HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.spires-l
Date:         Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:26:25 EDT
From:         "Elsa Nadler, Sponsored Program" <U2B8C@WVNVM.BITNET>

Help,
I am sure that if there is a way to do what I need to do, someone out
there will know how to do it.
    I am in the process of building a database that uses data from
a DBase file that are dumped in ASCII fixed column format.  I collect
 the flat files using FTP and write input formats for all the various
pieces.  So far I've figured out how to handle everything but the date
portion, and this one is a real bear.  So here is the problem:
    The SPIRES database has a date element that can occur as many as
four times.  The data I retrieve has the record key in the first 5
columns and the date (in metric format with no delimiters) in columns
6-13, as follows:
       0002419921231
       0003819930101
       0003819930401
       0003819930701
       0003819931001
       0012519920715
       0012519921215
and so on.
    I want to replace any pre-existing values in my database with the
new dates--up to four of them.  I also need to get the date format into
something SPIRES will handle on input.  So I need to put the date
associated with the first occurrence of a record key into occurrence
number 0 in my database and add dates incrementally (up to occurrence
number 3) until I get to a new record key, at which point the process
must begin afresh.  However, I think the biggest problem is the format
of the date.  Can anyone shed some light on this?
             many, many thanks in advance for sharing your expertise

Elsa Nadler
e-mail: U2B8C@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU
   +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For all knowledge and wonder (which is the seed of knowledge) is an
impression of pleasure in itself.       --Francis Bacon (1605)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
From: adb@herboid.uucp (Anthony DeBoer)
Subject: Re: To compute or not to compute
Organization: Linda's Dragon Memorial Society
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:41:46 GMT

awpsys@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In article <SCUBA-L%92100413261595@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU>, 
> RFLNG@CLEMSON.BITNET (Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)) writes:
>>In response to 21329KAD@MSU.BITNET (Kim.Dyer) on
>>
>>...  Note that Tables not only credit you NOTHING when you do your
>>safety stop (when you're outgassing) you treat such time as if you were
>>still diving at your maximum depth for that dive -- a gross distortion
>>of BT accounting.
>>
>Every instructional book on tables that I have seen states that the
>bottom time of a dive begins when you leave the surface heading
>for the bottom and ends when leave the bottom and head for the 
>surface. Safety stops are considered part of the ascent and do not
>need to be counted as part of the bottom time.

Both the U.S. Navy and DCIEM tables show bottom time ending when you begin
your direct ascent.  DCIEM even includes time ascending to a stop in the
stop time.  However, the NAUI instructor I've taught with always made a
point that the students should include their safety stop time (3 minutes)
and ascent time in their bottom time as an additional safety margin.
Surface-to-surface time would be used as bottom time in calculating your
end-of-dive letter group.

Personally, I have sufficient (dis?)respect for the U.S. Navy tables that
I'd always include such safety margins diving with them; there's not much
room for error there.  I'm much more comfortable with the DCIEM tables,
although I must confess to being a computer diver (with a safety stop
margin) when the interesting diving starts.
-- 
Anthony DeBoer   NAUI # Z8800, D5482 | Why watch TV, when Netnews provides
adb@herboid.uucp | adb@geac.com      | 100% of your daily requirement for
uunet!geac!herboid!adb               | trivia and meaningless entertainment?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Sat, 10 Oct 1992 09:39:00 EDT
From:         "Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)" <RFLNG@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: To compute or not to compute

In response to "(Craig Campbell)" <craig@CATTNTS.CANADA.NCR.COM> on fall
back on tables when the computer fails during a dive, I said

>>More importantly, if you started your dive deep and gradually work your
>>way up in a MULTILEVEL dive (as nearly all my dives are),  after a certain
>>time interval, no fall back to tables is possible]

Craig asks:

> How so impossible?  My backup tables go as far as 250ft (as I recall), with
> bottom times in excess of an hour.

Ah, the key phrase of what I said is "after a certain time interval".  The
impossible part is having ENOUGH AIR to execute the decompression schedule
your little "backup tables" are telling you to do, if you have one along.

