Silt Out - Wreck Danger! A graphic video demonstration.

[DevonDiver]

I applaud your efforts. However I do aggree with the statement that some "wreck ettiquette" would have also gone a long way.
Eric

Eric...perhaps some miscommunication on my behalf. The silt-out was deliberate - a training exercise and,also, necessary for me to be able to make a video highlighting the reality of a silt out.

It'd be rather a pointless video, if the silt hadn't been kicked. LOL I guess I could have smeared some vaseline on the lens or something?!?

None of my wreck students graduate unless they have first-hand experience of what a silt-out actually is...and does. As TS&M said...it's not something that you can appreciate (even slightly) until you've experienced it. In this case, experience is a great teacher...and bravado ends with that lesson. It's a potentially life-saving lesson, especially in regards to mind-set.

With the PADI course, there are two options for the final dive: penetration or non-penetration. Whilst virtually all of my students graduate with a penetration dive, some do not. They have to work for that right, by demonstrating proper technique and competence in the preceding dives. I don't take 'silt gremlins' into overheads. Those that aren't ready are offered remedial training or simply graduate with a non-penetration dive. I wish PADI issued cards on that basis, but sadly they don't. Their log books will show it though.

My entire course builds up to a final penetration dive. The PADI Wreck Diver manual is 'ok', but I supplement it with my own notes. The PADI Wreck Diver DVD is a joke... I use my own training/diving footage, along with the 5thdx 'Essentials' DVD.

Dive #1 focuses upon fundamental skills: Weighting, buoyancy, trim, non-silting propulsion, team-work and situational awareness. I use a 'loose' technical bench-mark for this.... bearing in mind the reality that it's a single dive...and student quality is variable to the extreme. The dive is videoed and the 'team' critique it for themselves - using my demonstrations and the 5thdx DVD as benchmarks.

Dive #2 focuses upon wreck assessment and familiarity. It's the "map dive", but students are appraised (and again, videoed) on the fundamental criteria dealt with on dive #1. In addition, they have to plan and conduct the dive as a team. I set them 'homework' to research the designated wreck in advance and plan accordingly. They have to deal with additional task loading (the map/survey/penetration assessment project), whilst retaining safe core scuba competencies.

Dive #3 focuses on guideline work. It is preceded by a morning (4+ hours) of dry training. They lay and retrieve a guideline. Then they lay a guideline along a complicated route outside the wreck. They follow the guideline. They follow the guideline in black mask as a team. They follow the guideline air-sharing. They follow the guideline air-sharing in black mask. They rehearse safety spool use - in black mask simulating a search for lost-line or direct exit. They do a black mask free swim to a designated point - to reinforce the inability/difficulty in finding a straight-forward exit without vision.

Dive #4 is the penetration dive if they've displayed sufficient competency on dives #1-3. This penetration is normally conducted into the gun deck area of the USS New York (ACR-2) armored cruiser. Despite being in the tropics, visibility is normally low, depth is significant by recreational standards (bottom-time/NDL are factors that need to be managed) and it is intimidating. It's 20m down and 20m in. There are regular exits (turret openings) overhead that retain the 'light-zone' throughout the penetration... but, whilst illuminated, it's a cathedral-like space...gloomy and darkness dropping away below them..

A 4-dive course isn't sufficient (IMHO) to "make someone a wreck diver". I don't advertise that. I'm pretty happy for my PADI wreck graduates to leave training with a new-found respect for wrecks... and a high degree of caution. They all recognize the need for further training/experience/refinement. They all have a 'road map' to progress upon in the future. Further, considerably more robust, training is available for those who want to gain real penetration skills. I get to sleep easy because I've educated people - and that education stresses prudence, rather than a pat-on-the-back and "congrats...go away and dive wrecks!".

The video I made can easily be seen as a big question mark... is there such a thing as a 'recreational wreck dive'. The limits, as stated, says there is. Reality, IMHO, differs... if there is silt, then there is no easy demarcation...

 

[tye1138]

It was a deliberate scenario. I kicked up the silt - for the purposes of education and filming that (educational) video.

Got ya! All makes sense, a bit of reverse psychology!

 

[nimoh]

I'll preface this post by saying that I have never taken a wreck, cavern, or cave course, but pursuing cave certification and have no plans to make such dives until certified. But I have a few questions:

I was under the impression that for a recreational wreck penetration, the opening needed to be big enough for two divers to pass through side by side while sharing air, and the exit shown did not appear to be large enough. Was it large enough, or is my impression slightly off?

Was the silt out caused by just the one kick? or, did you do a few more kicks for effect. I will admit that this video was my first "exposure" to a silt out, and actually felt my heart rate rising a bit (although the music might have been a contributor lol). Not that the kick count matters, just curious.

In any case, thanks for posting this, it was very informative.

 

[Akimbo]

That’s silly, how are you going to unbolt the binnacle or a port hole without stirring up silt? Learn to work in the dark like a real [-]pirate[/-] diver!

