Deep Air - Here we go again....

[Slamfire]

For your deep dive training what sort of exercises did your instructor teach you to better handle narcosis? I am being a bit silly as im sure your deep training consisted of the instructor telling you the dangers of diving deeper on air and then straight to 120. "how did you feel at 120"? "I felt fine". "Do you think you are up for 150"? "Sure I think I'll be ok". Post dive. "Congratulations you are now trained to dive deep on air"! Does that about nail it? I dont want to knock on your training but the notion of deep air training is a bit silly.

I got tough skin. It's going to be hard for me to feel insulted by you knocking on my training. Ok this IS the LAST post of the day. If I don't go up to the bedroom soon I might end up in trouble with the missus.

No, It was more involved than that. The first dive was very smooth. It was just the instructor and I. The profile graphic of the dive is very steady with all the stops at the right time. On the other deeper dives I had one more classmate. We were supposed to be a team and I did get critiqued for being a less than ideal team mate. There was too much focus on the instructor and not enough on my team mate. I left him behind a couple of times.

We discussed how this could be linked to the higher degrees of narcosis diminishing your peripheral view (diminished situational awareness) and making you more of a "one-track-mind" with a diminished ability to multi task. Still the dives were completed successfully and with no other incidents.

On the deepest dive I had the responsibility for keeping time and dictating the stops. Again critiqued for focusing too much on my wrist timer and not enough on my teammate, though it was not as bad as previously. The instructor commented that I was constantly looking at my watch - again he mentioned it could be linked to narcosis, having a slower comprehension time.

He asked me directly, "were you feeling narced," and I remember thinking, "Crap what crazy thing did I do that I don't remember." I answered yes, no point in trying to hide the obvious. But I also asked what was I doing that he mentioned that. He said the at shallower depths my ok signal with the light consisted of well defined big circles. As we went deeper my circles got smaller and less defined until there was a point when on one occasion he was unsure of what I was signalling back.

There were simple math operations we did at depth and at the top. I did mine slightly slower at depth but not by as slow as I thought I'd be. Also at depth my instructor questioned my time keeping making it look as if I had missed the start ascent time, but I successfully defended my position showing him our schedule on my slate and the timer on my wrist. Once at the top he said he would have like a pre-ascent notice, something like we'll start ascending in three mins from now, but overall my time keeping and my stops were right on the money and the post dive profile from the computers backed me up.

Also you have to realize that the course is not exclusively about narcosis and deep air. There's the skills, the valve drills, the bag deployments, the toxing diver rescue, the measuring of how far can you swim horizontally without breathing, OOA drils, etc.

And my honest veredict about the course, it is the best formal course I've taken so far. Based on my experience I have to disagree with your saying that there is no good deep air training. Also I consider formal training to be the beginning of the journey, not the destination. Was there still room for improvement after I finished the course. Definitely. Have I improved since, I'd like to believe so. I am also aware I can still keep improving.

 

[DCBC]

I really have a problem with this logic. You agree with this studies conclusions that helium is dangerous because it encourages divers to dive deep which exposes them to the higher risks of deep diving but at the same time you say it's ok to dive air to those deep depths so long as you train up to it which has been demonstrated to be dependent on an individuals susceptibility to nitrogen narcosis?

I still havent seen a reason from you why air is better then helium other then costs and availability.

Sloth, I'd appreciate it if you didn't misquote me. I haven't said that air is better than helium. My point remains that air is being used at depths that result in nitrogen narcosis and secondly, not all divers are trained to use helium, nor is it always available. If a diver elects to dive deep air for whatever reason. I'm suggesting that he/she is better off to have deep air training than not to.

 

[DCBC]

I wanted clarification in how he felt helium brought it's own risks when the benefits clearly outweigh the risks. I shouldn't have made the statement that his intent was to state air was better then helium.

Bottom line he makes these posts to do nothing but stir up a hornets nest. People like me will come in here and call him out on it because I feel whole hearty that by belittling the risks of deep air diving he is misleading people into potentially dangerous territory. It's worse in my mind knowing that he is an instructor and he preaches this to students.

I personally cant stand it when people belittle risks in order to justify to themselves that something they are doing is safe or ok. It's worse when that someone is an instructor that has a moral obligation to clearly define risks to students.

You have made claims, so show me the proof of your statements:

1. "I feel whole hearty that by belittling the risks of deep air diving he is misleading people into potentially dangerous territory."

Show me where I have belittled the risks of deep air diving? It is because of the risks that I train people the way I do, rather than ignore these risks.

2. "It's worse in my mind knowing that he is an instructor and he preaches this to students."

From your direct knowledge, what exactly do I preach to my students? You don't know me, so don't claim to know what I do or don't say to my students.

 

[DCBC]

Most of the deep commercial guys (a bunch) I know would rather dive air til they can't. Helium comes in after that. Each give a long list of the downsides they encounter using helium too shallow, when air can still work. I have to guess there is something to what they say.

Many on-shore commercial divers have this viewpoint. One contributing factor is that they require to be ticketed for mixed-gas. Most commercial schools certify unrestricted air. Mixed-gas is a second program that is often taken at a later date. The majority of commercial divers dive air on a daily basis.

Another factor is equipment availability and the cost. Good business dictates that profit is increased by lowering costs. If the dive is less than 175' why use Helium if the diver is trained and certified on air to that depth?

In addition to the Divers, the Dive Supervisor must also be on-site and certified as a Mixed-gas Supervisor. Often these are not available.

 

[Puffer Fish]

Interesting. I did not know this. I'd be interested in learning more about what actions would warrant revoking certifications.


I try very hard to avoid being misled in any situation . Have you ever gone through a deep air training dive and debriefing? Have you ever dove say... to 120' on air? If you have, you are probably, at least to some degree, aware of your narcotic impairment at that level. My deep air training dives started at 120' and progressed to 150'. You do not have to go all the way to 150' if your not comfortable. If you haven't taken a deep air training dive, don't you think that personally going through the experience would give you a better ground to discard it and the capability to say, "I've personally experienced it and based on what I went through I can categorically say there is no good deep air diving training."

If you have gone through a deep air training dive before do you mind sharing some of the details of your experience that contributed to your discarding of deep air training? I am genuinely interested in knowing that kind of details. You know... for the sake of avoiding misdirection

I'll take that one... I have several times more dives below 120 than you have dives.

I've seen experienced divers be good on a dive, and 3 months later be narced out of their mind at the same depth. I don't know if I ever was like that, as most of them did not seem to be aware they were, so who knows.

There is this macho, tough guy mentality that seems to says, "if someone says you should not go below (fill in the blank) depth, then I'll show them I can"... if someone says you get narced, you show them you can handle it.

Doing a training dive to say 150 ft, where all you do is go down... look at each other... and then go back up following a nice clean plan... is a kiddy dive. Deep yes, but trouble free. Now, here is a training dive... go down to 150, and have someone sneak up behind you, pull your mask off, shut your air off and inflate your vest, and then watch how you handle it...You live and you pass (I suspect I would not pass that test at 150, but I have at 120)

Note: In my time, inflating a vest meant pulling a CO2 lever, which thankfully at 120 does not do much..

The skill one needs at any depth is the ability to handle problems, but doing training with real problems at that depth may mean someone's life..so instead the training amounts to just easy practice.

 

[DCBC]

Any experienced divers care to say whether this is relevant to the question of when is Deep Air too deep?

Regardless of the recommendations made by the certification agencies, this is dependent upon the individual. I say this not to make light of these recommendations, but just because an agency says 130' doesn't mean a diver will be safe at that depth.

The point of deep air training is to teach the diver to be in-tune with how narcosis is effecting him. In this way he can follow a plan and understand if and when he's about to cross the line. Obviously this depends upon personal judgement as well.

The other factor that may be missed is that narcosis is not just a depth thing, but time is also a factor. An unwary diver who isn't trained in deep air can suddenly find himself overwhelmed by narcosis and not care. The trained diver (should he elect to follow his training) will recognize when this is an unacceptable hazard and thumb the dive before it occurs.

Does a deep working dive differ substantially from a deep look-see dive?

The difference is in the mental approach to the dive. This was easily seen when I was doing chamber testing at DCIEM. The Navy divers walk into the chamber and sit down with their game face on. They know what they will be mentally dealing with and will fight it through intense focus and concentration. The less experienced will come in to "go for a ride" in the chamber. Before they realize it they are acting inebriated. The Navy divers are calm and have the same expression on their faces, not a smile amongst them. It all depends upon mental approach.

The working diver is there to get a job done and go home. Fun isn't a factor. A Deep Air diver should have the same intensity. The deep look-see diver is just experimenting.

 

[Blackwood]

Marc, ...can I call you Marc? Paraphrasing Cuba Gooding in Jerry McGuire, you think we're fighting, but we're finally talking.

fighting? Haha naw I'm just bored, and though Deep Air has been done so many times I found something interesting in the newness of your posts.

That's the main reason why I brought up this whole thing about the standards. There was too much subjectiveness attached to the word deep. What is deep? Why not define it by the UTD training standards and get the facts clear.

I get what you are saying re. using common standards to define "deep" (which I think is >100 in most of the stateside agencies). What I'm saying is it doesn't matter much to the non-student.

You do make a good point, though. Some of us call 120 feet on air "deep air," while others call 210 feet on air "deep air."


BTW, I'd love to dive up there. I've heard great things about your lakes.

 

[DCBC]

I'll take that one... I have several times more dives below 120 than you have dives.

As do I... but so what?

I've seen experienced divers be good on a dive, and 3 months later be narced out of their mind at the same depth. I don't know if I ever was like that, as most of them did not seem to be aware they were, so who knows.

All divers breathing air are being adversely affected by narcosis by the time they get to 50'; it's a matter of degree. The diver should be aware of his condition at all times and thumb the dive before the risk becomes unacceptable. There's no excuse to ever be "narced out of your mind."

There is this macho, tough guy mentality that seems to says, "if someone says you should not go below (fill in the blank) depth, then I'll show them I can"... if someone says you get narced, you show them you can handle it.

If you were a Navy Diver you should know about dealing with narcosis as a requirement, not as anything macho.

Doing a training dive to say 150 ft, where all you do is go down... look at each other... and then go back up following a nice clean plan... is a kiddy dive. Deep yes, but trouble free. Now, here is a training dive... go down to 150, and have someone sneak up behind you, pull your mask off, shut your air off and inflate your vest, and then watch how you handle it...You live and you pass (I suspect I would not pass that test at 150, but I have at 120)

Although I often use harassment in training, I don't do so with recreational divers in open-water. As a 4000 series NAUI Instructor, you would have used harassment in training, as it was part of the NAUI training program at that time. Things have changed and although I wish it was more substantive, people can develop strong skill-sets without harassment.

The skill one needs at any depth is the ability to handle problems, but doing training with real problems at that depth may mean someone's life..so instead the training amounts to just easy practice.

If the Instructor isn't challenging the student i.e. "easy," he should revisit how he teaches.

 

[mongodives]

For all of you who posted study references, thanks.

 

[JeffG]

If the Instructor isn't challenging the student i.e. "easy," he should revisit how he teaches.

Challenging a student on a simulated deco dive vs a real deco dive at depth is two different things. One I would consider almost criminal.