|
Post by caveman on Jun 27, 2004 15:29:05 GMT -8
Although I probably would not like some young PADI jock (with no real experience) teaching the course. caveman
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jun 27, 2004 18:01:43 GMT -8
I always dive vintage, because I haven't bought any "new" equipment since the 1980s. I also always dive a BC, but it is my own design, which integrates the harness of the BC into the diving harness. I patented it in about 1988, and have been diving it ever since. But I couldn't sell it to anyone, so it's a one-of-a-kind BC I call the Para-Sea BC.
My most recent "new" regulator is a Scubapro A.I.R. I, which breaths as nicely as anything probably on the market today.
I regularly dive two-hose regulators, and have recently purchased an AMF Voit MR-12. It's now divable, but I have put the second stage on my Trieste II, so that this regulator is now equipped with a similar, vintage octopus. Both breath very nicely.
I continue to be a wet suit diver, and will vary what I wear by the water temperature. Earlier this year, it was full wet suit with hood and gloves. Last weekend, it was the wet suit top with hood-only. The water temp. had reached 59 degrees, and was comparatively warm to me.
I too like the minimalist feeling, and the streamlining I get with vintage gear. Today's BCs do not impress me with the amount of water that they catch. It seems that many of today's "push button" divers are diving vertically only, and have forgotten how to swim horizontally without DPVs.
John
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jun 27, 2004 22:30:18 GMT -8
I forgot to say a few things in my last post. Vintage gear, if it is in good condition and was "top of the line" in its time (Aquamaster, Royal Aquamaster, Mistral, Calypso, MR-12, etc.) will function very well at depths to 120 feet and below. One of our qualification dives for the US Navy School for Underwater Swimmers in Key West (1967) was a dive to 120 feet using twin 90's with a DA Aquamaster and a "J" reserve. You should remember that the Cousteau team used the Mistral regulator in the early 1960s to depths of 340 feet of sea water during their Conshelf 2 expedition, and to similar depths in the 1970s.
I just picked up an AMF Swimaster MR-12 (the original, for $35 on e-bay); my data sheet on it from Swimaster states:
Now, just a word of advise. If you dive exclusively vintage gear, with no BC, be sure to put your weights on last. The DIR folks, and Technical Divers who do decompression diving, regularly wear their weights under their scuba harness. This really is a "no-no" when diving vintage gear without a BC, as you may need that buoyancy sometime, and dropping the weight belt is the only way to achieve it with vintage gear.
John
|
|
|
Post by caveman on Jun 28, 2004 16:25:05 GMT -8
I consider myself kind of a technical diver, and I would never wear my weights where I could not get rid of them IF the need should arise. I usually wear very little weight, and mostly doubles with no extra weight at all. It is also MY opinion that whether I am in vintage or contemperary gear that dropping weights is not a viable option. caveman
P.S. neither is running out of air
|
|
|
Post by caveman on Jun 28, 2004 16:27:34 GMT -8
Like Hal Watts says; Plan your dive and dive your plan. caveman
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jun 28, 2004 18:09:12 GMT -8
I forgot to mention that the Cousteau team, when they dived their Mistrals to deep depth, used heliox and dove with a DDC (deck decompression chamber) readily at hand.
Concerning dumping the weight belt, I have done it on two emergency situations in my 45 years of diving. On one, our team had to rescue a diver in trouble, and we dumped his weight belt (but one of our divers was kind, and swam it in). On another, my buddy and I were rolled by a 20 foot breaker, and had to stay in the water for about three and a half hours awaiting the US Coast Guard. They were mighty glad to see us bouncing in the stormy water, and said that we were their first live ones in a while. Boy, were we ever glad to see them too. Dumping the weight belt is a viable option is a number of situations. It is also in both US Navy and US Air Force training protocols.
Now, about Hal Watts; I would be very hesitant to quote him as my expert. I'm not sure what he's been doing for the last twenty years or so, but in the 1970s, he lost some divers during his dives. "Plan your dive, and dive your plan" was not a Hal Watts original idea; it came from the US Navy, NAUI and others many, many years ago.
