Diving to 200' and Beyond

[beester]

Looks like a nice divespot stoo... I'm not going to comment on your dive plan because not enough details. However it's not because you've dived a specific spot in a specific way (equipment, gasplanning, decoplan) for 100s of times that nothing will happen next time. Murphy doesn't care about how many times you've dived a specific spot.

Same goes for this lady. In the end you can be eased into a false sense of security... because you've dived that spot so many times. So I'd rather have sufficient gas, a team and procedures in place to reduce the amount of improvisation when the **** hits the fan

YMMV of course. Going back to this wreck I dived a lot and ended up in with my buddy caught in netting, almost drowning. Yeah I knew that place well enough But in the end the gasplanning, procedures and team communication wasn't sufficient when murphy raised it's ugly hand... and we lucked out (fortunately).

 

[Bennno]

So what would be the danger for an appropriately trained diver on the dive that Stoo describes. I'd like to hear a few specific examples for '**** hitting the fan'. Busted hose is not gonna be a big issue, reg freeze isn't and if you narc'd you'd just be decreasing depth. This is certainly not a dive for beginners but If you think that a dive like this is so super dangerous than I believe trimix gives you a false sense of security. Whether you're really getting narc'd or not comes down to the person.

The conditions on those pictures look amazing btw. I can't believe I didn't go when I stayed in Toronto.

 

[beester]

It depends on who is doing the dive, with what kind of equipment, training and experience, and whether or not he is doing it solo or not. All those factors increase or decrease the risk.

The only comment I'm making is that everybody (including me, because it bit me in the ass already) should be aware that having dived a spot 100 times doesn't count for a lot in your risk assesment. Something can happen on the 101st time diving that exact same spot. Stoo basically mentioned this in the first sentence of his post... don't underestimate familiarity to a dive site but also that there is a risk that it leads to complacency.

I'm not going to guestimate what can go wrong on that particular dive, because I don't know the context. Stoo can do that himself.

Next whatever I would post as example (having experienced myself or having seen from close by) would just be countered by your "easy" solutions. In practice at least in my opinion it doesn't work that way. It's always a lot of small issues building up on eachtother until they become unmanageable. It's not just a freeflow, or just a leaking mask, or just a busted low pressure hose or just a punched wing, or a leak in your drysuit, or current causing you to breath harder and retain CO², or or or... But you know that.

When it comes to the French lady assuming what was said is true (solo, single 80 cuft back, slung pony of undefined volume, 200 feet, current) yes I think she is cutting some corners, but that is just MY risk assesment, not hers. Maybe she keeps doing that for another 20 years without any problem... maybe she ends up in a chamber breathing heliox being paraplegic going in (like a friend of mine who coincidently was diving a single 15L, small slung deco bottle, doing a 60m wreck dive)... who knows.

 

[Bennno]

It's not just a freeflow, or just a leaking mask, or just a busted low pressure hose or just a punched wing, or a leak in your drysuit, or current causing you to breath harder and retain CO², or or or... But you know that.

If you encounter any of these problems you should abord the dive so issues are much less likely to add up. Also, if you're doining dives like that you should have had issues like this in the past in shallower water...
If had CO² build up, reg freeze, drysuit and hose leaks, cramps and one busted inflator before I ever dove deeper than 130'. If you wanna do dive like that you have significant experience already. As long as you are in OW and the conditions are generally good and familiar with the site.
You say or, or , or... you should know specifically what could happen, IMHO.
And, really, If a leaking mask causes you any stress at all, you have no business diving deeper than 60'ish.

 

[beester]

And, really, If a leaking mask causes you any stress at all, you have no business diving deeper than 60'ish.

I've seen some deco-accidents in my diving carreer and in 3 cases I was on site (even helping out with the victims) where the initial "malfunction" was "just" a leaky mask, which was disregared and caused a spiral of other things happening. So yes in your book this doesn't happen... In my book it does. These were all CMAS trained experienced divers (**** to instructors).

They were not technical divers... but I don't think the lady which was the subject of the inital post is a technical diver either.

