Former FLL Now MSP Diver
Contributor
bwerb:
Sure is. Sounds more than qualified to write on the subject.
Marc
Rodale's pushing deep air.
- Thread starter MikeFerrara
- 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
Sure is. Sounds more than qualified to write on the subject.
Marc
IndigoBlue
Contributor
If everyone were trained and certified through hypoxic trimix (aka advanced trimix), then you would not have articles like that or threads like this.
Rodales normally has quite interesting articles targeted to the beginner diver. They are useful in that beginners are stimulated to think about what they would do in a given situation, one which they may not yet have experienced.
If air is the only breathing mix available in a certain location, and there is something to see at a depth deeper than X ft, then you can bet divers are going to dive with it deep. That is the problem.
I did not get a good sense of what the Rodales article was getting at from Mike's short snippits. That air is simpler to dive than helium mixes is a given, or else you would not need additional training to cert for helium mixes. That air is safer than helium mixes for a properly trained diver is probably not something that most helium trained divers would agree with.
I believe it makes more sense to encourage new divers to get some level of mixed-gas helium training diving if they want to dive deeper than X ft. What X is can be debated on and on. But even so, if there is no helium to be had at a given location, then you are merely back on square one.
You can argue all you want, and not get anywhere. Just like in this particular thread.
Rodales normally has quite interesting articles targeted to the beginner diver. They are useful in that beginners are stimulated to think about what they would do in a given situation, one which they may not yet have experienced.
If air is the only breathing mix available in a certain location, and there is something to see at a depth deeper than X ft, then you can bet divers are going to dive with it deep. That is the problem.
I did not get a good sense of what the Rodales article was getting at from Mike's short snippits. That air is simpler to dive than helium mixes is a given, or else you would not need additional training to cert for helium mixes. That air is safer than helium mixes for a properly trained diver is probably not something that most helium trained divers would agree with.
I believe it makes more sense to encourage new divers to get some level of mixed-gas helium training diving if they want to dive deeper than X ft. What X is can be debated on and on. But even so, if there is no helium to be had at a given location, then you are merely back on square one.
You can argue all you want, and not get anywhere. Just like in this particular thread.
OP
Michael Schlink:
Since the article wasn't meant to be a technical diving text, it's very possible that some of what was written was a simplification for the intended audience. That's why I invited the author here.
Still the rule of thirds and gas management in general is often misunderstood especially by recreational divers so I commented.
While you could argue that diving air is less complicated than trimix it doesn't negate the possible need for a seperate decompression gas or eliminate the possibility of breathing the wrong gas. We don't avoid breathing the wrong gas by only using one gas when we would do better with two or three. So, I commented on that too.
IndigoBlue
Contributor
MikeFerrara:
My BroInLaw gets Rodales, so I will need to borrow his copy next time I am over there to read it and see what it is really trying to say. Normally the target audience is beginners, and normally the articles make the beginners think.
You do not need to "argue" that diving air is less complex than trimix or nitrox. Its a no brainer.
What I am more interested in knowing is what was the author trying to say, and how did it get read by you, Mike, to the extent that it got your juices flowing enough to get you to indict it here on SB. I will find a copy, if I can.
Diving deep by beginners is not normally a good idea. With the right training and the right mix it is just a matter of risk management, however. I cannot imagine why a Rodales author would push a less desirable mix, for any given dive. So that is the question.
OP
IndigoBlue:
Maybe their not pushing the mix but some of the classes that teach deep-air.
The same reason the ran a promotional campaign for the SDI solo class prior to it's anouncement maybe?
Don't you remember all the solo diving articles in Rodale's just before that class was anounced? A lucky coincidence?
Somehow I don't think their goal is impartial jouralism.
Why would a mostly recreational diving magazine sponsor that tech diver boot camp?
You don't think that they expect technical divers are ever going to think of them as a serious technical diving magazine do you?
Former FLL Now MSP Diver
Contributor
MikeFerrara:
All? I just checked my back issues and I can only find one. Can you tell me the issues in case I missed them?
Thanks!
Marc
OP
FLL Diver:
Well shoot, there was more than one. I couldn't tell you all the titles or issues because I don't keep them.
Maybe when Machael Ange joins us we can ask him but I'll bet money there was more than one.
In fact when Rodale's was running their articles PADI posted their official stance on solo diving in response. They don't go to that much trouble over one article...honest there was more than one.
IndigoBlue
Contributor
MikeFerrara:
The only agency that promotes deep air currently is PADI-DSAT with their tech rec air/EANx diving. But then, that only happens to represent about 1/3rd of the diving industry, all "recreational."
Like I said, I want to read the article myself, and see what I end up reading in to it. Then I can compare and contrast with you, Mike.
OP
FLL Diver:
For starters start reading here
It looks like they combined several of the articles from the hard copy onto their web site.
Read all 6 pages and see if you find any names that might be found elsewhere in their endorsements, sponsorships ect...
I didn't read that close but I thought I saw something interesting.
Similar threads
