Tips on starting diving doubles

[Nick_Radov]

OK, what I am taking away is that your stiff and inflexible safety rules reduce risk to virtually zero. Therefore, what happens if the virtual zero risk, let's say a very low probability/extreme consequence risk occurs. Example, one of your dive pairs seriously wedge themselves in a very narrow cave passage (despite them wearing the slick dive gear you fiercely promote)? Do you have a contingency plan for this?

I'm not a cave diver. You'll have to ask someone else about that.

But in general, if you try hard enough you can always think up some contrived unlikely scenario to justify bad choices about dive protocols and equipment. What happens if a shark bites my leg off. What happens if the dive boat is sunk by cruise missile. What happens if I'm caught in the middle of a Tiller Galloway novel. Etc. That plays well with the "Internet divers" who love to pontificate online, as if this was some sort of creative writing exercise or role-playing game. In the real world almost all risks can be avoided by following Rule #1 and Rule #2.

 

[old frogman]

I'm not a cave diver. You'll have to ask someone else about that.

But in general, if you try hard enough you can always think up some contrived unlikely scenario to justify bad choices about dive protocols and equipment. What happens if a shark bites my leg off. What happens if the dive boat is sunk by cruise missile. What happens if I'm caught in the middle of a Tiller Galloway novel. Etc. That plays well with the "Internet divers" who love to pontificate online, as if this was some sort of creative writing exercise or role-playing game. In the real world almost all risks can be avoided by following Rule #1 and Rule #2.

OK, you are not a cave diver. We have established something for future reference.

I am going to paraphrase from the international risk management standard ISO: 31000 and apply it to your reasoning.

The only way you can avoid a risk is to avoid the dive activity altogether. So, from what you have told me so far, rule #1 must be avoid diving and rule #2 must also be avoid diving.

In reality you can only reduce risk to a level that is as low as reasonably probable. You cannot avoid it.

You can reduce the risk level as follows:
1. Control the probability of the risk event occurring.
2. Control the risk effect/impact resulting from the risk event.

You do this by introducing risk control measures as follows:
1. To treat the respective causes of the potential risk event.
2. To introduce measures to reduce the effect/impact of the risk event.

Could rule #1 and rule #2 be risk event and risk effect/impact reduction controls?

Please enlighten me, what are rule #1 and rule #2?

 

[Nick_Radov]

Please enlighten me, what are rule #1 and rule #2?

I'm not allowed to say, I might get banned for using a naughty word. You can probably search and find it.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

@rjack321 I'm diving a set of old 72's, because I've heard the buoyancy is good on those. The valves are modern 3/4 inch standard. I'm using a pair of vintage bands, because they're what fit the tanks and I got them cheaply enough that, if I decide to switch to modern bands so I can use a manifold, or decide doubles are too cumbersome and not worth it altogether, I'm not going to cry over the lost funds. Spending $160 on piranha bands only to decide doubles hurt my back too much would be annoying. Other than that, the only remotely old piece of gear I'm using is a conshelf 21, which is a reg that I got for free and will stop using if/when parts ever stop being available.

Point being, it's not like I'm kludging together some system out of parts salvaged from a museum. If I wanna switch to a more modern setup, I simply buy a set of modern 7.5 inch bands, a manifold and valves, and slap them on a pair of AL 80's. I'm just not sure I want to do that yet, so I'm trying a simpler (in terms of requiring less equipment/less intensive setup) approach. Is that really so bad?

You can use 7-1/4" bands on 6.9" diameter steel 72's. The bands will tighten around the cylinder more drawing the center flat bracket in further, but since the the steel 72's are narrower the gap in between the tanks is wider so this allows the bands to squeeze in further. It balances out.
The valve holes will be the same measurement on center so a manifold matching the bands will work.

 

[John C. Ratliff]

Is that an MC-1 canopy?

No, it’s a S-10, with sliding risers and the oval cutout. The canopy is the same as the Army T-10 except for those modifications for steering.

SeaRat

 

[JoeTPhilly]

I did the search for Old Frogman so Nick doesn't get banned...The link does use the dreaded "S" word so parental guidance is suggested...

DIR Rules. Explained

After a recent thread, someone dropped me a line and asked me what are the DIR Rules, especially "Rule6" as it seems to be unofficial and a ...

teamfoxturd.blogspot.com