use plastic guages to cut my travel weight down..

[nradov]

faye once bubbled...
Tanks add 6lbs when full
they lessen 6lbs when empty
Those buoyancy numbers are a little off. I assume you're thinking of an air or nitrox fill, but for any dive that would require more than minimal decompression you would have some helium in the mix. The real world buoyancy swing for an 80ft^3 tank would be closer to 4lbs.

Keeping the gas weights down is a necessary part of having a balanced rig. A lot of divers seem to miss that point.

-Nick

[padiscubapro]

nradov once bubbled...

Those buoyancy numbers are a little off. I assume you're thinking of an air or nitrox fill, but for any dive that would require more than minimal decompression you would have some helium in the mix. The real world buoyancy swing for an 80ft^3 tank would be closer to 4lbs.

Keeping the gas weights down is a necessary part of having a balanced rig. A lot of divers seem to miss that point.

-Nick

lets do some simple math.. from luxfers site they claim their s80 is 4.4 lbs pos empty thats out starting point..

we need to figure out our weight of the gass lets choose a 21-40 trimix

we need to convert the volume into liters so 77.4cu ft is approx 2192 liters of gas.. why is this important because 1 mole of gas is 22.414 liters, and we can then use the atomic weight to figure out the weight for 1 liter in grams..

using the atomic weights of he, n and o it works out to about 1.5 grams per liter of gas.. this works out to 3289 grams of gas or 7.25 lbs, add this to the buoyancy of 4.4 lbs, means a 21-40 trimix is 2.85 lbs negative at the start of the dive.. luxfer doesn't specify if valve is included in their buoyancy specs.. this is about 1lb ,pre negative than they state.. so I don't know what they used as a gas. or if their empty buoyancy is wrong.

[faye]

Keeping the gas weights down is a necessary part of having a balanced rig. A lot of divers seem to miss that point.

Well this is the most assinine thing I have ever heard.
I dive air. I can't afford HE on a regular basis. I usually do dives around a 70-90min run time. I do some diving in warmer water. If my options are
1) dive in a drysuit and sweat in order to have redundant boyancy
2) Purchase expensive HE in order to have a "balanced" rig

I'll take option 3

3) walk the razors edge of life and strap on satans BC (insert dark ominous music)....The DOUBLE BLADDER BONDAGE WINGS OF DEATH

:drown: :help: :bat: :whoa:

Why are people so scared of the dual bladder???
It is just like having the drysuit inflator plugger into another spot!!
No more failure points. Seems like alot of bending over backwards with the possibility of spending HUGE amounts of cash to avoid these things. They MUST be absolute death traps.


can't you drop your cannister light

you *could* bleed off backgas to get yourself more positive if needed.

with multiple stages, what do I need them for? I'm not extending my bottom time, I'm aborting the dive....why not dump them
Discard a whole bottle or cannister or vent back gas just to avoid dual wings. CRAZY. I wish I had that kind of money.

:out:

[MrBlue]

You asked what the GUE stance on redundant bladders, and you got your answer. That answer led to balanced rigs.

It's obvious that this thread could go on forever without resolution.

If you place losing some $$ over losing your life, you probably shouldn't be tech diving. Heck, you shouldn't be diving.

[faye]

I guess if you take that extreme aproach to diving it makes sense.
Dive with the minimal equipment that is safe.
When a problem occurs, ditch everything on your body except life support equipment.
Get out of the water...ALIVE

Me I'll spent the extra 300 bucks for the dual bladder
make sure the second lp hose isn't leaking
Deal with a tinny bit of drag
use it when the problem occurs
come home with everything I left with...ALIVE

Sorry
I know I meant to just get an answer regarding what GUE says regarding wet diving; I didn't mean to challenge your philosophy.
Just not happy with the party line. I guess I will have to take the DIR-F corse to experience it for myself,mabey challenge the founders of the philosophy instead of the followers.

[MrBlue]

You're talking about an extreme problem that is not going to happen in the real world. And, if that extreme problem occurs, extreme measures need to be taken to survive.

You're talking (from your example previously) of a catasrophic failute of the entire wing (a swordfish impales my wing and destroys it). If that were to happen, what makes you think the redundant bladder is going to be unaffected. Not to mention that you are extremely overweighted; so much so that you can't swim up with the damaged wing.

With these types of scenarios you have completely overthink your gear and plan for the unimaginable 'whatifs'. Then yeah, maybe triple or quadruple wings are the answer.

But in real life, do you need a redundant bladder if you are properly weighted (just negative by the amount of gas you are carrying in your backgas)? That is the premise of a balanced rig.

You also have to look at and weigh the risk vs benefit of the extra gear you are carrying. Do you want to be less streamlined, less efficient, work harder, have extra maintenance and extra failure points during each and every dive just in case the stray swordfish shows up or the wing somehow explodes at depth?

This is where the 'mainstream' and 'DIR' approach differs. Mainstream says redundant bladders, 100lbs of lift, etc... But are they needed if you organize your gear and think it out from a complete prospective? Do you need a 100lbs of lift in a wing when you are at the most negative by the weight of your gas and some equipment (say at the extreme 30lbs with multiple stages and deco gas....which is at the complete extreme edge) so why have 100lbs of lift when a 55lb wing is more the sufficient? The same goes for redundant bladders. In wetsuit diving with AL80's you should never be so negative that you couldn't swim the rig up without dropping all of your gear or having to take other drastic measures. Maybe you need to drop the little bit of ditchable weight that is there to counteract your gas in the tanks.

When I mentioned bleeding off backgas, or dropping a canister light, or stages, I was 'talking' about an extreme life or death situation.

I have tried to swim my rig up with full AL80's (21x35 mix) an AL40 stage, Pro6 can light) wearing a SS plate and 3mm suit. I emptied my wing completely at 160fsw and was able to swim up without any problems. This proved to me that the system does indeed work. Have you tried this concept out? Or only relying on what you think would happen.

As far as bringing your issues to the founders of the philosphy and not the followers.... Please don't treat 'us' as mindless lemmings following the herd. We 'follow' because we have thought out the issues, weighed the pro's and con's and made the decision that the system works for us. Treat 'us' with respect and the same will be afforded to you.

Personally, I've looked at the issue of redundant bladders and have decided that I don't want all of the con's (streamlining, work effort, maintainence, etc) for the .001% benefit of having the un-imaginable happen to me. Having a single wing and being properly balanced is enough for me, as I know it will work for me in any instance I could get myself into.

[padiscubapro]

twin 80s and an al 40.. thats not much gas...

using 50/50 as the primary deco mix for a simple 200 for 30 minutes and assumming an RMV of .5 cu ft/min (which is lower than most) you'd need about 50 cu ft of deco gas followin straight buhlman and 38 cuft following RGBM (This is using a slightly richer mix) Its a profile I do often so I know the numbers off hand..

[MrBlue]

You're absolutely right in the gas regard. I've never said I was doing 200+ foot gas dives.

I'm a normoxic/Tech 1 person right now, and am taking the progression into the deeper stuff slowly and deliberately. Right now there is plenty in the 100-150 range for me to be happy with. For longer BT's and extra gas cushion, I'll sometimes dive an AL80 with 50/50 or bring along an extra AL40 of 100% for backup and only deco'ing on the 50/50 as the savings in deco times isn't worth adding the second gas at the 150-160ish depths.

When doing wetsuit dives, it's AL80's and a single AL40 for 150 for 30 profiles and about 60 minute runtimes. When doing my regular diving (new england), it's LP95's and either a single AL40 (130ish dives) or an AL80 for the slightly deeper profiles.

With all that is available in the 100-150 range here at home and the caves of Florida when I can get down there and dive them, I have plenty to experience and grow with right now.

I don't need the extra gas right now and don't need the additional bottles to do my dives safely.

[Divesherpa]

MrBlue once bubbled...
You're absolutely right in the gas regard. I've never said I was doing 200+ foot gas dives.


