BSAC on “Hogarthian rigging” and “Primary take” for “out of gas response”

[Thalassamania]

When you only understand the final objective and have no clue as to the route that has been worked out to get there, and you are (perhaps) looking for a preconceived outcome, it is rather easy to come to an erroneous conclusion.

 

[mania]

The clarification is even worse than the original letter. But to quote one of the Yorkshire Divers - who would like to do the tech course with BSAC anyway

 

[lamont]

The clarification is even worse than the original letter. But to quote one of the Yorkshire Divers - who would like to do the tech course with BSAC anyway

it does pretty clearly establish the tech part of the BSAC agency as mostly an old farts club, and becomes easy to recommend people to do anything other than BSAC for tech...

 

[boulderjohn]

I think this paragraph is a key to their thinking:

A critical consideration in BSAC policy is that the Diver Training Programme teaches divers to identify and “take” an alternate Gas Source (AGS) from stowage rather than rely on the donor to formally “donate” their gas. As divers progress their skills and equipment configurations the emphasis changes to greater self sufficiency, indeed BSAC is now introducing the concept of self sufficiency at recreational levels through the Accelerated Decompression Procedures course. Transition to more advanced diver training will be built on this foundation.

They want to be consistent throughout all levels of instruction with the teaching that the OOA diver should take the alternate air source.

As Emerson said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

In my OW instruction, I tell my students that there are different ways to share air, and I show them all. I tell them that regardless of how you have trained, the way it is done for real is dictated by the OOA diver. I also tell them that there is a very good chance that the OOA diver will simply take either your alternate or primary,and we practice that scenario.

That should not preclude one from teaching another method, especially at a level where participants should be much better prepared for emergencies than a beginning OW student.

 

[Red Sea Shadow]

Update from BSAC at Clarification statement on Alternative Supply training and going diving - British Sub Aqua Club

 

[String]

A clarification that makes things even less clear and also seems to include more things they didnt bother putting into the original.

Again mentions closed trials of which NO details as to methodology, participants, controls or anything are mentioned. Mentions "incidents" again with no details or specifics. What have they got to hide?

In addition now it would seem that no hog looped diver can DIVE at all with an Ocean Diver regardless of it not being on a course.

The most worrying new line is:

When instructing the BSAC Diver Training Programme, an instructor must follow the prescribed techniques in which the instructor has been judged as competent to teach. This applies for all skills.

This one line has changed from an agency where you could shove non assessed "extras" in to benefit the student into something where you HAVE to teach the bare minimums and not a single thing more. This sets them apart from all the other main training agencies who do allow extras to be taught (provided its not assessed). BSAC just became a "minimum standard only" agency.

Add that to flawed claims that HL cant work with stages right and saying "its because it doesnt work on CCR" then at the same time saying "no primary donate unless someone is on independent twins because lots of our members use them" and its a complete mess. Its an edict made by people without a clue who had already decided on their position through personal political reasons and now frantically trying to find anything to justify that stance.


Huge threads on it on the BSAC forum and YD about it already.

As for tech courses, BSAC are/were spending a lot of resources writing them and rolling them out to much fanfare. Then they do this which instantly means nobody with any sense will so much as consider their courses.

I think there is only one GUE instructor in Britain, but NAUI is pretty much invisible in the Queen's Realm (someone correct me if I am wrong).

There are more than one. However AFAIK NAUI have no presence at any level in the UK or western europe. A few in scandanavia but i think no instructors or schools at all anywhere in europe other than that.

 

[Cave Diver]

In the case of divers configured with Hogarthian rig and where the out of gas diver approached from beneath and on the blind (left) side there was a significant problem. The primary regulator was taken from the donor who was not immediately aware of the approach. The primary regulator was pulled downwards and to the donors left before the donor could rotate forwards and to the left. This action in turn caused the hose to tighten and trap the hose for the secondary regulator that was placed in a necklace and positioned under the chin. This in turn caused the donor difficulty in placing the secondary regulator in his mouth. The donor was able to sort this situation out but took in excess of 40 seconds to do so.

In the case of a diver approaching another diver, both swimming horizontally, from behind and slightly below and to the right; again the donor was unable to see the approach and was thus not prepared. The donor’s primary regulator was taken by the casualty by reaching under the donor's right arm and across the chest to access it, the shortest route from this position. The primary regulator was pulled downwards sharply before the donor could act and again trapped the secondary regulator hose thus preventing the donor switching to it. Again the donor was able to sort this situation out but yet again it took considerable time.

So they managed to find two positions, that according to their evaluations, generated unsatisfactory results.

I'm curious to know what method they approved that went through all the same tests and produce more favorable donation results in a wider variety of situations.

 

[String]

Exactly, they decided hog looping is bad, went to a pool to "prove it" to fit that view and after exhaustive tests allegedly found some incidents where it proved not ideal.
They of course released NO details of these tests, whether the people were properly trained in HL setup and use, what the controls were or anything.

To be a FAIR test of relative risk they of course should have conducted identical trials to their conventional "octopus can be anywhere in this triangle and detached via any method" idea.

Its basically a CCR mafia at the top with some large personal agendas. For example the latest edict a CCR diver can dive with an ocean diver provided its been properly briefed etc. However a hog loop O/C diver cant and i know which system id say was more similar to the normal divers!

 

[Blackwood]

I was thinking that their notion of "resolving" the issue essentially meant getting all the routing figured out to untrap and fully donate the long hose, not being without gas for 40 seconds trying to figure out how to get the bungeed backup into the donor's mouth.

I figured the same thing.

 

[shoredivr]

We don't need kelp to get fouled in, we will supply our own entangling materials.

Priceless.