Yukon tangent thread

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Several people on this thread have remarked how they came to the conclusion that solo diving is the best choice for them. You and I both know that if one is methodical about picking and maintaining a buddy team, one will not necessarily conclude that solo diving is the best choice.

Agreed.

And WRT to "maintaining a buddy time," I think it's long overdue that I go practice non-responsive diver rescue.
 
So reading the last few posts it occurred to me, as a newb never been below 75 feet and never having witnessed anyone narc'ed, how common is it for people to get narc'ed at only 100 feet? If the sand is 105 FSW and the diver was seen "taking pictures in the sand" would it be reasonable that he might have been narc'ed? Would that lead us back to the gas question and what he was breathing? (I have no idea how much of a difference gas mixtures have on getting narc'ed.)

This is not meant as another fire-starter, but a legitimate question (in my opinion) from a newb who has no experience with this diving issue.

You'll get varying opinions on this subject.

As I understand it, there are a couple of things that you have working against you breathing air or some form of nitrox at this depth. They include:

- nitrogen narcosis
- gas density
- CO2 narcosis

Again, you'll get varying opinions on the nitrogen narcosis bit. I'll let others speak to it.

Regarding gas density, I have had the opportunity to dive the same dive (~100ft) with 32% and again with 30/30. I found 30/30 to be significantly easier to breath. So put a different way, if I am going to be working hard in current/surge with lots of gear/heavy exposure protection at 100ft, I personally would weigh the benefits vs expense of using 30/30 vs 32%.

Regarding C02 narcorsis, I think maybe this is related to gas density also. If you are working hard and are unable to breath effectively, it seems that the C02 levels in your system will begin to build up. I have heard on may occasions that C02 is significantly more narcotic than even nitrogen. I did a quick search on the interwebs and found this wikipedia entry. I don't really know how to interpret all the information there but based on a chart that the wikipedia entry has, it indicates that C02 has about 20x the narcotic potential of nitrogen.

It would be a reach to say that his gas choice was what caused this unfortunate accident. But I suspect that it did not help.
 
With the two lifeless bodies that I helped to the surface on two separate occasions it made a difference. After using my EMT and rescue diver training. They lived and thanked me a few days later for guess what, saving their lives. Yes CPR and rescue breathing worked.

You should buy a lottery ticket. I've done CPR probably a hundred times with a 0% recovery rate.

Last month I had a student in a Rescue Diver class who has been an EMT for 20 years. She said she has never had a victim revived through CPR and rescue breathing alone.
 
John, did your student mean a drowning victim? I certainly have seen people revived with CPR -- if it's done until more advanced methods of lifesaving are available.

With regards to narcosis, I don't think it's likely that an experienced diver would be incapacitated by it at 100 feet, but they could be more easily distracted and less likely to check their gas.
 
I don't know what all the facts are with respect to the efficacy of CPR, I seem to remember a Seattle study (recent JAMA, I'll find it for you if I need to) that showed about at 10% survival rate for patients that received CPR from untrained witnesses that were talked through the procedure by a 911 dispatcher.
 
Did anyone from the San Diego area see the channel 10 news at 11:00 last night? they interviewed the owner of the Humboldt. He had some interesting things to say. He also seemed to know Mr. Clampit (sp) from previous trips on the boat. His impression was that he was a more than competent diver. He also had a few comments about the lack of a proper head count and how that made his organization look.

This is the story. There is also a video. Boat Owner Discusses Fatal Diving Accident - San Diego News Story - KGTV San Diego

At the end he states that he wants to work with other dive Ops to make sure this doesn't happen again. I don't think other dive Ops are the problem. He needs to work with his own dive Op.

MISSION BEACH, Calif. -- Waterhorse Charters owner Ryan Wilbarger had nothing but kind words to say about diver Robert Clampitt, who was not a stranger on his dive tours.

Clampitt is the 48-year-old City Heights man who died on Saturday afternoon during a chartered trip on a boat called the Humboldt.

Wilbarger told 10News he's not ruling out that it may have been a medical emergency that he succumbed to during that fateful dive.

"There is no warning. There is no bell that rings [and] it's part of your responsibility as a diver to monitor and know how much air you have when you are diving," said Wilbarger.

The owner of the charter company said he was not there that day when it happened but he has been talking with the two women -- the captain and the crew member -- who were.

"If they did something incorrectly, if they did a tank count incorrectly, that's a separate issue that wouldn't have caused him to die, but it causes me and my company to look like an idiot," said Wilbarger.

The Humboldt left the dock at Quivera Basin Saturday afternoon headed northwest toward the Yukon, a shipwrecked vessel.

From there, the boat headed to another location when a passenger noticed that the man was missing. That's when the boat turned back and authorities were called to help find him.

Clampitt was found submerged and unconscious about 30 yards on the west side of the Yukon.

While the Coast Guard and Medical Examiner investigated how he died, Wilbarger hopes he can work with other dive operators to prevent anything like this from happening in the future.

"All I can do right now is offer them comfort and tell them I will be there for them and same with the family of the victim that died," said Wilbarger.
 
Ryan Wilbarger said: ...
"If they did something incorrectly, if they did a tank count incorrectly, that's a separate issue that wouldn't have caused him to die, but it causes me and my company to look like an idiot."
...
Exactly.
 
John, did your student mean a drowning victim? I certainly have seen people revived with CPR -- if it's done until more advanced methods of lifesaving are available.

She was not talking about the victims on which she had worked in general. I don't know all the circumstances.

She also said, as I did, "CPR and rescue breathing alone." I tell my students we do CPR and rescue breathing in the hope that we will keep the victim alive until "more advanced methods of lifesaving are available."
 
At the end he states that he wants to work with other dive Ops to make sure this doesn't happen again. I don't think other dive Ops are the problem. He needs to work with his own dive Op.

I recommend you do some study of "Correlation does not imply causation", and its opposite belief, "correlation proves causation", which is a logical fallacy also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc, by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The fallacy is is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other. :)
 
Dave,

One question. Were you diving off the Humbolt that day?

TB

Todd,
Not that day but previously. I stated earlier in the 34 pages of this thread that I was just south of there. On a private boat diving. I was on the radio. I started to head that way to help until the LG advised boats to steer clear of the area. I was within viewing distance. I heard the details on the radio from start to end of the incident. I have spoken to other people involved directly. I am offering what I know and saw, which although may be little is more than speculation and has more value than most posts here.
 

Back
Top Bottom