Blind CCR Depth Record Attempt

whats the point ???
a blind person cant see anything !!
this sport can have its hazards for people who can see,never mind people who
cant !!
sounds like an over inflated ego-trip ....!!
crazy, reckless,dangerous too..........

"Mark T" <false@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:mFmhf.3253$GC1.1047@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
> World Blind CCR Depth Record Attempt
>
> www.ccr100.co.uk
>
> Attempt in June 06 by the first blind diver to use an Inspiration
> rebreather.
>
> Cheers, Mark T.
>
>

j t wrote:
> whats the point ???
> a blind person cant see anything !!
> this sport can have its hazards for people who can see,never mind
> people who cant !!
> sounds like an over inflated ego-trip ....!!
> crazy, reckless,dangerous too..........

So? I don't have problems with people wanting to do things that
are supposedly impossible for them. It's the 'record' bit that urks me
and I'd say the same if he was fully fit and going for something else
as I have done about deep/deep air 'records'.

Not being blind I have no idea what his perception is like but a friend
of mine who is blind, and runs a small business, was a demon baby
sitter when we both had small children. He 'saw' round corners. His kids
could get away with less than mine.

nigelH

> whats the point ???
> a blind person cant see anything !!
> this sport can have its hazards for people who can see,never mind people
> who cant !!
> sounds like an over inflated ego-trip ....!!
> crazy, reckless,dangerous too..........

apart from agreeing with you............

is it not the same for a sighted person.
How much time will they have to see anything.

will it not push some boundary to encorage blind people to try
something new.

David.

Ps im not blind.

>> You mean, to you it's not. It clearly is to many.
>
> Yes I appreciate that it is for some, or possibly many. How do you
> compete? You could set up navigational challenges as in Stoney Cove, you
> could organise photographic competitions with the submarine theme, but how
> could you tun it into an Olympic sport?

I don't compete. I agree with Nigel. I probably could have been clearer on
that point. I just recognize that it's a competition for many.

> How about see who can up the fastest from (for example) 40m having been
> there for 40mins AND not get bent? This is on open circuit scuba breathing
> air of course, there would be Nitrox and Rebreather subcategories
> naturally.

Many compete on the basis of gas consumption.
Many compete on the basis of depth.
Many compete on the basis of wreck or cave penetration.
Many compete on the basis of number of dives.
Many compete on the basis of certification cards.

Some of us simply dive for the fun of it.

Lee

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jHhif.21928$i7.10300@bignews2.bellsouth.net.. .
> "Ken" wrote
>
>> I don't mind not having gone as deep, or as often, or be as qualified, or
>> anything else. But I detest being the one who everyone else is waiting
>> for to get in, or to get out, or the one who calls the dive through
>> consuming air the fastest, or whatever. Of course I have been the person
>> who calls the dive for any number of reasons, though I'd rather not be. I
>> certainly don't hold grudges against anyone who does call the dive.
>> Someone has to after all!
>
> Such things vary with location, diver experience and personal preferences.
> My diving is exclusively in warm water with good visibility. Those I dive
> with are, for the most part, experienced and responsible divers. The
> norm, for us, is to dive, more or less, as same ocean buddies. We usually
> start together, we usually stay within sight of one another, but we don't
> call a dive just because a buddy is out of sight, getting low on gas or
> for other non critical reasons. The norm is to let your buddies know
> you're heading up, that you're OK doing so without assistance and then go.
>
> While those with higher gas consumption or a lower tolerance for DCS risk
> (including everybody I know that uses a Suunto computer), probably don't
> like being the first to head up every dive, at least they don't have the
> added pressure of thinking they have cut someone else's dive short.
> Several people I dive with, who have higher gas consumption rates than the
> rest of us, dive with larger tanks or twins.
>
> While this is the norm for those I dive with, it's not a rule. While we
> try to agree how the dive will go before it starts, those who are less
> experienced are often reluctant to admit that they prefer a closer buddy
> relationship. When we're diving with someone whose diving skills aren't
> well known, we tend to watch, and stay, a bit closer. The same goes for
> any indication of increased risk before or during a dive. Experienced
> divers who prefer a closer buddy relationship are not usually a problem.
> They are more open in making their wishes known.

Agree 100% with all of the above. Diving around the UK is a tad different as
you will know. More than a few (usually about 6) metres away from your buddy
and you are often little more than a shadow. Closer formation finning is
mandatory. While a group may well go in together and split up once under, it
is customary for no splitting to occur beyond pre-arranged pairs. The same
re larger cylinders / pairs is as relevant on this side of the Atlantic as
on yours.

The problem with this arises when we in the UK go to warm water locations.
As we are unfamiliar with the local spots, the norm is to go with some or
other dive excursion company, and these are of course guided dives. The
guiode takes you through a guided tour of wherever you happen to be diving,
and for perfectly understamdable reasons likes to keep the group together.
Certainly at the start of a week#s diving, it is a case of "one up, all up"
though after the first few days diving a you suggest becomes more possible.

I know there is a "love it / hate it" affair with Suunto conservatism, and
from your post you appear to be less than enamoured with our Scandinavian
friends. The answer to prevent the conflicts you describe is for everyone in
a group to use them, or for no-one in a group to use them! While I have no
doubt that their conservatism is greater than others, other factors have
called the dive when I've been in a mixed computer group. Cold,
considerations of air consumption, the need to empty an ever-filling bladder
(remember - this is dry suit territory, the need to pee increases with cold,
and cold and dry suits go together!), headaches (crushingly cold water at
the temples) have been the typical limiting factors I've come across. Or
plain boredom. It's not always pretty down there.