John
|
|
|
Post by caveman on Jun 29, 2004 15:44:13 GMT -8
Two points. 1 I did not say that Hal said it first, and he is still teaching at the age of 69. Deep air, tri-mix, you name it and he teaches it. The accident was very tragic, and there were mistakes made. BUT,at this point in time he is quite possibly the safest instructor that I have ever had the privilage to know. 2.By saying drop weights is not a viable option I mean that I never haphazardly just hope nothing goes wrong. Like all of the tech and Dir divers I know and have had the pleasure to dive with , my weights, though they be few as possible are ALWAYS the easiest of my gear to discard..........caveman
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jun 29, 2004 21:14:27 GMT -8
Hal Watts left a very bitter taste in many diver's mouths in the 1970s. While I did not dive with him, I did know quite well a Orlando diver who had to do recovery diving after one of his dives. She said that she would never again dive with Hal Watts. It is the "deep air" diving that bothers me the most. I did say that have not known what he has been doing for the last twenty or so years though. I discussed this on the Scuba Forum a while back, and you can look there if you wish. I will not talk of it further here.
Above I told about the Cousteau team having dived the Mistral regulator deep. I have the book World Without Sun, by Cousteau and James Dugan. It is about their Conshelf 2 habitat experiments. This is a very good book on vintage equipment, and I would highly recommend it for anyone who wants a good read. In it Cousteau discusses his "deep cabin" men (who lived at a depth of 85 feet for a week; the Starfish House was at 33 feet) taking a deep dive.
On the way back, they nearly ran out of air, and had to have more bottles brought to them.
The interesting thing about this action is that the movie of the same name, and the book, show the Black Masks (they are wearing FFM with the double hose Mistral regulators attached, and have radio phones) exchange cylinders by taking off the Mistral from their used system, and putting it on the other, fully charged, cylinders. They did this, of course, underwater and simply continued using the same regulator.
These are some interesting tidbits about the use of the Mistral double hose regulator in extremely deep diving that I thought you would be interested in.
John
|
|
|
Post by caveman on Jun 30, 2004 16:32:17 GMT -8
I have one Royal aqua-master, but have heard so much good about the Mistral that I now want one of them.caveman
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 1, 2004 5:24:42 GMT -8
As to Hal Watts, anyone that still teaches deep air and will let his daughter set a deep air record (much like holding the record of russian roulette) is suspect in my mind (I am being polite). As for the drop weight issue, you should always be able to swim your rig to the surface, dropping weights should only be done on the surface to gain extra buoyancy, I have been tech diving since ’94 and none of my buddies ever put their weight belt under any of their gear. And finally, for those of you minimalists, try a back plate and a small streamlined wing (and proper weight), its like having no bc at all.
|
|
|
Post by caveman on Jul 1, 2004 14:36:48 GMT -8
You make my point well. However where can you take a tri-mix course without doing deep-air first.caveman
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jul 1, 2004 22:27:02 GMT -8
I've visited Hal Watts' website, and apparently what he calls "deep air" is a max of 230 feet. While that is over the recreation limits, it is not where he and his daughter went setting records (400+ feet).
I have been to 210 once; it was when I was working with the State of Florida on the Warm Mineral Springs Underwater Archiological Project. That was doable, and we had procedures set up, with decompression staged starting at 40 feet on air, with another air stop at 30 feet. At the next stops, we switched to oxygen. These were surface-fed regulators, and so decompression was pretty easy. We had also set up evacuation flights, potentially using Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service helicopters (this was 1973), so we had everything pretty well covered.
I've heard from others that Hal Watts is now a pretty safety conscious instructor, and that maybe he has learned from his earlier experiences. I hope so.
John
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 2, 2004 6:01:13 GMT -8
1. As far as I know, GUE and IANTD do not require deep Air to move to trimix (GUE for sure) 2. There is a whole laundry list of why not to dive air below 130' especially working dives, but the best thing to do is mix up a batch of trimix for a dive you have done on air and do it on the mix, you will realize just how bad off you were even if you "felt ok". 3. It is a lot easier to deco off trimix than air 4. something that is often forgotten in this discussion is that O2 is also narcotic at depth, with trimix you can cut the O2 down also, my mix down to 200 is 18/45, down to 260 is 15/60. THere has been a lot of false information out there about Trimix even from "experts" today. The key is to learn from someone that knows and really dives trimix and for deep diving you will never go back to air.
|
|