Losing regulator

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

And never once thought: "Jeez, I have an octo?" It's there somewhere. Are the not trained to use it if something goes wrong with their primary?

I think I answered that:

This problem is especially true when it involves a change in gear that demands a change in procedure. Those two arm sweep incidents occurred with moderately experienced divers shortly after the introduction of auxiliaries, so why didn’t they just shift to their auxiliary and then go looking for their primary? Reverting to old learning under pressure is a well-understood principle. It is similarly illustrated by a story regarding a fighter jet from the 1960s. Pilots ejected whenever anything went wrong. The engineers couldn’t find any pattern to the ejections. It didn’t matter whether the failure was a stall, a spin, hydraulics, a flame out, locked ailerons, no matter what happened, the pilot became a member of the Martin-Baker Tie Club. When the pilots’ flight histories were reviewed, it was found that all had transitioned to this aircraft from the same former aircraft. Furthermore, the cockpits of the two aircraft were almost identical. But there was a critical difference, the throttle and ejection seat handle positions had been switched. Pilots flying the new plane had no problem until something went wrong, when it did they reverted to old behavior and mistakenly ejected when they wanted to apply power.
 
Is someone trying to fool, me!

Deja vu
 
Many divers are taught a shoulder drop and/or arm sweep method for recovering their regulator. Often that does not work. The idea of an emergency procedure that you can not count in is a strange one to me. I teach: Left hand goes under the tank and lifts, right hand reaches over the top to the regulator first stage, encircles the IP hose and then pulls outward and slides down the hose. Now the second stage is in your hand and you're reay to go. I've watched too many divers flail, and fail, and flail again, doing armsweep after paniced armsweep.

There have been a few accidents over the years involving divers who lost their regulator from their mouth and continued to perform arm sweep after arm sweep, without success, in an attempt to effect a recovery. In the two cases that I am most familiar with, the divers also lost concentration on buoyancy control and were last seen dropping like a stone by buddies who could not catch up with them, and abandoned the chase at significant depth. In both these cases the description was the same, “… sunk out of sight over the wall, kept doing arm sweeps.” It would appear that the technique had been so ingrained and their perception had so narrowed that that was all they could do.

This problem is especially true when it involves a change in gear that demands a change in procedure. Those two arm sweep incidents occurred with moderately experienced divers shortly after the introduction of auxiliaries, so why didn’t they just shift to their auxiliary and then go looking for their primary? Reverting to old learning under pressure is a well-understood principle. It is similarly illustrated by a story regarding a fighter jet from the 1960s. Pilots ejected whenever anything went wrong. The engineers couldn’t find any pattern to the ejections. It didn’t matter whether the failure was a stall, a spin, hydraulics, a flame out, locked ailerons, no matter what happened, the pilot became a member of the Martin-Baker Tie Club. When the pilots’ flight histories were reviewed, it was found that all had transitioned to this aircraft from the same former aircraft. Furthermore, the cockpits of the two aircraft were almost identical. But there was a critical difference, the throttle and ejection seat handle positions had been switched. Pilots flying the new plane had no problem until something went wrong, when it did they reverted to old behavior and mistakenly ejected when they wanted to apply power.

So what do we do? I feel that a combination of training techniques is required. Divers need to have confidence in their ability to fix things on the fly within a given timeframe. We typically work with what are calling “dynamic drills” in thirty second blocks, (e.g., if you can’t solve it in 30 seconds you’re not going to solve it). Why 30 seconds? That’s rather arbitrary, but we established that guideline based on two criteria, and that‘s where the combination of things comes into play: a thirty second breath hold is not a big deal for our students, even if the problem is discovered after exhaling and while attempting to inhale; and all of the dynamic drills that we do can be accomplished in less than 30 seconds from onset to resolution, with the exception of the deep ESAs that we no longer teach.

The reach back and follow the hose has to work (if it doesn't you've much larger troubles than you thought) yet I've watched lots of divers (in real and other classes) do arm sweep after arm sweep, with each one getting faster and more spasmodic, until having reached critical mass they bolt for the surface. One of my instructors even started using an arm sweep as the hand signal for, "look out boss ... he's-a-gonna go!"

Neither of the two traditionally-taught methods work particularly well if, for example, you are caught in surf and take a tumble. We had a guy drown here three or four years back in waist-deep water because he took a tumble and couldn't find his regulator. Falling on a shore entry can put you in a position where you can neither sweep nor reach easily. A necklaced reg can be easily located ... even when you're doing the sand-sky-sand-sky-sand-sky tango ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
I just typed a page of mumblings and lost it


Reg in place in case you fall on your face

and mask too


No one ever got killed walking fifty yards not talking

Buffoonery

[video=youtube;tMlH9EreWNw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=tMlH9EreWNw[/video]

Treat em all like this and she'll be apples mate
 
No one ever got killed walking fifty yards not talking

Those that know me well
would agree that I won't die
but suffer greatly

:D

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
Neither of the two traditionally-taught methods work particularly well if, for example, you are caught in surf and take a tumble. We had a guy drown here three or four years back in waist-deep water because he took a tumble and couldn't find his regulator. Falling on a shore entry can put you in a position where you can neither sweep nor reach easily. A necklaced reg can be easily located ... even when you're doing the sand-sky-sand-sky-sand-sky tango ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
He could not stand up? He could not drop his weights and stand up? He could not ditch his rig and stand up? I'd be interested in some more details ... was this a failure of the vaunted single piece harness?

My problem with the necklace is two fold, first philosophically: I try to not have attachment points that I rely upon, 'cause I seen too many incidents that were exacerbated by the failure of an attachment point, something goes wrong, you reach for the attached piece of gear, and it's not there!; second operationally: we tend to dive from smallish inflatables, so we clip off our weights and rigs before re-boarding, something that we do with our fins on and mask and snorkel in place or down about our neck. Removing the necklaced auxiliary without first removing the mask and snorkel is no mean feat, especially when being bounced about while clipping off ones' weightbelt and rig.
 
He could not stand up? He could not drop his weights and stand up? He could not ditch his rig and stand up? I'd be interested in some more details ... was this a failure of the vaunted single piece harness?

My problem with the necklace is two fold, first philosophically: I try to not have attachment points that I rely upon, 'cause I seen too many incidents that were exacerbated by the failure of an attachment point, something goes wrong, you reach for the attached piece of gear, and it's not there!; second operationally: we tend to dive from smallish inflatables, so we clip off our weights and rigs before re-boarding, something that we do with our fins on and mask and snorkel in place or down about our neck. Removing the necklaced auxiliary without first removing the mask and snorkel is no mean feat, especially when being bounced about while clipping off ones' weightbelt and rig.
Cannot answer your first question ... I wasn't there. I believe the man was in doubles ... but that doesn't really say anything about whether or not his harness had quick-release clips ... DiveRite is pretty popular here.

As to the second ... for a few years I did a great deal of diving with Uncle Pug off of his whaler ... and we typically got out of our rigs in-water and clipped them off before boarding. Never had a problem ... well, except for the one time I forgot to undo my weight belt first (but I recovered quickly and didn't make that mistake again). Then again, we don't wear snorkels ... and gettting a necklace off with your mask in place isn't at all an issue.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
My problem with the necklace is two fold, first philosophically: I try to not have attachment points that I rely upon, 'cause I seen too many incidents that were exacerbated by the failure of an attachment point, something goes wrong, you reach for the attached piece of gear, and it's not there!; second operationally: we tend to dive from smallish inflatables, so we clip off our weights and rigs before re-boarding, something that we do with our fins on and mask and snorkel in place or down about our neck. Removing the necklaced auxiliary without first removing the mask and snorkel is no mean feat, especially when being bounced about while clipping off ones' weightbelt and rig.

I can possibly see your view on the second point as this is in relation to ability and ease of entering and exiting the water. But your first point makes no sense. Things are attached where the are so that when S..T hits the fan you know where they are without thinking. What your saying is you cant trust attachment points. So then why attach anyting ?? Try this and and you will soon learn this is not prudent.
 
One problem with this is that many people, speaking from experience, comment that panicking OA diver is likely to go after your primary. With unpredictability of panic, all kinda scenarios could be imagined when OA diver is fighting for regulator that is attached to you. I am not sure how it may work. More experienced (in my case that means just about anybody on this board:)) may disagree, I don't know. How about bungee cord under ziptie but without knots, so it stays there quiet securely but is going to release if pulled hard enough? Could this be a solution?

I should add that I don't like the idea of the bungee being fixed under the zip tie. My bungee goes around the mouthpiece (in the space of the double fisherman's knot), and will release if the regulator is pulled hard enough. In that case I'd be the one to go for my octo, which is also secured with a simple bungee tie to a D ring. The commercially available elastic necklace also will allow the reg to slip out. Once the OOA diver gets air from my reg I'd assume he'd calm down and we'd swap regs so he'd get the longer hose.
 
Perhaps I was not clear, sorry ... I'll try again.

Your second stage must be attached at the first stage in order to function, so that's where you go to find it, left hand goes under the cylinder(s) and lifts while your right hand reaches over the top to the regulator first stage, encircles the IP hose and then pulls outward and slides down the hose. Now the second stage is in your hand and you're ready to go. If you reach back and it is not there, you have, as I have observed before, larger problems than you thought. Securing your second stage with a secondary attachment (anywhere) maybe a convenience, but if you learn to depend on that attachment there is a finite increase in the chance that things will go seriously wrong when you really need it.

Now, if you don't have the operational issues that I do with a necklace, I say go for it ... but when you practice initiating it's use, you have a problem to work out: you donate the long hose and duck your chin ... what exactly do you do if the auxiliary is not there? Have you answered this question and drilled your response? I'm not sure I have a good answer for you, but I do think that it is a good question to ask.
 

Back
Top Bottom