Dive shops and training: the disconnect with reality

[jbtut]

Have any of you ever had a problem getting to the surface?

To a novice diver (me) the idea of a redundant source of buoyancy (especially as compared to say a 7mm suit) seems a bit like an airplane adding some lead as redundant source of weight. Is there some situation in which you could drop your weights and still not be able to surface?

Also would a SMB be considered a redundant source of buoyancy as well?

 

[BabyDuck]

I have found in my cold water diving experience that on my single Al80 with my SemiDry suit, I'm down about as long as the doubles/drysuit guys..and my photos come out clear and sharp with my 5 megapixel digital camera and universal strobe.

I don't need extra gear to compensate for skills shortcomings

and you think the word 'phase' is an insult directed totally at you but don't think that's an insulting insinuation directed at all divers in drysuit & doubles?

i'd say what you're being, but it's against tos (though i've typed the word once in this thread, so give it a thought). however, i doubt your skills are as sharp as you think they are and i'll continue to think that as long as you're being what you're being. remember, all we have to judge your skills by are your words. it may not be true, you may have mad skills, but that's not how you're presenting yourself. give that a thought, too.

 

[idocsteve]

Is there some situation in which you could drop your weights and still not be able to surface?

Yes.

I can think of 4 right off the top of my head:

A diver with a bunch of tanks and regs could still be negatively buoyant even after dropping weight

A diver who is positive might be unable to surface if they're in an overhead environment

A diver who is entangled in monofilament might be unable to surface, in fact if they dumped their weights they might be entangled even worse and be in an even worse position to get themselves free- for example they could be hooked by a fin and be so positive that they'd be a human lift bag

A diver who has exceeded NDL's would have a virtual ceiling and be unable to surface without potentially dire consequences

Also would a SMB be considered a redundant source of buoyancy as well?

I suppose you could use an SMB as emergency redundant buoyancy if conditions warranted

 

[Sas]

I did not know that.

That is a pretty important feature of a drysuit. I am surprised you dismissed them as a way to compensate for poor skill, given your knowledge of their usefulness is limited.

So you're one of those deep techie divers then. That's out of my realm. All of my diving is done within the 135 feet recreational depth. I have not yet had the need or desire to expand my diving beyond that point.

No. I am qualified to do decompression diving to 42m (no accelerated deco, and I don't do dives that require much decompression). That is not "deep technical diving" at all. From 42m I prefer to have more than 19cf for bailout and the twins are required at a number of the sites I wish to dive locally. I have done dives to that depth with a single and a pony though, but have had 40cf+ ponies.

That seems to be the case. When I dived from Howard Kline's boat, the Eagle's Nest, a few summers back...I was always quite surprised when looking at the chalkboard he uses to keep track of divers and their in/out times. I was always within a few minutes of just about every diver, many of whom used doubles and drysuits, and even had a short deco stop in there sometimes. I figured what's the point of increasing the complexity of my rig for a relatively nominal gain?

Whatever, that wasn't my point. My point was you are comparing apples and oranges if you are trying to compare your single wetsuit setup to someone who uses doubles + drysuit.

I'm going to look into a shorter regulator hose...in fact I'll be at the dive shop sometime this week to have the vent hose on my Balance BCD swapped out with a longer one, that would be a great time to look into that.

As far as my dangling sausage, maybe I'll just get a 4th retractor.

Ok.

 

[Sas]

Have any of you ever had a problem getting to the surface?

To a novice diver (me) the idea of a redundant source of buoyancy (especially as compared to say a 7mm suit) seems a bit like an airplane adding some lead as redundant source of weight. Is there some situation in which you could drop your weights and still not be able to surface?

Some people do not have ditchable weight. I don't with doubles usually.

Also would a SMB be considered a redundant source of buoyancy as well?

Yep. I don't think it is the best source (I think drysuit is), but that is just my personal opinion.

 

[idocsteve]

and you think the word 'phase' is an insult directed totally at you but don't think that's an insulting insinuation directed at all divers in drysuit & doubles?

I simply stated that I do not require extra gear to compensate for skills shortcomings

Some divers who do use gear to compensate for their own skills shortcomings might be insulted by that statement.

That does not mean that all drysuit/doubles divers compensate for poor skills by using drysuits and doubles.

Suggesting that divers who use retractors are "going through a learning phase" is an insult directed at ALL retractor users.

See the difference?

Great. You can thank me later.

 

[BabyDuck]

To a novice diver (me) the idea of a redundant source of buoyancy (especially as compared to say a 7mm suit) seems a bit like an airplane adding some lead as redundant source of weight. Is there some situation in which you could drop your weights and still not be able to surface?

Also would a SMB be considered a redundant source of buoyancy as well?

remember, you're not dropping weights to be *able* to surface. you wouldn't be able to control your rate of ascent and would have higher risk of dcs. if you have a problem, you're dropping weights *at* the surface to float better.

for usual circumstances, recreational divers probably don't need much in the way of redundant buoyancy, but if you penetrate wrecks or caves there's a bigger chance of poking a hole in your bc bladder and doubles and all the tech stuff is heavy so more buoyancy capability up to a point is better.

and yes, an smb is considered another source of buoyancy.

 

[idocsteve]

Whatever, that wasn't my point. My point was you are comparing apples and oranges if you are trying to compare your single wetsuit setup to someone who uses doubles + drysuit.

I was comparing doubles/drysuit diving to singles/pony/semidrysuit diving as has been my own personal experience having dived in the company of divers using the former gear configuration while I used the latter gear configuration and seeing no benefit to their set up over mine in terms of safety, comfort and dive duration.

 

[Scott L]

A drysuit gives you a redundant source of buoyancy, which is nice (as well keeping you much warmer in general) and another tank gives you a redundant source of gas, also handy.

As much as I dislike agreeing with Idoc, I do in this case. Drysuits are beneficial beyond the warmth factor as they are neutrally bouyant unlike thicker cheaply made wetsuits.

 

[jbtut]

Yes.

I can think of 4 right off the top of my head:

A diver with a bunch of tanks and regs could still be negatively buoyant even after dropping weight

A diver who is positive might be unable to surface if they're in an overhead environment

A diver who is entangled in monofilament might be unable to surface, in fact if they dumped their weights they might be entangled even worse and be in an even worse position to get themselves free- for example they could be hooked by a fin and be so positive that they'd be a human lift bag

A diver who has exceeded NDL's would have a virtual ceiling and be unable to surface without potentially dire consequences



I suppose you could use an SMB as emergency redundant buoyancy if conditions warranted

I guess I should have been more specific. Is there a situation in which a diver with a 7mm suit could drop weights and not surface, AND, having a redundant buoyancy would allow them to surface.


The diver with a bunch of tanks and regs seems to fit that situation. I don't know how much lift a 7mm suit provides compared to how many tanks/regs it would take to make a diver negatively buoyant. Any idea?

I don't see how an extra buoyancy device would help in any of the other situations.