What would you do: Molested at 100' by an OOA Diver

[DCBC]

Wayne -- your comment intrigues me for I'm uncertain as to what happened here.

Did you provide the other two with your 2nd stages and swim to the safety diver yourself hauling the other two with you? Or did you ditch your gear, leaving it with them and swim up? Or???? Color me confused as to what happened but intrigued.

Hi Peter... I gave my primary to the OOA diver and went to my secondary (this was contrary to Agency procedure at the time). I have no idea why I did that; I know I was totally caught off guard and just responded.

The Buddy wasn't close to us (10'?) sort of grooving to himself, shaking his hands around, narced. My attention was on the Diver OOA. He was hyperventilating and I couldn't help but think, we had to start to ascend before he used what air I had left. I tried to move him, but he shrugged me off. I decided to bring us both to the safety stop, which I started to do.

His buddy came up to me on my left, tapped me on the shoulder and gave me the "Give me Air" signal. I gave him air (buddy-breathing). He responded slowly to giving the regulator back, but as I had control, he didn't have much choice. Although I had started to ascend, all I could think about was the first Diver hyperventilating and the second being slow to buddy-breath; it was time to bail-out of the situation. Hopefully they would ascend to a depth where they would calm down and start the decompression process with the extra gas that was available at 50 FSW.

I started to take off my BC/Tank hanging on to my secondary with my left hand (in a death grip in-case Buddy didn't want to give it back) and using my right hand to undo my harness. I had just became clear of my BC, when I was waved off by the other two divers who were in our party of five. I replaced my SCUBA and indicated that I would start my ascent, as I was low on air. I think I had 500 psi at the time. I began my ascent to the safety diver who became worried (time) and met me at 100 FSW.

I don't think that I've ever been more angry at two divers in my life! Two Instructors (the Agency of which will be unnamed)... who obviously had no idea about gas planning or their SAC. They wouldn't even look at me at the decompression stops (which pissed me off more). On the surface they said nothing. No Sorry about that, or thanks for saving our asses, nothing...

As I was a guest on the dive (Dave, a PADI Instructor who was in-charge of the diving operation at Habitat at the time) and his friend from the Marine Lab had asked me to accompany them. The two other Divers were added on the morning of the dive. I was dubious of these divers, but it wasn't my decision. We agreed to each dive solo (collectively).

I was a Diver with the Navy at the time. Navy training is all about supporting the team (no matter what the personal consequences). I suppose that was in my mind and when it came down to it, I couldn't deny someone assistance. But by opening the door, it almost closed on my neck. It was a truly a learning experience for me.

 

[AfterDark]

An OOA diver molests me at 100FSW the 1st thing that happens is the removal of their mask. Then I'll offer up a bubbling second stage in his/her face. But then, I'm not a DM just a diver that doesn't take any chances with a panicked diver.

 

[supergaijin]

I don't think that I've ever been more angry at two divers in my life! Two Instructors (the Agency of which will be unnamed)...

So... not PADI then.

 

[DCBC]

So... not PADI then.

What a kidder... Over the years, my opinions have been formulated through many such experiences...

:storm:

 

[beester]

Slightly of topic but I read somewhere that no organisations have or had deep CESA in their curriculum. I know the Belgian CMAS federation had until 2003-4 a couple of deep tests/drills in their curriculum. (French FFESM also)

- CMAS *** diver : 100 feet (C)ESA
- CMAS **** diver: 120 feet (C)ESA

This was done with the regulator in hand (not in the mouth). There was alot of vocal critique over these test even since the 90's because of the unreasonable risk involved in these drills. Finaly in 2004 these were abandoned after a couple of high profile deadly accidents which were directly linked to these particular tests. (all dying because of pulmonary barotrauma and subsequent CAGE).

So it took some deads before decisionmakers realised that legacy tests which might have been usefull decades ago (no manometer, no J-valve), were in this age of backup regs, mano's, etc just a huge risk without any training benefit.

