What would you have done?

[Blackwood]

Just a useful piece of information . . . I had a freeflow on an LP 95 at 30 fsw, when I had only used about 500 psi out of the tank. I immediately went on shared gas, but before we got anywhere near the surface, the tank was empty. A freeflow empties a tank FAST. You're not going to get to the surface from 120 feet with a freeflowing regulator without running out of air.

Great anecdote.

The fact that you thought this was in your scope of training floored me.
FD

To be fair, that may not be entirely his fault. Who knows what he's been taught?

 

[Kingpatzer]

I appear to have a misconception here, or you do, I'm not certain which. The way I read the depth limits in all of my PADI material was that the AOW cert certifies me to dive to 130' within non-deco limits. 100' should be thought of as the max recommended limit, and 130' the absolute max limit, but dives past 100' are allowed by the cert.

Right. So, your training has a recommendation limit of 100'.

DAN insurance will cover you for any diving accidents that happen with your certifying agencies recommended limits.

PADI's recommended limit for you training level is 100'.

Now, I'm not saying that DAN won't cover you. DAN is a fine organization and they do a lot of things they don't have to do. But when laywers and underwriters get involved (which they tend to do when it's a serious high expense accident) don't assume that you're covered when you're pushing the limits.

Your training also does not cover solo dives -- and you planned this as a solo dive from the start.

Your training does not cover deco dives -- and you exceeded your NDL.

I could go on, but I think you get the point . . .

Look, I'm not that much further along than you. I'm still under 50 dives.

But I do have a few more classes under my belt, and I've had the benefit of instructors that stress, repeatedly, that I am responsible for knowing and staying within the limits of my training. I have been taught to question and plan and I take safety very seriously so I listen to that training.

I really think the number one lesson you need to take from this is that your buddy's certs don't matter. If it's a bad plan, it's a bad plan and you have to walk away from the dive. You must know and respect your own limitations. You must be conservative (that was stressed to you in PADI training). Pushing to 2 feet of the max rec depth limit on a solo dive, then blowing your NDL, with 11 dives under your belt isn't conservative.

Listen to your training. Stick to your training. If you do that, you'll rarely find yourself in a situation where you are in real danger.

But if you don't, you're going to have more experiences like this one, and sooner or later your luck will run out.

That doesn't mean "you're gonna die," but whatever happens, it won't be the pleasant diving afternoon you'll have hoped for!

 

[nereas]

I get that (now). My AOW deep dive was 91' btw, for 12 min, at 40 degrees.

What we appear to be debating at this point is whether or not I would have been covered by my DAN insurance had I ended up bent. Kingpatzer seems to think that if I go to 101' and try to claim coverage against DAN insurance they're going to go "screw you buddy! you went too deep."

DAN would have covered you to 130 fsw, at least.

I know of tech divers who were covered by DAN on deeper dives, of course. But I do not know what DAN does for dives deeper than 130 fsw by divers who are not trained to go beyond 130 fsw. I am not sure any of us knows that.

But in your case, your training was to 130 fsw, even though you have not been that deep yet.

130 fsw is just a convention. And 100 fsw does not exist as any kind of convention, as far as DAN or PADI or NAUI etc are concerned.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

What we appear to be debating at this point is whether or not I would have been covered by my DAN insurance had I ended up bent. Kingpatzer seems to think that if I go to 101' and try to claim coverage against DAN insurance they're going to go "screw you buddy! you went too deep."

I don't believe that is true. The one chamber ride I've taken in my life followed a dive to 112 fsw in Puget Sound. At the time I was only AOW certified, and DAN didn't question the dive profile ... they covered every dime of the ride that wasn't covered by my primary insurance carrier.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[miketsp]

DAN would have covered you to 130 fsw, at least.

I know of tech divers who were covered by DAN on deeper dives, of course. But I do not know what DAN does for dives deeper than 130 fsw by divers who are not trained to go beyond 130 fsw. I am not sure any of us knows that.

But in your case, your training was to 130 fsw, even though you have not been that deep yet.

130 fsw is just a convention. And 100 fsw does not exist as any kind of convention, as far as DAN or PADI or NAUI etc are concerned.

