Adobo:
Well, when I have the wealth and depth of your experience, I may change my mind.
And also, learn to read for comprehension.
Vandit
When does "Gas Management" get taught?
- Thread starter Peter Guy
- 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
Well, when I have the wealth and depth of your experience, I may change my mind.
And also, learn to read for comprehension.
Vandit
O2BBubbleFree
Contributor
vkalia:
Well, he can't plan to use the bottle if he doesn't know it's size, can he?
I once asked him, "I've read references to several different gas planning methods. What do you teach?" In reply he started talking about NDLs, and the wonders of Nitrox...
I mentioned him to illustrate that some instructors out there don't know gas planning.
Whether he is an unsafe or bad diver I can't answer, but I wouldn't take a class from him.
We're debating what an OW student should know about gas management. Wouldn't you agree that any instructor should have it down pat?
Adobo
Contributor
vkalia:
Oh, come on. Where is the love?
You are arguing against making basic information available to students for fear of what, that they are incapable of remembering rudimentary math.
You have two choices, you can either discuss your point using logical reasoning as to why you believe somehting is right or wrong and educate a newbie.
Edit: Or you can say I am wrong because I don't have your "wealth" of knowledge and leave it at that.
Your choice.
BTW, do you teach nitrox? Because you know, there is math involved there too. Do you find your clients to be overwhelmed with that material too? If so, do you decide to skip the math and teach them just to get one specific mix and follow one MOD?
darkpup:
Jason,
First, I'll refer you to my post to RJack outlining the 2 different things that I am saying.
Second, my problem is not so much with teach math. Teach differential calculus, if you want. But if you want to teach safer gas planning, it makes sense to start with a basic level of planning that is accessible to *everyone* - and then add in the details on top of that.
The devil is in the details - what seems like a minor detail to you is, IMO, something that can make or break whether or not gas planning becomes accessible and widely practised.
If you are saying that better gas planning is needed - and I agree it is - then the solution lies in teaching a degree of gas planning that everyone can remember. And the solution lies in linking the minimum amount of detail with the students training level (ie, teach some stuff for OW, teach some more stuff for AOW and teach a lot more for Deep Spec).
Re. your other statement:
What has happened here? 1 person has 50 bar and the other has 0? How did that happen? In most diving instances, when the first person in the buddy team hits 50 bar, the other will have 50 or more. They thumb the dive and head up. Plenty of air - no problems. You and I both agree on that.
If you are in a situation where 1 buddy has 50 bar at 30m, and at that *precise* point, the other buddy has a catastrophic gas failure, then I'll humbly posit that skipping a safety stop in this situation wont be the end of the world. 50 bar should get both of them to the surface.
If you are in a situation where 1 buddy has 50 bar and the other buddy has 0 b/c he forgot to watch his air, hen I'll humbly posit once again that it isnt better gas planning that is needed, but a swift kick upside the buddy's rear end, to remind him to watch his SPG.
Would knowledge of better gas planning be worth it? Absolutely. That doesnt change the fact that the humble ole recreational rule works spankingly well for the most part, and has withstood the test of time. It is possible to make an argument for better gas planning, without completely disparaging the existing method and calling it "completely worthless".
Cheers,
Vandit
O2BBubbleFree:
I agree with you that it is embarrassing for him to be an instructor and not know these things. It isnt so much due to the lack of awareness of the bottle size, as the mindset it reveals.
An instructor should always strive to be a role model in every area. When I taught martial arts, I made damn sure none of my students could ever beat me. When I dive, I make sure I maintain and update my knowledge of all things related to diving and the ocean (including conservation, environment, health & safety, and more). Any instructor who doesnt do shows a lack of committment and even self-respect.
*HOWEVER* - if he just has the bottle for his own use as a bail-out bottle, I can see how it may not matter much if the exact size is unknown, as long as he knows it meets his need. Dodgy reasoning, I know - I am just anal-retentive about logical extrapolation
Vandit
Deleted -- Posted The Same Thing Twice.
Adobo:
Great ghu, does anyone read anything around here? For the last time - I AM NOT ARGUING AGAINST MAKING BASIC GAS PLANNING AVAILABLE TO STUDENTS.
Let me repeat that: I think gas planning should be taught to students.
Let me repeat what I've said in every post I've written, and I'll even type it slowly: I *support* teaching gas planning. I even teach it (read my very first post in this thread. No really - go back, read it and then continue).
