US Divers circa question

[BubbleFL]

Theres a dive shop in Pensacola called Scuba Shack, they are the ones that run Wetdream. Anyway they have tons of NOS (new old stock) in the store for sale. Including masks and horse collar reg sets. And their lobby is a pretty cool museum of old scuba equipment and stuff found diving for browsing. Give them a call or just stop buy if you in the area, prices can be alittle steep but where else can you find brand new in the box gear from years ago?

 

[domeport]

It looks like its from the early to mid seventies

 

[John C. Ratliff]

In the 1970, I think (probably late 1970s) AMF Voit came out with some really nice diagrams about mask visual fields:

Here is another diagram from a book I have titled Human Performance and SCUBA Diving, Proceedings of the Symposium on Underwater Physiology, which was a Scripps Institution of Oceanography from a April 10-11, 1970, by Cy Yttri, Director of Publications. In it, Glen H. Egstrom, Ph.D., presented a paper titled "Effect of Equipment on Diving Performance." He put together the following figure on mask visual fields.

Historically, as an underwater explorer and worker, man has accepted the mposed equipment limitations with little protest since he realized that even limited work capability was better than none. A look at some of the early efforts reveals that vision received attention prior to the 13th century, utilizing tortoise shell masks of some sort. Then, just afte 1900 came modern diving goggles and the inherent pressure compensation problems. It is interesting that in the year 1865 a single lens mask was made for a compressed air apparatus called the Aerophore, but that this advance had to be rediscovered for free divers about 1930, and even then it took several additional years before the realization that putting the nose inside the mask would permit equilization and reduce squeeze. All in all, face plates have remained virtually unchanged since the 30's and few makor problems have been resolved.

The face plate still provides tunnel vision, magnification, refraction, and in some cases, distortion. The sports diver adapts to these limitations and generally finds little fault with faceplates. However, the increasing demands on working divers should result in a closer look at the problem. An effort to measure the visual fields of representative existing mask configurations was conducted at UCLA. The results are summarized as follows:

The normal field for two eyes extends about 60-70 upward, 100 to each side, and 80 downward. The binocular field of vision has roughly the same upper and lower limits but extends about 60 to the side. A comparison of the figures shows that wile upper vision is relatively free of restriction the side restriction is considerable and the lower field is severely handicapped...

This will be continued after I copy the figure 3 from the book, either on this post or a subsequent one.

SeaRat

 

[steely_resolve]

Here are some photos of my mask collection. I have included my three tri-view masks, the Dacor, Scubapro, and Farralon masks. I forgot the Farralon one, so it is an individual photo. I really liked that one when it first came out, and used it until it was gone (a dive shop person put a non-return into the mask's skirt, instead of under the nose, which cause problems). The Scubapro was my favorite, as it was a great mask in black; I like it better than the silicone one I currently own. But right now the Dacor is my favorite.

The tri-window on the Farralon mask (orange) do function very well to provide further visibility sideways (this one has surgical tubing in the sides to make the mask fit my face, but it is still a bit of a fit problem). This is the biggest asset to the tri-view masks. The Dacor, because of its black skirt, does not have internal reflections.

SeaRat

John or other members

Would you be willing to sell your Farallon Tri-Vue mask as I am very interested in buying one for myself from someone.

Regards

Dave