Kudos to the Ginnie Staff

[Soggy]

1. if doubles users died from doing "something stupid" and it had nothing to do with their doubles, then wearing doubles didn't buy them any extra safety. your argument that it's safer to dive doubles does not hold up.

Not even close. You need to look at each individual case and find out what happened.

2. let's assume that there has to be at least 1,000 single-tank dives in the
last 20 years. if single tanks blew up on you at a 1% rate, you'd expect 10
dead divers in the last 20 years. there's not a one. your argument that
diving single tanks is less safe does not hold up.

I didn't cite any percentages. What is the percentage of divers who die using doubles? I certainly doubt that burst disks go on the 1% rate. If that were the case, I'd never dive again. It is a rare failure, but one that *can* occur, *has* occurred, and *will* occur again in the future, and there is a way to prepare for it. I've only had one burst disk failure myself and it was in a car with overfilled tanks on a hot day. I hope I never have a burst disk failure in the water and I probably never will, but it is a realistic failure that one needs to be prepared for if one is in an overhead environment.

You still don't realize it, but you are not actually just arguing against double tanks, you are arguing against the need isolation manifolds at any level of diving in general. If you subscribe to that position, I suggest you go to CE and purchase Rich's "DIR Special" cross bar and replace your isolator with it or begin diving independents because otherwise that isolator is just an extra valve to service that provides you with no realistic benefit.

To quote Rand on the TDS version of this thread:
"I'd rather sacrifice 10 divers who died breaking the rules than one diver who died because he followed them."

This is a sentiment that I agree with. A rule I try to live by is, "CFD: You can't fix dumb." If someone is going to intentionally break rules that they know can kill them, there is nothing you can do about that, doubles or otherwise.

 

[WaterDawg]

I guess it goes back to the fact that you can get lots farther w/ a single lp 121 (properly filled ) than you could w/ either hp or AL80's or bd st 72's

 

[Soggy]

absolutely. and that something is the inherent limitation in range that
a single tank provides. by spending less time in the cave, and by spending
that time in the more accessible parts of the cave, you are cutting down
significantly on your risk.

A single tank does NOT provide any inherent gas limitation. You *still* have not even acknowledged that someone could pick up a single LP120 and dive it to thirds and get twice as far back as someone diving those double 80s to 1/6ths...or at the very least the *same distance* if the double 80s diver decides to be a meathead and dive it to 1/3rds also.

 

[H2Andy]

You still don't realize it, but you are not actually just arguing against double tanks, you are arguing against the need isolation manifolds at any level of diving in general.

well, clearly you are not reading my posts carefully. i've stated several times
that this argument applies to a limited number of divers: new overhead divers
with a low skill and experience set.

because (here we go again) we know that no intro. diver diving a single tank
has died in the last 20 years, whereas double-tank intro divers have... which
means that if anything, doubles are more dangerous to intro divers than singles...

and the band played on...

You *still* have not even acknowledged that someone could pick up a single LP120 and dive it to thirds and get twice as far back as someone diving those double 80s to 1/6ths...or at the very least the *same distance* if the double 80s diver decides to be a meathead and dive it to 1/3rds also.

ok, i acknowlege that. how does that make single tanks more dangerous
than doubles? it's a red-herring. if anything IT SHOWS THAT IT'S NOT
THE TANK THAT MATTERS. ok? single tanks are not more inherently
dangerous. end of story.

because (here we go again) we know that no intro. diver diving a single tank
has died in the last 20 years, whereas double-tank intro divers have... which
means that if anything, doubles are more dangerous to intro divers than singles...

 

[Soggy]

well, clearly you are not reading my posts carefully. i've stated several times that this argument applies to a limited number of divers: new overhead divers
with a low skill and experience set.

Why do you need an isolation manifold at 2500 ft back and not at 1200 ft back?

 

[H2Andy]

dude, you keep missing the point.

there are greater threats and dangers to a new intro. student
with a low skill set and little experience that what you have on your back.

stop fixating on the single tank as the source of the problem.

 

[Soggy]

dude, you keep missing the point.

there are greater threats and dangers that what you have on your back.

stop fixating on the single tank as the source of the problem.

One of us is missing the point, I'll agree with that...

Goodnight

 

[WaterDawg]

ok, i acknowlege that. how does that make single tanks more dangerous
than doubles?

Because you can NOT isolate and save half your gas.

 

[JeffG]

One of us is missing the point, I'll agree with that...

Goodnight

LOL

 

[Soggy]

Have we caught the vulture yet so we can beat it? You know the one that ate the dead coyote that ate horse that we beat to death?