My one-page U.S. Navy standard air decompression table tabulates only up to
190', 60 min., WELL BEYOND the max. depth and BT of my one-tank dives.  :-)
But that depth and time would call for a decompression schedule (5 stops,
beginning at 50') of 180 minutes total, plus ascent time.  If you've already
dived 60 minutes on the one tank on your back, beginning at max depth 190',
you're not going to have much air left (no matter how good an air-miser
you are 8-().  THAT's the impossible part.

Back to the Real World -- one of my recent no-decomp dives recorded 156 fsw
max/60 min. on the computer (I had 500 psi remaining from an 80AL tank
filled to 3000 psi at the beginning of the dive).  Let's say my computer
failed at the 50-minute mark (with 800 psi remaining), the "fall back" to
Navy tables would have called for the following decompression schedule:

                       Depth        Time (minutes)

                        40                2
                        30               16
                        20               23
                        10               55
                                       ------
                                Total =  96  + ascent time

No way, Jose (I mean Craig  :-).)  That's IMPOSSIBLE (on 800 psi).

> Official party line, as I recall it:  "Should a computer fail on a dive, ..

> However, if My computer failed, and I KNEW I was not in decomp, then I have
> to honestly say that I would ascend (if possible), do a safety stop, and
> climb out.    :...:

Precisely.  Educated commonsense should always prevail over Rules.
And follow the official line, if applicable, AFTER you surface.  :-)

-- Bob.
From: f_cnnghamjk@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Subject: Re: To compute or not to compute
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:56:59 GMT
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <SCUBA-L%92100716475015@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU>, "Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)" <RFLNG@CLEMSON.BITNET> writes:

> you've surfaced AT LEAST 10 minutes.  Now if you want to see a silly
> example, here's one:
> 
> 1.  Descend to 130' and immediately ascend to surface.  (Let's say this
>     took 5 minutes.)
> 
> 2.  Surface for 9 minutes and then dive at 15' for 10 minutes.
> 
> 3.  Repeat Step 2 10 times (I believe there's plenty of air in a standard
>     tank to do it).  :-)
> 
> Now what have you (PADI Table User) got?  A 130' dive for 105 minutes!
> 
> What have you REALLY done?  Essentially a 1 minute dive at 130' with a
> 100+ minute safety stop at 15' and 90 minutes of surface interval.  :-)
> 
> The real point of this exercise (and other equally silly ones) is that
> by definition/convention or discreteness of Tables, or both, one can
> easily come up with outrageous examples that Table Users have lost
> all senses of reality, whereas computers (their users) at least try to
> APPROXIMATE reality (via models and near-continuous updates of the
> relevant quantities).
> 
> -- Bob.

Hang it up Bob.  The triumvirate only site nonsense when it supports their
position.
 
Randomly, Kelly Cunningham
<deviate@lipschitz.sfasu.edu><f_cnnghamjk@ccsvax.sfasu.edu><jkellyc@tenet.edu>
    NeXTMail (encouraged)          VMS Mail (tolerated)     Pine (beats mail)
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home."
                    Ken Olson, President and visionary, Digital Equipment,1977
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.30]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:46:08 MDT
From:         "(Steven G. Lanaghen)" <sgl@SPATIAL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Dive Table Origins

        There has been lots of discussion lately about the different
versions of dive tables out an about - Navy tables, SSI derivations,
PADI original derivations and newer PADI versions, etc.  Does anyone
know what the basis for the individual tables are?  As I understand,
Navy tables were originally mostly (educated) trial and error with
a statistical safety factor thrown in.  Doppler limits on the Navy
table are empirically derived safety factors gathered from doppler
medical analysis of "silent bubbles" that are not symptomatically
noticable.

        Most dive computers, on the other hand, are based on compartment
saturation algorithms.  I know that the Beuhlman tables are also
based on an algorithm rather than empirical data.

