51 replies to this topic

[intotheblue]

Hey, I am sorry for not responding earlier.  I thought that the server was supposed to copy posts to my email when someone adds to a thread.  Usually it does; in this case it did not.

A couple of things to put into perspective here.  WW can normally carry out a dive to this depth with the amount of gas in her cylinder at the time to the tune of well beyond the planned dive time when we started the dive.  To say that one should carry out additional dives with only full cylinders makes no sense.  After all, my cylinders weren't full after the first dive, either.  Am I to carry multiple sets of doubles so that I can make sure to carry out additional dives with full tanks at the start everytime?  Of course not.  One only need plan the dive based on the gas carried, which we did.  Second, this was a planned dive that involved gas sharing.  It was not necessary but was done to provide an even greater margin of comfort of gas supply for both divers.

At no time were we in mandatory decompression.  So, even if there had been total gas failures for both divers on all cylinders a regulators (pretty darn unlikely), our average depth was about 60 feet or just above on this dive.  We could, in that unlikely event, have done a swimming ascent to the surface.  Not a first choice, but one that remained open.

I had double cylinders with redundant regulators and an isolator.  In short, there were plenty of regulators and gas to go around.  Additionally, I had a 40 cubic foot cylinder of oxygen with me.  I would only have had to get to 20 feet from about 60 to start to use that.

The dive was turned the second the incident happened.  We did not continue a wreck penetration dive after it happened.  Once we were in open water, I do not think that a diver with over 800 dives and another one with over 2,000 dives should have much of a concern about gas sharing in open water at this depth and under these conditions.

It would have taken about two minutes of just leaving the valve opened for the gas to drain from WW's cylinder.  This is still plenty of gas to get to the surface safely in the event of all other gas supplies also failing.  This could be extended significantly by working the valve opened and closed for breathing the gas.  This, of course, is not ideal.  However, this was not an out of gas situation here.

Given the circumstances, I would do this again without question.  This was a knowing decision on my part, and I feel comfortable with it.  You are entitled to disagree and to carry out your dives in any way you see fit.

I, for one, understood that you continued, meaning the penetration. I'll re-read later. I feel my points remain valid... but then again... I wasn't there and I am NOT the SCUBA police

ITB...

[RichardB]

Given the circumstances, I would do this again without question. This was a knowing decision on my part, and I feel comfortable with it. You are entitled to disagree and to carry out your dives in any way you see fit.

That's good to know. So this wasn't a mistake or occasional bad choice. It was intentional.

[David Evans]

The thing that is frightening to me is that two valued members (including the founder, who although I've not met in person, I'm becoming increasingly fond of), were an isolator failure away from being in serious trouble.

Diving doubles is a mixed bag. On the plus side, you get more gas, and the added redundancy of an extra valve and an extra first stage. On the minus side, you've introduced at least 9 extra failure points and no additional second stages.

I'm not as concerned about violations of basic dive training, violation of the NAUI Standards and Procedures by a course director, or even dive leaders exhibiting questionable judgement.

I'm concerned about my friends getting hurt.

Take care of yourselves, my virtual dive buddies. Although I'm still a n00b to this site, I think I can safely speak on behalf of the hundreds of members of this site when I say that we'd be very sad if something happened to you.

-david

[Diverbrian]

Given the circumstances, I would do this again without question.  This was a knowing decision on my part, and I feel comfortable with it.  You are entitled to disagree and to carry out your dives in any way you see fit.

That's good to know. So this wasn't a mistake or occasional bad choice. It was intentional.

I believe that most people's points have been made here.

Let's all step away from the keyboards and take a deep breath. I sense fur about to fly and as ITB says...

With due ,

WE ARE NOT THE SCUBA POLICE!

So our opinions are just that! Opinions!

[Diverbrian]

The thing that is frightening to me is that two valued members (including the founder, who although I've not met in person, I'm becoming increasingly fond of), were an isolator failure away from being in serious trouble.

Diving doubles is a mixed bag. On the plus side, you get more gas, and the added redundancy of an extra valve and an extra first stage. On the minus side, you've introduced at least 9 extra failure points and no additional second stages.

I'm not as concerned about violations of basic dive training, violation of the NAUI Standards and Procedures by a course director, or even dive leaders exhibiting questionable judgement.

I'm concerned about my friends getting hurt.

