Full Face mask Cave diving.

[KevinNM]

Shaw was on a rebreather. I don't believe he ran out of O2 or diluent or burned up his absorbant. I think (based on various reports) he got his internal CO2 level so high that, combined too much N2 in his diluent and the increased work of breathing due to ill advised modifications to his rebreather, he suffocated and stopped breathing.

 

[karstdvr]

.

It seems like some people here would feel their lives would absolutely be ruined if they were able to communicate with a buddy who is not in sight.

I don't think anybody has inferred this. Can technology provide a solution in the future that provides reliable communication, but doesn't introduce more failure points? Perhaps. Then a continued discussion on what-ifs with a different thread is prudent. But, I advocate good basic skills and planning as a means to a solution to cave diving communication until this alternative and reliable mean of communication is created.

 

[kensuf]

What about accidents like Dave Shaw's? I guess since Mr. Shaw was solo he would have eventually run OOA if he didn't quickly regain consciousness... I think I remember a recent oxtox fatality when a diver thought they had air in a tank that was labeled 100%. CO2 hits and OxTox hits would benefit from FFM wouldn't they? Obviously in the latter case, the fatality could have been prevented in other ways. It still seems to me like the FFM in these cases would provide an additional layer of safety.

Before you guys crucify me, I ask in earnest knowing full well that everyone already participating in this thread has vastly superior knowledge on the subject.

No one's going to crucify you here. You asked legitimate questions, so here are some legitimate answers.

Dave Shaw - a FFM could of made the onset of his fatality happen quicker due to the extra dead air space. He was exerting himself very heavily at close to 30 ATA, which caused a large amount of CO2 build up that lead to deep water black-out.

Carlos Fonseca (the O2 hit), a FFM would have reduced the chances of him drowning due to convulsions, but it would have added an unnecessary level of complexity. The oxygen bottle he was breathing was a stage bottle, which in cave diving parlance means he was breathing it to a point in the cave, and then he would park the bottle and leave it there for pickup on his return out. Swapping regs with the FFM would have made a simple switch difficult, and would not have corrected the underlying problem. A much more elegant and simpler solution would have been to analyze his tanks before putting a regulator on them.

FWIW, I had a former dive buddy who died back in 2001 by the same failure that took out Carlos, in the case of my friend Jonathan he breathed pure helium at 20' mistaking it for oxygen. There was nothing new to learn from Carlos' death, but it was a good reminder that complacency kills.

I think my overriding frustration with this thread is that the "communication failure" that is trying to be addressed with technology is really a human failure. In at least two of the three examples, if not all three, a member of the dive team broke down and failed to follow basic communications procedures. I do not believe technology would solve that problem, if anything, I believe that it would foster the kind of complacency that killed Carlos.

 

[ofg-1]

Look, if you have no experience in using a FFM, then I do not understand why you would have an opinion. I have used Widolf, Ocean Edge, DESCO, a Kirby KMB-9 and have hundreds of hours on a Aquadyne DM5. You have some very bad assumptions of their utility and use. They are a tool that was designed for certain jobs, and you want to use it for something else, kinda like using a Crescent wrench as a hammer, which I am sure no one would do.

Simple tasks, like clearing your ears, and compounded by the inability to touch your nose with your hand without flooding the mask. Clearing the mask is more difficult. Defog is more difficult because you are living with the heat and sweat off your face, and it is done by blowing your gas supply across the faceplate, at least on the Kirby and DM5. The comm in all of these units is fragile and only partially reliable. Loosing a mic or earphone on a dive is common. The clarity is not good depending on your distance from your buddy if you are wireless or, if on a hose, the amount of corrosion in the wiring.

The masks hold air, and the hoods that they are attached to also hold air, unless you punch holes in the hood. That adds buoyancy to your head area and throws off your trim for swimming. They restrict your movement. They are not low volume or streamlined.

