DevonDiver, you pretty much proved my point about those who are bound and determined to disregard a piece of equipment for whatever manufactured reason you can come up with.
Incorrect. I have sufficient experience with scuba diving, and different kit options, to make an
educated and informed decision about the equipment.
The basis of my rejection of SA, is a combination of scientific fact (
air consumption calculations), personal experience (
human reaction in OOA emergencies) and a fundamental understanding of scuba diving (
17 years, an instructor..having taught many people to CESA).
I wasn't closed-minded to SA. I considered it. Debated it. Tested it.
AND ONLY THEN... did I make the decision to disregard it as a sensible and beneficial scuba equipment choice.
What I
didn't make clear in my first post, was that I wasn't bothered to fully 'debate' the SA issue
again on this thread. You are a newbie on the forum, so you probably aren't aware that this subject has been debated
at depthon
many occasions already. Having been on the forum for a while... I didn't want to have to repeat all of my arguements and rationales
another time.
I took it for granted that anyone contributing to the thread would have the intelligence to consider browsing/searching the forum for past discussions, so that something
new could be added...rather than just re-hashing the same old nonsense again and again.
Here are two threads that you should read, before continuing your verbal pomposity here..
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/tanks-valves-bands/308607-spare-air-actually-useful.html
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/tanks-valves-bands/298295-spare-air-experience-its-use.html
Anyone--diver or car purchaser, what have you--who buys a product purely on the advertising or even word of mouth is not smart in my book. I know what marketing is.
Then WHY would you buy a SA?
Word of mouth -
no other scuba product gets as much negative reaction as the SA.
Marketing - SA make ludicrous claims, that don't survive realistic deconstruction based on the mathematics of air consumption.
You apparently didn't read my post at all or you would have come to a common sense conclusion that I am, in fact, correct.
Are you self-aware of how arrogant and pompous you sound?
They way I've approached it is exactly the way we should all approach things. You can complain about SA's marketing all you want. That's fine, and I wouldn't disagree with you for the most part.
IF you agree, then what are you being such a dick about? What exactly is your complaint about my negative critique of SA?
But to state, as if it were fact, that the SA is a pointless, unnecessary gadget tells me I'd never want to dive with someone like you.
I define it as a pointless, unnecessary gadget, because that is what it is...
Pointless. It serves no point. It is not necessary. It answers a problem that does not exist. It is a supplement that excuses bad diving and preparation. It is a fake confidence booster that won't deliver when it matters.
Sorry I made you cry by insulting your precious "
little yellow canister of wishful thinking"...
I can assure you that MY "faith" in the SA is not ill-informed--again, if you'd actually paid attention to my post you'd realize that--it is what it is.
As a PADI instructor... you won't certify a diver unless they can conduct a proper CESA.... correct?
You would expect any diver you certify to be able deal effectively with an OOA emergency & ascend safely, unassisted, from recreational diving depths... correct?
If not... why would you certify those people???
So...assuming that those divers
should be able to ascend anyway.... how can you say that the SA is necessary?
It's a pathetic CESA bottle...that allows a few snatched breaths en-route to the surface. It is NOT a redundant air-source.
In return for those few petty breaths... it gives a completely false sense of confidence. It delays a diver's
acceptance of an emergency situation by crucial seconds. It skews emergency decision-making by offering dangerous alternative options.
You, as a tech instructor, should be teaching students the appropriate approach and use of all gear, whether it's for redundancy, safety or special-purpose.
I suggest you don't go down the road of telling any qualified tech diver/instructor what they need to be doing. Tech diving is quite a different field than recreational diving..and different principles apply.
But please, please, please.... do take your
little yellow canister of wishful thinking to a tech diving class. Tell them all about what they should be doing... They'd all take you seriously, honest
If you are simply telling people "you're too ignorant to use something, so don't buy it", then I am sorry for your students.
I am telling people... in the basis of my experience and some rock-solid calculations, the SA is a bad equipment choice. It costs considerable money and offers little or no benefit. At worst, it can get you into more serious trouble than it could help you out of.
As an instructor...I am telling people this.... so that they don't
waste money and expose themselves to pointless risks by buying this. It is nothing to do with them being "ignorant". It has to do with having information and experience...and passing that on.
I could name you just about any piece of equipment and give you the same excuse NOT to use it. You simply cannot justify your position, other than "proclaim" a piece of gear you don't like is unworthy. I've already made quite clear the circumstances that I find the SA has a "point" and would actually be useful. I defy you to show how, in my situation, it's not. And you can't.
1. I can justify my position...and have done on this forum many times.
2. You've made your points. I read them. I disagreed completely.
3. I can easily defy you, by simply asking you to illustrate your model (
in respect of air supply vs consumption, accelerated/panicked breathing rates and time of ascent) to clarify how you think the SA would help in a true emergency that would be unescapable without it...
You're an Air Force guy right? Here is an analogy... Recommending Spare Air for scuba divers, is like recommending a parachute, instead of aN ejection seat, to fast jet pilots. Sure... you
could argue that parachutes do save lives...and it would be better than nothing... BUT... the parachute would actually be very little benefit given the reality of escape from a fast jet aircraft. A dick-for-brains
could argue for the parachute, but it would really be just a waste of space and money. In reality, the choice is for an ejection seat or nothing..
...and so it is with OOA scuba emergencies. In reality, the choice is for a proper redundant air source or nothing..
No equipment should ever be used beyond it's design, capabilities and the experience and training of the user. Period. That axiom perfectly answers your post.
Exactly!
What was the SA designed for? Shallow ditched helicopter escape for aircrew.
It was NOT designed for scuba ascents.
What are the SA capabilities?Provides sufficient air for 2-3 realistic breaths below 60ft.
Not sufficient for an ascent below max ascent speed of 9mpm with a safety stop or any other delays en-route to the surface.
User Experience and Training? NONE. SA is advertised as being 'simple'. No training courses are available in its use. No training courses are manufacturer recommended in its use. SA use contradicts, interupts or confuses the standard emergency procedure options taught to all divers as standard (CESA, Air-Sharing).