With all that is available in the 100-150 range here at home and the caves of Florida when I can get down there and dive them, I have plenty to experience and grow with right now.

I don't need the extra gas right now and don't need the additional bottles to do my dives safely.

I only know of a few caves in florida in the 120-160 range and only one that is accessible to the public. I'm doing the survey in one of the closed systems (with redundant wing). Are you referring to the 100 foot systems like Ginnie and Manatee where mix isn't necessary?

[MrBlue]

I was just referring to the opportunities I currently have available to me divingwise.

I wasn't trying to tie gas diving and cave diving together at all. Merely saying that I have ocean 'stuff' close to home in the 100-150 that will keep me busy for quite sometime AND in addition to that there are the caves in MX and FL that I've barely scratched the surface (so to speak) with.

So, the 200+ foot dives can wait for a long time.

As for caves in particular, I love the weenie dives in peacock (orange grove, peanut tunnel, etc) as well as ginnie, LR, and the like.

I have no reason to rush to go deeper, or longer, just for the fact of going deeper, longer, or carrying more gear.

[Divesherpa]

MrBlue once bubbled...


So, the 200+ foot dives can wait for a long time.

As for caves in particular, I love the weenie dives in peacock (orange grove, peanut tunnel, etc) as well as ginnie, LR, and the like.

I have no reason to rush to go deeper, or longer, just for the fact of going deeper, longer, or carrying more gear.

That's a very nice way to look at it. I made the mistake of moving to cave country so I could dive 5-7 days per week in the cave systems. If I were only able to dive a few caves per year (less than 35 dives), I would definately stick with those systems too, at least, for a while. Right now, they are all blown out except Ginnie, Manatee, and Merritt's Mill Pond systems. The exceptions are Diepolder and the other deeper systems (200+)

What can you do? If there's nothing else open, we dive the deep stuff out of necessity.

We also use redundant wings due to NASTY egressions and excessive dropoffs.

Cheers and safe diving

[chickdiver]

I beg to differ on the "nasty egressions and dropoffs" requiring redundant wings. I've done plenty of 200' + cave dives, and I have NEVER needed a redundant wing for any egress Or dropoff- heloo? bouyancy control??). In fact, my 55# does just fine for my 5'3" self, up to 7 stage bottles (I think thats the most I have carried at once), doble 104's and 2 long body Gavins.

[Divesherpa]

chickdiver once bubbled...
I beg to differ on the "nasty egressions and dropoffs" requiring redundant wings. I've done plenty of 200' + cave dives, and I have NEVER needed a redundant wing for any egress Or dropoff- heloo? bouyancy control??). In fact, my 55# does just fine for my 5'3" self, up to 7 stage bottles (I think thats the most I have carried at once), doble 104's and 2 long body Gavins.

I haven't had to use a long hose -EVER-, but I still use one when diving back mount. Have you ever used it in a true emergency?



You are very accomplished in your tasks and that is fantastic. The only point is that an extra wing takes up very little room and add to safety (in my opinion). You obviously disagree. Good thing that we have the right to disagree, eh?

[nradov]

padiscubapro once bubbled...


lets do some simple math.. from luxfers site they claim their s80 is 4.4 lbs pos empty thats out starting point..

we need to figure out our weight of the gass lets choose a 21-40 trimix

we need to convert the volume into liters so 77.4cu ft is approx 2192 liters of gas.. why is this important because 1 mole of gas is 22.414 liters, and we can then use the atomic weight to figure out the weight for 1 liter in grams..

using the atomic weights of he, n and o it works out to about 1.5 grams per liter of gas.. this works out to 3289 grams of gas or 7.25 lbs, add this to the buoyancy of 4.4 lbs, means a 21-40 trimix is 2.85 lbs negative at the start of the dive.. luxfer doesn't specify if valve is included in their buoyancy specs.. this is about 1lb ,pre negative than they state.. so I don't know what they used as a gas. or if their empty buoyancy is wrong.

I'm not sure where you're coming up with those numbers. From the Air Liquide web site (http://www.airliquide.com/) densities in lb/ft^3 for the various gasses at STP are as follows:
O2: 0.084
N2: 0.073
He: 0.01
So when filled with 21/40 to the rated pressure a standard Luxfer S080 will contain right about 3.9lbs of gas, not anywhere near 7.25lbs. The actual buoyancy of the entire package depends on the valve, regulator, hardware, etc. so you'll have to tie it to a fish scale and dunk it in the swimming pool to get an accurate number (not that it really matters much).

-Nick

[nradov]

faye once bubbled...
Well this is the most assinine thing I have ever heard.
I dive air. I can't afford HE on a regular basis.

Once again we see that if you do one thing wrong, you end up also having to do a bunch of other things wrong in an attempt to work around the problem you've created for yourself. Good luck with that air diving, and try not to hurt yourself.

-Nick

[padiscubapro]

nradov once bubbled...


I'm not sure where you're coming up with those numbers. From the Air Liquide web site (http://www.airliquide.com/) densities in lb/ft^3 for the various gasses at STP are as follows:
O2: 0.084
N2: 0.073
He: 0.01
So when filled with 21/40 to the rated pressure a standard Luxfer S080 will contain right about 3.9lbs of gas, not anywhere near 7.25lbs. The actual buoyancy of the entire package depends on the valve, regulator, hardware, etc. so you'll have to tie it to a fish scale and dunk it in the swimming pool to get an accurate number (not that it really matters much).

-Nick

I'm not sure where they came up with the numbers but their rounding is wrong..

basic chemistry 1 mole of any gas occupies 22.414l
so oxygen is 32 g/mol, nitrogen is 28g/mole and he is 4 g/mole at stp

thats using this with the appropriate fractions 21/40 would be 26.92 g/mole, dived by 22.414 to turn into liters thats 1.5 grams per liter of gas
an al80 (77.4 cu ft) has 2192 liters of gas, so 2192*1.5 g/l = 3288 grams, converting this to imperial, 7.25 lbs which is definately in the ballpark..

[nradov]

padiscubapro once bubbled...


I'm not sure where they came up with the numbers but their rounding is wrong..

basic chemistry 1 mole of any gas occupies 22.414l
so oxygen is 32 g/mol, nitrogen is 28g/mole and he is 4 g/mole at stp

thats using this with the appropriate fractions 21/40 would be 26.92 g/mole, dived by 22.414 to turn into liters thats 1.5 grams per liter of gas
an al80 (77.4 cu ft) has 2192 liters of gas, so 2192*1.5 g/l = 3288 grams, converting this to imperial, 7.25 lbs which is definately in the ballpark..

You've got to be kidding. Are you saying Air Liquide doesn't know the properties of gasses? Too funny. By the way, the numbers on the Air Products web site (http://www.airproducts.com/) are the same and I suspect they know a little more about this stuff than you do.

Instead of running your mouth about things you do not understand I recommend you go weigh an empty 77.4ft^3 tank, then fill it with 21/40 to 3000psi and weight it again. You'll find the change is rather less than 7lbs. Be sure to come back and let us know the results, OK?

-Nick

[padiscubapro]

nradov once bubbled...


You've got to be kidding. Are you saying Air Liquide doesn't know the properties of gasses? Too funny. By the way, the numbers on the Air Products web site (http://www.airproducts.com/) are the same and I suspect they know a little more about this stuff than you do.

Instead of running your mouth about things you do not understand I recommend you go weigh an empty 77.4ft^3 tank, then fill it with 21/40 to 3000psi and weight it again. You'll find the change is rather less than 7lbs. Be sure to come back and let us know the results, OK?

-Nick
I have a strong understanding of gas properties..
for example oxygen using exact numbers is 31.997 g/mol/22.414 mol/l x 28.32 l/cuft comes out to 40.428082 grams convert this to lbs = .0891287 @stp
find me a different chemistry book that gives different molar weights .. these are basic chemical definitions..
science isn't done with imperial numbers depending where its rounded it will make a difference (not a great difference though)..