For the commercial work I did for years, they were great. Compared to the old brass helmets, or even some of the older composite helmets like a Swindell, they were fantastic. The Widolf is the most comfortable I have tried, followed by the DM5, but the comm in the DM5 was junk. I have been 1800 feet back in a storm drain and lost comm. All of them are being phased out by the newer dry hats for most work, and you can also swim with a Kirby Superlite, but it is not the tool for cave diving.

As Kelly has said, cave divers are pretty innovative people, if this had made even a little sense, don't you think someone would be doing it? I mean the KMB-8 was available in the late 1960's. I tried my DM5 cave diving in 1977, it sucked.

I can see their usefulness for long decompressions, on high partial pressures of O2, but again, until you have puked in one and had to flush it out so you did not get chunks every time you inhale, I don't suggest you try it. ps - Don't eat a banana and 2 granola bars before a dive, the granola is a bit rough on the second stage.

 

[tbone1004]

have you used any of the modern ffm's? The are VERY different than a KMB-9 and DM5....

FWIW they are used in limited use for working dives in caves, mainly videography for documentaries, but those are all on modern FFM's like the OTS Guardian which still hold some of the principals of the ones that you have mentioned in terms of air consumption, but the comm devices are worlds ahead of where they were even in the 90's and the masks themselves are not that upsetting to trim.

 

[ofg-1]

have you used any of the modern ffm's? The are VERY different than a KMB-9 and DM5.....

Are they easier to de-puke? I have used the Ocean Reef Neptune several times for photography. I have not tried the Guardian.

 

[tbone1004]

nothing is easy to depuke lol. If I'm diving FFM and feel the urge, thankfully I haven't had it, I will pull the mask off and go to a half mask and normal reg. The Guardian is a bit nicer than the Neptune imho, but all of them are radically different than the old style that you've been talking about in terms of ease of use. If anything because they're much lower volume and much lighter than some of the older ones

 

[gearbow]

I can definitely see a lot of the cons as most of you are pointing out I also see the frustration of some of the poster here when you guys are not seeing his point. I personally am thinking of getting rid of my FFM for a couple main reasons. Air consumption. I have probably 50+ dives with the full face and feel very comfortable with it but I do use more air. One of the supposed pros of owning a full face mask is visibility. That is just not the case with the model I have anyway. You lose some of your peripheral vision due to the deeper profile. I find i have to move my head just that little bit more when looking side to side or down to look at a gauge. Without a expensive gas switch block, gas switching requires doffing the mask for your back up reg and mask. The skill is not especially hard but maybe a little harder than a normal mask switch but way harder than just switchin regs with the added task load of unhooking the bulky face mask. but I might argue the gas switch block reduces task load no? I believe there are blocks that allow stage bottles to be plugged in? The trim issue due to more buoyancy in the mask has not been a issue (for me anyway ). But it sure is comfortable and there is no clearing my mask ever.

I will state this again....The more stories and accident analysis I read the more I am certain a lot of accidents had the potential to have been mitigated before things got out of hand had voice communication been available. You guys can argue why the accident happened in the first place such as poor planning and poor training or lack of safety procedures it doesn't change the fact that the lack of this type of communication is currently costing lives.

I know that change doesn't come easy to the dive community and I trust that if the current equipment available was safer it would be used. It is a engineering problem to work on if we can get comms in a safe simple streamlined way.

 

[karstdvr]

I can definitely see a lot of the cons as most of you are pointing out I also see the frustration of some of the poster here when you guys are not seeing his point.

I think for the most part his point is well understood,it just for the active cave divers on this thread,the arguments are incongruous.

it doesn't change the fact that the lack of this type of communication is currently costing lives.

I tend to think this statement has a little hyperbole. Has there been a fatality where communication could have saved a life, I am sure if we dig we will find that there has been. I look at the 1000's upon 1000's of cave dives performed safely where current planning and communication techniques worked because the divers utilized their training. In retrospect, a lot of fatalities started on the land before the people ever got in the water.

 

[Stoo]

Wet notes. All my buddies can read.

Nice. I wish mine could.. ;-)