It would... if the acronym weren't already taken...Genesis once bubbled...
fumble-fingered keying
Although "equivalent NITROGEN depth" (as in nitrogen uptake) works too, doesn't it?
E.
#$%#$%@# Dive Training!
- Thread starter Genesis
- 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
E.
Genesis....
Looks like you got one out of two under control. Keep studying...
Maybe when you get a good grasp on those concepts, you can ask your girlfriend to explain to you the signs of someone experiencing oxygen toxicity? That might be one of those concepts to add to your list.
First, Ox-Tox is a potential risk at ANY elevated PO2.
Second, you expose yourself to that elevated PO2 any time you dive. This is true whether your Nitrox mix is EANx21 or EANx32.
Third, the entire "better gas" thing is nonsense too. If you don't trust the gas going in your lungs to be clean, you shouldn't be breathing it in the first place. Ditto for your tank's condition. I prefer NOT to breathe oil mist, thank you very much. As such I demand that I have very high quality gas ALL the time, and that my tanks be O2-clean ALL the time. Whether I put additional Oxygen in the mix therefore is of no material consequence in terms of the standards that my gear is maintained to.
Fourth, I am aware of no documented Oxtox hits in recreational divers at a peak PO2 exposure under 1.4. There have been a few documented hits with exposures of 1.6. However, 1.6 is a commonly-accepted decompression PO2, and appears to be quite safe, as when used for deco purposes there are very few reports of trouble. The "standard" for exposure in the recreational community is a PO2 of 1.4, and from the available accident analysis, it appears to be reliably safe in that there have been no recorded proven O2 hits at or under that exposure across millions of dives performed that were not potentiated by another factor (e.g. medication that one should simply not take while diving, and are just as likely to have caused the incident as the breathing gas itself.)
Whole-body (e.g. pulmonary) toxicity is simply not an issue in recreational exposures. I challenge you to find a set of profiles in recreational exposures that will exceed the NOAA whole-body limits, including credit back for time back on air at the surface during SIs. (It IS possible to do so on technical decompression dives; I'm talking about NDL recreational profiles here.)
The nearly sole cause of O2 hits is a diver unintentionally (due to lack of personal analysis!) diving a "hot" mix, a technical diver breathing off the wrong (e.g. deco) bottle at depth, or a violation of the MOD.
Yes, O2 hits are possible, and if you have one at depth you are likely cooked. However, the entire CONVENTID thing is largely academic, since (1) the first symptom of a hit is VERY LIKELY to be a seizure, and (2) even if its not, the risk of the hit does NOT go away instantly; if you detect the symptoms ascending immediately to cut your PO2 and thus risk does not alleviate the possibility of the tox incident for several minutes. Getting 30 seconds of warning that you're about to die isn't all that helpful.
The primary thing to know about O2 hits is that they must be prevented, not "detected." The means for preventing them is to (1) ALWAYS know what is in your breathing gas tank from personally witnessing its analysis or (ideally) doing it yourself, and (2) do NOT exceed the MOD for the mix you are breathing.
If you know that, and compute your effective nitrogen loading (either by using a computer that does so or by manually doing so in order to use tables cut originally for air) then the "big lesson" for diving Nitrox is to breathe continuously!
BTW I am Nitrox certified. The class was the biggest joke and waste of $150 that I've experienced in my diving career, and the resulting extra costs that shops try to hit you for annually thereafter with insane cylinder banding that are just continued insult. My personally-owned cylinders do not have Nitrox stickers on them and never will. I fill them myself, put contents labels on them, and nobody dives them without knowing what's in there and what that means. $10 for a big piece of vinyl to wrap around the top of the tank is beyond stupid and tells the diver NOTHING about the contents.
The two equations that are truly necessary to DIVE recreational Nitrox mixtures - under 40% FO2 - should be in EVERY BOW course. If you can't handle basic algebra, you have no business diving.
ALL tanks should be labelled as to (1) contents, (2) the fill pressure, (3) WHO filled it, and (4) WHEN it was filled. This way (1) you know what's in there, (2) who put it in there, (3) that it hasn't been used (because the pressure matches reasonably well) and (4) who your next of kin should go after if it turns out that the person who put it in there did something wrong, like filling a tank full of CO.
I personally won't dive a tank unless I put the contents label on the tank, and either personally analyzed the mix or witnessed it being done so with a known-good analyzer.
