Anything more than a swim through and a reel should be run. If you are well practiced with the reel it should enhance your safety not pose a hazard. To every rule there are always some exceptions, but in my experience they are few and far between.
Progressive Penetration vs. Running a Line
- Thread starter UCFKnightDiver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Progressive Penetration is a valid method of wreck diving so long as you fully understand where and when it is applicable. Wreck diving is NOT like cave diving, in that it is common to enter one way and exit another either by choice or necessity.
My methods of wreck diving have allowed me to explore hundreds of wrecks on thousands of dives over the years. I've used lines, no line etc. But each has a purpose.
My first goal on a wreck is to get knowledge from someone with experience on it first. That helps me understand what passages get to which exit and the special areas. After that I will do an exterior survey looking in holes and seeing if there is light on the other side, up or down. Always looking for an out. Then when i select an area to go into I will determine line or no line. If my goal is a deep penetration that does not show light, OR where my goal is to retrieve something deep inside I will run a line. If its just sightseeing then I will employ prog-pen by entering slowly, only going a few body lengths keeping the exit near by. If there is an opening on the other side or along side that has light then i will move along and exit where the light is.
I just did that on the Vandenberg this past weekend. Through engine room, along vent shafts etc.
When I run prog pen I will only run 1/6 gas rules meaning I will determine my current volume and turn at 1/6 the volume - so if I have 3000 psi i will prog-pen to 2500 and turn back If running line it will be 1/3rd plus 200 or 2800 psi.
Keep in mind that prog pen is a slow methodical method of learning a penetration route. Over the weekend I went through the same area 4 times on different dives, becoming familiar with it. One might think that is overly conservative but...... it's not like I wont visit that site again.
The prog-pen debate has been going on for decades . glad to hear it's still going on.
Cheers
JDS
My methods of wreck diving have allowed me to explore hundreds of wrecks on thousands of dives over the years. I've used lines, no line etc. But each has a purpose.
My first goal on a wreck is to get knowledge from someone with experience on it first. That helps me understand what passages get to which exit and the special areas. After that I will do an exterior survey looking in holes and seeing if there is light on the other side, up or down. Always looking for an out. Then when i select an area to go into I will determine line or no line. If my goal is a deep penetration that does not show light, OR where my goal is to retrieve something deep inside I will run a line. If its just sightseeing then I will employ prog-pen by entering slowly, only going a few body lengths keeping the exit near by. If there is an opening on the other side or along side that has light then i will move along and exit where the light is.
I just did that on the Vandenberg this past weekend. Through engine room, along vent shafts etc.
When I run prog pen I will only run 1/6 gas rules meaning I will determine my current volume and turn at 1/6 the volume - so if I have 3000 psi i will prog-pen to 2500 and turn back If running line it will be 1/3rd plus 200 or 2800 psi.
Keep in mind that prog pen is a slow methodical method of learning a penetration route. Over the weekend I went through the same area 4 times on different dives, becoming familiar with it. One might think that is overly conservative but...... it's not like I wont visit that site again.
The prog-pen debate has been going on for decades . glad to hear it's still going on.
Cheers
JDS
ucfdiver
Contributor
That seems VERY conservative...which begs the question, why not just run a line? I realize you mentioned it has a reason, but I can't figure out what that reason was. If it's just exiting a different entrance, why not just treat it like a cave traverse?
Admittedly, I'm not a wreck diver, hence why I'm asking!
SuPrBuGmAn
Contributor
Initially, I thought 1/6th was really conservative as well... but, its not like he's gonna run a mile(or even a half, or quarter mile) into a wreck. Sure SOME wrecks might have that much passage, but not many, and I'm betting a line would be run in that situation(with a succession of dives to get it all laid out).
Hey, on most of the busted up wrecks here in NJ you need to run a line OUTSIDE the wreck if you want to find your way back to the anchor!
LOL. I was just about to say this about the North Sea wrecks too.
