Re: Yes, zat's so.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by seahunt on January 23, 2003 at 11:20:41:

In Reply to: Re: Yes, zat's so. posted by tleemay on January 23, 2003 at 09:34:18:

In what you say, the biggest single factor seems to be gas. Not to say that other stuff isn't all related, but the problem seems to be that one way or another the gas characteristics got them. The accidents I heard of (1 death, one severe bend that trip) sounded similar. I suspect that most of the people that have gone down on the Matterhorn were experienced divers that wouldn't make avoidable mistakes, but most of the early divers just did not have gas or much gas knowledge available. I wonder how deep Cousteau team went there and on what gas.
A question arises from this. Why did they go down there? Tim said that the large flat spot was at 150 feet. While that is a dangerous enough depth, there is a lot of difference between that and 180 feet in terms of DCS and narcosis. Why didn't they stop at 150? Narcosis is far more managable there and decompression might be surprising minimal. I mean I can see going past the top tip at 130 to see bigger area at 150, but why go on deeper? Is it just the diver?
Enjoy, seahunt

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]