Learned Wrong...

[Jill from Phoenix]

One of the hardest things to teach divers is judgement. I teach ESA and EBSA. I have them practice both from about 30ft, and the EBSA I have them simulate dropping the weights and flaring about 15ft. I think it's different for everybody, but in my head I think the average diver couldn't perform an ESA much deeper than 50-60 ft, in which I case I think that dropping the weights is necessary to prioritize airway/breathing over dcs risk. But then again they have to know they may or may not be saving their life for temporary or permanent injury. I let the divers discuss this and weigh their options as a point of discovery. You're right instinct is extremely strong. One of my first lectures to the divers is 'Instincts and Habits', knowing what are the Instincts that are dangerous in diving and the habits we need to reprogram them with to keep them safer. So, when faced with an emergency, they have the clarity of mind to say I want to flee to the surface, but I'm going to go as slowly as possible and keep my airway open or I'm not going to make it so I will efficiently drop my weights and flare to slow my ascent.

 

[Thalassamania]

Because when you are a long way from the surface and you need to breathe, it is much easier to ride up then to swim up.

I have tried 100 foot plus ascents in most every mode, swimming, buoyant from belt drop, buoyant using a BC Air Siphon, and let me assure you that buoyant is much, much more comfortable, there's no struggle, you know that you're gonna get there.

That's why I have a standing offer to all of my students that if they ever drop their belt and lead ... I'll buy them a new one.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Yeah, of course, they're not gonna need it, since they'll never dive again... They'll be lucky if they live at all, and luckier still if they're not confined to a wheelchair for the rest of their lives.

What's really shocking to me is that it's from maximum depth that y'all are really recommending this uncontrolled procedure. It seems that y'all like the idea of a CESA from 60', but from 120', use an EBA.

CESAs - a last resort to be used only when the other option is drowning (and no, a diver should never get to that point) - can be used just as effectively as an EBA. As the diver swims up (which is a faster solution than dropping weight, emptying your BC and waiting for physics to take over), he/she becomes progressively more bouysnt anyway because of expanding bubbles in the BC and in the diver's suit. Normally, a diver vents these gasses to maintain control of the ascent. In the case of a CESA, no venting means that the diver faces positive bouyancy eithout having to drop a weight belt anyway.

Add to that the fact that the air in the diver's lungs expands rapidly, and that a reduction in ambient pressure allows the draw of another breath from the scuba unit, and I don't see any reason to perform an EBA.

Sorry... The key argument of "it's easier" doesn't fly... It's not easier to stop, drop weights, possibly inflate the BC with air that you presumably do not have, and then flair the body as described. It's much easier to simply swim up.

...Not that "easier" should be a concern at the OOA situation that you describe. I would think that "whichever way gives me the best chance of survival" would he a bigger attraction. And certainly a "controlled" ascent would be safer than an uncontrolled one.

 

[Jill from Phoenix]

It's not the first choice for an emergency or the second or the third. But it is an option if they are alone and too deep. We hope they never use it. It's just another tool for the arsenal. But dropping the weights is impressed upon in any emergency situation, when in doubt, drop 'em. Statistics do say that divers are commonly found on the bottom with their weight belts. It's a personal choice, but I'd rather survive and be paralyzed than be dead on the bottom.

 

[Bob DBF]

See, I don't see this. Assuming that the obvious - Bob (Grateful Diver)'s recommendations are ignored and the situation really does present itself that the diver must ascend to the surface or drown - I don't see why a buoyant ascent would have an advantage over a CESA. That is, I see no advantage to dropping your weights and/or inflating your BC prior to ascending (inflating... with what? I thought we were OOA).

There is more than one way to fill a BC. The USN still uses CO2 cartridges to fill the BC in an emergency. The diver safety focused recreational crowd removed them 20 or more years ago.

No amount of skill or practice is going to prevent an air embolism or anneurism from expanding bubbles in the bloodstream or difficult-to-vent body cavities. That's the difference between a scuba diver who has been breathing compressed gasses at depth and an escaping submariner who is "freediving" or "bounce diving," depending on how you see it. That's why an escapting submariner can do a bouyant ascent at 600 fpm, while a scuba diver must (and can, since he gets another breath every few tens of feet) ascend much slower.

Once again, an escaping submariner breathes compressed gas as he is being pressurized to make his escape. The decent rate is quick but might be matched by a scuba diver. The speed of the escape is to minimize the bends, the risks on ascent are the same as a diver doing their profile.

