Interesting article from John Chatterton

This forum is provided for the further edification of our club members seeking to improve their knowledge and diving skills. (recreational diving only)
User avatar
Paulicarp
Aquanaut
Posts: 646
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Paulicarp » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:18 am

spatman wrote:And really, this convo hasn't really been about DIR vs nonDIR. To me, it's been about interpreting what we all mean by self reliance.


Agreed, in part, but to put my lengthy previous post in context, I was largely taking issue with the way Chatterton interprets buddy diving and team diving.

User avatar
Norris
I've Got Gills
Posts: 4569
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:31 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Norris » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:23 am

Mortuus wrote:
Norris wrote:He is speaking about dives where carrying air for you AND your teammate is not preferred or even possible in some situations?


There is no dive Chatterton is doing where it is impossible to carry enough air for him and a buddy. He may not prefer to take the extra gas, as you state, but I just want to clarify that you can always have the extra gas available. It might make logistics more complicated, but it is doable.


Possible in a realistic scenerio mortuus, thanks for having the obvious part of the debate covered.

Image
**Pinch it, don't stick your finger through. You're just pinching a bigger hole.
CAPTNJACK - 2012**

User avatar
Mortuus
Amphibian
Posts: 859
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Mortuus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:37 am

It is quite realistic.... That picture certainly isnt. but there is no reason to not carry enough gas for two people on a 200, or even 300 ft dive. Or more. You don't have to dress up like a clown to carry that much gas either.

User avatar
Norris
I've Got Gills
Posts: 4569
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:31 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Norris » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:44 am

Mortuus wrote:It is quite realistic.... That picture certainly isnt. but there is no reason to not carry enough gas for two people on a 200, or even 300 ft dive. Or more. You don't have to dress up like a clown to carry that much gas either.



:goodpost:
**Pinch it, don't stick your finger through. You're just pinching a bigger hole.
CAPTNJACK - 2012**

User avatar
nwbobber
Extreme Diving Machine
Posts: 455
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:34 am

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by nwbobber » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:46 am

It seems to me that what he said was that if someone tried to take his reg, or tried to jump him for it, on a deep dive that he would fight you. This to me is not unreasonable. At the depths he is talking about this divers training has failed, he has slipped into panic, and is a huge risk that must be managed. I have no idea why this was never clarified on scubaboard, maybe JC enjoys the kind of banter that normally resides there, or perhaps he thought the discussion was valuable. I am just guessing that if you went to him and signaled OOA he might help. Just be organized about it.
If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading - Lao Tzu

User avatar
Mortuus
Amphibian
Posts: 859
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Mortuus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:53 am

I don't understand Norris. Are you trying to deny that team divers around the world very often carry out deep and/or long dives while still carrying ample reserves of gas? Because that just simply isn't the case. It is also a little disappointing to see someone recently made a mod reduced to using snide posts instead of engaging in civil debate, which had been going on just fine. Perhaps you would like to define "realistic" instead? That would actually contribute to the topic

User avatar
H20doctor
I've Got Gills
Posts: 4052
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:13 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by H20doctor » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:02 pm

i think if you commit to deep diving, you commit to the terms that you have a risk of dying if somethings goes wrong.. because of the Long deco your going to have to do, and if you have an air issue at deep depths, then chances are someone is going to get bent or hurt trying to get to the surface, thats why i dont like deep tech diving , its not worth my life to see something at a depth of 200 or 300 feet
NWDC Rule #2 Pictures Or it didn't Happen

User avatar
pensacoladiver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 1350
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by pensacoladiver » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:04 pm

Mortuus wrote:It is quite realistic.... That picture certainly isnt. but there is no reason to not carry enough gas for two people on a 200, or even 300 ft dive. Or more. You don't have to dress up like a clown to carry that much gas either.


Mortus , can I ask how many dives you have done to 200 or 300 feet? How many have you done in an area like South Florida with a 1 plus knot current while anchored with 500 feet of line out to get down the line to the wreck?

I won't even pretend to know how many bottles each team member would carry. But I know how many the guys I dive with carry.

Double 100s with 2 40s and a scooter. And often, that is a bitch to get down the line. That's to a wreck in 220.

Do I feel I have enough gas for my buddy? Sure, depending on when the problem arises and when he asks for help.

Is there a scenario he could get into where we could not get to 70 feet ish to get him on 50 percent... Probably.

User avatar
pensacoladiver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 1350
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by pensacoladiver » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:07 pm

nwbobber wrote:It seems to me that what he said was that if someone tried to take his reg, or tried to jump him for it, on a deep dive that he would fight you. This to me is not unreasonable. At the depths he is talking about this divers training has failed, he has slipped into panic, and is a huge risk that must be managed. I have no idea why this was never clarified on scubaboard, maybe JC enjoys the kind of banter that normally resides there, or perhaps he thought the discussion was valuable. I am just guessing that if you went to him and signaled OOA he might help. Just be organized about it.



