Deep Air

[Blackwood]

It's the same today. People in our Society want instant gratification. Technology is allowed to make up for many of our short-comings. If you give some young people a mathematical problem and hand them a piece of paper and a pencil, they can only answer it if they have a calculator. No calculator, no answer. I hope the world never runs out of batteries... .

I don't agree that it's an "instant gratification" sort of thing. Rather, it's the natural progression of society.

When I went to engineering school, I used integral and differential calculus. If I'd had to go through the steps Newton did in developing the maths, I'd have never reached the point of actually applying it. Same with physics, chemistry, and a plethora of science. We take what has been previously learned and build upon it.

It's the old saying: if reach I high, it's because I stand on the shoulders of giants (or however it goes).

 

[ucfdiver]

Lynne-

Since you mentioned it, why do you think the WKPP, EKPP, and Britannic exploration groups have such an amazing safety record while doing dives that consistently break world records and expectations? Perhaps not diving intoxicated? Not putting a price (helium) on risking human life?

 

[Thalassamania]

Lynne, the problems is that, in some ways, you are truly comparing apples and oranges. I fully support everyones' right to decide not to dive under any set of circumstances that make them uncomfortable, that a prime tenet in the scientific diving world. But it is important to look at what it is that one is uncomfortable about, and the possible causes of that discomfort.

Yes, there is narcosis on every dive. Yes, it is more pronounced at greater depth. Yes, it is even worse under the worst circumstances ... stressful dives. But it can, on most occasions, be dealt with. Close buddy work is one of the important ways; and on the days when it just doesn't all come together ... you thumb the dive. The science community's flawless experience with air dives from 130 to 190 proves that this concept is true.

You do not want to dive below 100 feet on air, I respect that and hope that you will stick by that decision. But is that because you are (and always will be) "farm animal stupid" on air at that depth, or is it because you moved more rapidly to diving at depth without gaining the experience that you would have had to if there was only air and you needed to learn to deal with the narcosis problem? Now I'm not against mix ... frankly I'm strongly for it, and I took a lot of flack within the science community for being the first DSO who strongly advocated its use; however, I am also strongly in favor of the use of air between 130 and 190, if just because it greatly helps to prepare divers for ENDs in that range and we have shown that air in that range has been used without incident. Face it, not many students' research project budgets can cover the expense of mix, so they have to pay in terms of gaining adequate experience first.

... why do you think the WKPP, EKPP, and Britannic exploration groups have such an amazing safety record while doing dives that consistently break world records and expectations? Perhaps not diving intoxicated? Not putting a price (helium) on risking human life?

It's never one thing. I'm sure that mix contributed to it, especially since many of those dives were (to me) deeper than air should ever go (190). But I'd give most of the credit to good planning and excellent teamwork, critical items regardless of what you're breathing.

 

[Blackwood]

Lynne-

Since you mentioned it, why do you think the WKPP, EKPP, and Britannic exploration groups have such an amazing safety record while doing dives that consistently break world records and expectations? Perhaps not diving intoxicated? Not putting a price (helium) on risking human life?

The gases couldn't hurt, but I really have to credit their highly qualified team and support divers. Those record breaking dives were probably among the best equipped and staffed in dive history.

 

[Diver0001]

Lynne-

Since you mentioned it, why do you think the WKPP, EKPP, and Britannic exploration groups have such an amazing safety record while doing dives that consistently break world records and expectations? Perhaps not diving intoxicated? Not putting a price (helium) on risking human life?

Actually, in a long conversation I had with Mark Ellyatt this topic came up. His point was that what took the GUE 6 months to plan would be something the "masters" of scuba diving could do "off the cuff".

The point being that what the real "hard core" of the deep diving scene seem to think is "normal diving" is exceedingly challenging (if not death defying) for the "new tek" of our sport.

I'm pretty sure you're going to find that hard to swallow but that's how the deep masters of our sport see the GUE way of doing things... Guppies with ambition and a few good ideas. Hardly more than that.

Mark's nearly fatal dive was done with Wenkie's tables and after that everything GUE was reversed and debunked in terms of deep diving.... None of our sport's masters use GUE DIR prinicples now..... shouldn't that say something?