Take care of yourselves, my virtual dive buddies. Although I'm still a n00b to this site, I think I can safely speak on behalf of the hundreds of members of this site when I say that we'd be very sad if something happened to you.

-david

I second that motion.

Thanks for keeping this in the proper perspective!

Let's everybody try to stay safe down there!

[intotheblue]

The thing that is frightening to me is that two valued members (including the founder, who although I've not met in person, I'm becoming increasingly fond of), were an isolator failure away from being in serious trouble.

Diving doubles is a mixed bag. On the plus side, you get more gas, and the added redundancy of an extra valve and an extra first stage. On the minus side, you've introduced at least 9 extra failure points and no additional second stages.

I'm not as concerned about violations of basic dive training, violation of the NAUI Standards and Procedures by a course director, or even dive leaders exhibiting questionable judgement.

I'm concerned about my friends getting hurt.

Take care of yourselves, my virtual dive buddies. Although I'm still a n00b to this site, I think I can safely speak on behalf of the hundreds of members of this site when I say that we'd be very sad if something happened to you.

-david

Well said David...

[drdiver]

Ditto on that! Well spoken!
10, 100, 1000, 10,000 dives, still can't breathe water, no sir.

Like the old Central Divers sign.
"There are old divers and there are bold divers, but there ain't no old, bold divers."

[Kamala]

To all...in retrospect I made a poor choice and I've learned a great deal from it.

Thank you, Kamala

[intotheblue]

To all...in retrospect I made a poor choice and I've learned a great deal from it. 

Thank you, Kamala

It's so easy to get caught up in the fun of a dive...

[ScubaDadMiami]

To all...in retrospect I made a poor choice and I've learned a great deal from it.

Thank you, Kamala

If you are doing this to avoid controversy, that is your decision. This was not a poor choice.

[ScubaDadMiami]

. . . violation of the NAUI Standards and Procedures by a course director.

Precisely which Standard/Procedure was violated?

[David Evans]

If you are doing this to avoid controversy, that is your decision. This was not a poor choice.

Given the circumstances, I would do this again without question. This was a knowing decision on my part, and I feel comfortable with it. You are entitled to disagree and to carry out your dives in any way you see fit.

If you're saying this stuff to create controversy, it's working.

I'm glad that things didn't go sideways for you, and that you're both safe.

-d

[Warthog]

QUOTE (David Evans @ Jun 3 2005, 11:51 AM)
. . . violation of the NAUI Standards and Procedures by a course director. 


Precisely which Standard/Procedure was violated?

I donno about NAUI, or if it's techncially a 'standard' in PADIland, but every course I've ever taken says if there's an equipment failure the dive is over...end of story. Which I think is where most ppl have issue.

Having said that, I've been at 70' with a free-flowing reg (just small bubbles)...which I should have known better, but I didn't get to dive all weekend, etc., etc. And that is how we get ourselves in to trouble.

I was also inside the 'big' cavern at Ginnie Springs when my HP hose blew. I lost 2000 PSI in the time it took to swim from the grate to the exit (less than a minute). Having experienced that, I can't imagine wanting to continue a dive in the ocean.

Edited by Warthog, 03 June 2005 - 01:23 PM.

[David Evans]

Precisely which Standard/Procedure was violated?

I don't have my S&P handy - it's 2200 miles away right now. But I'm guessing that somewhere around chapter one is a statement that says something about each diver having his/her own functioning SCUBA gear as a requirement for diving.

Maybe you could have a look and let me know... I've been wrong before, and will be happy to eat crow if this isn't the case. Perhaps there's a NAUI "tandem SCUBA" course that my course director failed to tell me about.




I don't want to further fan the flames on this topic, so I think I'll step away from it for a while. Again, I'm very glad that your dive was without further incident.

-d

Edited by David Evans, 03 June 2005 - 01:56 PM.

[TheSassyRabbit]

Thanks for the post. I think it sounds like you did a fabulous job of managing a stressful situation. This may be the unsafe practices referred to in another post. I have to say that while I'm a fan of safe diving, I'm also a fan of letting two dive buddies decide what's within their comfort zone. WW is a very experienced diver (as may be SDM- I just don't know him - but based on the way he handled it, sounds like he's the kind of buddy I would want) - so she is within her rights to make choices for herself. Her choices may not be mine, or yours, but then again, I plan my dive and dive my plan.... not anyone else's! Again, good job of letting great problem-solving skills prevail!