As posted earlier.... Very well put. Funny how people choose to miss that part.

User avatar
H20doctor
I've Got Gills
Posts: 4052
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:13 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by H20doctor » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:08 pm

pensacoladiver wrote:
Mortuus wrote:It is quite realistic.... That picture certainly isnt. but there is no reason to not carry enough gas for two people on a 200, or even 300 ft dive. Or more. You don't have to dress up like a clown to carry that much gas either.


Mortus , can I ask how many dives you have done to 200 or 300 feet? How many have you done in an area like South Florida with a 1 plus knot current while anchored with 500 feet of line out to get down the line to the wreck?

I won't even pretend to know how many bottles each team member would carry. But I know how many the guys I dive with carry.

Double 100s with 2 40s and a scooter. And often, that is a bitch to get down the line. That's to a wreck in 220.

Do I feel I have enough gas for my buddy? Sure, depending on when the problem arises and when he asks for help.

Is there a scenario he could get into where we could not get to 70 feet ish to get him on 50 percent... Probably.


ive been on the anchor line , with a Magnus :supz: :taco:
NWDC Rule #2 Pictures Or it didn't Happen

User avatar
spatman
I've Got Gills
Posts: 10881
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:06 am

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by spatman » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:09 pm

Mortuus wrote: It is also a little disappointing to see someone recently made a mod reduced to using snide posts instead of engaging in civil debate


That's because you are relatively new here. :angelblue:

Guys, stop bickering. Go diving. I actually think you two would like each other IRL.
Image

User avatar
Norris
I've Got Gills
Posts: 4569
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:31 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Norris » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:15 pm

I'm going to steer away from this as I think I am being somewhat misunderstood. My whole point is that we are talking about very different scenerios and I also agree that the initial blog was somewhat of a troll.
However it woke people up and got some good ole SCUBA threads going. It once again proved that many divers are loyal to their chosen paths and they are willing to debate those paths. But most of all it strenghtens the fact that there is not only one way to do things.

Mortuus I dont understand why you are getting so defensive and choosing to try and debate with me. I think I was very clear on my comments and stand behind my opinion. Please quote where I spoke about team diving and stated that they dont do technical dives.

Your initial response to me challenged my statement about certain scenerios where carrying gas for you AND a team mate was unrealistic (my apologies for using possible). The dive that John initially posted about was a perfect example of this. I didnt understand why you quoted me with something so obvious as whether or not someone COULD bring enough air, when of course its "POSSIBLE". This didnt seem like a "civil" debate, almost felt like I was being called out.

I love this community and accepted being a mod as I enjoy what NWDC is. A place where people can meet to dive, set up dives, and debate from time to time. I try to hold a neutral stance on diving styles as a whole as there are many possibilities for mud slinging as people are commited to their choices, which I assume is why you might be defensive.

So please PM me and we can speak to our differences if you would like, as I am not going to taint this discussion with something you may have against me.
**Pinch it, don't stick your finger through. You're just pinching a bigger hole.
CAPTNJACK - 2012**

User avatar
Jeff Pack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Jeff Pack » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:43 pm

:goodpost:
=============================================

- I got a good squirt in my mouth
- I would imagine that there would be a large amount of involuntary gagging
- I don't know about you but I'm not into swallowing it

CCR discussion on Caustic Cocktails.

User avatar
Mortuus
Amphibian
Posts: 859
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Mortuus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:03 pm

I am sending you a PM, but I also do want to publicly declare I was not in any way trying to challenge you: simply clarify what you had said. Thank you for that post. That is MUCH better, and that is the sort of stuff I like to see from mods. I am sorry you felt you were under attack in any way

User avatar
Joshua Smith
I've Got Gills
Posts: 10228
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:32 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Joshua Smith » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:08 pm

Mortuus wrote:
Norris wrote:He is speaking about dives where carrying air for you AND your teammate is not preferred or even possible in some situations?


There is no dive Chatterton is doing where it is impossible to carry enough air for him and a buddy. He may not prefer to take the extra gas, as you state, but I just want to clarify that you can always have the extra gas available. It might make logistics more complicated, but it is doable.

I beg to differ. Do the math on bailout for a 500' dive. The logistics are beyond ridiculous.
Maritime Documentation Society

"To venture into the terrible loneliness, one must have something greater than greed. Love. One needs love for life, for intrigue, for mystery."

User avatar
LCF
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5697
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 5:05 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by LCF » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:18 pm

Well, a lot of it has to do with how you want to do the dive, and what you are willing to do for preparation. Diving the Doria, from the stuff I've read, was always a gamble against changing weather conditions, so one of the biggest safeties, caching bottles, may not have been very possible. I don't know -- I've never dived the Doria, and don't even want to.