If a tank has no contents label containing the above, it is not IMHO diveable and should be used to fill tires rather than your lungs. This PREVENTS mistakes and does away with silly tank decals which serve to provide no useful information.
Second, you expose yourself to that elevated PO2 any time you dive. This is true whether your Nitrox mix is EANx21 or EANx32.
Third, the entire "better gas" thing is nonsense too. If you don't trust the gas going in your lungs to be clean, you shouldn't be breathing it in the first place. Ditto for your tank's condition. I prefer NOT to breathe oil mist, thank you very much. As such I demand that I have very high quality gas ALL the time, and that my tanks be O2-clean ALL the time. Whether I put additional Oxygen in the mix therefore is of no material consequence in terms of the standards that my gear is maintained to.
Fourth, I am aware of no documented Oxtox hits in recreational divers at a peak PO2 exposure under 1.4. There have been a few documented hits with exposures of 1.6. However, 1.6 is a commonly-accepted decompression PO2, and appears to be quite safe, as when used for deco purposes there are very few reports of trouble. The "standard" for exposure in the recreational community is a PO2 of 1.4, and from the available accident analysis, it appears to be reliably safe in that there have been no recorded proven O2 hits at or under that exposure across millions of dives performed that were not potentiated by another factor (e.g. medication that one should simply not take while diving, and are just as likely to have caused the incident as the breathing gas itself.)
Whole-body (e.g. pulmonary) toxicity is simply not an issue in recreational exposures. I challenge you to find a set of profiles in recreational exposures that will exceed the NOAA whole-body limits, including credit back for time back on air at the surface during SIs. (It IS possible to do so on technical decompression dives; I'm talking about NDL recreational profiles here.)
The nearly sole cause of O2 hits is a diver unintentionally (due to lack of personal analysis!) diving a "hot" mix, a technical diver breathing off the wrong (e.g. deco) bottle at depth, or a violation of the MOD.
Yes, O2 hits are possible, and if you have one at depth you are likely cooked. However, the entire CONVENTID thing is largely academic, since (1) the first symptom of a hit is VERY LIKELY to be a seizure, and (2) even if its not, the risk of the hit does NOT go away instantly; if you detect the symptoms ascending immediately to cut your PO2 and thus risk does not alleviate the possibility of the tox incident for several minutes. Getting 30 seconds of warning that you're about to die isn't all that helpful.
The primary thing to know about O2 hits is that they must be prevented, not "detected." The means for preventing them is to (1) ALWAYS know what is in your breathing gas tank from personally witnessing its analysis or (ideally) doing it yourself, and (2) do NOT exceed the MOD for the mix you are breathing.
If you know that, and compute your effective nitrogen loading (either by using a computer that does so or by manually doing so in order to use tables cut originally for air) then the "big lesson" for diving Nitrox is to breathe continuously!
BTW I am Nitrox certified. The class was the biggest joke and waste of $150 that I've experienced in my diving career, and the resulting extra costs that shops try to hit you for annually thereafter with insane cylinder banding that are just continued insult. My personally-owned cylinders do not have Nitrox stickers on them and never will. I fill them myself, put contents labels on them, and nobody dives them without knowing what's in there and what that means. $10 for a big piece of vinyl to wrap around the top of the tank is beyond stupid and tells the diver NOTHING about the contents.
The two equations that are truly necessary to DIVE recreational Nitrox mixtures - under 40% FO2 - should be in EVERY BOW course. If you can't handle basic algebra, you have no business diving.
ALL tanks should be labelled as to (1) contents, (2) the fill pressure, (3) WHO filled it, and (4) WHEN it was filled. This way (1) you know what's in there, (2) who put it in there, (3) that it hasn't been used (because the pressure matches reasonably well) and (4) who your next of kin should go after if it turns out that the person who put it in there did something wrong, like filling a tank full of CO.
I personally won't dive a tank unless I put the contents label on the tank, and either personally analyzed the mix or witnessed it being done so with a known-good analyzer.
If a tank has no contents label containing the above, it is not IMHO diveable and should be used to fill tires rather than your lungs. This PREVENTS mistakes and does away with silly tank decals which serve to provide no useful information.
