Mr Chattertons Self Reliance Article...

[PfcAJ]

I think 10x is achievable, given sufficient panic.

NOAA list 5x under heavy workload. Heavy workload is still controlled breathing,...'out of breath', rather than hyperventilating and/or severe CO2 hit.

Extracted / Interpolated From NOAA Diving Manual, 2001:
Work Level.............................. Typical Swim....Typical O2
Description__ _____RMV, lpm__ __Speed,Knots_ _Cons., Lpm__
Light..................... 22.5........ ...... 0.6............... 1.1
Moderate............... 40.0 ...............1.0............... 1.8
Moderately Heavy.... 62.5............... 1.2............... 2.5
Heavy.................... 75.0............... 1.4............... 3.0
Extremely Heavy...... 90.0............... 1.6 ...............3.5

Further to that; this excerpt from the Diver Medical Technician Manual (Dive Bell, Australia):
View attachment 150509
(is attached/uploaded images not working?)

From 'WHY US DIVERS DIED IN 1991' by Ben Davidson (SPUMS Journal Vol 25 No.2 1995):




...so, even erring on the moderate (and I do believe it is moderate)... how does that 'bullet-prood' gas-sharing plan deal with a 5x SAC rate increase?

Your table isn't really clear to me, and all I see is less than a 5x increase for any of the values on it. I doubt a 10x increase is even sustainable in a scuba environment for any length of time. Its just not realistic at this level of diving. If its 'realistic' for you and your team, somethin ain't right.

A 5x increase will debauch virtually any gas plan, RBs included. You done goofed if you're in the water with someone who doesn't have their act together at 250'. And if you're in the water with a person like that, I'd contend that YOUR sac rate is just as likely to go through the roof.

 

[lowviz]

...//... It's sad that this thread somehow became derailed to the point that an official agency representative of a respectable organization has to disassociate wannabees who may or may not be talking out their ass from the organization in an online forum.

Suffer me one observation. I disagree. I saw JJ's (no familiarity, couldn't identify the guy to save my life) post as him seeing a glimmer of hope in narrowing the gulf between DIR/GUE/UTD and everyone else. He tried to take advantage of a pivotal moment in the thread.

Masterfully played, but it didn't stick.

You should re-read the previous posts, I'm pretty sure of my observation, but only Mr. Jablonski really knows. And I'm guessing that he has better things to do than post again...

 

[ScubaInChicago]

Suffer me one observation. I disagree. I saw JJ's (no familiarity, couldn't identify the guy to save my life) post as him seeing a glimmer of hope in narrowing the gulf between DIR/GUE/UTD and everyone else. He tried to take advantage of a pivotal moment in the thread.

Masterfully played, but it didn't stick.

You should re-read the previous posts, I'm pretty sure of my observation, but only Mr. Jablonski really knows. And I'm guessing that he has better things to do than post again...

Ok, reread it, and it doesn't say anything about DIR/UTD/& Everyone else. It says GUE as an orginization does not have anything to do with this tread as there is no common ground to mention, let alone debate.

 

[lowviz]

...//... there is no common ground to mention, let alone debate.

Agreed.

 

[DaleC]

I don't see it as an us or them conflict myself and can easily understand John's intent while appreciating the point of view of committed team divers. But then again, I am Canadian.

Both individually oriented and team divers can be well trained, diligent and good at what they do. The difference comes in how they plan and execute their dives.
John is obviously describing his POV as an individually oriented diver. His plan will not be the same as that of a team diver (as DIR might define it). However, John is not diving with another team diver so his plan fits his situation. He is saying "I am an autonomous unit and expect you to be too". Considering the human environment he finds himself in (non standardized diver pools) this is probably more realistic than attempting to create a team oriented dive plan with an unknown element.

A committed team, or group with the same training and understanding, can adopt another philosophy that will work in their environment.

The unrelenting debate comes when one group attempts to suggest the other dive their way.

