Octopus free-flow at depth

[hudson]

But it's an excellent example of the type of responses in here that drive away divers from posting their incidents. And if we keep doing that, who's going to post in here? Think of all the excellent learning opportunities we'll all miss, because some people can't keep their rudeness, arrogance and self-righteous superiority in check.

On the other hand, if we were to force everyone who is pointing out possible areas of improvement (whether they are applicable to the specific case in question or not) to revise their already lengthy and elaborate responses several times, just not to step on any toes or offend any sensibilities, then that may drive them away from posting.

I know there are responses that can legitimately be called rude and out of line (welcome to The Internets), but this thread has none. You can easily spot them because they are usually full of exaggeration and misinformation. But here even the one remark you later singled out was made in the appropriate context: if the OP can't see any room for improvement, maybe he should take up knitting. Which is true enough. I'm with Peter - grow thicker skins. Why are you posting here? To invite suggestions for improvement. Check your ego by the door. So someone makes an assumption while responding that doesn't hold true in your scenario. You point it out and carry on - what purpose does it serve to accuse the responder of lacking tact?

I'll always take good information over compliance some kid-gloves policy.

---

Now to actually stay on topic: if the BC has a crotch strap, undoing that may make it possible to reach the valve.

 

[openmindOW]

what purpose does it serve to accuse the responder of lacking tact?

Because tact is a good thing. And, yeah, some people are, well, tactless.

If divers, particularly newbies or inexperienced divers, post here and get bashed, then we will be creating a disincentive for divers to post here. Then you won't have as many OPs, or you could get posts that are less than fully honest.

The key to accident analysis is to get witnesses to state the truth. I have a little phrase, "If they messed-up, you want them to fess up." But confessions only happen when a tone has been set, a tone that encourages truthfulness.

Posts along the lines of, "You're an Idiot" will discourage future OPs.

Here is another way to think about. How about trying to be a polite? Constructive criticism and tact are good things.

Divers sometimes make mistakes. You can point out errors without being a schmuck.

 

[Leejnd]

Interesting. It looks like we fall into two camps on this forum: those that think it's perfectly acceptable to be insulting and tactless to divers who post their incidents...and those who don't.

I'm happy to fall into the second camp. Y'all can decide for yourselves which camp YOU fall into. (Although I think it's pretty obvious.)

On the other hand, if we were to force everyone who is pointing out possible areas of improvement (whether they are applicable to the specific case in question or not) to revise their already lengthy and elaborate responses several times, just not to step on any toes or offend any sensibilities, then that may drive them away from posting.

So wait, let me get this straight: are you saying that if someone goes to all the trouble to type up a lengthy and elaborate response, they shouldn't be expected to revise it to remove any insults, belittling, or rude comments that might have crept in? You think it's too much to ask of the posters in here to make even the slightest effort to not step on toes or offend sensibilities? And if we ask them to remove any such comments before they post, or to at least TRY to be tactful, we might drive them away from posting?

Oooookay. Just wanted to make sure I understood your point.

I know there are responses that can legitimately be called rude and out of line (welcome to The Internets), but this thread has none. You can easily spot them because they are usually full of exaggeration and misinformation. But here even the one remark you later singled out was made in the appropriate context: if the OP can't see any room for improvement, maybe he should take up knitting.

I disagree with you that that comment wasn't rude. It was. And you mis-quoted the comment. The comment didn't say "can't see any room for improvement."

What the comment actually said was that if the OP couldn't see anything he could have changed or done differently, then he should quit diving and taking up knitting...even though the OP had never said that! He didn't once state that he didn't think he'd made ANY mistakes. In fact, the OP came back later and made it clear he did think there were things he should have done differently.

But by that time he'd already been told he should quit diving and take up knitting. Sorry, but that's just plain rude. And obviously I'm not the only person who thought so.

The interesting thing is that I didn't actually have a problem with DA's initial response. I thought some of it was tactlessly stated, and I didn't agree with all of it, but I had no problem with him posting any of it to get the discussion started.

What I had a problem with was the fact that he got so snippy when the OP had the audacity to disagree with him, and offer some clarification in defense of his actions.

THAT RIGHT THERE is the biggest problem in this forum. It all boils down to this: some people don't like to be disagreed with. Some people just can't handle somebody telling them that they are wrong - even if they are. And when it happens, they will say something rude. Because they're ticked that somebody actually disagreed with them.

That, in a nutshell, is all that happened here.

So someone makes an assumption while responding that doesn't hold true in your scenario. You point it out and carry on - what purpose does it serve to accuse the responder of lacking tact?

Note the part that's bolded above. That's what went wrong here. A poster made "an assumption while responding that didn't hold true." The OP pointed it out. And then he was told that if he didn't agree with the erroneous assumption, he should take up knitting instead of diving. Can you see where it went sideways?