DANs Preferred and Master Plans have no depth limit and you don't even have to be qualified OW. Only the Standard plan has a limit of 130ft. The price difference to go from Standard to Master is minimal.
Now back to the topic.

 

[TSandM]

I would think that rock climbing would be a good preparation for diving -- In both, you have to be meticulous and careful, plan for an experience appropriate to your experience level, and keep your head when things aren't going as they should. (A vivid memory of getting stuck on an exposed face, unable to figure out how to go forward, and unable to retrace my steps, comes to mind.) The ability to remain calm and rational is probably the single biggest asset a diver can have, at least in my opinion.

But, as somebody used to have as a sig line, "A superior pilot uses superior judgment to avoid situations where he has to employ his superior skills." Like this one, many diving incidents are the result of a chain of mishaps and bad decisions that lead to the point of an underwater urgency or emergency, and often, the chain could have been broken at any step. THIS is the biggest lesson from this story, I think.

Because of the kind of diving I have chosen to do, I practice and practice emergency skills (and, as Bob points out, things like maskless ascents and air-sharing ascents with controlled buoyancy are NOT as easy as one might think!) but even more than that, I try to practice good dive planning, good pre-dive communication, prudence in my diving choices, and careful pre-dive equipment checks to AVOID any situation where I might ever have to use the skills I've so diligently acquired. Hopefully, I'd step up to the plate competently, but I'd love to end my diving career without ever having found out if that was true.

 

[mdb]

Well, it looks like we are now talking about what DAN will or will not cover, not a bad debate, but the OP started a very interesting thread that was filled with lots of good replies. NWGD made a number of very informative posts.

After 35 yrs. diving I still am learning. This board, and some others, provide lots of good input. I think TLT will be off training with a new mindset.

When I began diving my first cert. was with NASDS, 5 open water dives, mid water buoyancy checks etc. I followed up with NAUI rescue, more NASDS classes on night, deep, compass dives etc. I think the first year or two I was diving mainly in class or with instructors. After about 150 dives I hooked up with a regular buddy-he had a boat- and we were out diving most weekends and practiced skills on almost every dive. Now, with classes, IMO, dumbed down, by several agencies it is more important than ever to find a good instructor and follow his/her advice. I am glad some of those good instructors are on this board.

 

[Leejnd]

I think there have been some amazing lessons in here, not just for the OP, but for any new diver. I just wanted to pop in and say that it is refreshing to see someone (the OP) who is open, honest, logical, and willing to acknowledge errors and learn from his mistakes. There are a LOT of people on SB who couldn't have handled all of the constructive criticism in here with so much dignity. I have enjoyed reading this thread immensely.

(And there are a lot of people in SB who couldn't have replied to this thread w/o resorting to snotty personal attacks...so I'm glad they stayed away!)

 

[Kingpatzer]

I don't believe that is true. The one chamber ride I've taken in my life followed a dive to 112 fsw in Puget Sound. At the time I was only AOW certified, and DAN didn't question the dive profile ... they covered every dime of the ride that wasn't covered by my primary insurance carrier.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

And to be clear, I'm not saying that DAN would or would not cover this specific dive.

I am saying that the fine print (at least as I remember reading in my policy when I read it 5 months ago and I'll grant that I might be mis-remembering something) does provide some room for argument as to if they will cover dives that exceed agency recommendations.

I also don't want to in any way suggest that DAN as an organization would try to avoid payment. But I work in the finance world, and I understand that the company and the underwriters don't always see eye to eye.

 

[nereas]

And to be clear, I'm not saying that DAN would or would not cover this specific dive.

I am saying that the fine print (at least as I remember reading in my policy when I read it 5 months ago and I'll grant that I might be mis-remembering something) does provide some room for argument as to if they will cover dives that exceed agency recommendations.

I also don't want to in any way suggest that DAN as an organization would try to avoid payment. But I work in the finance world, and I understand that the company and the underwriters don't always see eye to eye.

Agency recommendations in the USA are 130 fsw for NDL recreational sport divers.

And for tech divers, their agency recommendations are normally printed on their trimix cards.