Yet you will let your girlfriend risk herself because:
A) She is not fully aware of the algebra behind the gas
B) Does not know how to analyze a tank without your assistance
C) Is unaware of the physiology behind the gas she is breathing
D) Will be dependent on you.
You demonstrate a knowledge of diving, which makes you very comfortable. However your girlfriend is new to the sport, yet YOU are making decisions about what gas SHE will be diving, all the while she has not had the training to evaluate for herself what SHE wants to dive.
I can see that very quickly your girlfriends diving experiences are going to be more about YOU than it is about her enjoyment of the sport. This woman already took it up based on your interest. I think you should slow down and nurture her interest before you start throwing all of these extra things at her.
A) She is not fully aware of the algebra behind the gas
B) Does not know how to analyze a tank without your assistance
C) Is unaware of the physiology behind the gas she is breathing
D) Will be dependent on you.
You demonstrate a knowledge of diving, which makes you very comfortable. However your girlfriend is new to the sport, yet YOU are making decisions about what gas SHE will be diving, all the while she has not had the training to evaluate for herself what SHE wants to dive.
I can see that very quickly your girlfriends diving experiences are going to be more about YOU than it is about her enjoyment of the sport. This woman already took it up based on your interest. I think you should slow down and nurture her interest before you start throwing all of these extra things at her.
This is a pure malicious set of lies unsupported by anything other than your own shop and instructor bias and a clear violation of the rules of the board.
First, she IS aware of the algebra behind the gas. She is NOT a third-grader. She is a competent, grown woman. Get over your "I'm the teacher and you're a f@#$ing idiot" mentality; its insulting and its a good thing she's not reading this or you'd get a piece of her NY state of mind!
Second, she DOES know how to analyze a tank. It comes from being around me for many months, watching me do so many times, being shown HOW to mix Nitrox (I do my own in my garage!) and asking lots of questions. Hand her a tank and an analyzer and she'll give you a number. She also understands why if she didn't do it, or if my initials aren't on the contents label, she doesn't dive the tank. She trusts me to do it correctly, but she also knows how to do it on her own - she's done a few while we've both been in the garage chatting while its been done. She's not comfortable mixing up her own gas, but that's ok - I've yet to see a shop that expects you to MIX your own Nitrox in order to dive it
Third, she is aware of the physiology behind the gas she is breathing. She just didn't pay some idiot $150 who likely knows less math and has less formal education than she does for a "class" of dubious or no value and doesn't have a "card" proving that someone raped her for the aforementined $150. That doesn't make her incompetent or unable to understand, nor has she lacked access to the "academic" materials - she has, in fact, read the agency "one true advertising-based way" stuff and had lots of questions that indicated that she not only understood what was said but understood why some of it was a really bad idea (like the "tank banding" nonsense.)
Fourth, she is not "dependant" on me. Well, ok, she is for that aforementioned Nitrox at present, but only because people like you won't accept knowledge in place of money, but are more than willing to grab a wad of cash while not even imparting the basic knowledge necessary to dive safely, as evidenced by what she's gotten for money up to this point from the "industry."
That, for the time being, is ok, because I happen to have my own compressor and we like diving together. And gee, with some effort on her part and a bit of bubble time, she "gets it" on the buoyancy thing now. Its amazing how quickly someone "gets it" when what they have to "get" is actually pointed out to them, and the salutatory impact "getting it" has not only on gas consumption but also on one's enjoyment of diving; floating rather than fighting is a good thing. The video shot by a friend of mine (of both of us) this weekend is all the proof that either of us need; what a difference just one actual hour of bubble time makes. Of course in order to learn someone has to first point out what the objectives are! Her original instructor never bothered to tell her that a simple way to know how you are trimmed and if you are swimming horizontally is to simply point your head towards your fins and see if you can see behind you!
If, perchance, we stop seeing each other then she'll probably have to put up with the crap of the "dive shop" nonsense and fork over the $150 so she can have her gas, even though she'll be quite capable of marching up to the fill station and, for 3000 and 3500 psi service pressure tanks, TELLING the monkey exactly how many PSI of O2 to stick in the tank before topping it with air to get the mix she wants - and for the common ones she dives, she will not even need a calculator as it'll be in her head. Oh, she'll demand a tank full of AIR to do the analyzer calibration on too - and watch that same monkey look at her like she's from mars, as nearly ALL of the dive shops I've been in calibrate in free air (which is typically off by 0.2-0.3% due to the humidity difference impact on the sensor.)
