The other divers should have been within NDL so there would be nothing preventing them from surfacing at a safe ascent rate. Also it was a drift dive; leaving divers 'bobbing around' in current is how people get lost at sea
He means drop a spare tank/reg set over the side to a set depth (say 100') where divers can find it and ride out an extended deco stop. You can do it on static lines/anchorage lines, but its almost impossible in Cozumel due to the constant and varied currents
Never heard of a boat hanging a tank at 100'... 5m/16' would be more common, as that's safety stop depth and within the MOD of 100% O2, which is what would have helped in this case. Whether that's possible on this dive site off a live boat, I don't know
WSOPFAN:
while it was a dive performed in poor judgement and lack of preparation, her getting narced was not on purpose which is what got her to 400ft. they had done ...very deep dives before without narcosis
(actually a quote from a different sited linked by WSOPFAN) You can't do deep air dives without narcosis; without noticable symptoms, without blackout/unresponsiveness, memory loss etc yes. But the narcosis is still there. Nobody gets narced 'on purpose' because you don't have a choice in the matter
If all is true, the 330' depth is scarily deep from my perspective. It also makes you wonder if all divers were in the same health condition as in previous dives. Was fatigue or some other issue a factor that could have resulted in narcosis this time? ...I am still amazed that Gabi functioned so well at that depth
While fatigue and other factors can increase susceptibility to the symptoms of narcosis, you need to shift your mindset from it being a logical, predictable event; it's not, or at least we don't understand it well enough to be able to predict it. Some people can 'function' just fine when it comes to reflexive actions and maintaining some awareness of what's happening - what goes out the window is your cognitive ability to solve unexpected problems
WSOPFAN, this discussion has made me realize that I have forgotten a lot about DCS. Right or wrong (as a poster asserted a page or two back) I am still working under the assumption that a given person will respond "about" the same given otherwise identical starting conditions.
That could be way wrong. I am curious if anyone has developed a graph that gives relative risks of narcosis and O2 toxicity as a function of depth
You seem to be getting a few different topics mixed up there - DCS, OxTox and Narcosis. They're not directly related. And again, they're not linear & they're not predictable, at least not to the extent that you're implying. Someone suggested you should read Mark Powell's book earlier, that's a good starting point. OT is generally accepted to be a significant risk beyond a PPO2 of 1.6 but there are a lot of other factors and actually you can survive much higher exposures and tox at lower ones, depending on other factors
I wonder why a message was not posted here in SB or any other appropriate forum advicing the public to withhold judgement and / or speculations until eyewitness information is available? It may take a couple of days, but I'm sure the public understands the sensitive nature in situation such as this... The result, as I can see from the postings, did nothing but allowed heresays, speculations and other negatives to get ahead of the message
Welcome to scubaboard