If you haven't seen anything happen yet... read any of the available accident reports. (on scubaboard, the anual bsac report, etc)

 

[The Chairman]

I've met a lot of bad divers who justify their bad decisions by their good luck. I'm not impressed by them one whit and see them as frauds. They've convinced themselves that they are safety conscious while breaking several obvious rules. They don't have any special skills except the ability to delude themselves and sometimes others. There is nothing there to admire, no matter how old or what gender they might be.

 

[Bennno]

True but if I'm deep or in overhead I take these little things very seriously, if you don't manage them immediately they can spiral out of control.

Overhead and deep (in this case 55ishm on air)is not the same, not even close. In an OW dive as described by Stoo, you can abort the dive, a cave dive you can't really abort or go up a few Meters, all you can do is swim back... and the way back might be long. As you know from earlier discussions, I'm more conservatives than you when it comes to cave diving.

I've seen some deco-accidents in my diving carreer and in 3 cases I was on site (even helping out with the victims) where the initial "malfunction" was "just" a leaky mask, which was disregared and caused a spiral of other things happening. So yes in your book this doesn't happen... In my book it does. These were all CMAS trained experienced divers (**** to instructors).

They were not technical divers... but I don't think the lady which was the subject of the inital post is a technical diver either.

If you haven't seen anything happen yet... read any of the available accident reports. (on scubaboard, the anual bsac report, etc)

This were I believe you wrong. You consider the actual 'malfunction' of the mask or another part of the gear to be cause of the accident, I see the cause elsewhere.

Just to give a an example: I was out wreck diving in the Baltic with my buddy and a couple of full trimix trained guys I didn't know prior. The wreck is only at 37m/120' the conditions were good.
While my buddy and I were still on the boat on guys basically popped out of the water after a super fast accent.
What happened was that one of his regs had frozen up and instead of shutting down he panicked and bolted to the surface. He was Ok, so he got lucky.
What would you see as the issue here?

In this story, I don't see the freeze of the reg as the problem, I see him as the cause of the problem. Even though he was trimix trained he did not manage a 'standard' gear issue on a fairly easy dive. IMHO, you can't fault the dive profile or the reg... people (especially since 'tec' has become so hip) take deep, cave and rebreather diving way too lightly and I feel that people are not willing to 'pay their dues' an learn diving in easy conditions for long enough. I see people with ***** trim and buoyancy in caves on scooters and I see people with horrible basics doing dives with 2 stages in quarry pounds.
So the problem to me is, that too many people start deco and cave training too early, before they have gathered some 'normal' dive experience.... now, if you experience a leaky mask for the first time on your 100s dive at 70m or in a cave.... I think that where the problem lies...

As for that lady, if she whats to nail down to 60m stay for 1min and does a 'normal' multi-level dive, I wouldn't recommend doing that but it worries my less when someone with 1000 dives does that, than some dude with a 100 dives doing an 70 min trimix dive to 60m. There is no substitute for experience and talent... good training gives you the tools to learn but it doesn't make you a good diver.

Maybe his makes people understand better why I think it's a problem when people, especially instructors, write stuff like: strarting deco training at 30 dives is OK or that any kind of cave diving in not a big deal.

 

[Bennno]

...while breaking several obvious rules.

If she was CMAS certified in France, she is probably not breaking any rules. 200' at least used to be max depth for *** divers. You might think that it's stupid but it ain't against the rules.

 

[The Chairman]

You might think that it's stupid but it ain't against the rules.

It appears you have earned your "Hair Splitting Specialty" for CMAS.

• The OP suggests that she frequently goes below 200 ft.
• Even below 100 ft, she does not have enough gas to do this dive safely.
• Regardless of agency: Stupid is as stupid does. I'm not going to respect stupid, no matter how lucky they are.
• Moreover, I don't respect those who justify others being stupid.

You can pick up your box of chocolates at the door.

 

[Storker]

It appears you have earned your "Hair Splitting Specialty" for CMAS.

Pete, you're way too Americanized. If there ever were a "Hair Splitting Specialty" course, it would have been offered by PADI, not CMAS

Now, pointing out that people certified a long time ago, when standards were different, isn't exactly the best argument for defending practices that don't fit with what is taught today. In the 1950s, people smoked freely and drove around without seat belts. Sure most of them survived - at least when it comes to the driving practices - but that doesn't necessarily mean it can be considered as safe practice given what we know these days.