Ah, the Kraken (not our Kraken) enters the picture. I think we'd be wise to not put much credence in anything coming from the (oh, so accurate and enlightened) press.Ocean One:
Rick
Coast Guard Cutter Healy Deaths
- Thread starter Doubles
- Start date
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
- Status
Rick
DiverInAk
Contributor
Yes Rick you're right, I am a bit impatient. I'm not going to make apologies for that. I worked with both of the people involved here. I guess we'll all see what the investigation finds. Jessica's autopsy results were not a surprise as far as cause of death are concerned.
You can't believe much of the press and you certainly have to be careful what's speculated around here. I don't know what video was mentioned but they were not wearing doubles. I have also not heard anyone say anything about some sudden rapid descent that pulled the lines etc.. It was certainly difficult to pull them up, but there were many people lending a hand by that time.
I'm not going to discuss all the factors here and I am waiting to see what the investigation finds. Besides the obvious procedural errors, let's hope they find out the technical details of how two fit and trained (though one was inexperienced) divers managed to end up this way on a 20fsw tended dive plan.
You can't believe much of the press and you certainly have to be careful what's speculated around here. I don't know what video was mentioned but they were not wearing doubles. I have also not heard anyone say anything about some sudden rapid descent that pulled the lines etc.. It was certainly difficult to pull them up, but there were many people lending a hand by that time.
I'm not going to discuss all the factors here and I am waiting to see what the investigation finds. Besides the obvious procedural errors, let's hope they find out the technical details of how two fit and trained (though one was inexperienced) divers managed to end up this way on a 20fsw tended dive plan.
SuSexFulDiver
Contributor
Just because they were supposed to dive to a max of 20 feet do not mean the deck hands were not supposed to give them more than 20 feet of rope. Maybe they were diving under ice horizontal. The mission could have required them to dive to 20 feet below the ice and out away from the ship 200 or more feet below the surface or the ice. Probably explain why the deck hands let out so much rope so they could actually drop down to 190' below the surface instead of horizontal from the ship or along the ship?????????
Rick Murchison:
Yes Sir, I believe you are quite right. I don't want to speculate on what happened underwater or above water but the latest news is not good. Especially the new information regarding a 3rd diver who aborted the dive.
On a different note, it sure would be nice if the national news folks would research diving or at least find someone who understands diving before publishing or broadcasting the news.
My deepest sympathies to the families of everyone involved. It is unfortunate that these investigations take so long. But they are necessary and hopefully will be completed soon.
james croft
Contributor
mike_s:
Not sure what equipment was used but I am wondering if they were using surface supplied air with a bailout bottle. Many military units use wet suits that are heated by a hot water pump. I have a suit like this and it has hoses in it that flood your suit with hot water from a water heater. It has a hose like a garden hose attached to the umbilical. There is a feature on some dive hats such as the Kirby Morgans that envelopes the supply tube at the regulator with hot water. I am wondering if this is what they are referring to in the article. That is the only thing I can figure. If they were on an umbilical there is a pneumofathometer hose that would show the divers depth on a console so the tender would know how deep the diver is so he can adjust the intermediate pressure as the diver ascends and rises. There is something wrong with this picture. I am only guessing as I don't believe a tender/ diver on surface supplied air would allow the diver to sink that far. The umbilcal should have a safety line, comm wire, air hose and possibly a hot water hose.
There are obvious errors in the press releases or maybe some misunderstanding in the translation from medical/or other documents into a press release.
The video and photos of them in doubles was canned footage. Those could have been from previous dives, possibly from a different voyage.
30 minutes of gas at 20' and 10 and 180' doesn't compute mathmatically. I quoted it in yesterdays post only since it was in the article that I was referencing. If the dive plan called for 20 feet I would think it safe to make a single assumption that they didn't have gas for 190 fsw.
30 minutes to descend to 200' also is off the mark. 50' per minute is the recommended descent rate - at least that is what I have been taught.
I could comment on some of the questions regarding barotrauma and bubbles in the blood stream, but I am hoping that our medical moderator would make a post which would be more accurate.
The video and photos of them in doubles was canned footage. Those could have been from previous dives, possibly from a different voyage.
30 minutes of gas at 20' and 10 and 180' doesn't compute mathmatically. I quoted it in yesterdays post only since it was in the article that I was referencing. If the dive plan called for 20 feet I would think it safe to make a single assumption that they didn't have gas for 190 fsw.
30 minutes to descend to 200' also is off the mark. 50' per minute is the recommended descent rate - at least that is what I have been taught.
I could comment on some of the questions regarding barotrauma and bubbles in the blood stream, but I am hoping that our medical moderator would make a post which would be more accurate.
DiverInAk
Contributor
The 3rd diver aborting is not new information. She aborted because of a suit leak after they entered the water but before the dive even got underway. I'm still guessing something like pure O2, but who knows? The tanks had been filled by prior to the trip by a local company, (apparently not a dive shop). So, there should be several tanks available with the same fill for analysis. If it wasn't the gas, then it's damn puzzling.
Tigerman
Contributor
What doesnt make sense to me about this whole thing is the medical examiners conclusion. Especially the part about the "uncontrolled descent". How can he know as a fact that there was one to begin with? Its not like my corpse will say much different if I conciously empty my floatation device and start kicking towards the bottomn or if I go down there for other, uncontrolled, reasons?
DiverInAk
Contributor
Gilless, regarding errors between the medical examiner and transcriptions in the press, I can say this with certainty.
"...died of Asphyxia with Pulmonary Barotrauma with Possible Air Embolism, sustained as a result of an uncontrolled descent to a possible depth of 189 feet of seawater (FSW) followed by a rapid ascent to the surface."
"...died of Asphyxia with Pulmonary Barotrauma with Possible Air Embolism, sustained as a result of an uncontrolled descent to a possible depth of 189 feet of seawater (FSW) followed by a rapid ascent to the surface."
Tigerman:
The medical examiner "may" have had access to equipment that would have presented that information to him/her. Maybe even a dive computer.
Again we dont have enough information yet to form conclusions or observations
- Status
Similar threads