 

[ajduplessis]

@DD: Well done. Even if this "message" only sinks in with 1 diver you have done a great job. I have made one or 2 careless fin strokes myself in a cave environment and the results was. It changes you focus and:blessing: forever in a matter of seconds. Sadly, silt-outs is the very last thing untrained divers think about.

 

[waterpirate]

I fully understand that it was you who made them screw the pooch first hand. I was just saying that follow the leader into a compartment is a sure fire recepe to what you gave them, unless you are the 5th dimmension guys or equivalant. Training beyond standards should allways be the objective, but sadly it is not allways done.
Eric

 

[dumpsterDiver]

On a PADI Wreck Course, yes... within PADI recommended limits for wreck penetration (light zone/no restrictions/130' linear from surface). The penetration shown in the video is about 4m into an empty cabin 6x4m, with door exits at each side and 6 portholes near the 'roof'. Ooodles of ambient light, no entanglements, no restrictions and only 14m deep.

I'd love for PADI to make redundancy mandatory for deep/wreck recreational dives, but they won't/haven't. Many of the wreck courses I teach are now in conjunction with sidemount (for those serious to develop penetration skills), but there's always going to be single-tank divers who want to train for wrecks.

The video shows just one training experience they are given which helps educate them about the necessity for exemplary core skills, guideline technique...and the benefits of redundancy. Most of my recreational wreck graduates leave the course with a profound respect for penetration - knowing precisely what they need to improve, develop and equip with before venturing back inside again. For a 4-dive 'intro' course (which is all the PADI Wreck Diver course is...) I'd call that effective training.

More dives/courses are available for those who feel sufficiently prepared and competent to continue with wreck penetration skills training.

I'm the one in a rash guard and x-shorts (not a shorty)... I also do technical wreck (4+ tank sidemount/backmount) in the same exposure protection. Water temp is 32 Celsius Will wear a full suit (3mm) when I know I'm going to be squeezing through restrictions, otherwise, my buoyancy/control doesn't let me down. All students are offered, if not already equipped, with a full suit for wreck training dives. What's the problem?

This is a very instructive video. I have criticized PADI in the past for lax rules and standards... But it is totally within PADI standards to take 3 students into a confined wreck that appears to alllow only single file exit and then totally silt out the passage and allow them to work the situation out having no redundant breathing system? I find that to be ridiculous, if you are correct in the assertion that this was within current PADI standards. quite a representation of what a PADI training class involves. Did they each have multiple lights? All I can say is WOW...

I have zero wreck training or cavern or technical training, but I would be a hell of a lot more comfortable, solo at 160 feet with a redundant air supply on the outside of a wreck compared to being inside the wreck with some student in front of my exit with nobody having any redundant air supply.

I thought the video was silly, the narrative talks about zero visibility (I think) yet the vis never really got that bad in the video. It was NOT a good representation of zero visibility at all.. I am confused by it.

 

[Rogersea]

Nice educational and marketing tool. Tim is now in Bohol, I will let him know the splash this is making .

Cheers,
Roger

 

[DevonDiver]

But it is totally within PADI standards to take 3 students into a confined wreck that appears to allow only single file exit and then totally silt out the passage and allow them to work the situation out having no redundant breathing system?

That's the point in the training (and something noted in the video)... the penetration used is well within the PADI penetration limits. It's also a very benign penetration - a simple 'swim through', with doors to open-water at each end of a short compartment...and bunches of ambient light entering from portholes upon high.

Here is Subic, 9-out-of-10 dives conducted are wreck dives. Of those, a gross proportion of divers actually undertake some form of penetration. Many penetrate the area shown in the video. I couldn't guess how many of them had wreck training... but certainly a significant proportion don't.

What the video (and my lesson) demonstrates is how a "safe" penetration... well within the PADI limits... can easily and rapidly turn into a very unsafe situation. I feel that is a critical lesson for wreck divers to learn.

Also, not sure why you imagine a full-size doorway enforces a single-file exit? The 'rule' is that divers need to be able to exit whilst sharing air (assuming no long hose). They can do that through a door. Side-by-side is one technique. Piggy-back is another. I teach both. Piggy-back is especially important... as doorways tend to feature highly in most wreck penetrations...

Also, not sure why you're getting twisted over "no redundant breathing system". That's a 'recommended' at recreational levels... not a 'mandatory'. I train them as they're likely to dive afterwards... and that rarely involves pony cylinders (this is a holiday market/destination.... not mainland USA). There's no point in training divers to use ponies, if they won't be equipped with ponies afterwards. None of the customer divers I see in Subic Bay, penetrating wrecks, have ponies....sadly. A pony, or other redundant air-source, isn't a 'get out of jail free' solution... it shouldn't be seen as one. Yes, it's a damned fine idea... but it breeds over-confidence and complacency.... especially if the use of that pony hasn't been drilled and ingrained under realistic scenarios.

In recreational wreck... PADI supposes that air-sharing (or even CESA) are still acceptable contingencies, given the limits put on penetration. PADI tend to be dismissive of silt-out IMHO.... that's reflected in their manuals and videos (and limits?). I disagree with that... and my course reflects my concern over disregarding the issue of silt-out.