I found a missing decimal point(actually 1 of my cells (in excel)were supposed to be divided by 100 which was missing) in my spreadsheet for 21/40 tmx, my weights were right but the he portion of the molar weight was wrong

the total should have been .8584 g/liter, or 1881 gm or 4.14 lbs, for air the weight was in the ball park which is 1.29 gm/l or 2827 gm or 6.23 lbs. I knew it looked a bit high (like I said in the earlier numbers comparing it to luxfer) but the spreadsheet looked fine and at work its hard doublechecking work i'm not supposed to be doing..

That what I get for doing it in excel instead of by hand.

[omar]

Joe,

*[The 26.92 g/mol is wrong, eg (32 * .21) + (28 * .39) + (4 * .4) = 19.24 g/mol]
**[ Dividing 26.92 by 22.414 is also wrong. The result is 1.2]
You need to go back and check your math and how you got the answer you did.

77.4 cuft ~ 2191.7 L

2191.7 L ~ 97.78 mol

(97.78 * .21) = 20.53 mol O2 ~ 657.1g
(97.78 * .4) = 39.11 mol He ~ 156.4g
(97.78 * .39) = 38.13 mol N2 ~ 1,067.8 g
For a total of 1881.4 g ~ 4.14 Lb

omar

by the way your new numbers are screwed up as well

[padiscubapro]

oops I copied the wrong numbers tmx numbers air was ok
I edited it.. thanks..
I have to stop doing this while working

the spreadsheet had errors.. it had the weight as 33.64 in one place and 26.92 in another..

[Doppler]

omar once bubbled...
Joe,

*[The 26.92 g/mol is wrong, eg (32 * .21) + (28 * .39) + (4 * .4) = 19.24 g/mol]
**[ Dividing 26.92 by 22.414 is also wrong. The result is 1.2]
You need to go back and check your math and how you got the answer you did.

77.4 cuft ~ 2191.7 L

2191.7 L ~ 97.78 mol

(97.78 * .21) = 20.53 mol O2 ~ 657.1g
(97.78 * .4) = 39.11 mol He ~ 156.4g
(97.78 * .39) = 38.13 mol N2 ~ 1,067.8 g
For a total of 1881.4 g ~ 4.14 Lb

omar

by the way your new numbers are screwed up as well


Closer... did you factor gas compressibility? :D

I find unless I'm mixing gas by atomic weight, my relationships are off anyway, so it's not science any more but art...

So the selected gas will weight= "somewhere in the region of..."

And don't pick on me... I'm a physics major -- properties of light -- Chemistry came a distant second.

Anyhow, interesting postings guys... you gotta take that one into your local scuba shop !

[padiscubapro]

Doppler once bubbled...



Closer... did you factor gas compressibility? :D

I find unless I'm mixing gas by atomic weight, my relationships are off anyway, so it's not science any more but art...

So the selected gas will weight= "somewhere in the region of..."

And don't pick on me... I'm a physics major -- properties of light -- Chemistry came a distant second.

Anyhow, interesting postings guys... you gotta take that one into your local scuba shop !

Picky, piky picky ;)

if my math is correct the compressibility factor for an 21/40 trimix @3000 psi is about 1.05153 so there is 2085 liters of gas instead of 2192, therfore 1789 grams or 3.94 lbs

[Doppler]

padiscubapro once bubbled...


Picky, piky picky ;)

if my math is correct the compressibility factor for an 21/40 trimix @3000 psi is about 1.05153 so there is 2085 liters of gas instead of 2192, therfore 1789 grams or 3.94 lbs

Hey PSP: you having a slow day at work too!! :)

You gotta post the spreadsheet by the way!

Take care... and don't you dive a 'Breather all the time. You have different buoyancy challenges then don't you?!

DD

[padiscubapro]

Its not really a concern.. the inspiration uses two 3l steels (approx 600lfg per cylinder)
If I use 10-20 bar of diluent (30-60 liters of gas) thats alot.. I also use about 20 bar of oxygen an hour (approx 60 liters of oxygen an hour)

thats about 1 cuft of oxygen an hour (actually less) and 1 to 2 cuft of diluent for the entire dive..

[faye]

Once again we see that if you do one thing wrong, you end up also having to do a bunch of other things wrong in an attempt to work around the problem you've created for yourself.

any one who says that you are doing something wrong, without any flexibility has to have there head looked at.

As for the requiring HE to have a balanced rig, I just see that as too fine a line for something that is as important as bouyancy.
And yes I am going to give her a go this summer on the single bladder thing. I was taught with double bladders and would like to try the single as there are some very good points about diving that way. But I won't throw out the dual just yet. I just hope I don't have to buy alot of HE, I'm only a lowly dive bum;-0 plus I like diving air!=-)

The jab at the founders of philosiphy was just that a jab not and insult.:)

[omar]

well...

I used the tilde to represent approximate. You will notice I tried not use equal signs.

As far as compressibility it will depend on the EOS used and temperature and the size of the cylinder that the gas is going into. At best all EOS for real gas compressibility are only approximations of an infinite Taylor series.

For a general idea on compressibility of mixes look at:

http://www.atomox.com/mixing.html
http://www.atomox.com/Z_factor.html
http://www.atomox.com/gas_volume.html

omar

[padiscubapro]

omar once bubbled...
well...

I used the tilde to represent approximate. You will notice I tried not use equal signs.

As far as compressibility it will depend on the EOS used and temperature and the size of the cylinder that the gas is going into. At best all EOS for real gas compressibility are only approximations of an infinite Taylor series.

For a general idea on compressibility of mixes look at:

http://www.atomox.com/mixing.html
http://www.atomox.com/Z_factor.html
http://www.atomox.com/gas_volume.html

omar

Thanks for posting the links.. I forgot about that site.. Its a good reference for people who are unaware of gas compressibility.. and
I agree with you about being approximate approximate.. temperature is a BIG factor.. everthing is referenced to STP..
if 100 liters of gas make that big a difference... The person is really planning the dive wrong.. thats only a bit over 3 cu ft.. if the planned it using 80, its still only 5 cuft per tank...


The only place I used the "=" was for a mole of gas at STP, thats a standard....

As you can see I'm not afraid about mistakes.. I didn't try and hide them.. I could have easily edited my messages, but then everything looks fishy.. just easier to admit the screw up and go on..

Trying to run calcs or picking out table values between my boss look over my back can get a bit tricky..

The thing that fooled me earlier was that the "air" numbers were almost right just a little high 6.23 vs 7.25 by what I noted in the luxfer specs.. I just didn't have time to look over everything.. but once the thread got moving I had to fix it.. I didn't suspect the He component was off by a factor of 10... (had a divide by 10 instead of divide by 100)

[cnidae]

This has been the hardest thing for me to decide. Currently I’m diving a dual but I go back and forth whether to go to a single. My current opinion is based on task loading. You look at what tasks can be created wearing a dual and what tasks will be created if a single fails. Deaths are usually caused by a chain of events, if you can stop the chain before another task is created then you’ll be much more likely to survive. As far as DIR is concerned, remember that DIR is an evolving thing and none of it is set in stone. At first DIR was all about the V weights and getting rid of weight belts now they’ve changed to V weights are bad and weight belts good. Who knows in a year DIR may be single bladder bad, dual is good.


JMHO
Safe diving everyone

[Doppler]

omar once bubbled...
well...
SNIPPED
http://www.atomox.com/mixing.html
http://www.atomox.com/Z_factor.html
http://www.atomox.com/gas_volume.html

omar

Omar: I've had that site bookmarked for a while because it is a useful resource... I particularly like the "outcome statement" which basically says: When mixing trimixes, add a little less oxygen and a little more helium... Which is the pragmatic view.

Still think this is one of the most intersting threads going right now... even if getting one's buoyancy rarely involved representing functions near their expansion point.