Read my response to Jason and RJack on where I am coming from.
From our first discussions on trim, etc. a few months ago, I have always responded to your arguments on their merit. And I didnt start knocking your experience until you started trivialising mine.
I dont claim to be a diving guru, but at our dive shop, we go through a reasonable number of divers every season. I also travel extensively, and dive a lot elsewhere (usually alone, and usually end up diving with beginners). Between our dive center and my travels, I dive with between 600-1000 divers every year - and most of them are beginners.
So whether or not you agree with my assertion that a vast majority of divers are incapable of remembering the math behind gas planning, atleast extend me the courtesy of assuming that I am not pulling this out of my rear.
I've seen muppets that dive nitrox who would be at sea if they didnt have their dive computers. More power to the instructors who certify them - I am not one of them.
I do teach nitrox. I can, and do, refuse to certify people if they show an inability to perform the math. I point-blank tell some students that they are not ready to dive nitrox (the most recent one was last week). I cannot do that with OW or AOW. There is a distinction.
Vandit
It's really amazing how much we actually agree on this stuff. We're quibling over about 3% of the actual content IMO.
But is this the best way to plan for an emergency. IMO, in this situation you have 3 key areas to focus on: the emergency, the ascent, and any safety stops.
My solution would be to increase the reserve gas supply to give more time to handle the emergency, do a nice slow ascent, and include a safety stop.
Your solution is to stick with the rule of thumb of 50 bar because in that situation getting to the surface is more important than drowning, and skipping the ascent / safety stops won't kill you.
To each their own. Would the divers survive following both of our plans? More than likely yes, and that's what's really important. I just prefer my way for various personal reasons.
A serious *** whooping is more like it.
Did I actually say that your 50 bar rule is worthless? I'm sorry if I did, and probably said it out of frustration.
For the most part the 750 psi / 50 bar rule works for most recreational dives. Especially those above 60' / 20 m. It's when you start going deeper that I have a problem with it. 750 psi / 50 bar is plenty of gas for 2 divers to make a safe ascent from 60' while including a safety stop. When you use the same rule for 100' to 130', then you have to skip things to survive. If all OW graduates stayed above 60' until after taking aditional classes, then this would be a great way to go. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way as experienced by my first post OW dive to 120' in Hawaii at the age of 16 because the DM said it would be safe.
Does the rule work for depths from 0' to 130' all of the time? Most of the time yes, but not always.
Why not make the rule of thumb 750 psi for dives above say 70', 1000 psi to 100', and 1400 psi for dives past 100'?
Are 3 numbers really that difficult to remember?
What about teaching a rule of thumb where you add 50 psi for every 10' below 60', and 100 psi below for every 10' below 100'?
Is this really beyond the average diver to understand?
I still have a problem with not teaching the why's of how all this works, but that's more my problem than yours.
And for the record, a lot of us have been attacking you lately. I know from our past conversations that you are a tech diver, and have likely forgotten more about diving than I've learned in my life time. Your passion for teaching and scuba in general is quite clear from your posts.
Don't take this stuff personally. Don't get me wrong, I like to stir the pot from time to time, but I'm really enjoying the conversation.
~ Jason
vkalia:
But is this the best way to plan for an emergency. IMO, in this situation you have 3 key areas to focus on: the emergency, the ascent, and any safety stops.
My solution would be to increase the reserve gas supply to give more time to handle the emergency, do a nice slow ascent, and include a safety stop.
Your solution is to stick with the rule of thumb of 50 bar because in that situation getting to the surface is more important than drowning, and skipping the ascent / safety stops won't kill you.
To each their own. Would the divers survive following both of our plans? More than likely yes, and that's what's really important. I just prefer my way for various personal reasons.
vkalia:
A serious *** whooping is more like it.
vkalia:
Did I actually say that your 50 bar rule is worthless? I'm sorry if I did, and probably said it out of frustration.
For the most part the 750 psi / 50 bar rule works for most recreational dives. Especially those above 60' / 20 m. It's when you start going deeper that I have a problem with it. 750 psi / 50 bar is plenty of gas for 2 divers to make a safe ascent from 60' while including a safety stop. When you use the same rule for 100' to 130', then you have to skip things to survive. If all OW graduates stayed above 60' until after taking aditional classes, then this would be a great way to go. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way as experienced by my first post OW dive to 120' in Hawaii at the age of 16 because the DM said it would be safe.
Does the rule work for depths from 0' to 130' all of the time? Most of the time yes, but not always.
Why not make the rule of thumb 750 psi for dives above say 70', 1000 psi to 100', and 1400 psi for dives past 100'?
Are 3 numbers really that difficult to remember?
What about teaching a rule of thumb where you add 50 psi for every 10' below 60', and 100 psi below for every 10' below 100'?
Is this really beyond the average diver to understand?
I still have a problem with not teaching the why's of how all this works, but that's more my problem than yours.
And for the record, a lot of us have been attacking you lately. I know from our past conversations that you are a tech diver, and have likely forgotten more about diving than I've learned in my life time. Your passion for teaching and scuba in general is quite clear from your posts.
Don't take this stuff personally. Don't get me wrong, I like to stir the pot from time to time, but I'm really enjoying the conversation.
~ Jason
Jason,
I dont take it personally at all - and I dont think anyone has been attacking anyone (my little lapse on Adobo excluded. I blame that on my rec.scuba ancestry, but we've kissed and made up there, I think/hope
).
To be honest, given my druthers, I'd be very happy to teach gas consumption calculations to anyone and everyone. When I started teaching, I actually used to do so for OW.
Also, I have to admit that I am stirring the pot a little as well, trying to get folks to think through their pet dogmas.
While I am all in favor of tech training (the diving discipline and greater knowledge you learn from it really takes one's diving skills to a whole new level), it gets my hackles up when I see people who have been exposed to a little tech stuff turn around and starting to denigrate everything recreational.
Take an example: perfect horizontal trim for reef diving is one of the things that doesnt make sense to me. For tropical diving, one has to look all around - in front, below and above. Being horizontal gives me a crick in my neck - I find it easier to be slightly inclined. Is that the most efficient way to dive? Probably not. But it is the most comfortable - and I've started seeing a lot more mantas since I modified my trim to be angled.
But I digress. Getting back to the topic at hand, you are right - we dont actually disagree, we are just talking about different parts of the picture. And I have to admit that I am probably over-dramatizing the onerousness of the math to make my point.
As before, it's been fun and interesting having this discussion with you and the others.
Safe diving,
Vandit
I dont take it personally at all - and I dont think anyone has been attacking anyone (my little lapse on Adobo excluded. I blame that on my rec.scuba ancestry, but we've kissed and made up there, I think/hope
).To be honest, given my druthers, I'd be very happy to teach gas consumption calculations to anyone and everyone. When I started teaching, I actually used to do so for OW.
Also, I have to admit that I am stirring the pot a little as well, trying to get folks to think through their pet dogmas.
While I am all in favor of tech training (the diving discipline and greater knowledge you learn from it really takes one's diving skills to a whole new level), it gets my hackles up when I see people who have been exposed to a little tech stuff turn around and starting to denigrate everything recreational.
Take an example: perfect horizontal trim for reef diving is one of the things that doesnt make sense to me. For tropical diving, one has to look all around - in front, below and above. Being horizontal gives me a crick in my neck - I find it easier to be slightly inclined. Is that the most efficient way to dive? Probably not. But it is the most comfortable - and I've started seeing a lot more mantas since I modified my trim to be angled.
But I digress. Getting back to the topic at hand, you are right - we dont actually disagree, we are just talking about different parts of the picture. And I have to admit that I am probably over-dramatizing the onerousness of the math to make my point.
As before, it's been fun and interesting having this discussion with you and the others.
Safe diving,
Vandit
Adobo
Contributor
vkalia:
My mistake Vandit. In fact you do say you are for gas planning. I'm not clear what you mean by gas planning but I would think it includes:
- usable gas
- turn pressure
- rock bottom
If you read some of the earlier replies in this thread, you will agree that there are several people within this thread alone who have clearly not been exposed to these concepts. Some of those people have, according to their profiles, roughly 10 times the "wealth of experience" that I have. How they figure out when it is time to turn around to get back to the anchor line, I have no idea. Perhaps after logging a great deal many more dives, it will come to me.
If I may, I'd just like to point out that statements like the one you made above led me to believe that you are against teaching gas planning. So please forgive a newbie for making some bad assumptions.
Similar threads
