Do you dive with a snorkel!??

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If one is so happy that the tables are gone how does one teach students the basic facts about decompression theory. Does one look at a set of those horrible tables and see how time and depth interplay with each other or is one just taught to blindly follow whatever the computer is saying? How does one demonstrate what the values expressed on the screen represent or how they are derived? It would seem some sort of graphic representation at some point during the learning phase would help a diving student to "see" what is happening and why time and depth need to be considered.

This really should be in another thread but... You cannot learn any facts about decompression theory from the RDP. The tables are merely a set of precalculated square dive profiles, nothing more, nothing less. You actually learn more about decompression theory playing with simulation mode on your computer and watching as your remaining bottom time jumps when you switch from one tissue compartment to the next.
 
As with many things in this world what one thinks is part and parcel of the world that you exist in. Let's say that you were outfitting people to travel 5 miles to the next town. You could either give them a pair of sneakers or a bicycle. The rub is that almost none of the travelers know how to ride a bicycle, they have been selected for this particular lack. I can see how, in a fairly short time, you would be recommending to everyone that they walk, going on about how dangerous bicycles are and be looking to have bicycles banned. But that is not reality, that is just the skewed sample that you are subjected to. People who know how to ride a bike and have done so at least once a week since they were in grade school are, in fact, able to get to the next town much faster than the walkers and in comparable safety.

Just because you choose to subject yourself to the least competent sample of divers that there is out there doesn't really entitle you to describe things like a snorkel in the absolutest terms that you use.

For example:
... Snorkels are indifferent in calm places quarries. They are stupidly dangerous in the ocean in the mouth of most people, for the situation I see daily listed above.
That's patently absurd from the point of view of a competent instructor who trains competent divers.
 
This really should be in another thread but... You cannot learn any facts about decompression theory from the RDP. The tables are merely a set of precalculated square dive profiles, nothing more, nothing less. You actually learn more about decompression theory playing with simulation mode on your computer and watching as your remaining bottom time jumps when you switch from one tissue compartment to the next.

The tables are not the RDP. The tables are a tabular form of dive depths and the corresponding times one can remain at that depth before decompression becomes necessary. Decompression tables do the same but inform the diver how much decompression, and at what depth one must perform it for a given depth/time. They lay the whole spectrum out in one image so that divers can see the progression of those values effects and the interplay between values. It's an excellent learning tool. Using a computer doesn't give the same information in the same way. It gives one set of values at a time. It also only teaches one to read that value instead of thinking about how it was derived. If a student asks how those numbers are derived an instructor who really wanted to show the student would have to eventually pull out... a graphic table (or the numeric value tables but the graph gives both values and a visual image).

If you want to demonstrate an effect one often plots that effect in the form of a graph - that's what the tables do. Running through depths or time on the dive planning part of a computer doesn't offer the same comprehensive overview. One may chose to dive with a computer, as I do, but saying the tables should disappear is like a city person who loves vegetables saying they will be glad when all the farms are gone.

While the two topics may not be similar directly the underlying thinking is the same.
 
The tables are not the RDP. The tables are a tabular form of dive depths and the corresponding times one can remain at that depth before decompression becomes necessary. Decompression tables do the same but inform the diver how much decompression, and at what depth one must perform it for a given depth/time. They lay the whole spectrum out in one image so that divers can see the progression of those values effects and the interplay between values. It's an excellent learning tool. Using a computer doesn't give the same information in the same way. It gives one set of values at a time. It also only teaches one to read that value instead of thinking about how it was derived. If a student asks how those numbers are derived an instructor who really wanted to show the student would have to eventually pull out... a graphic table (or the numeric value tables but the graph gives both values and a visual image).

Again, just another set of precalculated values. Please provide a link to a dive table that actually provides insight into how the table was derived. Even when teaching tables to new divers, it should be emphasized that the numbers are merely the results, and not the theory behind the results. Otherwise, you run the risk of divers thinking they can use the tables in all sorts of new and wonderful ways, since, after all, they now understand decompression theory. "Don't exceed the bottom time allowed by your computer" provides exactly the same insight as "here are a bunch of times for depths in tabular form".
 
Hello, I am trying to get some input on who uses snorkels and who does not. Is it safe to not dive with a snorkel? Why do people choose to not use them?

Saltwater = snorkel 99% of the time. Fresh water = no snorkel the majority of time.
 
I do wish I could understand the divide here. Part of it is that the snorkel advocates have pushed snorkels as essential safety devices when they are not. If everyone said go dive with/or without a snorkel there would be no issue. But people on both sides say rather absurdly that you will present yourself to mortal peril if not moral iniquity if you do/do not wear a snorkel.