I would caution anybody to advocate CESA as a valid procedure that should be trained regularly. Even if you are very fit and young you could have pulmonary bulae which could cause a barotrauma (one of the deads was a fit 28 y old male).

 

[DCBC]

CMAS...So it took some deads before decisionmakers realised that legacy tests which might have been usefull decades ago (no manometer, no J-valve), were in this age of backup regs, mano's, etc just a huge risk without any training benefit. I would caution anybody to advocate CESA as a valid procedure that should be trained regularly. Even if you are very fit and young you could have pulmonary bulae which could cause a barotrauma (one of the deads was a fit 28 y old male).

Your account is partially correct. CMAS removed emergency ascent training from its "minimum requirements;" however nothing in CMAS Standards prohibits CESA training. In any regard, nothing in CMAS Standards can disagree with the policies of the National representing body. If the national Agency responsible says it's required, it is.

As I've described, there are situations where an emergency ascent can be a requirement for survival. The only question is whether the Student is better position to undertake such an ascent trained, or untrained. Personally I feel that training is preferable.

 

[beester]

Your account is partially correct. CMAS removed emergency ascent training from its "minimum requirements;" however nothing in CMAS Standards prohibits CESA training. In any regard, nothing in CMAS Standards can disagree with the policies of the National representing body. If the national Agency responsible says it's required, it is.

As I've described, there are situations where an emergency ascent can be a requirement for survival. The only question is whether the Student is better position to undertake such an ascent trained, or untrained. Personally I feel that training is preferable.

Hi DCBC, I was talking about the Belgian CMAS organisation (BEFOS/NELOS) that removed these (C)ESA drills from their curriculum not the CMAS organisation as a whole. I should have specified this more in detail.

I'm sure there are situations where an emergency ascent could mean life or dead. My point is:

- These drill were done mostly in a local estuary with bad conditions (bad vis sometimes as low as 2 feet, cold, current), increasing the likelyhood of stress/panic.
- Learning moment: In my experience the goal of training/examination is to learn/ingrain something. I fail to see what I would learn from such a one off CESA, beside knowing I could do this, probably when the **** actually would hit the fan I might not be able to still do this.
- Training risk vs actual emergency need. In a real emergency the benefits might outweigh the risk (if you start breathing water your dead anyway), however if the only benefit from the training is knowing you can do this, but the training in itself presents a significant risk for serious bodily harm and dead (barotrauma, CAGE), what's the use?

These kind of drills grew out of military style training (which CMAS and other early agencies started out with). Even know the risk/benefit equation will be much different for military (navy seals anyone?). However for norma recreational scuba-divers these kind of drills make no sense whatsoever.

I did do these drills so I'm entitled to my critique

 

[DCBC]

I did do these drills so I'm entitled to my critique

Absolutely Beester, each of us are entitled to our opinion. On this topic, we just disagree...

 

[beester]

Absolutely Beester, each of us are entitled to our opinion. On this topic, we just disagree...

Of course DCBC... hats of anyway . Reason I stated the above was because of former experiences in that regard. I always critiqued the CESA drills, even before I did them myself. The old guard would often stop the discussion by stating, you cannot criticize these drills because you haven't experienced them yourself.

 

[DCBC]

Of course DCBC... hats of anyway . Reason I stated the above was because of former experiences in that regard. I always critiqued the CESA drills, even before I did them myself. The old guard would often stop the discussion by stating, you cannot criticize these drills because you haven't experienced them yourself.

I too disagreed with CMAS on the regulator out-of-the-mouth procedure. I was on the CMAS Technical Committee at that time and argued that the regulator should be left in-the-mouth because of the air that will be made available on ascent.

The military and commercial diving communities have long ago discovered the benefits of safe realistic training that increases anxiety. Emergency ascent training is just one more skill that can be added to a person's repertoire or left-out of the training program. Personally, it's a skill that I'm happy to have and maintain through practice.