R..

 

[ucfdiver]

The gases couldn't hurt, but I really have to credit their highly qualified team and support divers. Those record breaking dives were probably among the best equipped and staffed in dive history.

Very true. Safe dives seem to have a ton of contributing factors, and unsafe dives seem to have an "incident pit" that lead up to them.

There's no doubt these projects have an excellent support team. I know divers like PFCAJ who's posted in this thread deserve a ton of credit for helping make these dives successful by being a part of the support teams. From talking to some of the wkpp support divers, some of the stuff that took several dives to map in leon sinks (on air) has been pushed much further on the first dive due to how detail oriented these guys are.

 

[Scott L]

I am also strongly in favor of the use of air between 130 and 190, if just because it greatly helps to prepare divers for ENDs in that range and we have shown that air in that range has been used without incident. Face it, not many students' research project budgets can cover the expense of mix, so they have to pay in terms of gaining adequate experience first.

Are you training for unforseen spikes in depths?....hence the need to train for a END greater than planned?

 

[TSandM]

Thal, I don't know whether I went deep too fast. I do know that I had several early experiences with narcosis that taught me forcibly that I didn't want to deal with it again, period. If that meant limiting my dives, that was fine -- that's where my personal hard deck of 100 fsw on non-helium gases comes from. I did discover that diving helium mixes appears to avoid the problem, so I go deeper than that on mix. I do not want to work on adaptation to narcosis. I didn't like it. I don't want to work through it. I am perfectly happy either not to do a dive that will run me into it, or to do it on mix, whichever is possible. I thoroughly enjoy shallow dives, and I am not a dedicated wreck person, so passing up square profile dives to depths deeper than I am comfortable is really no skin off my nose.

 

[bletso]

Okay . . .I've got another week long Truk Lagoon Trip coming up (where helium last year was $4/cf; $0.14/litre).

The plan is to initially survey the external features in the "break" of the Aikoku Maru, looking for the passageway to the engine room & the infamous "bone" room on non-penetration deep air dives at 54m. Subsequent dives will be to evaluate & test cognitive faculties with 20/20 mix --END 39meters at a cost of $160 for the backgas in twin 11L tanks (double AL80's); other option is 18/45 standard mix --END 30m at a cost of over $300 for one set of twin 11L tanks, if I'm not comfortable on the lesser 20/20 mix. The primary goal is to eventually penetrate at a planned depth of 54m for no more than 15meters linear distance and 25min bottom time. SAC rates planned are 15L/min (0.5cf/min) nominal and 22L/min (0.75cf/min) contingency. Ratio Deco schedule 1:2 used for all bottom mix scenarios (Air, 20/20 and 18/45), using eanx50 and O2 for deco gases. Probably will utilize a 11L stage of bottom mix as well.

Anyway, that's the kind of pre-planning & decision making I'm up against right now before leaving in two weeks . . .thoughts, ideas and useful comments appreciated.

My solution to high helium costs is the rebreather. I can do two 70 msw dives and still have enough to abort from the bottom OC. All this with a 45 cf mix. Heck, I can dive all weekend on a 30 mix and 13 cf O2 in recreational realms.

Dale

 

[TSandM]

None of our sport's masters use GUE DIR prinicples now..... shouldn't that say something?

Is this true? I think manifolded doubles with the hose setup GUE uses is pretty mainstream. I think a number of technical agencies are now teaching END < 100 ft, ppO2 of 1.4 or even 1.2 for the working part of the dive. I think they're teaching team skills, and a lot are using the same gas planning strategies that GUE uses. Are you just talking about using RGBM for decompression planning? I don't believe the WKPP does that, but I can't say for certain -- I don't dive with the WKPP, and wouldn't ever expect to be invited to do so. GUE teaches DecoPlanner with tweaks, and DecoPlanner is basically straight Buhlmann.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to discover that the people on the ragged edge in some directions aren't compatible with GUE's principles, because GUE is basically like me . . . If the dive can't be done with an acceptable amount of risk mitigation, it doesn't get done.