YD Scuba Diving Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
"hardly ever here"
Joined
·
771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Imported post

I was reading Dive magazine last night, and read with interest the 'World's Best Wreck Dives' feature, especially the sections on the Yongala and the Coolidge, as I dived both those wrecks last year (and yes they are fantastic)

However, I was very annoyed when the article mentioned that "the site comes under environmental laws, and the Aussies love nothing more that prosecuting hapless tourists, such as the American diver who was recently fined the equivalent of £1,450 after venturing inside the wreck"

I don't think anyone who knows the story would disagree that the diver in question was in the wrong, and I object to Dive magazine portraying him as a victimized innocent.

The site is not protected simply for environmental reasons; more than 120 people died when the ship went down and the bodies were never recovered - there are skeletons inside the wreck and the Australian government forbids penetration for that reason.

You may or may not agree with the prohibition, but the fact is every single diver on the wreck is told in no uncertain terms "DON'T go inside or you WILL be fined'. So if a diver ignores that warning, goes inside the wreck despite the fact the Australian government has forbidden it for reasons of respect, and finds himself landed with a hefty fine, is he therefore 'hapless'? (without 'hap' or luck; luckless; unfortunate; deserving of pity, according to my dictionary) I don't think so!

But my rant does not stop here, oh no

There were the usual spelling and grammatical errors - i once idly flicked through a copy of Dive and saw three mistakes in about a minute.

There was the review of the SeaQuest Diva BC by Ms Boan, during which the item in question blatantly did not leave Ms Boan's office.

And there's the pushing of their favorite publications. Charles Hood, senior correspondent for dive magazine, has published a book called '100 Best Dives in Cornwall'. This is a very good book, very informative with brilliant photographs - but did it need to be mentioned four times in this month's Dive? Again, I don't think so.

But all this, in addition to the substandard writing skills displayed throughout, would not bother me if I wasn't being forced to pay so much for it!

Subscription price of Dive magazine - £33. Difference between my student membership of BSAC (no Dive mag) and my current full membership (including Dive mag) - about £30. Hmmmm. Let me put it this way - I pay £29 year to receive BBC Wildlife magazine, which is a world class, extremely professional publication. And I'm expected to pay £30 for dive magazine? And I don't get a choice?

Don't get me wrong, I do support BSAC, and if that's what it takes for them to make money, then OK I suppose. But I'm not overly happy about it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,828 Posts
Imported post

I think the worst part about this month's edition wasn't the wreck feature, nor the much-maligned Halcyon review. It was the Mares airlock.

Admittedly I'm highly prejudiced against it becaus it's a HUB component, but even so..

For those who don't know, the airlock is a camband that uses a direct feed to power a thingie that tightens the camband for you, so it never slips. I think it costs £60.

And it was rated as a good thing to have.

FFS! How hard do the folks at Dive think it is to tighten a camband by hand?? One of the first things I was ever taught was how to use the buckle on the Buddy camband to 'ratchet' the camband superhumanly tight. Takes two seconds and it's free.

But no - take Dive's advice, and buy a direct-feed powered camband tightener, and never display your incompetence at tightening a strap ever again!

If BSAC had the option of a regular membership that didn't include Dive magazine, their subscription rates would plummet like a rock - practically everybody you ask seems to think it's a worthless rag..
 

·
Ginger, Irish, sometimes stroppy
Joined
·
5,898 Posts
Imported post

I don't read the magazine (any more), but have to agree about the incident you mention. The story I heard was that the DM made it clear that under no circumstance was anyone to enter the wreck.....the tourist went into it anyway, having been told not to and having the legisaltion and reason (mass grave) explained to him.

He was pretty far away from an innocent victim
 

·
"hardly ever here"
Joined
·
771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Imported post

[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dominic @ Dec. 22 2003,14:21)]I think the worst part about this month's edition wasn't the wreck feature, nor the much-maligned Halcyon review. It was the Mares airlock.
of course that too. i disagree with a lot of what dive says, although the aim of the post above was to point out their lack of ability to produce a quality magazine, not to argue about their diving philosophies

but now we've started - yes that's a pile of poo. their argument was that some people aren't strong enough to close the cam-band. what rubbish - if you do it correctly you use the leverage to do the work for you, that's how it's designed. and if you really are that weak&feeble you get a mate to tighten it up for you, rather than spend (how much?) on a silly gadget. oh, and then you get said mate to carry your gear to the boat, put it on your back, pick up your weightbelt, tow you around on the dive...........
 

·
Shipwrecked & Comatose, drinking fresh mango juice
Joined
·
2,610 Posts
Imported post

<font color='#810541'>General bad reporting point - in this morning's 'Metro' newpaper - the free rag handed out at many train and tube stations - it reported that Mark Ellyat had made a record deep dive on Scuba gear.  

He needed to carry 6 oxygen cylinders apparently.

It didn't specifically mention it but I suspect he may have been wearing flippers as well.

It doesn't take much time to find facts out but I fear too much for the hacks who probably (and I apologise in case there are any hardworking journalists reading this, but I mean, what's the chance of there being a hardworking journalist, never mind them reading something that doesn't attempt to smear a celebrity in some way) dashed off a couple of paragraphs on the way to / in / after the pub.

Andy
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top