My divers are trained to air-share under those circumstances... black masks, tactile signals and guideline exit. Those that want to train with a pony get that training as a supplement to the course.... they have to drill with that kit also, if they are to use it. Simply slinging on a pony, with no clue or practice, is not a 'better' solution.

Ask me for a personal opinion...and I'd simply say "no penetration" after a measly 4-dive wreck course. It's an intro-course... and what I show them is the dangers involved and the high complexity in extracting/surviving those worst-case, but likely, scenarios. Those that graduate are in no way uncertain of their capabilities...and gain a deep respect for what wreck penetration actually involves. It is a warning course, not necessarily an 'enabling' course. Those who specifically train to develop wreck penetration skills need to commit to much more robust and in-depth training... which I supply.

I find that to be ridiculous, if you are correct in the assertion that this was within current PADI standards. quite a representation of what a PADI training class involves.

The PADI class doesn't prohibit anything seen in the video. Students have learned guideline skills... a guideline is run on the penetration. They enter a compartment well within PADI penetration limits. That the penetration suffers a silt-out is neither here nor there... those happen on penetrations... and is why student wreck divers train to deploy and follow guidelines. If they weren't capable of extracting from the wreck, along a guideline, in order... in that silt-out.... then why would they ever be qualified as wreck divers and given an 'agency green light' to go away and penetrate by themselves?!?

I, also, am quite skeptical of what a 'standard' PADI wreck course offers...especially given the low calibre and experience with which an instructor can qualify to teach it. What it boils down to is that some zero-to-hero instructor can perform a handful of low-intensity (low skill development) dives with an equally zero-to-hero diver...and "hey, congrats'... they gain approval to go heading into wrecks "within 130' linear of the surface, in the light zone and no restricted passage"... no thought whatsoever of the inevitable hazards that can arise. Of course, those hazards are well taught in theory.... but not considered in training. That's a big failure in my books... and something I don't let happen on my wreck courses.

Did they each have multiple lights? All I can say is WOW...

They were fully equipped as per PADI standards, including lights + backups...along with safety reels. Not that a light would make a gnat's chuff of a difference in a silt-out...

I would be a hell of a lot more comfortable, solo at 160 feet with a redundant air supply on the outside of a wreck compared to being inside the wreck with some student in front of my exit with nobody having any redundant air supply. ...

That's why they pay me the big money!..... no.... wait....

Seriously though... I had a door behind me. It's a clean walled compartment... no real issue with escape or ensuring student safety. Now... talk to me about technical wreck courses.... that can be seriously stress-inducing for an instructor... redundant gas or not... (and what killed a buddy of mine earlier this year).

I thought the video was silly, the narrative talks about zero visibility (I think) yet the vis never really got that bad in the video. It was NOT a good representation of zero visibility at all.. I am confused by it.

The zero-viz was mushrooming... as we exited it was following us out. We moved higher in the compartment, which gets us out of the worst of it (and still under those delightful port-holes). By the time I (last man) reached the door, the viz was fully zero. One of the issues raised with students as a learning point is the very short time you can extract from the area before viz diminishes.

Again, I'm not sure why you're so confused. If I stuck around at the bottom in the full silt... what sort of video would I have had? I doubt people would remain viewing after the first minute of a black screen. LOL. Not that I fancy myself as a budding Lucas or Spielberg... but I had to make a video that'd be watched... as actually watching it for the duration is kinda prerequisite to getting a message across.

---------- Post added November 23rd, 2012 at 12:50 AM ----------

Nice educational and marketing tool. Tim is now in Bohol, I will let him know the splash this is making .

He can download it from Vimeo. The full course video is on Youtube (can download with a browser plug-in). Hope Tim's doing well over at your place... let him know that his clutz on the final dive was due to forgetting to put his trim weight on (as he'll notice from the video) LOL. I'm sure he's enjoying some stress-free diving now

 

[DevonDiver]

I was under the impression that for a recreational wreck penetration, the opening needed to be big enough for two divers to pass through side by side while sharing air, and the exit shown did not appear to be large enough. Was it large enough, or is my impression slightly off?

They have to be able to air-share (conventional hoses) for exit.

I teach this:



and also this:



Trained wreck divers (even PADI ones) shouldn't have difficulty getting out of a feck'ng door.... whatever way it is orientated. Seriously...

Was the silt out caused by just the one kick? or, did you do a few more kicks for effect.

Technically... it was 3 small kicks (from a Force Fin) directly into the silt. It probably equates to much less than I've seen recreational divers do in open-water when they have a buoyancy melt-down in vertical trim near the bottom...

I will admit that this video was my first "exposure" to a silt out, and actually felt my heart rate rising a bit (although the music might have been a contributor lol).

Thanks... that's kind the point (and why I choose that music too). Had a few divers feedback similar statements...and if it had that impact, then I am happy. The heart rate rises much more when it's not a video