And that's what I see happen in here all too often. A diver posts their incident. Somebody tells them they did something wrong. The OP defends himself. The other guy then attacks him for defending himself, because he can't stand anybody disagreeing with him.

And to bring this back to this incident...while I agree with some of DA's original comments, I still strongly disagree with his assessment that the OP put any of the other divers in danger by deciding to ascend. The other divers were all certified divers, each with their own buddy. He didn't "obligate" the guide to come help him - he was performing a self-rescue. The guide coming to help him had no impact on the safety of the other divers. The OP's actions didn't impact anybody's safety, except for his own buddy - but that was inevitable, by virtue of the fact that he was having a problem. His own buddy's safety WAS compromised, but that would have been true regardless of whether he chose to ascend to self-rescue, or to swim to his buddy to use his redundant air source. That's inherent in the buddy system: if one diver has a problem, the other diver's safey is compromised.

I also completely understand the OP wanting to come back and defend himself against that charge. If somebody told ME that my actions had put a bunch of other divers in danger, and I didn't feel it was true, I certainly would have come back and defended myself!

Anyway, I will happily remain in my...um..."tactful" camp , and continue to treat other members with respect and consideration.

 

[wrybosome]

THAT RIGHT THERE is the biggest problem in this forum. It all boils down to this: some people don't like to be disagreed with. Some people just can't handle somebody telling them that they are wrong - even if they are. And when it happens, they will say something rude. Because they're ticked that somebody actually disagreed with them.

:thumbs-up

Not just this forum or the internetz either.

 

[Hintermann]

@Hintermann: Have you considered mounting the tank with the valve not facing directly forward (opening toward the back of your head)? By mounting the tank with the valve turned a bit (pointing toward your left side), the valve knob will be much more accessible. Even someone with only a moderate level of flexibility should be able to operate the valve knob in this position. Give it a try the next time you're in the water.

Thanks. I had not thought of that and you could well be right. I have suffered from "proportional obsession" all my life - things have to be proportionate even when they don't have to be, left & right have to balance each other etc. I am continually checking my socks to make sure that they are at the same level and so on. No wonder I always mount my tank with the valve in the dead centre.

 

[zamburinha]

Thanks very much for posting this report, I found it very illustrative. It seems to me that the most important thing is that you did not panic and took a reasonable and decisive, although perhaps not optimal, course of action.

It has already been pointed out, but I also found it strange that you recognized your buddy's difficulty in swimming towards you, but did not consider that this should make it easy for you to reach him, specially if he was already aware of the situation and working with you towards meeting and sharing air. Other than that I found the suggestion of closing down the valve on a single tank somewhat risky. I would hesitate to close my only air source without any redundancy, it seems that it could easily generate more problems than it solves. Perhaps someone could elaborate on why this is perceived as a better option than your decision to head to the surface on a controlled ascent ...

 

[Peter_C]

Other than that I found the suggestion of closing down the valve on a single tank somewhat risky. I would hesitate to close my only air source without any redundancy, it seems that it could easily generate more problems than it solves. Perhaps someone could elaborate on why this is perceived as a better option than your decision to head to the surface on a controlled ascent ...

Since I am the one that brought it up...

Once you are breathing off someone Else's air source, you can safely turn off the valve to shut off the bubbles, probably lessening the confusion, and conserving the air for possible use later. Otherwise it will be gone in a less than a couple of minutes anyway depending on the failure.

In the case of a free flow from a reg, due to IP or something along those lines, you might even be able to reopen the post and then safely end the dive on your own air supply immediately.

 

[Rick Murchison]

... I would hesitate to close my only air source...

So would I, I suppose, if it weren't routine and well practiced for me. But let's think about this a bit, shall we?
If I can reach and manipulate my own valve, I can turn the air on if I screw up and jump in with it off (or a quarter turn on), or if some helpful deck hand does that "for" me. Dive long enough and you'll jump in both ways sooner or later. If you can turn the air on, it's no big deal; if you can't... it could be very bad indeed, and may ruin your entire day.
If I have a massive freeflow, sometimes interrupting the gas flow through the regulator can stop it. Or, if it doesn't stop it at the least I can meter the gas with the valve, breathe the freeflowing reg and make the gas last a whole lot longer.
If I dive with a redundant air supply I can just shut down a freeflow and save all that gas for later.
Being able to manipulate your own tank valve has many benefits, and no drawbacks. It's one of those diving skills it's wise to have in your bag of tricks. And if you'll practice it frequently it just won't be any concern when you need the skill for real.
Rick

 

[DA Aquamaster]

Other than that I found the suggestion of closing down the valve on a single tank somewhat risky. I would hesitate to close my only air source without any redundancy, it seems that it could easily generate more problems than it solves. Perhaps someone could elaborate on why this is perceived as a better option than your decision to head to the surface on a controlled ascent ...