Dependant and "at risk" my tailfeathers.
At what point did I make any mention to your girlfriend needing an instructor, or a shop to help her gain the knowledge she needs to dive Nitrox?
If you are going to throw out an allegation like that, then please follow it up by telling me what rule you believe I have broken.
If I have broken a rule, then I will appologize to all the members.
Have I ever implied that my being an instructor makes me any better than anyone else? Yes, it makes me poorer.
My comments were in reference to the relative wisdom of taking a new diver who is so new that buoyancy control is a major issue, and add on what is obviously an overbearing boyfriend, and a gas (That at the time, I assume she knew nothing about) that she has never dove before.
I was by no means was questioning the intelligence of your girlfriend..... I was questioning your decisions with regard to how she dives, and what it seemed like was YOU making HER decisions.
I can see from most of your posts that you have a major chip on your shoulder when it comes to dive shops and instructors. That is your opinion to have, and I respect that. You proclaim that you love diving, and that you are concerned about the state of instruction, and you will scream at the top of your lungs how wrong it is, yet you don't do anything to correct all that you see as wrong.
I have seen nothing but complaints from you, and little in the way of solutions. I will be one of the first to say that there are bad instructors out there doing a poor job of training divers. That is one of the reasons why I refuse to associate myself with certain agencies that insist on lowering standards and training requirements to increase the market share. Instead of complaining about it, I chose to associate myself with one of the organizations that still believes in standards. I also associate myself with a group of instructors that is committed to training good responsible divers.
Once again, I will ask the question I asked, and you ignored before. If you are so easily able to identify what is wrong with dive training, and so willing to vocalize that belief, then why aren't you out there making a positive effort to change it by teaching yourself.
Yelling from the sidelines doesn't get you anywhere. Got a problem with the way things are being done, get in the @#%$@ING! GAME AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
More assumptions, and again, all unfounded.
"obviously an overbearing boyfriend"? You've been around the two of us and understand the dynamics of our relationship..... how?
Oh, you haven't and you don't, but you can play armchair psychologist. Stayed at Holiday Inn Express last night too, right?
Again, as I put the original position on the board, all the info was there - if you read it.
Perhaps you can explain exactly how a "new diver", making a dive on a Nitrox mix that is intrinsically safe for the depth involved, where there is a hard bottom above the MOD, is somehow "less safe" than making the same dive on air?
Get out of the "I'm gonna sell 'ya a class, by God" mentality for a moment and use your head!
First, IF one was to have a serious buoyancy problem and make a rapid ascent as a consequence would you prefer to do that with a LIGHTER or HEAVIER dissolved nitrogen load? Which would be SAFER?
Second, how does one have an O2 tox risk to manage if the MOD of the mix is approximately TWICE the planned depth?
Third, how is it "overbearing" to dive with someone who is new to the sport, obviously just got done with a class that taught damn near nothing about one of the critical issues related to dive safety, enhance the safety of that continuing experience by using a safer gas mix to breathe ("just in case") and provide that new diver with an example to follow and someone to buddy with - especially when that person trusts that IF there is a problem you can likely help them through it!
Would it be "preferred" to, instead, have that new diver just hire out a charter and jump in with a randomly-paired buddy, who might turn out to be ANOTHER random person from the same class (or one of equal quality), NEITHER of which has the first clue of what they're doing?
What rules were broken? Virtually every post you've made towards me in this thread had consisted of some form of ad-hominen attack and some claim of horrible violation of safety, without a shread of evidence from my own words to back up your assertions. That which you didn't read you construe in the most effective way that serves to find a means to bash. What the devil for, other than to stir up trouble?
This began as a rant (admitted) on the general state of dive training, with me observing that there is essentially zero attention paid to a very critical skill in what is sold as an open-water course. For that observation I was attacked, called all kinds of names, told I was a horrible dive buddy, etc.
The proof, however, that zero attention was paid to this aspect of diving was borne out this Saturday, when we did indeed dive together and spent the dive working on exactly that - buoyancy control. Having seen the original video I shot, and also seeing one of me on another dive the same day that another gent shot, the difference was instantly apparent to her. Between the two of us, we worked on the matter, and the difference - in ONE dive - was astounding.