Personally I took the training were we instructed on freedivng and snorkeling and in the end I would rather swim, or dive, and just skip the snorkeling. That said if you want to suck air through a tube have at it. Just don’t ask me to join you, and if you insist that I am unsafe you may get a thumb right through your eye.
 
I do wish I could understand the divide here. Part of it is that the snorkel advocates have pushed snorkels as essential safety devices when they are not. If everyone said go dive with/or without a snorkel there would be no issue. But people on both sides say rather absurdly that you will present yourself to mortal peril if not moral iniquity if you do/do not wear a snorkel.

The third camp says that snorkels have their place in some situations. In other situations, it's better to have them tucked away.

To deny their place in any and all diving situations and to argue that they are inherently unsafe is being obtuse.
 
Just because you choose to subject yourself to the least competent sample of divers that there is out there doesn't really entitle you to describe things like a snorkel in the absolutest terms that you use. For example:
beanojones:
Originally Posted by beanojones ... Snorkels are indifferent in calm places quarries. They are stupidly dangerous in the ocean in the mouth of most people, for the situation I see daily listed above.

That's patently absurd from the point of view of a competent instructor who trains competent divers.

Of course taking into account the fact that these are my divers (or at least people on the boat I am on), but not my students, what exactly can be done?

Most instructors are simply unaware of what (for instance) the Hawaii ocean can be like so they think they are teaching adequate snorkel breathing patterns. This is treading into I2I area, but I have said, and I believe, that instructors using pools to train, unconsciously (at least I hope it is unconsciously) end up training people to dive in pool like conditions by not enforcing ocean awareness (airway protected until on dry land, facing the waves, no standing in fins) while they practice in the pool.
This goes along with what passes for snorkel/free dive training in OW courses. Anyone can free dive in a pool because the surfacing diver can completely exhale to clear the snorkel when they surface, because there are no waves. This makes divers think of snorkels as a magic air tube instead of the garden hose it becomes in the ocean.

If a diver is forced to only partially exhale to clear because there is no reason not to expect a wave, then snorkel clearing becomes a much harder proposition, and the overwhelming urge to breathe just makes that proper breathing pattern go out the window on the never properly learned, and never practiced skill confronts water in the airway in the ocean.

Which makes snorkels stupidly dangerous when these divers come to the real ocean which is only pool-like in order to trick people into acting stupid, and then turns the magic air tube into a garden hose, and then the divers spit out the snorkel, and suck more water, and quit diving for the day, or for good, because someone somewhere made the inane suggestion that snorkels belong on divers heads to save air, or to provide safety.

One solution: revoke everyone's C-Cards until they take a proper Ocean based free diving course, and have the necessary breath control to hit 50 feet comfortably and repetitively, and clear the snorkel on surfacing while only exhaling less than half of the air on their lungs. (Not realistic, because right now few instructors can do this, let alone teach it. It would mean most instructors would lose their basic OW certification.)

Here's another solution: Recognize the world as it is, where inept snorkel use causes panicked divers. Admit that snorkels are not necessary for safety, and in at least some cases, counter productive to safety because the skills are never properly taught, and/or are never practiced, and just move snorkel use to a separate course. Make the leave 500 psi rule that boats idiotically enforce for no good reason make sense by actually providing a reason to leave 500 psi instead of using most of it at the safety stop. (Realistic)

I know where I fall, not that I have dove many places; but because I have seen divers from all over the world, and they all can get themselves in trouble by thinking of the snorkel as a reasonable option in the ocean.

---------- Post added ----------
To deny their place in any and all diving situations and to argue that they are inherently unsafe is being obtuse.
Or realistic. You gave one example where snorkel could be used. But there is no reason why it is preferable to using a regulator.
 
Last edited:
The snorkel is preferable to the reg on some shore dives involving a surface swim because it allows one to look straight ahead, and negotiate obstacles and not use tank air.

Those reasons are good enough for me to justify recommending snorkel use for shore dives. I also recommend that snorkels are carried on ocean dives. I don't have one attached to the mask in the ocean, but I carry one in case I am forced to ditch equipment and swim. Shikata-ga nai is not an option in the open sea when/if things go wrong.

Being realistic means showing awareness. I would argue that you are not in that you are arguing through your own confined situation of being an instructor teaching Japanese tourists, which is not indicative of the diving world as a whole. That, is being obtuse. I'm yet to hear the statistics in snorkel use leading to diver accidents, which one would assume would be rampant seeing as many divers continue to use them even though they are "stupidly dangerous". :rofl3:

When the situation means using a snorkel to benefit the user, then by all means use the snorkel. If as a diver, you can not use a snorkel, then don't. The snorkel is a tool, nothing more, nothing less.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom