Right after world peace, no hunger, and stabilization of climate change, my perfect world would have the individual draw their own line....but only after taking into account how their decision might affect others.
809 feet?
- Thread starter pauldw
- Start date
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
iointerrupt
Contributor
Is not the main challenge with these depth record attempts the issue of gas density? We know we have equipment that will work at that depth. We know we have decompression models that will get you back from that depth. But will your lungs function at all down there?
David Shaw found out the hard way, that no, they would not. To me these extreme depths have the risk profile of a coin flip. Your own personal physiology can handle the gas density, or it can't.
And if that's the case, why not find out first with a hyperbaric chamber? There is no reason to get wet at all trying to find your lungs maximum depth rating. Your odds of coming back alive are nearly guaranteed in comparison to using SCUBA gear and a 900ft column of water.
David Shaw found out the hard way, that no, they would not. To me these extreme depths have the risk profile of a coin flip. Your own personal physiology can handle the gas density, or it can't.
And if that's the case, why not find out first with a hyperbaric chamber? There is no reason to get wet at all trying to find your lungs maximum depth rating. Your odds of coming back alive are nearly guaranteed in comparison to using SCUBA gear and a 900ft column of water.
Beau Holden
Contributor
One man's pointless risk taking....is another man's walk in the park.
The only time that will happen is when Jesus returns and no one will be concerned about taking risk
It's not that I disagree with you. There is a cause and effect for every decision that has ever been made will ever be made, such as this post. Did Sheck, did Neil Armstrong, did David Shaw, did Karen van den Oever, did Roald Amundsen think how their decision would effect everyone in their life? Yes, maybe, no. What about the mother of all decisions in the last 80 years, Harry Truman's decision to use the atomic bomb? We don't know what goes through another person's mind when they make a decision. We only know how we perceive that decision.
.
GF99/99
Contributor
NEDU and the French have been doing this for years. Home - COMEX sas
-701m (2299 ft), HYDRA 10; 1992 and in open sea to -534m (1751 ft); HYDRA 8, 1988
GF99/99
Contributor
Not really. 250m dives you can still have mixes with manageable gas densities and END's, yes this is something of concern but not one of the main ones. HPNS, IBCD, gas switch choices, and decompression models and how you body will react would be the main concerns.
But then again this is all personal opinions, who your mentors were for deep diving, and what kind of deep diving you doing.
I have a work colleague, who has done many summits. Last on his list is Everest( next year) and he has a family. We discuss our hobbies regularly. I shared this thread and he found it fascinating that his hobbies made him a poor husband and irresponsible parent. From his point of view, he makes all his kids events, show them that hard work and preparation helps one achieve their dreams. incredibly dedicated to his family.
Kay Dee
Contributor
Dave Shaws death is not all about gas density. Have you ever seen a photo of his scrubber post dive? It was packed and assembled incorrectly to begin with.
Kay Dee
Contributor
Arguments against pointless risk taking no doubt. But where do you draw the line? Not all deaths on record breaking pushes / dives would be classed as 'pointless', and especially not so to the participant. Besides, where would we be if some people didnt accept risk in their endevours? Who are we to tell others what is the level of risk they should accept?
halocline
Contributor
Hence the endless arguments!
halocline
Contributor
I'm not telling anyone to do (or not do) anything. I'm just saying that there are many arguments about risk taking in climbing, which was brought up in a previous post. I should have been clearer in that I'm not the one calling risks in sport pointless, but that is one side of the argument.
Similar threads