Team diving works very well, when there's a team. It doesn't work so well, when there isn't. We all make choices as to how we deal with that. Some refuse to dive when the second condition exists, others prefer to adopt a philosophy that allows them to move forward regardless. Choosing one doesn't mean one needs to reject the value of the other unless one is small minded and needs to live in an Us vs Them, White vs Black, Right vs Wrong reality.

 

[nimoh]

I am saying this IS NOT a UTD/GUE/TDI/LMNOP agency this or that against anyone...It's about either you're a thinking diver that knows how to make the correct decisions on land and in the water that will solve nearly any problem that arises during the dive or a selfish jag like Ed who only thinks about himself. It's sad that this thread somehow became derailed to the point that an official agency representative of a respectable organization has to disassociate wannabees who may or may not be talking out their ass from the organization in an online forum.

OK, I see where you are coming from now. However, I see the two groups as more of one group claiming that the best way to dive is completely self reliant and managing emergencies themselves and the other group taking a team approach to conducting dives and managing emergencies. I see neither of these groups being incompetent.

I have recent GUE training and find that the team approach works well for me but at the same time I have a great deal of respect for John Chatterton and all he has accomplished in his diving career. I think there is a lot of truth to what he says about being self reliant, an even though I dive in a team, I plan my dives such that I don't need them to save me, but like that they are there. So perhaps I am a self reliant team diver.

My original question was merely aimed at identifying the two groups. On the one hand the team divers seem to be DIR focussed, but the other group doesn't appear to be very well defined.

I don't see it as an us or them conflict myself and can easily understand John's intent while appreciating the point of view of committed team divers. But then again, I am Canadian.

Both individually oriented and team divers can be well trained, diligent and good at what they do. The difference comes in how they plan and execute their dives.
John is obviously describing his POV as an individually oriented diver. His plan will not be the same as that of a team diver (as DIR might define it). However, John is not diving with another team diver so his plan fits his situation. He is saying "I am an autonomous unit and expect you to be too". Considering the human environment he finds himself in (non standardized diver pools) this is probably more realistic than attempting to create a team oriented dive plan with an unknown element.

A committed team, or group with the same training and understanding, can adopt another philosophy that will work in their environment.

The unrelenting debate comes when one group attempts to suggest the other dive their way.

Team diving works very well, when there's a team. It doesn't work so well, when there isn't. We all make choices as to how we deal with that. Some refuse to dive when the second condition exists, others prefer to adopt a philosophy that allows them to move forward regardless. Choosing one doesn't mean one needs to reject the value of the other unless one is small minded and needs to live in an Us vs Them, White vs Black, Right vs Wrong reality.

Well said

 

[lowviz]

...//...the team divers seem to be DIR focussed, but the other group doesn't appear to be very well defined ...//...

-when viewed through a DIR lens.

 

[ScubaInChicago]

My original question was merely aimed at identifying the two groups. On the one hand the team divers seem to be DIR focussed, but the other group doesn't appear to be very well defined.

Sorry if this is beating a dead horse, but EVERY agency I know of teaches buddy diving (excluding a solo dive cert). That leads me to believe that this isn't just about "TEAM" (buddy) diving, it's about idea of looking at EVERYONE as a liability and not seeing the synergy that can be accomplished with the right plan.

 

[lowviz]

Yes. Two freshly minted OW's, when paired, become something magical.

That plan only benefits the instructor and the agency.

 

[Pullmyfinger]

Yes. Two freshly minted OW's, when paired, become something magical.

That plan only benefits the instructor and the agency.

---------- Post added March 20th, 2013 at 06:30 PM ----------

Team diving works very well, when there's a team. It doesn't work so well, when there isn't. We all make choices as to how we deal with that. Some refuse to dive when the second condition exists, others prefer to adopt a philosophy that allows them to move forward regardless. Choosing one doesn't mean one needs to reject the value of the other unless one is small minded and needs to live in an Us vs Them, White vs Black, Right vs Wrong reality.

Very true, Sir!
Often, the biggest challenge is finding teammates.

Cheers,
Mitch