Take care:)

[nradov]

cnidae once bubbled...
At first DIR was all about the V weights and getting rid of weight belts now they’ve changed to V weights are bad and weight belts good.
It would be greatly appreciated if those who do not understand DIR would please refrain from making false statements about it. The rule has always been to have a balanced rig. This has never changed. There has never been a specific rule about V-weights. If we are discussing ocean diving here, there are some combinations of equipment where a V-weight works well and others where using one would leave you without sufficient ditchable weight.
I am curious, though: who has been giving you this misinformation? There are an abundance of DIR "wannabes" out there spreading nonsense so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that so many divers end up unclear on the concept.

Who knows in a year DIR may be single bladder bad, dual is good.
Don't count on it.

-Nick

[faye]

You guys are talking about molecular weights as it portains to mixing. Any resources on the net or in paper that are dedicated to the "art " of mixing. I got to get better at this you know:D

[SeaJay]

Okay, I'm only newly DIR, but I think I can answer your question.

...Or rather, elaborate on the other's correct answer of "DIR teaches a balanced rig."

The original question posed by faye was, "What's the DIR stance on redundant bladders?" (Forgive me for paraphrasing.)

The stance is, "No redundant bladders."

However, the question was later elaborated on, and again I'll paraphrase and say that the question was, "Well, how do they recommend I handle this situation?"

The situation, as best as I can tell from reading this thread, was this:

Salt water, open ocean dive
AL80 doubles rig
Backplate and harness
3 mm wetsuit
Properly weighted and trimmed for the dive

Here's how the situation would unfold, if the diver was diving the above rig:

The short version is that the diver would be properly balanced throughout the dive and buoyancy would never be an issue, even with a complete bladder failure.

The long version works like this (and you don't have to be a chemical engineer to understand this):

Let's assign some numbers to your rig so as to illustrate the way this would happen. These are common numbers that I personally have experienced:

Me: Relatively neutral in salt water
3 mil wetsuit: 8 pounds buoyant in salt water at the surface, 70% of that lost at 100'
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: 2.2 pounds negative (each) at the beginning of the dive, 4 pounds positive completely empty
Weight belt: 10 pounds on the belt

Okay, let's say that at the beginning of the dive, I jump in the water and immediately sink to the bottom, uncontrolled. I have a complete and catastrophic bladder failure (unlikely, since it was tested on the boat.) If the problem is that my valves are turned off, then I simply reach back and turn them on. (Taught in DIR-F.) Likely, I can do this before I hit 20 feet. Of course, this would never happen, since I've responsibly tested my gear before getting in the water. However, assuming that it did happen, then let's see how the weight would work out:

Me: Relatively neutral
3 mil wetsuit: At 100', my wetsuit is (30% of 8 pounds) 2.4 pounds positive
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: Combined, 4.4 pounds negative
Weight belt: 10 pounds negative

That puts me at 18 pounds negative. I can actually swim this up, buy why? I'd drop my belt and surface 8 pounds negative, at 30 fpm. Interestingly, much of this would be offset with my lungs (never holding breath, but filling them with each breath). Deco would be a nonissue, since I would not need a deco stop. I'd have only been in the water a matter of seconds. We're also assuming that the bladder failure is COMPLETE, and that there is no assistance from the bladder whatsoever. This is highly unlikely. The errant sharp object or swordfish would make it leak a good bit, but it would still hold some air. Even the elbow suddenly coming off would not produce a catastrophic failure... You could simply hold some buoyancy with it by placing your body horizontally, which you should be anyway.

At the surface, in that instance, here's how that would turn out:

Me: Relatively neutral
3 mil wetsuit: 8 pounds positive
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: Combined, 4.4 pounds negative
Weight belt: Gone

That puts me at just 2.4 pounds negative, easily swimmable. The difference would be the buoyancy change in the wetsuit. Of course, don't forget that I'd be just 2.4 pounds negative with two full tanks of air on my back. I'm in no danger of drowning. And again, we're assuming that you don't have even one pound of help from the wing.

Of course, this scenario would never happen anyway, since:

1. I tested my gear before I got in the water.
2. I entered the water with a full air cell.
3. If the problem was valve-related, then I'd simply reach back and turn them on.
4. I also have the option of dumping air out of my tanks before surfacing... There is no emergency if I'm on the bottom with two full tanks. I could technically do this as a last resort instead of ditching my weights. (There's as much as 12 pounds ditchable there.)

However, the scenario that I think you're more apprehensive about is the scenario where there is a deco obligation. Here's how that would pan out at 100':

Me: Relatively neutral
3 mil wetsuit: 2.4 pounds positive
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: Combined, around 5 pounds positive (remember, they're not totally empty yet)
Weight belt: 10 pounds negative

That places me at 8.6 pounds negative, and I'd swim that up. At 20 feet I plan to do a stop... But now I have this situation:

Me: Relatively neutral
3 mil wetsuit: 4.8 pounds positive
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: Combined, around 6 pounds positive (they're getting empty)
Weight belt: 10 pounds negative

That places me at a little over 5 pounds negative, which is very managable, either with just lung power (the average lungs from full to empty can produce as much as 9 pounds of bouyancy) or with simple kicks (not as pretty, but just as effective). I have not bothered to ditch weights. And still, we're assuming NO help from any air cell at all, which again, is unlikely.

At the surface, here's how it would pan out:

Me: Relatively neutral
3 mil wetsuit: 8 pounds positive
Backplate: 6 pounds negative
Tanks: Combined, approaching 8.8 pounds positive
Weight belt: 10 pounds negative

That leaves me almost perfectly neutral... At least within a pound.

Thus, a redundant bladder is not necessary... And since a redundant bladder increases task loading with no benefit, DIR preaches that single bladders are a better choice. Additionally, a redundant bladder may actually give you a false sense of security, since as someone else mentioned, if you have a tear in one, you're likely to have torn the other as well. Two bladders does not mean that one will always work. In fact, in the specific examples that you stated, such as dangerous marine life or an errant sharp object, a redundant bladder would have failed just as easily as a single bladder.

Things get even simpler when using single tanks, since there is about a 6 pound swing instead of a 12 pound swing from full to empty tanks, and so the diver will be diving with even less weight.

The same math above can be applied no matter what your circumstance.

My recommendation, if you want the real answers to your question, is to pose them at your DIR-F class. They do this stuff for a living, and are much better at it than me, and can help you to understand even more.

[Divesherpa]

SeaJay once bubbled...
Okay, I'm only newly DIR, but I think I can answer your question.
DIR preaches that single bladders are a better choice.

Sorry guys, I couldn't resist the pulpit approach that seajay took in his write-up.

[cnidae]

nradov once bubbled...

It would be greatly appreciated if those who do not understand DIR would please refrain from making false statements about it.

I understand DIR completely. I own all the literature and have read it from cover to back. Many of my methods follow the basic concepts of DIR, do I call them that, of course not. I also keep in touch with people who have been diving the so called DIR method before GUE was created and before any book was writen on the subject and before someone put a silly name to it. As far as a balanced rig goes this rule has been around since the first tank was strapped on a humans back, this is nothing new, and the method of being able to swim to the surface or to what ever depth is also nothing new.



These arguments are great for controlled situations but I think the scenario’s are a little off. There are still allot of places in the world were helium is not available and your selection of tanks is not up too you. Some may say well, I just won’t go there and I applaud you for thinking that way. To say that a dual bladder is inapporpate in every situation is closing your mind. Once it's closed and you stop questioning you become a drone.

[SeaJay]

cnidae once bubbled...

To say that a dual bladder is inapporpate in every situation is closing your mind. Once it's closed and you stop questioning you become a drone.

GUE encourages questioning. You should try taking the class. You'd be amazed. When it comes to their methods of teaching, that's exactly what they ENCOURAGE... Questioning.

It's statements like this that show that you have no clue what you're talking about.

In and of itself, that's no problem... DIR doesn't care if you are clueless or not... It doesn't care what your personal, uneducated opinion is. If you want to dive with Hefty bags and cinder blocks, go ahead... DIR doesn't care.