Ken

"Ken" wrote

> The problem with this arises when we in the UK go to warm water locations.
> As we are unfamiliar with the local spots, the norm is to go with some or
> other dive excursion company, and these are of course guided dives.

Interesting that you would way that they are "of course" guided dives. That
does not apply to many of the places I visit. There are "of course" some
guided dives, but I tend to seek sites that don't require that. I much
prefer the pleasure of discovering something on my own to being shown what
someone else previously discovered. Only when we're there to see a specific
feature, do I prefer guided dives. The Devil's Throat, a swim through in
Cozumel was one of those instances.

> The guide takes you through a guided tour of wherever you happen to be
> diving, and for perfectly understamdable reasons likes to keep the group
> together. Certainly at the start of a week#s diving, it is a case of "one
> up, all up" though after the first few days diving a you suggest becomes
> more possible.

Most operators I've dealth with insist on buddy teams and, particularly on
drift dives, they tend to form groups, they also tend to allow buddy teams
to ascend without requiring the entire group to head up. When I first
encountered it, I was surprised to find operators that formed groups without
buddy teams that allowed individual divers to ascend alone. While I don't
mind diving as a same ocean buddy, I prefer to share my dives with others.
I tend to travel with a known buddy and to acquire a buddy, or buddies, even
when they are not required.

> I know there is a "love it / hate it" affair with Suunto conservatism, and
> from your post you appear to be less than enamoured with our Scandinavian
> friends.

The computers have a good reputation for being reliable and everybody that
uses them in gauge mode seems to love them. The conservative nature of the
algorithm doesn't bother those diving on air too much, but they get really
wierd as oxygen partial pressures reach or exceed 1.4. I almost always dive
nitrox.

> The answer to prevent the conflicts you describe is for everyone in a
> group to use them, or for no-one in a group to use them! While I have no
> doubt that their conservatism is greater than others, other factors have
> called the dive when I've been in a mixed computer group.

That's not a bad answer even with less conservative computers. I've been
diving a lot longer than my wife. My first computer was a US Divers Monitor
I. I still have it. As I recall, it was dead on the US Navy dive tables
for a first dive and close to them for repetitive dives. When my wife
started diving, I bought her an Oceanic computer. It was only a little more
conservative than mine for the first dive, but was noticably so for
subsequent dives. In a multi dive day, it didn't take long before the
difference became an annoyance. I solved the problem by buying an Oceanic
for myself. Sure, it limited me more than my previous computer had, but it
matched what my wife's computer did, allowing me to more easily schedule
diving for both of us.

These days, I either use my Oceanic or, for deco diving, my Dive Rite Nitek
duo. It is noticably more conservative than my Oceanic, but does not get
wierd at higher PPO2 and does handle two gases in the same dive.

> Cold, considerations of air consumption, the need to empty an ever-filling
> bladder (remember - this is dry suit territory, the need to pee increases
> with cold, and cold and dry suits go together!), headaches (crushingly
> cold water at the temples) have been the typical limiting factors I've
> come across. Or plain boredom. It's not always pretty down there.

All good points. Regarding the pee issue, however, I thought you guys (as
opposed to the ladies) had figured this one out. It wasn't that long ago
that I purchased, here, a Halcyon overboard discharge that I sent to
somebody in the UK. It seemed to be a good option for men. I have no idea
how women handle the same issues.

Lee

In article <Ov4if.30684$Y82.27255@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,
Lee Bell <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>> You mean, to you it's not. It clearly is to many.
>>
>> Yes I appreciate that it is for some, or possibly many. How do you
>> compete? You could set up navigational challenges as in Stoney Cove, you
>> could organise photographic competitions with the submarine theme, but how
>> could you tun it into an Olympic sport?
>
>I don't compete. I agree with Nigel. I probably could have been clearer on
>that point. I just recognize that it's a competition for many.
>
>> How about see who can up the fastest from (for example) 40m having been
>> there for 40mins AND not get bent? This is on open circuit scuba breathing
>> air of course, there would be Nitrox and Rebreather subcategories
>> naturally.
>
>Many compete on the basis of gas consumption.
>Many compete on the basis of depth.
>Many compete on the basis of wreck or cave penetration.
>Many compete on the basis of number of dives.
>Many compete on the basis of certification cards.
>
>Some of us simply dive for the fun of it.

And, some of us insist on calling this a hobby, not a sport!

-- mrr

>>>How about see who can up the fastest from (for example) 40m having been
>>>there for 40mins AND not get bent? This is on open circuit scuba breathing
>>>air of course, there would be Nitrox and Rebreather subcategories
>>>naturally.
>>
>>Many compete on the basis of gas consumption.
>>Many compete on the basis of depth.
>>Many compete on the basis of wreck or cave penetration.
>>Many compete on the basis of number of dives.
>>Many compete on the basis of certification cards.
>>
>>Some of us simply dive for the fun of it.
>
>
> And, some of us insist on calling this a hobby, not a sport!

On the other hand, it used to be a sport. At one time the national
championships were broadcast live on television: http://tinyurl.com/8uzqj

Tony

"Tony Johnson" wrote

>> And, some of us insist on calling this a hobby, not a sport!
>
> On the other hand, it used to be a sport. At one time the national
> championships were broadcast live on television: http://tinyurl.com/8uzqj

Fascinating.

Lee

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:cKCif.23461$i7.21619@bignews2.bellsouth.net

> "Tony Johnson" wrote
>
> >> And, some of us insist on calling this a hobby, not a sport!
> >
> > On the other hand, it used to be a sport. At one time the national
> > championships were broadcast live on television: http://tinyurl.com/8uzqj
>
> Fascinating.
>
> Lee

That'l be it then. THAT's where he must have been voted '3rd best Diver
in the World' then!!...and he still feels the need to advertise the
fact.




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG