SCUBA-SE Archives

November 2002

SCUBA-SE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reef Fish <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SCUBA or ELSE! Diver's forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 00:25:30 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
On Sat, 2 Nov 2002 15:04:33 -0600, Mike Wallace <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


>> There are considerably more TRIMIX diving fatalities than deep air.
>
>Care to cite your sources for this statement?

Lots of sources.  Hey, I am on vacation and have no desire to do any
extended debate or counting game.  But let's start with an easy one
for you and Strike:  Tell me how many Trimix fatalities there are in
the last FIVE YEARS, and I many be able tell you how many or perhaps
even which ones you've missed.  :-)

List them!  Start with 2002, and go backwards.  I don't know of many
"deep air" (see below) fatalities in the past 5 years.


We can argue the below MUCH later :-)  because I ain't got time while
I am on vacation.

>> Check the fatality record of the Andrea Doria alone -- a SHALLOW dive
>> on AIR even by my standards -- 200 fsw, if the EXPOSURE time is SHORT.
>
>The majority of the fatalites, that I have read about, have been air dives.

You may be right there.  But that doesn't count as "deep air" in my
book anyway unless they go below 218 fsw (1.6 ppo2) which is the
traditional limit considered "toxic".  Even DAN sactions the use of
1.6 ppo2 depth for nitrox, as of 2001.

-- Bob.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2