        So what are the PADI, NAUI, SSI, etc tables based on?  And if
they are derivatives of some other table, how was the derivation
(like a "safety factor") determined?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"scuba-l@brownvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Thu, 8 Oct 1992 09:16:00 N
From:         EDP ENEL CRTN-MI <PW6MIIY1@ICINECA2.BITNET>
Subject:      Computer battery change

>From what I've heard on the net, it sounds like some computers allow the
>owner to change the battery themselves, while other computers require you
>to send it to the factory for a battery change.  I'm curious to find out
>which computers have easily changable batteries and which do not.  Also,
>what's the impact on a computer if it gets flooded?  Do you just dry it out,
>or is it destroyed?

>-Michael Wolf
>wolf@hyperion.com


In reply to Michael:

I use an Aladin Pro, about 50 dives/year. You must send it to an authorized
dealer for the battery change and a full check of its funcions, when a battery
low alarm occours. The rate of this alarm depend on your frequency diving: I
don't see this alarm yet, after 4 years.

                                                        Giorgio CECCATO
From: craig@cattnts.canada.ncr.com (Craig Campbell)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Subject: Re: To compute or not to compute
Date: 5 Oct 92 12:10:35 GMT
Organization: AT&T / NCR Canada Ltd., Toronto, Canada

In article <SCUBA-L%92100413261595@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU> RFLNG@CLEMSON.BITNET (Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)) writes:

>>>      ...       what are the pros and cons of diving with a computer?

>"(Craig Campbell)" <craig@CATTNTS.CANADA.NCR.COM> writes

>More importantly, if you started your dive deep and gradually work your
>way up in a MULTILEVEL dive (as nearly all my dives are),  after a certain
>time interval, no fall back to tables is possible!

How so impossible?  My backup tables go as far as 250ft (as I recall), with
bottom times in excess of an hour.

>Here're a couple of my recent computer-recorded max. depth (fsw) and BT
>(minutes) in NO-decompression dives:  (131/49 for 1st of three dives on
>the same day) and (129/49 for the 1st of 5 dives on the same day).  I
>should add that on those dives, at no time (except for the first few
>minutes at or near max depth) was I even close (within 20 minutes say)
>to a decomp dive, so that IF my computer should fail after I had been
>diving for 35-40 minutes say (now probably at less than 50 fsw), all I
>would have had to do was to surface.  I don't see HOW one could/should
>fall back on 140/40 Table at that time.

Official party line, as I recall it:  "Should a computer fail on a dive,
the diver must resort to table calculations assuming a square profile, unless
the data for a multilevel dive is available."

However, if My computer failed, and I KNEW I was not in decomp, then I have
to honestly say that I would ascend (if possible), do a safety stop, and climb
out.  The more likely scenario, is that I can't surface, and rather than fall
back to tables and decomp schedules from some frozen hell, I'll follow the
most conservative of my buddy's computers.

If I'm alone, I'm into the frozen hell zone.

>>Me:  I dive with a computer and love it.  I also dread the day it fails
>>     and I have to fall back to tables.

>Don't dread it.  Buy and use a SECOND one.

But my bank account is tending towards zero....and one day soon, perhaps it 
will even reach +ve numbers :-)

>-- Bob.

craig
-- 
Craig Campbell		|	These opinions are entirely the result of a 
Systems Engineer	|	small butterfly crashing into the far side
NCR Canada,		|	of the planet.  Chaos Rules.
an AT&T Company		|	I speak for no one, except, possibly, myself.
From: story@BENT.WPD.SGI.COM ((David Duis Story))
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Subject: Re: To compute or not to compute
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:50:20 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL4]
              "WVANDERC%BENTLEY.BITNET@BROWNVM.brown.edu" at Oct 13, 92 9:41 am

Bill writes:
> (NAUI also departed from the USN tables I believe)

To the best of my knowledge, NAUI's tables are still using USN model
as a base, and are essentially derived directly from the USN Tables
with conservatism factors added.

These factors include slower offgassing when you are a low-lettergroup
diver ("A", "B", or "C", up to 24 hours before you exit the "A"
lettergroup), and reduced NDLs.  Emergency decompression information
is still printed on the tables, and the lettergroups still mean the
same thing.