There are no issues with turning the tank valve off as it just as easy to turn it back on, and even if only on a little, will still deliver air.

In cold water, a "freeze flow" is not uncommmon in many regs, particularly if the diver does not use perfect cold water technique. It is probably one of the more common reasons for a full on free flow.

You could immediately head for the surface, but the tank will go completely empty, you may or may not have enough pressure to inflate your BC on the surface and you will not have the option of having a working reg in your mouth when you exit the water. That can be important on a dive boat in heavy seas or in a surf exit.

On the other hand, if you can switch to the buddies reg and shut your valve off, it will thaw in a minute or so and will most likely not freeflow when you turn it back on. You cna return to your gas supply, most if which you have managed to conserve by shutting off the valve. You may still want to abort the dive or perhaps ascend to depths with warmer water, but you now have more time and more options, and it is much less of an "emergency".

Also if you are separated from your buddy for any reason, and have a serious free flow, the ability to turn your valve off and on will let you breathe more or less normally and will ensure you have enough gas to reach the surface without skipping a safety stop. Even if you do not want to turn the valve on and off for each breath, you could crack the valve to allow enough gas to breathe while grealy slowing the loss rate of the gas. As long as you have enough flow at depth, you will have surplus flow as you ascend.

Admittedly, thinking that way and acting that way are not automatically basic/OW techniques and it may take some practice to be comfortable with it. But it does add a level of safety and flexibility well beyond what is taught in OW courses and it is a skill well worth having. Every diver should practice air sharing ona regular basis and it only adds one more step to practice turning your valve off and back on. Do it in a controlled setting, then even if it goes badly (you turn it off but can't turn it back on) your buddy is there to do it for you. Even if the knob falls off and no one can turn it on, you just ascend to the surface on your buddy's gas supply. With practice, your air sharing and coordination with your buddy will improve and you will add another skill and another option to the tool box.

 

[zamburinha]

Regarding the closing of the valve ...

Since I am the one that brought it up...

Once you are breathing off someone Else's air source, you can safely turn off the valve to shut off the bubbles, probably lessening the confusion, and conserving the air for possible use later. Otherwise it will be gone in a less than a couple of minutes anyway depending on the failure.

In the case of a free flow from a reg, due to IP or something along those lines, you might even be able to reopen the post and then safely end the dive on your own air supply immediately.

If you are already breathing from your buddy, I completely understand. I was just wondering whether it would make sense when you do not have any other air source.

I am not familiar with all the acronyms, what is IP?

So would I, I suppose, if it weren't routine and well practiced for me. But let's think about this a bit, shall we?
If I can reach and manipulate my own valve, I can turn the air on if I screw up and jump in with it off (or a quarter turn on), or if some helpful deck hand does that "for" me. Dive long enough and you'll jump in both ways sooner or later. If you can turn the air on, it's no big deal; if you can't... it could be very bad indeed, and may ruin your entire day.
If I have a massive freeflow, sometimes interrupting the gas flow through the regulator can stop it. Or, if it doesn't stop it at the least I can meter the gas with the valve, breathe the freeflowing reg and make the gas last a whole lot longer.
If I dive with a redundant air supply I can just shut down a freeflow and save all that gas for later.
Being able to manipulate your own tank valve has many benefits, and no drawbacks. It's one of those diving skills it's wise to have in your bag of tricks. And if you'll practice it frequently it just won't be any concern when you need the skill for real.
Rick

I completely agree on being able to turn on your own valve. I am not that experienced, but I have already jumped into the water with the air closed. Once I forgot to open it and another time a helpful boat hand closed it and I did not check before jumping. Luckily, I had already practiced and had my buddy right by me.

There are no issues with turning the tank valve off as it just as easy to turn it back on, and even if only on a little, will still deliver air.

In cold water, a "freeze flow" is not uncommmon in many regs, particularly if the diver does not use perfect cold water technique. It is probably one of the more common reasons for a full on free flow.

You could immediately head for the surface, but the tank will go completely empty, you may or may not have enough pressure to inflate your BC on the surface and you will not have the option of having a working reg in your mouth when you exit the water. That can be important on a dive boat in heavy seas or in a surf exit.

On the other hand, if you can switch to the buddies reg and shut your valve off, it will thaw in a minute or so and will most likely not freeflow when you turn it back on. You cna return to your gas supply, most if which you have managed to conserve by shutting off the valve. You may still want to abort the dive or perhaps ascend to depths with warmer water, but you now have more time and more options, and it is much less of an "emergency".

This is interesting. I am not familiar at all with cold water techniques. I did not realize you can solve a regulator freeze this way. Definitively a good reason to be comfortable opening and closing your valves by yourself as well. However, I am not completely convinced still that the best solution to the original poster's problem would be to close his valve unless he has managed to reach his buddy.