I've done a little bit of penetration without lines. In one case it was in a small(ish) wreck, a 65m long freighter in Egypt that sunk in shallow water. Inside it's pretty clean and even if you did get turned around it wouldn't take you long to find a way out. The combination of being clean and being shallow made it, for me, a good candidate.
Here's a picture of her butt. I'm sure there are better pictures but Google isn't giving them to me right now. I must be spelling it wrong:
I've also done all kinds of "swim throughs" on other wrecks and some limited penetrations without lines on purpose sunk wrecks where I had a good idea where I was going.
For the rest, though, if you have any doubts at all about the conditions or orientation inside then I really think you need to lay a line.
R..
Good posts. Now that I've got Trimix under my belt I'm going start progressing my penetration dives this season. Most of my dives up to this point have only involved "cavern" type forays into the wrecks. I'm going to practice on the U853 and others this season. I've got 6+ dives on it and some limited penetration but this year I'm going to do the whole sub if I can. It's got plenty of wide open blast holes. I think it's a perfect wreck to practice on as it's a sub and easy to navigate. Like others have said there are other concerns like sharp, rusted metal, doors, cables, deco etc. to worry about. Not just getting lost. Another couple of wrecks I've been on are the Bass and the Stoldt. I'd like to explore the engine room on the Stoldt. I backed off taking photos etc. while I was learning deco. I really wanted to concentrate on nailing those skills first but I think I'm ready to start adding "back on" photography, penetration etc. I prefer to take small steps while progressing into tech and not try to handle too much as I learn. I've seen others just overwhelm themselves at times and actually hinder their diving. From what I've learned so far when you start to penetrate a wreck, run a line etc. your dive planning becomes more complex. It may only take you 5 minutes on the way in but 15 minutes on the way out while you're realing in line, possibly in low vis etc. etc. Maybe one day I'll find that cool artifact but I'd prefer to do it as safely as possible.
w ripley
Contributor
Run a line.
I agree. I use both. As a cave diver, I believe in running a line. However, on most of the wrecks we dive off the NC coast they are open enough that it is not necessary. However, I teach that running a line is safer. I guess my opinion is it depends on the wreck and it depends on the team.
KodyWalley
Registered
Hey guys I am pretty new to wreck diving. I can see there are some divers on SB with thousands of wreck dives ... cool! Just wondering if you guys have seen John Chattertons dive on the Andrea Doria? I think he makes a strong case for progressive penentration. Again I have not done that much wreck pen but already I hold the opinion that in some wrecks I can see how a line may be more dangerous than no line (which goes against conventional wisdom here) ... of course on other dives the opposite would be true.
Kody
Kody
I used to see John Chatterton on the Seeker a number of time. This was many years ago. He (and his cohorts) are uniquely skilled dive specialists. Progressively penetrating a wreck is one way to go about it. And yes, a line can be a true pain with regards to entanglements. I know this personally.
At the end of the day - it's a judgement call as diving the interior of a wreck in Northeast waters is a truly different animal with its own set of protocol much different than a gin-clear cave, or nice warm wreck in the Caribbean with visible spots of daylight peeking through holes. At the end of the day - best to have cave and penetration training and requisite experience for a specific project. This can take days, months or even years. One project lasted a few years as we had to conduct video surveys, wrangle with paperwork/regulations and find routes inside the hull during specific times of the years scheduling with human and support resources when they were most available.
At the end of the day - it's a judgement call as diving the interior of a wreck in Northeast waters is a truly different animal with its own set of protocol much different than a gin-clear cave, or nice warm wreck in the Caribbean with visible spots of daylight peeking through holes. At the end of the day - best to have cave and penetration training and requisite experience for a specific project. This can take days, months or even years. One project lasted a few years as we had to conduct video surveys, wrangle with paperwork/regulations and find routes inside the hull during specific times of the years scheduling with human and support resources when they were most available.
Similar threads