Cheers,

David Story                        NAUI AI Z9588, PADI DM 43922, EMT
story@bent.wpd.sgi.com             Better diving through tolerance.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Mon, 12 Oct 1992 11:37:08 EDT
From:         "(Nicholas J. Simicich)" <scifi!njs@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject:      Nitrox Class

>  Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:52:35 GMT
>  From: "(Philip Weissman)" <uunet!SHEARSON.COM!pweissma>
>
>  I have made arrangements for a private nitrox class (ANDI) for my dive
>  club, the Sea Gypsies.  There a few spots left so I thought I'd open
>  the class to the net.  The class will be held on Thursday, October 22
>  from 6-11 pm in Manhattan (Village area).  The instructor is Bob
>  Raimo, the owner of Enchanted Diver.  Bob usually charges $150 for
>  this class at his store in Queens but has agreed to come to Manhattan
>  to teach us for $100 per person.  There will be no required dives
>  needed for certification which further reduces the cost compared with
>  other nitrox courses.  Prerequisites consist of OW certification and
>  a fair amount of experience, preferably in the north-east.
>
>  If you're interested contact me ASAP.
>
>
>  Philip Weissman
>  pweissma@shearson.com
>  (212)362-6234

Over the weekend, I had occasion to talk to Ed Betts, and I asked him
why he wouldn't, in general, take crossovers from IAND.  He indicated
that it was because ANDI has an absolute minimum of 8 hours of time
for a Nitrox user's card, and that shorter courses violated his
standards, so he couldn't accept them.  He claimed that he was willing
to cross people over if they could show that they had an equivalent
course from IAND.

Based on those comments, the above course violates ANDI standards.

Does the $100 include the $35 book?  Or is that extra?

Nick Simicich - uunet!bywater!scifi!njs - njs@watson.ibm.com
SSI #AOWI 3958, HSA 318, NAUI #14065
Join the movement ---  turn 'to bush' into a verb.
Words of wisdom from Zippy:
What I want to find out is -- do parrots know much about Astro-Turf?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
From: lls@kings.demon.co.uk (Lady Lodge Systems)
Subject: Re: To compute or not to compute
Organization: Lady Lodge Systems
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 17:16:46 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.132410.27181@ultb.isc.rit.edu> awpsys@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In article <SCUBA-L%92100413261595@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU>, 
> RFLNG@CLEMSON.BITNET (Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)) writes:
>>In response to 21329KAD@MSU.BITNET (Kim.Dyer) on
>>
>>...  Note that Tables not only credit you NOTHING when you do your
>>safety stop (when you're outgassing) you treat such time as if you were
>>still diving at your maximum depth for that dive -- a gross distortion
>>of BT accounting.
>>
>Every instructional book on tables that I have seen states that the
>bottom time of a dive begins when you leave the surface heading
>for the bottom and ends when leave the bottom and head for the 
>surface. Safety stops are considered part of the ascent and do not
>need to be counted as part of the bottom time.

Try reading the BSAC '88 tables then. Bottom time is defined as the time
from leaving the surface to arriving back at either 6 meters or 9 meters
if a stop is required at that depth. Mind you, the old BSAC RNPL tables
used the definition you described above and this caused difficulties with
long/slow ascents. At least the new tables default on the safe side.

-- 
Regards,
        Russell
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Russell Brown          | MAIL : russell@kings.demon.co.uk                 |
| Lady Lodge Systems     | PHONE: 0832 272224 (Home/Work it's all the same) |
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Wed, 7 Oct 1992 11:52:00 EDT
From:         "Tony.Kuhlman" <ADP64@MSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: UW Foto Housings

  Ikelite also makes a variety of housings for cameras.  I don't have an
address or phone number, but they are located in Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
I can't say if they sell direct to the diver, however, or if you have to buy
through a dealer (I.E, your local dive shop).
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <geary%cfa3.DECNET@cfa.harvard.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Thu, 8 Oct 1992 07:40:44 -0400
From:         geary%cfa3.DECNET@CFA.HARVARD.EDU
Subject:      Bonaire for the holidays

              HOLIDAY TRIP TO BONAIRE
       19 DECEMBER (Sat.) to 3 JANUARY (Sun.)