The only actual escape from a sub, that is known, was from the USS Tang in WWII in 180' of water, about half the people that escaped were not found, of course there was a battle going on at the surface.

When? Where? Do you have statistics? How do you define "far too frequently," and who was "found dead on the bottom?" How would a bouyant emergency ascent have prevented the fatality better than a CESA? Do you know people who have been in the situation where they had to decide to CESA or bouyant ascend or drown? What was their choice, and what was the outcome?

Check the Accident and Incedent forum. At this point they don't have a choice at all. By the training they were given, they did not have any choice of a buoyant ascent which puts them on the surface where help may be available to save them.

And Bob DBF... What's to say that you're choosing to be bent at the surface or drowned on the bottom, anyway? If a diver, neutral in the water column, kicks up as a last resort - without dumping weight or adding gas to his/her BC - then guess what? They're bouyant. No additional work needed. That is, they'll be bent at the surface whether they like it or not, whether they dropped weights or not, if they kicked up as a last resort.

Don't you get "last resort". Regardless of the senarios used to support your point which all stop at a happy ending, your options stop there and mine don't.



Bob
---------------------------------------
I may be old, but I’m not dead yet.

 

[*dave*]

Yeah, of course, they're not gonna need it, since they'll never dive again... They'll be lucky if they live at all, and luckier still if they're not confined to a wheelchair for the rest of their lives.

Now, that's just ignorant. I'm speculating such statements are based on what you might imagine would happen or what you may have been told would happen, but it's clear your understanding is limited in regard to the procedure and the physiological realities of a proper execution.

Free ascents from 60' were a required OW skill when I certified and I'm not aware of a single incident out of many hundreds of executions. While I don't teach, recommend or execute these free ascents any longer, I know I can. As a solo diver, I consider the skill to be absolutely essential.

 

[Deep South Divers]

You were taught to dump your weights at 60' and perform a "free ascent" (what the rest of us call an emergency bouyant ascent)? What year was this? What agency? Did they also teach you to inflate your BC at depth as well? Did they teach you to perform this on a BC with a CO2 cartridge attachment?

Did you practice the procedure? Did you do it while loaded? What was your rate of ascent during practice?

Now, that's just ignorant. I'm speculating such statements are based on what you might imagine would happen or what you may have been told would happen, but it's clear your understanding is limited in regard to the procedure and the physiological realities of a proper execution.

Negative.

I am fully aware of the procedure, and fully aware how it's performed. I have performed EBAs myself, as required by some of the facilities I've worked for. For a complete diving resume, you're welcome to Google my name - "SeaJay Bayne." Included there you'll find some of my references to diving with Duke University's Hyperbaric Facility and DAN, specifically for the US Navy.

My statement, which you called "ignorant," is based on the fact that taking an N2 loaded scuba diver and forcing them into a fast ascent from depth due to catastrophic unweighting - and perhaps even inflation of their BC - is going to cause at the very least a pre-DCS condition in their body. Whether or not this is diagnosed, addressed, or whether or not the diver has medical issues from such an ascent is a gamble.

If the diver has a bad day - and especially if he/she is unfit, has heart disease, is dehydrated, has symptoms of obesity, is in poor physical health, or is heavily N2 loaded (read: near or over their NDLs, for the layman), then serious injury could occur that includes air embolisms, anneurisms, or DCS. Many of these problems can prove fatal or permenantly injuring.

If that seems ignorant to you, I recommend expanding your education regarding the subject. Calling someone else "ignorant" doesn't change the facts.

There is more than one way to fill a BC. The USN still uses CO2 cartridges to fill the BC in an emergency. The diver safety focused recreational crowd removed them 20 or more years ago.

Yes, I'm aware. They were just recently out of style when I first started diving in the 1980's. Recommending a procedure based on a piece of equipment that hasn't been in practice or production in 30-something years seems a bit irresponsible.

Once again, an escaping submariner breathes compressed gas as he is being pressurized to make his escape. The decent rate is quick but might be matched by a scuba diver. The speed of the escape is to minimize the bends, the risks on ascent are the same as a diver doing their profile.

Of course. It's also not recommended for a diver to do a bounce dive - on air - to 363 feet... Or 180' in your other example.

Check the Accident and Incedent forum. At this point they don't have a choice at all. By the training they were given, they did not have any choice of a buoyant ascent which puts them on the surface where help may be available to save them.