No, this new divers is not an "ace" at buoyancy control now. But she can now manage to very nearly meet the standard I set forth in the other thread for "minimum" buoyancy control for new OW divers, and in a few more dives, I bet she easily meets it entirely.
The important point I was raising here is not that it wasn't mastered. It was that it was not even TAUGHT; you can't expect mastery of that which is never discussed or demonstrated!
That was, and remains, the central point - all the rest is window-dressing and ad-hominen deflection of the central issue.
As for "getting in the game", show me an agency that has objective standards and will permit non-shop-affiliated instruction, and I might consider it.
scubasean
Contributor
I would argue [sadly] that many of these same divers would dive the same way even if they had the best instructor money can buy. They wouldn't have the enthusiam for learning that would be required to improve.
WOW.....KARL....WOW...I READ POSTS ON THIS BOARD DAILY..BEEN DOING IT DAILY FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS.I USALLY DON'T COMMENT ON ANYTHING JUST LIKE THE READING..I SEE LOTS OF POSTS FROM YOU AND OTHERS TRYING TO SLAM YA BACK..EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION...BUT THIS THREAD IS A KARL RANT TO ME....#$$$%@#$DIVE INSTRUCTORS....YOUR CLEARLY SLAMING THE THE INSTUCTOR WHO TRAINED YOUR G/F...HOW HE DID SUCH A POOR JOB OF THIS AND THAT... WHAT I HAVEN'T SEEN YOU MENTION TO THE BOARD IS THAT THE SORRY SOB CAME TO YOUR HOUSE IN YOUR POOL TO SPEND EXTRA TIME (4 HOURS) WITH YOUR G/F..NOT A REQUIRMENT OF HIS JOB..THE SORRY SOB....I TOOK THE SAME CLASS WITH THE SAME INSTRUCTOR AND WAS ON THE SAME CHECK OUT DIVES AS YOUR G/F...WE DID THE SKILLS KARL...SIMPLE AS THAT...THEY WERE DISCUSSED IN CLASS MANY MANY TIMES..NOW I'M READIN THIS THREAD AND YOU MENTION NOTHING OF THE TIME THE GUY SPENT AT YOUR HOUSE ON HIS OWN TIME, JUST THAT HE SUCKED...WOW..DUDE YOU ARE RANTING.....YOUR G/F WAS NOT TOO COMFORTABLE IN THE WATER...SURLEY A DIVE PRO FROM OLD SCHOOL COULD SEE THE SIGNS...SHE MADE A COMON NEWBIE MISTAKE ON HER FISRT DIVE..BACK OFF THE INSTRUCTOR DUDE...IT WAS MY CHECK OUT DIVES TOO. I REMEMBER IT LIKE YESTERDAY VERY CLEARLY.. I REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE DOIN OUR SKILLS YOU WERE SWIMMING AROUND THE WRECK LOOKING WITH YOUR FLASHLIGHT....I COULD GO ON PICKING AT THE THE POSTS YOU PUT UP ON THIS THREAD, BUT WOULD RATHER NOT.. JUST WANTED TO SAY TELL THE WHOLE STORY KARL..NOT JUST THE PART THAT MAKES FOR RECREATIONAL RANTING THAT HAS OTHER MEMBERS WANTING TO CONTACT SSI...YOU EVEN GAVE THE INSTRUCTOR AN OPEN INVITATION TO DIVE ON YOUR BOAT ANYTIME...YOUR A REAL PAL KARL... ANYONE WANTING TO HEAR THE OTHER SIDE OF KARLS G/F'S DIVING SCHOOL IM ME OR ASK ON THIS THREAD I'LL BE HAPPY TO GIVE THE DETAILS.......KARL YOUR G/F WAS, IS A NICE LADY,,, MAYBE YOU SHOULD GET THE PICTURE THAT SHE IS NEW TO THE SPORT AND NOT PUSH HER TOO FAR TOO FAST...
ScubaRon
Contributor
- Messages
- 577
- Reaction score
- 4
You take a brand new diver with only four training sessions, on her first dive without an instructor, throw her in the water, tell her to go deeper than she has ever been or than the safe diving limit for OW divers is, get her all nervous about ruining visibility...and now it's the instructor's fault????
You have got to be kidding.
ScubaRon
You have got to be kidding.
ScubaRonSimilar threads
