Hello Steve!
09 Jul 95 22:01, Steve Elliot wrote to All:
 SE> Questions:
 SE> 1.  Does it show proper technical diving professionalism,
 SE> technique and procedures to attempt such a dive under these
 SE> circumstances, the surface interval of a recreational two-tank
 SE> dive -- without safety divers in the water to monitor the events,
 SE> assist in the event of problems, and/or provide eyewitness
 SE> accounts of the events, causes and results, and without
 SE> instruments or communications to monitor the progress of the
 SE> dive?
I think I've already made my position on unnecessary deep dives clear.  I 
think the deceased was an idiot.  The accident is nothing more than a 
demonstration of natural selection.....those more suited to life get to live, 
those less suited don't.
His preparation was in keeping with the quality of his endevour.
 SE> 2.  Is it proper to allow or attempt such a technical,
 SE> potentially fatal dive during the surface interval of a two-tank
 SE> recreational dive?  Does this give a positive and serious image
 SE> of the technical diving community to recreational divers?  Does
 SE> it show proper recognition and respect for the dangers associated
 SE> with technical diving?  Is it the proper environment to offer
 SE> safety, support, and documentation of such dangerous and
 SE> information-rich undertakings?  Does it leave an impression of
 SE> the technical community as safety-conscious and interested in the
 SE> advancement of knowledge about diving or as simply goal-driven
 SE> and recklessly adventurous?
You already know the answer to this.  The captain doesn't appear much 
brighter than the deceased, though he *is* still alive.  I hope the money was 
worth it.
 SE> 3.  Does  the technical diving community have established some
 SE> widely-accepted protocols for safety and documentation to make
 SE> the risks reasonable relative to the rewards and to
 SE> scientifically record data essential to our growth of knowledge
 SE> about humans' survival in the alien ocean environment?  Aren't
 SE> fewer divers lost today due to such diving rules and technical
 SE> practices?  Aren't we safer because of dive association rules,
 SE> dive tables and computers, all of which were developed as a
 SE> result of proper recording of the effects of the ocean
 SE> environment on our predecessors in this wonderful, but alien and
 SE> potentially hostile environment?
Depth limits were set as the results of accidents in days past.  Only a moron 
would ignore the lessons of history.  My grandfather was a Navy hard hat 
diver. In fact, he was one of the divers that raised the battleship U.S.S. 
Maine out of Havana Harbor.  Back in those days, they didn't have the benefit 
of extensive dive computers or even good dive tables.  People got hurt 
regularly. Personally, I prefer to get some benefit out of their suffering, 
so that those old Navy divers weren't crippled or dead for nothing.  Their 
sacrifice led to the creation of the Navy Decompression Tables.  Has anyone 
learned anything really new since then?  If anything, we are even more 
conservative these days because of doppler studies, etc.
The training organisations are entirely correct in their present handling of 
depth limits.  There always is that one idiot who figures the limits don't 
apply to them.  We read about them regularly.
Jay
PADI M-9033
--- MeanMail 2.15
---------------