I still have an empty two-bedroom apartment with kitchen available
at the Carib Inn.  Ideal for two couples or a small family.  Great
diving from both boat and shore, and inexpensive too.  Contact me
for details on the accommodations, diving, best airfares, etc.

John Geary
geary@cfa.harvard.edu
From: story@BENT.WPD.SGI.COM ((David Duis Story))
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Subject: Falling back to tables from computers
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:43:18 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL4]
              "SCUBA-L@BROWNVM.brown.edu" at Oct 8, 92 1:34 pm

Craig Campbell writes:
>
> In article <9210071709.AA05894@bent.wpd.sgi.com> story@BENT.WPD.SGI.COM
 ((David
> Duis Story)) writes:
> >
> >I'm curious to see how folks plan on falling back to tables.  What's
> >your plan?  Will it work midway through a week-long dive trip?

[...]

>     If I was clear prior to the dive, then the dive is calculated as a
 straight
>     square profile dive.  Given the somewhat extreme nature of most of the
>     dives I enjoy, that change in and of itself may require 'tweaking' due
>     to air limitations.  (Not an action of choice.)  Because a square profile
>     is more conservative than the computer, you should have 'fairly' good
>     odds of being all right, even with minor tweaking.  If tweaking is
>     necessary, however, you can't dive for 24 hours.    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Your procedure sounds fine, perhaps even a bit conservative for
insignificant decompressions.  I might simplify your rules and just go
to 15-25fsw and staying there for 15-25 minutes, with extra time
ascending to and staying at that depth if you have air.  A while back
I posted some rules on rec.scuba on how to do no-computer, no-table
diving, and they might well apply to the kind of diving you do.  It
was pretty flexible

You've skipped what I consider the hard part, though: really falling
back to tables from a computer.  Taking a day off to offgas back to
(depending on your model) "zero" doesn't really tackle the hard
problem of getting yourself back onto a table and doing another dive
that afternoon.

Cheers,

David Story                        NAUI AI Z9588, PADI DM 43922, EMT
story@bent.wpd.sgi.com		  Every dive is a decompression dive.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: SCUBA-L@BROWNVM.brown.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"SCUBA-L@BROWNVM.brown.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:07:00 MST
From:         Clarke Whitehead <TSCWHITEHEAD@CC.WEBER.EDU>
Subject:      Re: UW Foto Housings

Ray,
Thanks for the comments on UW housings vs. Nikonos.  The lack of zoom
lenses for the Nikonos was a concern of mine.  My biggest concern about
housings is the bulkiness.  I noticed that IKELITE does have a housing
for the Minolta Maxxum 7000.  Has anyone used the IKELITE housings?

	Clarke Whitehead
	TSCWHITEHEAD@CC.WEBER.EDU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.30]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Mon, 12 Oct 1992 13:38:34 MDT
From:         "(Steven G. Lanaghen)" <sgl@SPATIAL.COM>
Subject:      Re: To compute or not to compute
              92 11:54 am

>
> Steven G. Lanaghen writes:
>
> >         As long as you are ascending (or holding a calculated
> >         safety/decompression stop) you are off-gassing and this should not
> >         be considered bottom time (on-gassing).
>
> This means that, while ascending, it is still possible (indeed, very likely)
> that one or more compartments in the model are ongassing during all or a
> portion of the ascent. This is particluarly true for slow compartments, which
> are likely to have an inert gas loading that is below that of the partial
> pressure of inter gas inthe breathing mixture for all but the shallowest
> few feet of depth.
>
> Dave Waller

        You're right.  I was generalizing on the fast compartments and I
        stand corrected!  I'd still be interested in any references or
        interpretations you have regarding counting ascent time as bottom
        time.  Does anyone out there teach this school of thought?  I was
        taught (and teach) that there is:

                Bottom time - from begining of descent to beginning of direct
                                                ascent to the surface
                Ascent time - from begining of direct ascent to the surface to
                                                reaching the surface (includes
 stops)
                Surface interval - from time at surface to beginning of (next)
                                                descent (except for the less
 than 10 minute case)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU