Deep Diving Bad Decision... Avoided

[jagfish]

Deep Diving Bad Decision... Avoided
Continuing this week's theme of scuba gasses, deep diving, narcosis, and dangers of CO2, here is a story of when I was tempted to make a bad decision based on the high cost of the dive. Avoid danger, especially at depth, and live to dive another day.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Not just cost, but time. I did a dive to the Warren wreck in Lake Crescent, on the north end of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington state. We were on air, one of my buddies was completely narced out of his mind. He was like a cat watching a laser pointer when I was signaling him with my light to see if he was okay. I thumbed the dive to my other buddy who rejected it (yes, I've never gone diving with those guys again).

It was the hassle of going out there, as it took a lot of time. The cost wasn't money, but time and effort.

There are other lessons in your video that I won't go into. I just wanted to add that money isn't the only factor that leads divers to summit fever.

Edit: That was also a lesson to never dive deep on air again. Though it wasn't years later when I learned of Dr. Simon Mitchell's research that led to a recommended maximum gas density of 5.2 g / L and an absolute maximum gas density of 6.2 g / L

 

[Celt]

That was a terrible dive plan, did ye not consider using a shot line?

 

[Bagoose]

Thanks for posting. This article opened my eyes to something that I had experienced but was unable to put my thumb on concerning deep diving and CO2 retention.
Density Discords: Understanding and Applying Gas Density Research

 

[johndiver999]

That was a terrible dive plan, did ye not consider using a shot line?

Why was it a terrible dive plan?

 

[Celt]

Why was it a terrible dive plan?

They misjudged the current and missed the wreck. A shot line ahead of the wreck up current would have made a simple drift back. Also there’s no point planning a dive to 46 metres if there’s a possibility that you may drift deeper, you have to plan for the deepest possible depth and carry the gas to complete it.

 

[jadairiii]

What a joke. Based on his "memory" they were diving the Miller Lite wreck, bottom in 165'. I laugh that they did not "plan" their deco for max depth (mistake #2). I have hot dropped that wreck lots of times over the years, biggest mistake people make is not knowing how to "hot drop" (mistake #3), newbees end up dicking around on the surface and blowing past it. The captains know what they are doing, the divers dont.

4th mistake was just not re-dropping, they would have seen the wreck from above 100' even in poor conditions, but my guess would be that they were hoovering their gas (deep air) and they couldn't re-drop (as he eluded to). Interesting to know if they were diving doubles or just a single tank?

...first mistake, diving deep air. That was a stroke fest of a dive and a complete lack of understanding on how to conduct a "deep dive". The worst part, they guy in the video was an instructor and that unprepared and uninformed on how to dive an easy dive such as the Miller Lite.

My first dive on the Miller was in 1995.

 

[johndiver999]

They misjudged the current and missed the wreck. A shot line ahead of the wreck up current would have made a simple drift back. Also there’s no point planning a dive to 46 metres if there’s a possibility that you may drift deeper, you have to plan for the deepest possible depth and carry the gas to complete it.

I've never used a shot line. Can you take the time to explain how it would be used in a strong current when drifting into (toward) a wreck? Thanks.

As for errors, I was surprised to hear the instructor say (explicitly) that they had NOT made contingency plans to go to the bottom on that drift dive. I would think that the nitrox mix would be selected so that it is OK for the potential maximum depth and the deco/dive time could be adjusted if they had to go all the way to the bottom?

 

[Wibble]

Is there no slack water for that wreck?

 

[Celt]

I've never used a shot line. Can you take the time to explain how it would be used in a strong current when drifting into (toward) a wreck? Thanks.

As for errors, I was surprised to hear the instructor say (explicitly) that they had NOT made contingency plans to go to the bottom on that drift dive. I would think that the nitrox mix would be selected so that it is OK for the potential maximum depth and the deco/dive time could be adjusted if they had to go all the way to the bottom?

A suitable shot and use for the wreck described would be, 3” stainless pipe long enough to hold 30 pound of lead. An eye on the pipe to take 5 feet of chain and enough 3/8 rope to go to the deepest wreck plus 1/3. Topside a float big enough to float all the weight and some. On the float a carabiner large enough to let the chain slide through. A sliding weight is on the other side of the rope to take up the slack. Going on the vis description get 100 feet up current of the wreck and drop the shot with the carabiner clipped in a bight of the rope. The heavy weight will drop to the bottom and the sliding weight will slide down the standing rope to take up the slack. The divers dress and are dropped at the float. They can drop down the rope and drift into the wreck maintaining the depth they wish to stay at. Any amount of divers can use the shot and when everyone is back on board the shot can be retrieved. To retrieve the shot the float is hauled but left in place, the counter weight is unclipped from the standing rope and attached to the stern of the boat when the boat is driven away from the wreck the float will run along the rope hauling the shot to the surface, the chain on the shot will run through the carabiner on the float and the shot will be hanging on the float for retrieval.