I guess I'm going to have to spend some time in there and compare it to what are known and accepted scientific resources like http://www.aaimedicine.org/journal-of-insurance-medicine/jim/1995/027-01-0015.pdf . The information there is several years old, but clearly shows the trends and averages... Something like a 0.0035% fatality rate... That is, three and a half fatalities per four hundred million divers - or - one fatality per 114,000,000 divers. The largest single common denominator was "heart disease," seen in nearly 31% of the dive fatalities, and close to 2/3rds of the fatalities occurred on the bottom, during the ascent, or on the surface, immediately following the ascent.

This information is dated 1993, and takes fatalities into account from 1970-1993... 23 years of it. There may be a more current data set, but regardless of year, this set can be deemed "statistically significant." It's doubtful that you'll find radically different information in more modern data.


My point is... If you're basing your idea that EBAs can prevent LOTS AND LOTS of "diver fatalities" as a "last resort" on the Accident forum here at Scubaboard, please have a better look at actual diver fatality data. Actual data suggests that divers with heart disease (in poor physical condition) are the leading cause of the very tiny number of them that die diving. Of these, most of them have issues with the ascent or immediately prior or after the ascent.

None of these issues could be solved with an emergency bouyant ascent. That is, if you're reading the accident forum here on Scubaboard and think that the solution to "all of these diver fatalities" is an emergency bouyant ascent, you're wrong. Firstly, there's NOT "all these diver fatalities," and secondly, the largest common denominator between those few fatalities is heart disease (which is usually brought on by poor fitness levels and diet) and improper ascents.

...And no, that's not "ignorant," those are the facts, whether you agree with them or not.

Don't you get "last resort". Regardless of the senarios used to support your point which all stop at a happy ending, your options stop there and mine don't.

Of course I "get" "last resort." I'm telling you that a few kicks to the surface, and you're bouyant anyway. It's called a controlled emergency swimming ascent. You're recommending a different procedure, where a diver drops his weight belt and/or inflates their BC, assumes this upside-down skydiver body position, and "rides" up. Both procedures are designed as a "last resort."

One is controlled and immediate and capable of ascent rates from zero to around 300 fpm, depending on what the diver chooses. It's also the most commonly taught method of "last resort" ascension. The other is not controlled, although it is possible to "slow" the ascent from 200 fpm to about 60 or 70 fpm if a very unusual body position is taken.

Your claim is that the latter should be utilized, and that my protests are "ignorant" because a bouyant ascent was once used successfully from 180' in WWII.

I am concerned with what happens if a new diver comes and reads this and chooses to believe that dropping weights at depth "as a last resort" is a good idea, rather than performing a CESA "as a last resort," especially when "last resort" decisions can be avoided.

 

[*dave*]

You were taught to dump your weights at 60' and perform a "free ascent" (what the rest of us call an emergency bouyant ascent)?

Yes, dumping weights was an option. Typically, it wasn't required nor recommended, but it was an option.

What year was this?

76,77 and 78

What agency?

NASDS in 76, SSI 77 and 78

Did they also teach you to inflate your BC at depth as well?

I don't recall.

Did they teach you to perform this on a BC with a CO2 cartridge attachment?

The standard rental rig was a SP horse collar and I believe they did have a CO2 inflator mechanism, though I'm not sure what the relevance is in this discussion.

Did you practice the procedure?

As an AI, we were required to be as proficient in this skill as any other. We practiced from 80' and I have conducted them from as deep as 115'. Much easier to do than free diving to 60'.

Did you do it while loaded?

If narced counts as being loaded, yes.

What was your rate of ascent during practice?

I'd guess it was in excess of 100fpm at times, but the goal was 60fpm.

My statement, which you called "ignorant," is based on the fact that taking an N2 loaded scuba diver and forcing them into a fast ascent from depth due to catastrophic unweighting - and perhaps even inflation of their BC - is going to cause at the very least a pre-DCS condition in their body. Whether or not this is diagnosed, addressed, or whether or not the diver has medical issues from such an ascent is a gamble.

If not ignorant, then it is a blatant lie at worst or intentional disinformation. Your statement was not conditional, it was presented as "If you do this, you will die or be bent". I've heard this from quite a few professionals in the last 7 years.

FWIW, I totally agree with you about this being something to avoid at any cost, with the exception of drowning. BTW, what do you suppose total N2 loading is for :02 BT at 80'? I know you're aware of M-Values, so what do they tell you?

 

[Deep South Divers]

Yes, dumping weights was an option. Typically, it wasn't required nor recommended, but it was an option.

I don't understand... You were told then that it wasn't recommended, which is exacty the same thing that we're all told now... Nothing's changed. I don't understand your argument in support of an EBA. Why would a diver choose it over a CESA?

The standard rental rig was a SP horse collar and I believe they did have a CO2 inflator mechanism, though I'm not sure what the relevance is in this discussion.

Well, the scenario that we were all talking about involved a diver who had lost his buddy with no redundant source of breathing gas, and was completely out of gas... At depth. In other words, he/she had gotten themselves into a situation where there literally was no choice but to surface or drown.

Another poster had suggested dropping weights at depth, and even pointed out that in training, some were taught to also inflate their BC or "life preserver." I pointed out that an OOG diver has no gas with which to inflate their BC, and another poster pointed out the old CO2 cartridge-equipped flotation devices.

As an AI, we were required to be as proficient in this skill as any other. We practiced from 80' and I have conducted them from as deep as 115'. Much easier to do than free diving to 60'.

Well, of course they are. When freediving to 60', you're traveling up and down, which is 120', with a stop/pause in the middle. It's also aided in one direction by your buoyancy and slowed in the other, depending on your weighting. Yes, of course an 80' EBA is going to be easier than a 60' freedive. Try a, 80' CESA and see how it compares. It's even easier.

If narced counts as being loaded, yes.

LOL! That's funny.

No, I mean "loaded with nitrogen." Near your NDLs. In other words, if you have a lot of nitrogen in your body tissues.

.
If not ignorant, then it is a blatant lie at worst or intentional disinformation. Your statement was not conditional, it was presented as "If you do this, you will die or be bent". I've heard this from quite a few professionals in the last 7 years.

Okay, sure... Then my statement was sloppy. It can be compared to saying something like, "You know, if you jump off of a 3-story building, then don't be surprised if you end up with broken legs and/or are permenantly disabled." Or, "If you drive 150 mph down a residential street, you're gonna hurt someone." Sure, I didn't preface the jump with, "if there's no trampoline down there," or "if you're not jumping into a pool," but I was trying to make a point. Taking a scuba diver, specifically one at the end of the dive who is nitrogen-loaded (unlike an escaping submariner) and having them drop weights so as to initiate an uncontrolled, bouyant ascent is a dangerous procedure with a high likelihood of permanent injury. There are other solutions to the same problem of being without any available breathing gas at depth that are less dangerous, specifically, a CESA, because it remains controllable due to not losing weights and/or not inflating a BC prior to ascent. Both a CESA and an EBA are bouyant... But the CESA is fully controllable whereas the EBA is not.

Either method allows the diver to get another breath every 1 ATA or so, depending on a variety of factors... So the procedure does not have to be rediculously fast to be successful, although I've never seen any diver OOA at depth who doesn't hurry to the surface in a CESA or EBA maneuver.

FWIW, I totally agree with you about this being something to avoid at any cost, with the exception of drowning. BTW, what do you suppose total N2 loading is for :02 BT at 80'? I know you're aware of M-Values, so what do they tell you?

Very little, assuming no latent loading from previous dives.

The same could be said about the escaping submariner, which is why he's different, physiologically, than a scuba diver at the same depth. Sure, if there's no difference in the profiles, then there's no difference between the two situations... Of course, assuming other things are equal, too, like core body temperature, hydration level, physical fitness, lack of PFO, overall health and BMI. But the fact is, a diver does NOT have the same profile as an escaping submariner because of the difference in time at depth... That is, nitrogen loading... Closeness to each compartment's M value...

That's why it's a really bad idea to drop weight - or use any other method to force yourself into an uncontrolled bouyant ascent... Especially if there's another, more controlled option that creates an identical solution.

 

[Akimbo]

…I just don't see the need for a bouyant ascent when it comes to a scuba diver. Sure, it can be done, but wouldn't a CESA (ascending by swimming and becoming progressively bouyant, rather than instantly bouyant by dropping weights and/or inflating your BC) be a better solution? ….

For this conversation, my use of “Navy divers” includes divers trained in free ascents under longer training cycles typical in the US before about 1980. This includes military, commercial, scientific, and “old-school” divers trained world-wide.​

​

Sometimes, and Navy divers are trained to understand that:

…Granted it isn’t obvious from 7-8.1 Emergency Free-Ascent Procedures alone that it isn’t necessary to dump your weight belt and inflate your BC unless you deem it appropriate. ….

