bridgediver:Why is resuscitation necessary? The back up should be able to get down to clear the primary be it under ice or anywhere else well within the parameters of a "safe" dive time. <---BLADES AGREES. RECUSCITATION WOULD BE THE LAST OPTION, DEPLOYING A SAFETY WOULD BE THE FIRST OPTION. THE POINT I WAS MAKING PREVIOUSLY IS RELEASING A Q.R.S.S. IS ALWAYS A LAST OPTION IN ANY SITUATION EXCEPT UNDER ICE. IN THOSE SITUATIONS WE ALL AGREE THAT WE WOULD NOT WANT THE DIVER TO SEPERATE FROM THE SEARCH LINE.
Another thing .......... is that it would seem to point out that we should not try to pull a diver out of a snag or entanglement. <---BLADES AGREES. NEVER PULL A DIVER WHO HAS GIVEN A DISTRESS SIGNAL. IN THE PREVIOUSLY REFERENCED NIOSH REPORT, DIVER #3 WAS NOT TRYING TO PULL THE VICTIM BY THE SEARCH LINE.
I've given an answer of how to solve the problem of a trapped diver without him having to d/c from his tether but nobody has been able to give me an example of why this answer doesn't work. SEE BELOW ... Blades
Very good discussion thus far. Thanks to all that have taken part.
........................................................................
Mark...
This is an EXCELLENT discussion. Thanks a million for keeping an open mind, using sound logic and asking good questions. You are keeping me on my toes and members of the forum are learning here too. You asked for an "example" so I will throw out three real world incidents, and then I will follow with a tough question...
I will start with Art Schumacher...
Art was the coordinator of his dive team (like you)
and he too had considerable diving experience;
his highest rating was "divemaster" and he held
the rank of Assistant Chief. Art was a public
safety diver who died at age 46 wearing a
nylon chest harness with a nylon rope attached
to his chest harness via a locking carabiner.
Art and his team members were dispatched to a
report of a vehicle in a rain swollen creek.
When they arrived, the vehicle had already come
to rest against a culvert pipe passing beneath
County Road 42 in Medina County, OH. It was cold
and early in the morning and they arrived on scene
around 4 AM. Art made a decision to enter the water.
He was "only going to check under the car and
along the side" one teammate stated.
Minutes after entering the water, Art was sucked
under the vehicle and into a culvert pipe that
was 5 feet in diameter. There were no line pull
signals since the search line had been pulled
taunt against the underside of the vehicle. A
few minutes after entering the water, team
members knew Art had a problem. The search
line was pinned under the vehicle so they could
not give slack allowing Art to exit the pipe
on the down current side. The vehicle was
removed via a wrecker and at 0520 hours, Art
Schumacher's body was pulled from the culvert
pipe. Art was still wearing his chest harness,
nylon rope and locking carabiner, and a dive
knife. Additionally, he had 2400 psi in his
SCUBA cylinder and his regulator functioned
normally; his mask was still in place. A senior
company officer, well trained, with considerable
experience died because he could not release
himself from his search line and exit on the
down stream side of the culvert pipe. He was
less than 25 feet and 5 seconds from the pipe exit.
Charles David Hartman (age 30) was an experienced
public safety diver (police officer) who entered
flowing water wearing SCUBA gear and a search line
attached via a carabiner. He too died when he
could not release from his search line. Teammates
and spectators on site watched him on
the surface for a period of time and didn't know there
was a problem until it was too late. Water currents
caused Officer Hartman's body to move in a life-like
motion and it was only after a short period of
time that personnel on shore realized the seriousness
of the situation.
Frank Hut (age 28) died in the relatively calm waters
of a South Carolina Sound. Frank had submerged,
made a dive, and returned to the surface for
another tank of air. Unfortunately his comm rope
had wrapped under a submerged cable. When wind
shifted the dive boat slightly, he was pulled underwater
with the submerged cable acting as a directional pulley
on his comm rope. Even though team mates responded
promptly, they were unable to save Frank's life.
Reflecting on these three incidents, I would ask the forum members, who believes that clipping onto the victim's search line and swimming towards the victim would have any benefit? Maybe in the last situation but by the time Frank's rescue diver arrived, Frank was already unconscious. I wonder how many additional minutes were lust becasue the rescue diver could not activate a quick release system. In the case historys above, is it not possible to believe that Q.R.S.S. would have made a difference?
I am not saying that deploying a safety diver is a bad thing. DEFINITELY NOT...
What many people believe (including myself) is there are times when a quick release snap shackle can make a difference between life and death. If the diver is using a carabiner, it can not be released under load and, as pointed out, death can result. A snap shackle can have the strength of a carabiner and the benefits of being released by the diver in an emergency. Why would we not want to use a safer device that allows the diver to have options? Why is a knife or cutting shears the only "last option" we presently give to the divers during their last moments of life? If we can trust a diver to cut himself free, can we not trust him to pull a quick release snap shackle?
As one of our Bother PSDs pointed out earlier, commercial divers have been using quick release snap shackles for years. They are used in the water rescue community too! So I would like to ask, why are Q.R.S.S. bad for public safety divers?