Keep in mind that I am very naive at this point and learning as I go.
Having read several texts on the topic of deep and wreck diving as well and referencing back to my PADI open water Manuals, PADI ERD and many other texts that I have at hand, I see a disconnect or shift that takes place somewhere in the move from “Recreational Diving” to “Technical” diving. This shift is away from the reliance on a “Buddy” to viewing a “Buddy” as a liability.
Many of the Deep and Wreck Divers I have read from or about, Gilliam, Gentile, Eckley and Chatterton to name a few depend solely on their own underwater resources and skill. They do not appear to gas plan for others at all but only for their own survival. They dive with doubles to 210 FSW for 25 minutes leaving no room for bailing out a buddy on the bottom or on a hang line.
Another point I seem to see is that they wear only enough back gas to complete the depth portion of the dive and then a partial deco. Then they pick up deco gasses on the line to complete their debt. I believe that Gentile likes Nx70 if I remember from my reading and others like Nx50. Most seem to like 100% O2 at the 20 foot mark which makes sense and they do switched to blend to give their bodies/lungs a rest every 15 minutes or so.
Another interesting point that was made by Gentile in Deep, Dark and Dangerous was the apparent overemphasis on algorithm dependency and over learning of theory instead of just doing what is needed. He balked at the people that sit on the boat and run algorithms all day long and then plan accordingly. He stated that they may make a 200 FSW dive, leave the bottom right on time and hit ad leave every stop to the second. They make a picture perfect dive and miss the entire reason for diving in the first place. What happens when they overstay a minute? Can they then rethink the tables in their head and make adjustments or do they throw out the tables and just hope the computer is right, And how about computers that calculate DECO and deep stops like the VR3?
The metaphor Gary uses is; a race car driver doesn’t need to know every single detail of how the engine is build and tuned to race, he just needs to know some basics about the engine and the cars capabilities and then its up to his experience and skill. Vice Versa, the engine specialist may know everything about how the car and engine run including the timing curves, fuel ratios, tire pressure and oil pressure but he would be dangerous behind the wheel in a race situation. I paraphrased from memory so don’t beat me down.
I see this as a classic example of experience vs. knowledge.
Do I have a point here? Not really, just a few thoughts that might start some interesting discussion.
Thanks for reading this ramble,
Scooter
Having read several texts on the topic of deep and wreck diving as well and referencing back to my PADI open water Manuals, PADI ERD and many other texts that I have at hand, I see a disconnect or shift that takes place somewhere in the move from “Recreational Diving” to “Technical” diving. This shift is away from the reliance on a “Buddy” to viewing a “Buddy” as a liability.
Many of the Deep and Wreck Divers I have read from or about, Gilliam, Gentile, Eckley and Chatterton to name a few depend solely on their own underwater resources and skill. They do not appear to gas plan for others at all but only for their own survival. They dive with doubles to 210 FSW for 25 minutes leaving no room for bailing out a buddy on the bottom or on a hang line.
Another point I seem to see is that they wear only enough back gas to complete the depth portion of the dive and then a partial deco. Then they pick up deco gasses on the line to complete their debt. I believe that Gentile likes Nx70 if I remember from my reading and others like Nx50. Most seem to like 100% O2 at the 20 foot mark which makes sense and they do switched to blend to give their bodies/lungs a rest every 15 minutes or so.
Another interesting point that was made by Gentile in Deep, Dark and Dangerous was the apparent overemphasis on algorithm dependency and over learning of theory instead of just doing what is needed. He balked at the people that sit on the boat and run algorithms all day long and then plan accordingly. He stated that they may make a 200 FSW dive, leave the bottom right on time and hit ad leave every stop to the second. They make a picture perfect dive and miss the entire reason for diving in the first place. What happens when they overstay a minute? Can they then rethink the tables in their head and make adjustments or do they throw out the tables and just hope the computer is right, And how about computers that calculate DECO and deep stops like the VR3?
The metaphor Gary uses is; a race car driver doesn’t need to know every single detail of how the engine is build and tuned to race, he just needs to know some basics about the engine and the cars capabilities and then its up to his experience and skill. Vice Versa, the engine specialist may know everything about how the car and engine run including the timing curves, fuel ratios, tire pressure and oil pressure but he would be dangerous behind the wheel in a race situation. I paraphrased from memory so don’t beat me down.
I see this as a classic example of experience vs. knowledge.
Do I have a point here? Not really, just a few thoughts that might start some interesting discussion.
Thanks for reading this ramble,
Scooter