I do know that a team of divers I know personally dove on, and did documentation of the wreck of the Atlanta, which lies in over 300 feet of water. And knowing the people, I also know that gas was planned so that each diver carried enough, or had easy access to enough bailout (since they were on RB80s) to get to the next gas supply. I'm also quite sure the logistics were frightful and a lot of preparation diving was done, and safety divers were on site. This is quite different from the person who gets on a charter boat and decides to do a 200 foot dive with the guy on the opposite side of the aisle, where days (or more) of preparation hasn't taken place, and there's no guarantee that the two people have calculated safety reserves in the same way -- they may not even be on the same gas!

You can do major, deep, challenging wreck diving in a way that manages safety reserves and allows team members to help each other. You can also do it with each diver planning and understanding that he's on his own and has to get himself out of whatever trouble he gets himself into, and that seems to be the way Mr. Chatterton developed his deep dives. But I think saying that you HAVE to dive that way because it isn't possible to do the dives any other way may apply to some exploration diving into very small, silty cave passages, and perhaps some artifact diving where you KNOW you are going to blow the viz. But it doesn't apply to the vast majority of cave or wreck diving.
"Sometimes, when your world is going sideways, the second best thing to everything working out right, is knowing you are loved..." ljjames

User avatar
Mortuus
Amphibian
Posts: 859
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Mortuus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:25 pm

Best thread recovery ever on NWDC :partyman:

User avatar
Marc
Extreme Diving Machine
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:51 am

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Marc » Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:01 am

Joshua Smith wrote:
Mortuus wrote:
Norris wrote:He is speaking about dives where carrying air for you AND your teammate is not preferred or even possible in some situations?


There is no dive Chatterton is doing where it is impossible to carry enough air for him and a buddy. He may not prefer to take the extra gas, as you state, but I just want to clarify that you can always have the extra gas available. It might make logistics more complicated, but it is doable.

I beg to differ. Do the math on bailout for a 500' dive. The logistics are beyond ridiculous.


Don't totally agree. A pain in the balls? Yes. But if you have-and I would-safety divers on a 500' dive, the logistics would be manageable.
Reporter: "The helmet has a special meaning for many drivers. How important is it to you?"

Raikkonen: "It protects my head."

User avatar
Mortuus
Amphibian
Posts: 859
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Mortuus » Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:50 am

Blitz wrote:
Joshua Smith wrote:
Mortuus wrote:
Norris wrote:He is speaking about dives where carrying air for you AND your teammate is not preferred or even possible in some situations?


There is no dive Chatterton is doing where it is impossible to carry enough air for him and a buddy. He may not prefer to take the extra gas, as you state, but I just want to clarify that you can always have the extra gas available. It might make logistics more complicated, but it is doable.

I beg to differ. Do the math on bailout for a 500' dive. The logistics are beyond ridiculous.


Don't totally agree. A pain in the balls? Yes. But if you have-and I would-safety divers on a 500' dive, the logistics would be manageable.


Call me crazy, but I love planning logistics for stuff. Or at the very least, reading about how others have planned them =P

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7760
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by CaptnJack » Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:01 am

Mortuus wrote:Call me crazy, but I love planning logistics for stuff. Or at the very least, reading about how others have planned them =P


I have yet to see a plan survive impact with the water. Despite this I haven't had a problem carrying enough gas for me, a buddy plus a bunch in reserve of that to boot.
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

User avatar
Joshua Smith
I've Got Gills
Posts: 10228
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:32 pm

Re: Interesting article from John Chatterton

Post by Joshua Smith » Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:34 pm

Blitz wrote:
Joshua Smith wrote:
Mortuus wrote:
Norris wrote:He is speaking about dives where carrying air for you AND your teammate is not preferred or even possible in some situations?


There is no dive Chatterton is doing where it is impossible to carry enough air for him and a buddy. He may not prefer to take the extra gas, as you state, but I just want to clarify that you can always have the extra gas available. It might make logistics more complicated, but it is doable.

I beg to differ. Do the math on bailout for a 500' dive. The logistics are beyond ridiculous.


Don't totally agree. A pain in the balls? Yes. But if you have-and I would-safety divers on a 500' dive, the logistics would be manageable.


True enough. We use safety divers for almost all of our 2-300' dives. Its a different animal on closed circuit though. And of course, Chatterton's comments were about OC. Our policy is that anyone on the team should feel free to take BO gas from anyone else on the team.
Maritime Documentation Society

"To venture into the terrible loneliness, one must have something greater than greed. Love. One needs love for life, for intrigue, for mystery."

Post Reply