The problem comes in when someone like you who proclaims to "understand DIR completely" goes and spouts this sort of pointless drivel. Then the incorrect message (that DIR is closed minded) gets spread, and suddenly there's a whole movement that's anti-DIR for no reason other than because some uneducated fool spread some wrong information based on some silly notion that they "understood DIR completely."

Let me tell you, bud... I also read the DIR stuff, and I've taken the classes... And I've practiced hundreds of times. *I* don't "understand DIR completely." How could you?

...And to me, your statement rings of the most closed-mindedness that I've seen in a long time. For you to call DIR "closed minded" is nothing but a farce.

[cnidae]

SeaJay, Did I say GUE is closed minded? NO! Did I say all divers using the DIR method are closed minded? NO! I dive with GUE instructors often enough to know that they are very open minded at least the one's I know. It's a shame that some bad apples like Irvine has given the DIR thing such a bad rap and all the others that promote a negative attitude. What my comments were refering to is the people that close there mind, get a clue buddy and go read my post again I did'nt bash DIR or GUE.

[NetDoc]

I will not ask nicely again.

[faye]

I don't think this is nessesarily a dir question. I asked the DIR guys what thier stance was on redundent bladders because they have the most experience in that sort of thing, from my guesstamation. Just because you are not DIR dosn't mean you are this great open minded diver willing to try all kinds of new things. The majority of divers I know are NON-DIR and are the most pig headed divers you could ever meet. I think DIR gets picked on because it is a large group speaking as one voice. I've dove with only a couple GUE divers and they don't have small upper lip mustaches or have an out stretched are.


Let me tell you, bud... I also read the DIR stuff, and I've taken the classes... And I've practiced hundreds of times. *I* don't "understand DIR completely." How could you?

I would hope you would try to understand diving not DIR.
DIR is an opinion. If DIR helps you understand diving then bully for you, but DIR isn't diving, it is and approach to diving. Can easily be mixed up.

[faye]

Sorry netdoc
didn't mean to get so DIR vs the worldish
Now back to the whole balanced rig conversation.



functions near their expansion point.

This is key to understand befor one understands boyancy:D

functions near there whata????;)

[SeaJay]

faye once bubbled...

I would hope you would try to understand diving not DIR.
DIR is an opinion. If DIR helps you understand diving then bully for you, but DIR isn't diving, it is and approach to diving. Can easily be mixed up.

Fair enough.

I didn't mix anything up, though... I was simply commenting on the fact that you said that you "understood DIR completely."

BTW, Irvine is not affiliated with GUE.

What GUE instructors did you dive with?

[MikeFerrara]

SeaJay once bubbled...



The problem comes in when someone like you who proclaims to "understand DIR completely" goes and spouts this sort of pointless drivel. Then the incorrect message (that DIR is closed minded) gets spread, and suddenly there's a whole movement that's anti-DIR for no reason other than because some uneducated fool spread some wrong information based on some silly notion that they "understood DIR completely."

Another problem is when divers with little actual experience preach what they have heard but not done.


Let me tell you, bud... I also read the DIR stuff, and I've taken the classes... And I've practiced hundreds of times. *I* don't "understand DIR completely." How could you?



How many classes? You've gotten in alot of practice in the last few weeks huh?

This is the tech section right? Have you ever attempted to manage a set of 104's and dry suit without your wing? Comming out of a cave? While doing some deco?

BTW in regard to your al tank buoyancy calculations...my al tanks are closer to 4 pounds neg when full and 2 pound pos empty. you also left out regs, manifold, bands, can light and all the other gear often used on a technical dive. And no we don't ditch the can light in a cave.

Putting together a balanced recreational rig is trivial. Tech rigs usually end up very heavy with full tanks.

Don't think of swimming up think of swimming out or holding position for decompression.

I've done it for practice and my wife has done it for real. I'm not using a second wing but...

Try it. Strap on a set of doubles, let all the air out of your wing and then go practice your DIR skills with nearly full tanks. Let us know how it works.

[MrBlue]

Now everyone is going to start arguing about how much more they are DIR than the other?

It's bad enough that there are the endless fights between the DIR bunch and the anti DIR bunch, but this is just ridiculous.

debate, discussion and even the occasional 'polite' argument is a way to learn and re-learn. But where this thread has gone is just pointless.

You know, people say the reason they hate DIR/GUE is the attitude of the 'people' that support DIR/GUE. 90% of those people have never met a GUE trained diver in person and have only encountered the DIR movement in chatrooms and forums.

From what I've seen across the internet and on this thread I'd not only be anti DIR, I'd be embarrassed to be considered DIR and in company of some of these internet cowboys.

Luckily I've seen the 'real' side of what DIR is and have gotten to personally know some GUE students and instructors. Every one of these people I've met and talked with are genuine, caring, reasonable people. They don't berate or belittle, they try to share their knowledge and experience. They take thier own time and many times spend their own money to help 'spread' the word. And, they don't beat their chests about how great of divers they are.....but they are the real thing.

My question is simple. Why can't 'we' (the internet proponents of DIR and GUE) be more like those that brought us to DIR/GUE? Those real human beings that actually taught us and showed us during our GUE courses?

It's no wonder why so many real DIR types don't bother with the forums. It seems like 95% of the pro DIR posters have never taken a DIR course let alone a GUE Tech or Cave course. 80% of the posters have either read JJ's book, or took a fundy's class and now consider themselves DIR-masters capable of telling everyone how it's done and how it should be done. No wonder people take snipes at them, and don't take them seriously.

It's great to be passionate about something and to want to share. But take a look at how you present it and think twice about whether you should present it or not. There's alot of great stuff to be shared here and learned from, but it's oh so easy to muddy up the waters with mis-information and general crap.

my apologies for the rant.

--MB

[SeaJay]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...


Another problem is when divers with little actual experience preach what they have heard but not done.

Agreed. That's why I said:


SeaJay once bubbled...
Let's assign some numbers to your rig so as to illustrate the way this would happen. These are common numbers that I personally have experienced:


But first made it clear that:


SeaJay once bubbled...
The situation, as best as I can tell from reading this thread, was this:

Salt water, open ocean dive
AL80 doubles rig
Backplate and harness
3 mm wetsuit
Properly weighted and trimmed for the dive


So unless you're willing to read the whole message, Mike, I suggest shoving it up your a**.


MikeFerrara once bubbled...
How many classes? You've gotten in alot of practice in the last few weeks huh?


Yeah, something like 91 practice dives in the past 10 weeks. How many dives do you have in the past few months? What's it to you, anyway? I specifically said:


SeaJay once bubbled...
Okay, I'm only newly DIR, but I think I can answer your question.


So take a long walk off a short pier, Mike.


MikeFerrara once bubbled...
This is the tech section right? Have you ever attempted to manage a set of 104's and dry suit without your wing? Comming out of a cave? While doing some deco?


You're clouding the issue. Those things have nothing to do with this conversation. This is because Faye explained his rig to us when he said:


Faye once bubbled...
Well I am trying to look at bouyancy and how the system deals with this issue, and my situation.
I am diving twin al80
I am diving in a 3 mil, Very little change in boyancy.
Tanks add 6lbs when full
they lessen 6lbs when empty
I need to add six lbs of weight for the end of the dive
I cruise down at the beggining of the dive 12lbs neg.


I felt that it was appropriate to answer since I have some experience with this particular sort of rig. Is that okay with you? I would not have answered if the question pertained to "managing a set of 104's and dry suit without my wing while coming out of a cave," since I have no experience with that one.


MikeFerrara once bubbled...
BTW in regard to your al tank buoyancy calculations...my al tanks are closer to 4 pounds neg when full and 2 pound pos empty.


Well, then you aren't diving a Luxfer S080 like I am (probably the best-selling and most commonly used AL tank in the world). Perhaps you aren't diving in salt water either... The characterisitics change by about a pound in fresh water. If you'd like the statistics on tanks, I've got them on my website... Check my signature and then go to that site. Then Talk/Equipment/Tank Specifications. Remember that these numbers are in salt water, and that they change a little for fresh. 'Course, that's pointless informaiton, since we've already established that we're talking salt water here.

Besides, I also included the following, to cover those people who's numbers came out differently in case they had different tanks or whatever:


SeaJay once bubbled...
The same math above can be applied no matter what your circumstance.



MikeFerrara once bubbled...
you also left out regs, manifold, bands, can light and all the other gear often used on a technical dive. And no we don't ditch the can light in a cave.


Faye didn't mention those things in the question that I was answering, so I chose to leave them out too, in the interest of simplicity. I also didn't include the stages that one might carry when doing deco, etc... Again, that's only clouding the issue, since the original question didn't include them.


MikeFerrara once bubbled...
Putting together a balanced recreational rig is trivial. Tech rigs usually end up very heavy with full tanks.


Who cares? That wasn't the question. Perhaps you should reread the thread before jumping all over my sh*t, Mike.

Better yet, I have a suggestion: Stop jumping all over my sh*t period, Mike. It only makes you look like a loser. As my S.O. says, "That's two cents too much."

[SeaJay]

MrBlue once bubbled...
Now everyone is going to start arguing about how much more they are DIR than the other?


Of course not. The original question, which is what I answered, was posed to "those people who are DIR."

My suggestion, then, is to ignore all of those who are NOT DIR when it comes to getting your answer. What, exactly, makes someone DIR?

Well... The books spell it out specifically, so if you have THAT question, I suggest that you look it up and get that information from the source.

MikeFerrara? Don't listen to his spout... He's never been DIR trained.

I am a DIR newbie, but at least I've been trained.

As I said in my post that answered your question, faye, my suggestion is to get the information specifically from GUE instructors, since they're much better at this than I am, and much more qualified. In the meantime, I do know the answer to your question, and so I've shared.

MikeFerrara, on the other hand, has stepped on himself. He shouldn't be opening his mouth at all here, since he's not a DIR diver, and the question was posed specifically to DIR divers.

[JamieZ]

I must be a looser too because I read your post the same way Mike did. I'm actually surprised you didnt use the word "stroke". I think your post is way out of line, Mike didn't call you any names.

Personally I think that your taking this way overboard. You need to relax a little.

He's right about your post, you come across like you've taken numerous classes from GUE and that you know everything there is about diving because you took a DIRF class and you've read the books and talked with a few big wigs from GUE.

Try to tone it down a notch. Were all happy you have all these new great things in your life but honestly you sound like GUE is the Gospel. Its not. Their idea's are great but so are allot of others.

I'm not talking just about you when I state this but this board is getting brutal. I think I have contributed to this at times and its a shame. I read more and more posts every day from people that have a Halcyon wing and plate or they've taken a DIRF class and all of sudden they think their gods in the water and everyone elses idea's suck. Then go in to preaching about stuff they have read but have never experienced because the only thing they've done with that backplate and that Halcyon wing and their DIRF class is weenie dives. Stop preaching so much and just offer advice. I believe you truly would like to have people see the light of things that you have experienced and at the same time sway them towards your side of thinking but just remember there is always another person on this board that has more experience then you or the people your getting your info from they just tend to prefer to stay out of the lime light.

By the way Mike might not have been trained by GUE but I bet he's been trained by the people who started Hogarthian which GUE adopted. I dont think Chickdiver has ever taken a GUE course but I betcha she could teach you a thing or 2 about doing it right.



This whole DIR, Anti-DIR thing is way out of control.

[MrBlue]

SeaJay, my post/rant was directed at you individually but more to the entire internet DIR group.

Too bad egos keep flaring up and we can't have a civil discussion. I think there is/was alot for people to learn from this topic (balanced rigs), unfortunately it has degraded into a bunch of guys standing around tying to figure who's is bigger.

[MikeFerrara]

I don't think I stepped on my self. I was pointing out that balancing a rig such that you can dive it effectively without your wing may not work the way you think. I also pointed out why. I also pointed out that I've done it in the water and suggested you do the same before you give lectures on it.

[SeaJay]

scubanarc once bubbled...
I must be a looser too because I read your post the same way Mike did.


Well, then I suggest you go back and reread my post. I specifically said, "I'm a newbie" in the beginning, and "Get the answers from the GUE instructors" at the end. I've never claimed to be anything but what I really am. I even gave my own personal actual numbers. Why am I on the stand here? Someone asked a group which I belong to a question... For which I shared the answer that was taught to me. Now I'm "on the stand?" That's a completely bizarre thought process. You sure you're not a sock puppet for MikeFerrara?



I'm actually surprised you didnt use the word "stroke". I think your post is way out of line, Mike didn't call you any names.


Mike's a complete ***hole. I'll call him the names... I'm sick of his little tirades. The guy actually follows me around this board tr9ing to pick fights, and I'm sick of it. The guy's a complete loser with nothing better to do. Check the archives.

...And I would suggest looking at his history before associating yourself with him.



Personally I think that your taking this way overboard. You need to relax a little.


...Again, "two cents too much." Who asked you for your opinion?



He's right about your post, you come across like you've taken numerous classes from GUE and that you know everything there is about diving because you took a DIRF class and you've read the books and talked with a few big wigs from GUE.


That's funny, how does, "I'm newly DIR" and "Get the information from the GUE instructors because they're much better at this than me" come across as "I come across as having taken numberous classes from GUE and that I know everything there is about diving?"

You sure that you are not MikeFerrara?



Try to tone it down a notch.


Nope. Next time I'm looking for personality pointers, I'll be sure to ask you for them. In the meantime, I suggest that you take a long walk off a short pier with Mike.



Were all happy you have all these new great things in your life but honestly you sound like GUE is the Gospel. Its not. Their idea's are great but so are allot of others.


Who said anything about a "gospel?" The question was asked, and I gave the answer, being sure to mention that I'm new at this, but that I knew the answer. I didn't say anything about "being gospel."

That's a bizarre thought process!

...And what does this have to do with redundant bladders? If you want to argue with GUE about them, then present your facts rather than attack me on my merits, which I have posted plainly.



I'm not talking just about you when I state this but this board is getting brutal. I think I have contributed to this at times and its a shame. I read more and more posts every day from people that have a Halcyon wing and plate or they've taken a DIRF class and all of sudden they think their gods in the water and everyone elses idea's suck.


I smell a sockpuppet.



Then go in to preaching about stuff they have read but have never experienced because the only thing they've done with that backplate and that Halcyon wing and their DIRF class is weenie dives. Stop preaching so much and just offer advice.


What? "Stop preaching so much and just offer advice?" What are you on, man? What, exactly, constitutes the difference between "preaching" and "offering advice?" No matter anyway... In this case, a question was asked, and an answer offered... There was no "preaching" and there was no "offering advice" either. The question was simply answered... Which was a lot more than you contributed.



I believe you truly would like to have people see the light of things that you have experienced and at the same time sway them towards your side of thinking but just remember there is always another person on this board that has more experience then you or the people your getting your info from they just tend to prefer to stay out of the lime light.


Duh. There's always someone with more experience. What's that got to do with it?

The question was, "What does DIR say about..." I answered the question, preceding it with, "I'm new at this, but I know the answer..."

Conversely, YOU have offered your butthead opinion, unsolicited. Nobody asked you for it... Or Mike's. Then both of you have spouted pointless drivel about some sort of posting philosophy, even though neither of you have read any of the posts that you are offering your opinion on.



By the way Mike might not have been trained by GUE


Okay, freeze... What other point is there to be made? The question was, "What does DIR say about..." And somehow Mike's got something to say about this, even though he's never been GUE trained? He's never seen the inside of a classroom? Perhaps he can dive to a bazillion feet on superdupertrox... I don't care. The point is that the question wasn't, "What's it like on superdupertrox at a bazillion feet... The question was, "What does DIR say about...?" For that question, I am qualified to give an answer... At least moreso than MikeFerrara, who's never been to any GUE class.

...And my answer was, "I'm a newbie... This is what they told me..." and, "For the best answer, talk to your GUE instructor."

If you have a problem with that, then I say, "So what?" Nobody asked you for your opinion.



but I bet he's been trained by the people who started Hogarthian which GUE adopted.


Uh, I don't think so.

Even so... Even if that were true, how does that qualify him to answer the question, "What does DIR say about...?"



I dont think Chickdiver has ever taken a GUE course but I betcha she could teach you a thing or 2 about doing it right.


What? So? What's that got to do with, "What's DIR say about...?



This whole DIR, Anti-DIR thing is way out of control.


Yeah, no kidding... Here's the short answer to that problem:

Relative to expressing you opinion about DIR...
If you aren't currently using a 100% DIR rig, then keep your mouth shut.
If you have never been GUE trained, then keep your mouth shut.
If you have never read the DIR-F manual, then keep your mouth shut.

Simply put, unless you qualify for all three of the above, then your opinion is uneducated. Period.

[SeaJay]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
I was pointing out that balancing a rig such that you can dive it effectively without your wing may not work the way you think.

Jeez, Mike... I didn't read that at all in your post... I read your uneducated and unfounded opinion on DIR.

Again, let me remind you that the question was very solidly posed at the beginning of this thread. You are the one who has taken this out of context and introduced caves, canister lights, other weight and trim issues, etc. The question was simple, and the answer was simple. You've managed to cloud the issue nicely.

...And nowhere did you say, "...Balancing a rig such that you can dive it effectively without your wing may not work the way you think." Instead, you directly attacked me and my credentials, which, as shallow as they are, are more than yours, relative to the question posed about DIR.

However, Mike, if you'd like to debate that "...Balancing a rig such that you can dive it effectively without your wing may not work the way you think," I would be happy to debate that with you... Although I have to agree with your basic premise. IMHO, it's true that, "balancing...may not work the way you think." I don't see that as debatable.

Instead, what sounds more like a worthwhile debate is whether or not a redundant bladder is a useful tool... Which was the original idea behind this post. I say no... Apparently you disagree. I'm going on the years of experience that founded an organization which has taught me some basics in a very short period of time. You have gone on just one person's opinion, although it's been your own personal experience.

Is that worth debating? I don't think so... If you want to dive with redundant bladders because that's been your experience, then feel free. I don't care how you dive. That's not my business, and I'm not in an educated position about your rig to offer my opinion.

Similarly, when the question is posed, "What does DIR say about..." please refrain from personally attacking me and my credentials, which are better than your own about what DIR says.

Now, if you have a bone to pick with DIR, then by all means... Feel free.

<Snip inflammatory statement. My apologies.>

[Uncle Pug]

SeaJay once bubbled...
keep your mouth shut.
keep your mouth shut.
keep your mouth shut.

You are not properly trained, certified nor appointed as a moderator on this board to tell others to keep their mouth shut.

Please refrain for doing so.

You may however politely ask folks to shut their pie hole if you can find a way to do it with civility.

Thanks.

[SeaJay]

MrBlue once bubbled...
SeaJay, my post/rant was directed at you individually but more to the entire internet DIR group.


Fair enough, MrBlue. Sorry that this came up during this thread... Mike tends to follow me around and attack me personally on a regular basis. It drives me nuts.



Too bad egos keep flaring up and we can't have a civil discussion.


We can. I think we all need to move him to our "Ignore Lists" though, in order for that to happen. I remember that he used to be on mine... I don't know what happened that he's not any longer.

But I can fix that... :D



I think there is/was alot for people to learn from this topic (balanced rigs), unfortunately it has degraded into a bunch of guys standing around tying to figure who's is bigger.

I thought the numbers that I brought up in my post were a good idea... They help to illustrate the point of the balanced rig. Someone who reads that can then go and do the same to their own rig... Helping to explain the idea behind the answer, "DIR says, 'no redundant bladders.'"

[SeaJay]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

You are not properly trained, certified nor appointed as a moderator on this board to tell others to keep their mouth shut.

Please refrain for doing so.

You may however politely ask folks to shut their pie hole if you can find a way to do it with civility.

Thanks.

10-4, UP.

[Uncle Pug]

SeaJay once bubbled...
I hope you get run over by a bus. :D
This is totally unacceptable.... let it be known to all reading this thread that death wishes will not be tolerated on Scuba Board even when accompanied by smilies.

SeaJay... second public admonishment (and in such a short time!):shakeno:

Any more of this crap and I will personally lobby for your removal from Scuba Board.

[NetDoc]

Actually Seajay... I don't have a problem with you presenting things from a DIR standpoint. But, there is no need for name calling... ever! Also, you and Mike seem to be interested in the same type of diving. No wonder you keep running into each other. I would not suggest that either of you go find your own areas... just agree to disagree with all civility.

Uh, Mr Blue... Amen!!! It has been said that DIR is an excellent system which has been lost on many due to the attitudes of those who dive it. The Pugster is a notable exception to this.

[SeaJay]

Okay, edited.

...But I'm moving this guy to my "ignore list" again. How frustrating to be constantly drilled by this guy, no matter what is said... I mean, I could say, "Hey, the water sure is nice today," and he'd chime in with, "You aren't qualified to know whether the water's nice or not... What sort of credentials do you have?" It's like he's constantly trying to prove that "his is bigger than mine," as someone mentioned above. Why's every debate have to end with this guy's personal attacks?

What, is the dude following me around, just pickin'? Is he that bored?

Whatcha say we get back on-topic? The question was, "What's DIR say about...?" And you, UP, are one of the most qualified people I know to talk about it... Perhaps you'll give us more insight...

[padiscubapro]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

You are not properly trained, certified nor appointed as a moderator on this board to tell others to keep their mouth shut.

Please refrain for doing so.

You may however politely ask folks to shut their pie hole if you can find a way to do it with civility.

Thanks.

Amen..
Thanks pug.. I was getting tired of this crap.. We have had disagreements on issues in the past but never resorted to the mud slinging that has gone on here..

You acknowledge there is more than 1 side to a coin.. Mike's experiences aren't unique.. I mirror many of his.. I'm not for or against DIR I am for choice... When I teach I present as much of both oposing sides as I can and let the diver make the choice.. For many of the divers I deal with DIR diving is not a real option because many are "working" dives where hammers, hacksaws, crowbars, water dredges (even brocos) ect are needed... and in many instances the most dangerout point is just jumping in the water!

I was going to suggest the section be renamed "Preaching from the Pulpit"

[omar]

SeaJay,

As they say, it is time to adjust the cotton.

I would rather read Mike's opinion than your's because he has a ton of experience.

Also, I expect that when you get more experience you will realize how foolish it is to argue about DIR on the net. It is a no win proposition (been there, done that).

omar

[Rec2Tek]

A guy like Seajay is the reason I don't want to be DIR. A weekend wonder who has taken a DIRF class and now is an expert with all kinds of experience.
I'd dive with MikeF anytime, I would never dive with a SeaJay type. Plus SJ doesn't mind diving alone(he proved that the day of his DIRF class, plus when he did his little 6 knot current swim to test gear) So he'd probably leave me if the s**t hit the fan any way.
Move the cotton SJ.
I'm done with my little rant.
Dive safe

[SeaJay]

Okay, I'll try to make this short and sweet:

1. I have no interest in any more flames. I like the board, and generally, I think I've got a decent rep on this board. I'd like to keep it that way. I have not added anyone to my "ignore list."

2. Some people that I have a great deal of respect for are expressing the same opinions about this post. I can't understand the opinion, but I'm willing to accept that I can't understand the opinion, instead of thinking, "the opinion's wrong."

3. I will offer a sincere apology to anyone for any reason... Even MikeF... If I've done something wrong. I can't see it, but I'm willing to listen if someone can explain to me what the heck went wrong here. If I've done something wrong... If I've misrepresented myself... If I've "preached..." Well, then I'm sorry. I don't see it that way, but I'm willing to listen if someone will be patient enough to explain it to me.

4. I have no objective to cause any problems with myself and the board, or DIR and the board. If I've said something or done something that's caused people to steer clear of DIR, or to hurt GUE's reputation, or whatever... I certainly did not intend to do that. If I've done something that's caused a "rift" to form between DIR people and non-DIR people, then I sincerely apologize. I certainly do not want to encourage any sort of problem with DIR. Frankly, I'd like to see it promoted. In what little experience I've had with DIR, I've found it to be enlightening and a very positive, learning experience. I thought I was doing good here, and helping to bring it to other people. Apparently, though, that hasn't happened, and I've done more damage than good. If that's the case, then my sincere apologies. It was not my intent to do anything but help.

5. I don't "get it." The way I see it, someone asked, and I gave an answer... Then I was personally attacked. Sure, I got <edit>RAVENC'S</edit> panties in a bunch. We all do that from time to time. My aplogies for that. But I don't see how I am the instigator here... And if someone is willing to share with me that point of view, I'm all ears.

6. Above all, please... No more flames. MikeF, can you and I please get along? Will you please (nicely) tell me what your beef with me is so that I can correct it? I'm really tired of this, man.

7. Can we please go back on-topic and stop making this thread about ME? What the heck did I say to get slammed like this?

I don't see how everyone thinks I took some kind of "pulpit" stand on this... Will someone please explain that to me?

[SeaJay]

Rec2Tek once bubbled...
A guy like Seajay is the reason I don't want to be DIR.


Sh*t.

Alright, whatever I said, the exact opposite of my intentions has occurred.

I accept full responsibility for this. I don't understand it, but I'm very sorry for it.

I will now keep own mouth shut.

Rec, not all DIR guys are like me. Please don't shoot the establishment just because I said something wrong. Don't let me stand in your way.

I'm very sorry. :(



So he'd probably leave me if the s**t hit the fan any way.


No I wouldn't.

My aplogies to the board for my inflammatory posts. Apparently, I have a lot to learn when it comes to being an ambassador of DIR. This is not at all what I intended.

[SeaJay]

omar once bubbled...
omar once bubbled...
SeaJay,

Also, I expect that when you get more experience you will realize how foolish it is to argue about DIR on the net. It is a no win proposition (been there, done that).

omar

Fair enough, omar. I wasn't arguing DIR on the 'net, though.

Someone asked, "What does DIR say about redundant bladders," and I gave them an answer. That's all. There was no argument about DIR on the 'net.

From there, I was accused of "preaching." All I did was answer the question. I even preceded it with, "I'm new at this, but here's the answer that I was taught."

I don't understand why y'all see this so differently than I do. Are you guys reading the posts? Would you please explain to me what's going on here?


Rec2Tek once bubbled...

A guy like SeaJay... A weekend wonder who has taken a DIRF class and now is an expert with all kinds of experience.


Okay, firstly, I am not a "weekend wonder." I've got 200+ dives in just a few short months. Sure, it might not be the thousands of dives that others have proclaimed here, but it hardly makes me a "weekend wonder."

No matter, though... Why are my credentials up for review? Someone asked, "What does DIR say," and since I JUST learned the answer to that question, I shared. This isn't, and has never been, about ME.

It doesn't seem like anyone is jumping on the bandwagon to explain this to me. Will someone please? Why such a negative attitude about all of this? Sure, I got testy with MikeF, but that's because of his long-standing history of coming after me. I still don't understand what the problem is, and it's not getting any better if y'all don't talk to me about it.

Hello?

[Uncle Pug]

SeaJay once bubbled...
I still don't understand what the problem is, and it's not getting any better if y'all don't talk to me about it.

Hello?
Someone said, "The fire goes out when there is no more fuel."

And I said, "Yes... some dogs are better left unkicked."

[faye]

An aside from the present purpose of this thread.

When you ask what a certain agency says about a topic, it is nice when an experienced diver relays some information that pertains to actual DIVING. A carbon copy of what the text says is not information from an experienced diver, it is the party line. Said diver is some one who has completed a fair share of dives in a variety of environments and situations. I should think that he could converse civily about HIS choice of gear and why HE dives it. A simple, I dive IANTD, is not an answer. No matter what you say, there will be situations where your present gear configuration is not optimal. If you say different, you are not trying new things or you are close minded. Can't we disscuss opinions on trainning and gear config without feeling personaly attacked? Pasionate yes but not offended! I'll tell you what I dive. Tearing it apart and critisizing my gear will either solidify my beliefs in my config or allow me to change and try a possiblys better set up. Thats the way I see it. Nobody tells me how to dive, just suggests good ideas on how to dive.

Now
With regard to dual bladders, has anyone diving a single bladder had a REAL failure where they had to abort the dive? With drysuit or without? How did it go?

[MikeFerrara]

Yes. but don't tell my wife I told you about it LOL. I was teaching an Advanced Nitrox class. I had three students and we were doing a dive just to do some shallow water skill work. My wife was wearing a Zeagle wing with double HP 100's and a dry suit. She was buddied with a student. The two other students were buddied together and I was a fifth weel. We were in about 40 ft of water and were to descend to about 30 ft and stop and begin our drills. Only my wife didn't stop. She plowed streight into the bottom with her student buddy hovering over her in bewilderment. I moved over to find out why she was setting such a bad example for my class and she started flipping me the bird. When we have a piece of equipment that isn't working we flip it off to say it's broke. She claims that she was trying to flip off her pull dump but I still say she was flipping me off. By this time I realized that everytime she hit her inflator a plume of bubbles rose from her shoulder. She put some air in her dry suit and got up off the bottom. It was touch and go for a little bit but she got the feel of it and we escorted her back to the dock. The entire pull dump just came off. I later went back and found all the pieces except the o-ring. We don't use wings with pull dumps anymore.

It made for a great class. I couldn't have staged a better training situation. In that depth of water niether her or her student buddy had time to react before she hit the bottom though. If we had been back in a cave with a silty floor and a long way to go to get out it would have made a real mess. We still refer to that spot as Sandy's impact crator.

Those HP tanks are not as neg as LP tanks yet when the tanks are full your heavy. She did have some ditchable weight but it was a short enough swim back that she didn't bother.

[SeaJay]

<edited>

<snip>

Ah, looks like Mike already conveyed his wife's experience, which is what I mentioned here.

Thanks, Mike.

[MikeFerrara]

Aw Tom! We just got back to talking about wing problems.

[NetDoc]

many posts are missing. STAY ON TOPIC! This is NOT the pissing match forum. Don't try to make it one. If you have ANY questions, comments or profane utterances about my lack of tolerance in this, please confine them to a PM to me, each other or the powers that be! STAY ON TOPIC!!!

[MikeFerrara]

A quick comment about the story of my wifes win failure.

As I try to impress upon my students peers and sometimes my betters...descents, ascents, gas switches or anytime you are doing something other than swimming in a streight line is when problems will arise. Things usually don't just fall apart as you cruise along. Comments?

[Divesherpa]

Does taking a DIR-F classify someone as technical?

I met Mike Ferrara at a cave where we were doing technical diving. I had two wings, he had one. We agree to disagree on the point.

Mike, have you tried to hold stops wearing 104's and a couple of stages using a drysuit? It's not very fun.

As a side note, every time I backmount cow, my inflator button sticks in dump mode. It's really a bummer.

[MikeFerrara]

Divesherpa once bubbled...

Mike, have you tried to hold stops wearing 104's and a couple of stages using a drysuit? It's not very fun.

As a side note, every time I backmount cow, my inflator button sticks in dump mode. It's really a bummer.

I've never had a wing totally fail. As I related before, my wife has though. The dive was just getting started so there wasn't any required decompression but she had a tough time anyway. I have only done it for short periods of time for "practice". I can see it being a real PITA in some situations even with a "balanced" rig.

I don't use a second wing now but I don't promise not to ever use one.

After crawling into Cow it took a while to get the sand out of my drysuit deflator. Sidemount guys keep telling me that the restriction isn't small but it sure seems small to me. LOL