…Add that a scuba diver would be N2 loaded (unlike an escaping submariner), and would likely receive another breath out of his rig every few tens of feet while ascending, and it simply too small a benefit for the risks associated….

That is true for slower tissues, but not faster tissues. In any case, N2 loading on recreational Scuba divers is low enough that the probability of any DCS symptoms are low, even at 120'/minute ascent rates.

…Think about this:

For this type of emergency to occur, the following would have to have happened: ….

Your list is irrelevant. The body count is way too high to argue that divers don’t screw up or become victims of unanticipated circumstances.

…If one of the above is not happening to this diver, then the diver can simply swim up... That is, do a CESA. That way, the diver remains in control of themselves during the entire ascent, and gets another breath of gas from their tank or tanks every few tens of feet. It's even possible that, in doing a CESA, the diver does not exceed a recommended 30 fpm ascent rate... Or at least a 60 fpm ascent rate. ….

What’s your point? That is what Navy divers are trained to do when circumstances allow.

…There is simply no reason to dump weight and shoot to the surface... That is, no reason to choose an emergency buoyant ascent over a CESA….

Sure there is. How about when you think that you might black out during the ascent? When everything hits the fan you may not be able to extricate yourself in time to make a comfortable free ascent or the subset called CESA.

…But if the whole world is defining a term one way, then it's a miscommunication to call it something else, even if you were the first one to use the term….

The bastardization is teaching a small portion of free ascents and thinking it is adequate. Nobody cares about the title. It is all the over-weighted divers found lifeless on the bottom shallow enough to freedive wearing their weights and empty cylinders.

…I hear that, and... Having studied for the USN at Duke University's Hyperbaric Facility... I can tell you that I completely understand where you're coming from. However, that opinion is a broad generalization and doesn't account for individual instructors or exactly what part of dive training that you're talking about….

What part?

• The part that is supposed to teach divers how to survive when everything goes wrong.
• The part that makes instructors indicate DCS risks are comparable to drowning (not you but there are plenty of threads).
• The part that turns out divers with no confidence that they won’t embolize themselves in a minor crisis.
• The part that teaches divers to make feet-first descents, which requires over-weighting for descents halfway into the dive.
• The part that freaks out at the mention of free ascents because of what they were taught without experiencing them or recognizing that the practice is common is important sectors of diving world.

…For example, I can tell you that I saw the direct results of Jarrod Jablonski and DAN working together to create dive profiles that affected the USN dive tables. Jarrod, by military definition, is a "recreational" dive instructor. Yet they sought his expertise, and clearly learned a lot from him. ….

OK, what’s the point? People from EDU et al (Experimental Diving Unit) are open to useful input. They talk to lots of people all the time and follow up on what might be useful to their mission.

…Another example is the citation that you provided from the USN Dive Manual. While emergency bouyant ascents might be appropriate for escaping submariners that are effectively freedivers... Or described by Bob as "bounce divers," N2 loaded scuba divers - that is, divers that have been breathing gasses at depth - have better, safer, faster, simpler options to the triple-catastrophe of being simultaneously lost from their buddy, without any other backup breathing gas, and out of gas on their primary source... Namely, swimming up and taking another breath... The CESA.….

The US Navy Diving Manual is primarily an operations manual, not a training manual. What part of this statement is unclear?

…Granted it isn’t obvious from 7-8.1 Emergency Free-Ascent Procedures alone that it isn’t necessary to dump your weight belt and inflate your BC unless you deem it appropriate. ….

…I agree. But that doesn't explain why a loaded scuba diver would choose a bouyant ascent over a swimming, neutral one, especially after suffering a double or triple (depending on how you look at it) catastrophe. ….

Because they think they won’t be successful if they don’t. That is what is actually taught and is apparent to anyone with any practice at free ascents and all of the sub-sets — low air, total supply failure, buoyant ascents, and swimming ascents.

I don’t drop my weighs or inflate my BC until the OPV vents during any of the free ascents I practice. They are assisted by a BC to be be neutral, swimming ascents, with my regulator in my right hand ready to shove back in my mouth in case I get uncomfortable with it. I already know from every ascent that I can keep the regulator in my mouth! I also know if my BC and/or drysuit failed and I wasn’t comfortable swimming up my weights would be dumped without a self-debate that I wouldn’t have time for.

