In-Water Recompression, Revisited

[Jack Hammer]

That being said, and for the record again, and let me shout this out this time "I AM NOT RECOMMENDING IT (I.E. 2.8 ata IN-WATER ON O2), AND I DON'T RECALL SAYING I WOULD, (RECOMMEND IT) EXCEPT SAYING I, REPEAT I, WOULD TAKE THE CHANCE MYSELF IF IN A TOTAL WORSE CASE EMERGENCY AS I ALLUDED TO WAY BACK MANY PAGES AGO"

Is that clear enough re my position now for all?

Dive safe, and if you cant be good, be careful!

Allow me to help you out with how people interpret things...

By saying you would do it you are inadvertently recommending it.

 

[cerich]

Yes, long term resolution of course. I was paralyzed from the waist down after all! And given that was twenty five odd years ago, and I have been diving much deeper / longer on multi day / week expeditions ever since, it appears so (i.e. resolved. I still can walk (not limp) and talk without slurring (except when drunk) although some may refer to what I have to say as simply 'doggeral' though.



Very very funny! Almost spat out my gin and tonic on those last few words! ;-) As it certainly has no bearing whatsoever / is not in the areas / countries where I have dived regularly over the last 25 odd years.

Did you mistake this thread as a discussion that only concerns you?

 

[cerich]

Oh, I agree with you completely. "Treatment" using IWR and "treatment" in a hyperbaric chamber have different objectives. That would be another advantage of having a flexible hyperbaric chamber around.

Best regards,
DDM

having chatted on a few occasions with the minds that brought us flexidecs, one of the design goals was to make it easily transportable while in use, helicopters in particular as a consideration. Another was the ability to mate with a multiplace (which isn't universal sadly)I think they had a very valid mindset

 

[Akimbo]

@cerich

Operating a chamber is not rocket science, as demonstrated by my ability to do it. However, I would rate the learning curve substantially above learning to use surface-supplied FFMs, even at the most demanding training levels. Probably not as demanding as good eCCR training, but a lot more than advanced Nitrox plus Decompression.

Although the logistics of a monoplace portable chamber (collapsible or not) is much lower than a typical DLCs (Double Lock Chamber), they are still relatively expensive. I have bought used DLCs that have been fully depreciated for a lot less... especially when the price of oil was low like it is now.

The killer part of the cost restriction for expedition dives isn't the chamber... like days of sailing time to a small port on a chartered vessel of opportunity. It is the logistics and the larger vessel required. Mobilizing a 54" DLC and a couple (primary and backup) LP compressors to run them is north of 14,000 Lbs/5,550 Kg.

Both are way beyond amateur budgets. Most science, film/video production, and investor-funded treasure hunting budgets are over-strained by the total cost. I have done some R&D work on a submersible tent/OBB (Open Bottom Bell) for operations like this. At least you can lease DLC systems fairly cheaply.

 

[cerich]

@cerich

Operating a chamber is not rocket science, as demonstrated by my ability to do it. However, I would rate the learning curve substantially above learning to use surface-supplied FFMs, even at the most demanding training levels. Probably not as demanding as good eCCR training, but a lot more than advanced Nitrox plus Decompression.

IWR is not just knowing how to use a FFM, surface supplied or otherwise. The team involved needs to have a higher level of training and knowledge of decompression. If they have that, they likely have chamber experience, if they have that using a flexidec is not even a intellectually straining exercise.

 

[Kay Dee]

Not at all. A diver in the situation you described may well benefit from IWR to an initial treatment depth indicated by an established protocol, e.g. 30 fsw as recommended by the US Navy. There's a big difference between that and going to 60 fsw.

Jesu Christo! It seems almost no one, and I repeat almost no one here read or fully understood the so-called 'hypothetical' situation I described way back when. Talk about falling on deaf ears.

As boulderjohn quoted (my clarification for one and all here now in capitals "The only reason you would go to 60 feet, as I thought you meant in your original post (I DID MEAN THAT), is that Brett Gilliam (OR SOMEONE ON THE BOAT IN A POSITION SIMILAR SO TO SPEAK) was dictating the conditions of your treatment and you had no say in it whatsoever (EXACTLY!!!!!.)

Oh well, not to worry. Back to another G and T for me, as it is actually after 6pm here, and you know what they say anyway; "Drinking alcohol before noon, makes one a pirate, not an alcoholic" ) and its well past noon here!

 

[Duke Dive Medicine]

having chatted on a few occasions with the minds that brought us flexidecs, one of the design goals was to make it easily transportable while in use, helicopters in particular as a consideration. Another was the ability to mate with a multiplace (which isn't universal sadly)I think they had a very valid mindset

The one flexible chamber I have experience with was light enough to be carried by two people (empty of course). It wouldn't fit on our Lifeflight aircraft but would easily fit in a military helicopter. The doors in our primary treatment chambers aren't wide enough to accommodate a flexible chamber. If we'd ever received a diver in one, we'd have had to use one of our research chambers that has a large-diameter hatch.

Best regards,
DDM

 

[cerich]

@cerich



Both are way beyond amateur budgets. Most science, film/video production, and investor-funded treasure hunting budgets are over-strained by the total cost. I have done some R&D work on a submersible tent/OBB (Open Bottom Bell) for operations like this. At least you can lease DLC systems fairly cheaply.

yup, have spent a million dollars of OPM to have a comprehensive and self supporting expedition capable system...and that was on a 300 ft ship.

 

[Duke Dive Medicine]

Jesu Christo! It seems almost no one, and I repeat almsot no one here read or fully understood the so-called 'hypothetical' situation I described way back when. Talk about falling on deaf ears.

As boulderjhon quoted (my clarification here in capitals "The only reason you would go to 60 feet, as I thought you meant in your original post (I DID MEAN THAT), is that Brett Gilliam (OR SOMEONE ON THE BOAT IN A POSITION SIMILAR SO TO SPEAK) was dictating the conditions of your treatment and you had no say in it whatsoever (EXACTLY!!!!!.)

Ditto the expletive and add a few saltier ones. If you were so badly bent that you weren't in a position to speak for yourself, nobody but NOBODY would have any business putting you in dive gear and dropping you to 60 feet under water breathing O2. It would be beyond foolish. Enough said on the subject, I hope that our readers get the message. May I respectfully recommend that you put your desires in writing in a living will.

Best regards,
DDM

 

[Kay Dee]

Enough said on the subject,

Agreed, it's useless to continue 'talking' with you sir, you simply have your blinders on way to tight, even for an MD.

I hope that our readers get the message.

If they don't by now they never will. So given how many times you have said 'it' I am sure they do.

May I respectfully recommend that you put your desires in writing in a living will.

WTF has a living will got to do with it now? You have also completely missed my point about my attitude towards death as opposed to paralysis (as you have about the other 'issue'). I take whatever I do as my responsibility and mine alone, and my loved ones are fully aware of that. And while my living will does not state to treat me at 2.8ata on o2 if I can't communicate, it certainly does say to pull all the plugs ASAP should I ever be being kept alive in a hospital, etc, by 'machines', that is if / when I no longer have a say in the matter, when the time comes. And the time comes for us all!

Best fishes to you.