Re: Yes, zat's so.

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

Posted by tleemay on January 23, 2003 at 13:07:04:

In Reply to: Re: Yes, zat's so. posted by seahunt on January 23, 2003 at 11:20:41:

Is it just the diver? Primarily yes. It's their decision to do such activity revelent to what
knowlege and experience they have.

N2 is a drug at depth and does cloud a diver's
mind - no matter how good they THINK they are on
air. The diver is the first place where the red
flag should be recognized before attempting a task
like a 180'+ dive. At 150', he makes a bad
judgement, I mean after all it's only another 30
feet, right? The effects of N2 alone on the body
at that depth for another 30' further amplifies
the effect. I've done chamber dives nearly that
deep. The clouding of mental and motor skills were
very pronounced - and that was while just sitting
on a dry canvas cot.

Of course the diver could do everything within
his power given current knowlege, understanding, configuration, and support. Even after all is
said and done, he could still get chomped on
by whitey or suffer a heart attack if he's in
poor physical shape. Something like the shark he
could not forsee, the bad physical condition of
known AND unknown preconditions (ie; PFO) could perhaps have been forseen. The other variables I
mentioned can be planned for and applied making
the activity must more survivable, or at the least
providing a much less chance of injury.

But diving on air deep at sites like the
Matterhorn, regardless of proper planning,
configuration and support is not a smart thing to
do. It's blue water dive and you and your team
(or buddy - hopefully) are totally alone out
there. This is especially true when diving from a
private boat when the captain dives at the same

I remember addressing a dive club a couple
years ago and a diver bragged that he liked the
effect of N2 on his grey matter and agressively
sought the experience out, even joking about the
dillusions he admitted to have. I would call that
person dangerous to himself and not very
compassionate to his family menbers and friends.
If I were on a dive boat paying a few hundred
of $ for a three day trip and I knew this diver
was looking to get hammered, I would have a
discussion with the captain. He may or may not
do something about it, but at least I could
verbalize at the depo that I did everything in my
power to point out he was a potential problem.
Since I am an industry professional - I would
clearly be a target by the surviving familly's
insurance co and lawyers. It's happened before
and don't dismiss the fact it could happen again.
As you know seahunt, some of us are constantly
diving - every weekend for the most part. The law
of averages eventually catches up with you.
Fortunately, I have had my ducks in a row for
each time I've been called to provide a depo or
testimony. I can't say as much for some boat or
shop owners.

But enough about that. Back to the attempt of
applying relativity.

If you are going to race in the Indy 500 and keep
up with the bunch without crashing or being a liability to yourself and others on the track, a
very - very advanced thing to do with typical
driving skills, do you think you could do it safely in your own family car? I would hope not.
At least not without proper training, subsequent
developed skills, right equipment (proper car and
safety equipment) and the right support should
something go wrong.

Diving such an advanced spot to such a depth
without the right skills, equipment, planning and
support is just as 'stupid' as someone else has
pointed out. Yes it can be done, and has been done
the same way many times before. That doesn't mean
it was a smart thing to do.

So, I say yes - it's the divers. The gas selection
is just one of the diver's potential bad

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




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