…Bob's right... It shouldn't ever get to that point. And Thal's right... If it does, the diver needs to know how to handle it. ….

We are in total agreement here.

…"Bouyant" is uncontrolled, dangerous, likely going to cause some sort of barotrauma in the person that's never done it before, and probably slower overall (slower to initiate) than a "CESA," which is natural, comparatively safer, and consistent with all of their training. ….

(I added the red emphasis) Also true. So instructors should teach free ascents and divers with C-cards should learn to do them.

What do you teach people to do when their failure-prone $2 plastic weight belt buckle fails? If dropping a belt is so deadly then why are the dominant buckles designed for quick-release and such crap? How heavy was the weight belt you dropped that caused you such profound concern?

Your actual experiences with buoyant ascents must be a lot different than mine. Try this: split your weight between two belts. Tie a float line onto the lighter one, find a sandy 30' bottom, and drop it. Start with the light belt at something you have absolute confidence will not be dangerous, maybe 2-5 Lbs. Repeat by shifting more weight to the “drop belt” until you become uncomfortable that you cannot safely control ascent. I suspect that you will be surprised by how much weight that actually is and how many maneuvers you discover to counteract it. Also keep in mind that dropping a weight belt intentionally is literally an option in your “last ditch” effort to live.

…I have yet to see an intelligent argument for when it is "appropriate" to dump your weight belt and inflate your BC at depth. The idea of an "escaping submariner" may be, in retrospect, but it's definitely not a good idea for a scuba diver. That is... There are safer, simpler options including the CESA... And as Bob (Grateful Diver) pointed out... Not getting to the point of needing to consider a CESA. ….

Fair enough. How about you are approaching your planned minimum cylinder pressure to leave bottom. For whatever reason you get separated from you buddy — visibility is bad, the surge is up, he’s a macro photographer focusing on a critter, or she found a better looking guy. It doesn’t really matter. Then:
(each bulleted item is an “or” not an “and” to the scenarios)

• You experience a total loss of air. Perhaps an HP O-ring or blow-out plug fails, an LP hose lets loose, or flow just stops because your rental cylinder has clogged your regulator inlet filer or valve dip tube. The important part is there is nothing left to breath by the time you figure it out. You can’t inflate your BC and you fear the additional drag of all that inoperable gear will reduce your chances of survival.
• You swim into a wad of monofilament and can’t get lose. You remove your cylinder, still breathing from it, to get unhooked. Three is a hopeless knot of stainless wire entwined with the mono and you sense inhalation resistance on your high-performance balanced regulator. That means about three more labored breaths before you pass out.
• You start to vent your BC when the corrugated hose pulls off in your hands. You start to sink during your night dive and the option is drop your 3 Lb negative $8,000 dollar camera or your 20 Lb $50 weight belt. You try to swim against the current and negative buoyancy and notice the needle approaching 300 PSI as the debate continues. You are tired, concerned, and not sure what to do if anything else goes south. Your computer shows green in the deco box.
• The bottom is somewhere past 600' on a wall dive. You feel funny and uneasy. Suddenly you get a splitting headache and lose all vision. Your weight belt is 16 Lbs and your BC has 40 Lbs of lift. You can’t sense if you are losing or gaining depth. You have no idea how much longer you will be conscious.

…You know, I agree with you, and I, too, feel that there are a lot of shortcomings in the recreational diving community's teachings. Still, I don't see what that's got to do with choosing an emergency bouyant ascent over a CESA, Lord forbid a diver ever get themselves into that situation. ….

Given the clarifications above of what the full spectrum of classic free ascent training for divers includes and accepting that there are situations where you can have total gas supply failures or the ability to deal with your ascent, is this still the case? Your “Lord Forbid” comment is exactly why buoyant emergency free ascents were devises and taught.

All that said, the free ascent skill is secondary to the physiological value. I am sure that you can double the “I’m screwed” scenarios listed above. It is even more likely that you know in your soul that there are plenty that you didn’t think of that can turn a misjudgment or unanticipated circumstance into a death sentence. What matters more than anything is that you don’t panic. That is a lot easier when you are confident from practice and experience that you will make it to sunshine.

It’s nice to have this debate with someone who is actually considering the replies. I think it would be great to find a compromise that has no risk, is easy to teach, and actually works. The body count is too high to call the current method an unmitigated success.