MASS-Diver
Contributor
"trained" to deal with narcosis, 200' + on air......here we go again
USS Aaron Ward (DD-483)
- Thread starter Kapiti Diver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Shanronn- you bring up a good point about the differences in tech training then and now and the ultimate impact on diver competence.
On the one hand, learning "technical" diving the old fashioned way through mentorship and what amounted to on the job training or an apprenticship was a long slow process and depended heavily on finding more experienced dive buddies to bring you along. It also required a good deal of research on your own and a good deal of insight into your own abilities and weaknesses. It did however offer the advantage of providing you with a lot of experience in addition to knowledge and the pace was normally slow enough that you could fully absorb and incorporate what you learned and allowed you to incorporate one technique at a time.
A modern approach to tech diving education is heavy on training and procedure and will get you up to speed on technique a lot faster. But it is also potentially going to produce a diver with a lot of training and very little real world experience, judgement and what I will call "pilot in command time". It's a trade off.
The risk here is that students will get the certifications in minimum time and say all the right things and exude the right image needed to get what amounts to a merit badge but really may not have mastered all that is required at the level at which it needs to be mastered to be truly competent when things truly do not go as planned on a dive.
Admittedly the traditional hands on approach involved a certain element of "live and learn...if you live" but it did produce divers who absolutley knew that they had the stuff to make the right decisions and to prioritize correctly when things got interesting on a dive. The ones who did not, voluntarily weeded themselves out somewhere along the way. There is in my opinion no real substitute for experience and for the maturity that comes with that experience.
I hear a lot of tech divers talk with great confidence on this board. Often the newer members of the breed will defend their philosophies and configurations to the death based on nothing other than what amounts to an authoritarian argument that some one or some agency said so, rather than based on observation, experience, and an open minded thoughtful approach to what is really going on. This is certainbly an artifact of the accellerated learnign process but i amnot sure it is a good thing.
I suspect this forceful defense also is to some degree out of necessity as in some cases their philospohy and configuration is the corner stone of their self confidence and the corner stone of their acceptance into an elite group. But take that away and in many newly minted tech divers, you may not have much left.
Consequently when a novel situation is encountered that differs significantly from the training environment, a lot of congnitive flexibility and the ability to think clearly under pressure is required and those attributes may or may not be there despite the presence of a piece of paper. In those cases, prodigious amounts of tech training of a diver with what amounts to the "wrong stuff" would not result in competence. I am not sure how you could effectively and reliably weed out those divers in the current process.
In many ways a newly minted tech diver can be very similar to a newly minted soldier. They believe what they believe very strongly but it takes a few years and a few stripes for them to really understand "why".
It needs to be recongnized by everyone that any type of tech certification or training is in reality only a license to continue learning and carries with it a great deal of personal responsibility. You need to know and respect your own personal limitations.
-----
And MASS Diver - The ability for a diver to devleop a tolerance to narcosis over time is supported by reseach. Whether you choose to endorse it or not, or whether or not it is "PC" in the current tech diving community, it is a legitamate research based opinion and Shanronn has a legitamate right to exress it as an informed opinion and as an informed choice.
The variability of the effects of narcosis due to the divers indoctrination about whether it is possible to function at depth on air and at what depth it will ultimately incapacitate a diver is also established by research.
So in the case of a diver who has been indoctrinated to believe that narcosis is incapacitating at depths much below 130 ft and who may also have been trained that the use of trimix is prudent for all dives below 100' (or 130, 150, or whatever), they will most likely be incapacitated at 200' on air because they believe they will be. But you need to understand that these same largely psychological limitations would not neccesarily apply to divers who routinely do deep air dives.
It's a free country with free speech but we all have to recongnize that our right to free speech stops at the point it infringes on someone elses right to express themselves. It's ok to disagree and I would encourage anyone to do so in a civil manner. But I prefer it when people do it respectfully, factually, and without the eye rolling - it's demeaning and insulting to others.
On the one hand, learning "technical" diving the old fashioned way through mentorship and what amounted to on the job training or an apprenticship was a long slow process and depended heavily on finding more experienced dive buddies to bring you along. It also required a good deal of research on your own and a good deal of insight into your own abilities and weaknesses. It did however offer the advantage of providing you with a lot of experience in addition to knowledge and the pace was normally slow enough that you could fully absorb and incorporate what you learned and allowed you to incorporate one technique at a time.
A modern approach to tech diving education is heavy on training and procedure and will get you up to speed on technique a lot faster. But it is also potentially going to produce a diver with a lot of training and very little real world experience, judgement and what I will call "pilot in command time". It's a trade off.
The risk here is that students will get the certifications in minimum time and say all the right things and exude the right image needed to get what amounts to a merit badge but really may not have mastered all that is required at the level at which it needs to be mastered to be truly competent when things truly do not go as planned on a dive.
Admittedly the traditional hands on approach involved a certain element of "live and learn...if you live" but it did produce divers who absolutley knew that they had the stuff to make the right decisions and to prioritize correctly when things got interesting on a dive. The ones who did not, voluntarily weeded themselves out somewhere along the way. There is in my opinion no real substitute for experience and for the maturity that comes with that experience.
I hear a lot of tech divers talk with great confidence on this board. Often the newer members of the breed will defend their philosophies and configurations to the death based on nothing other than what amounts to an authoritarian argument that some one or some agency said so, rather than based on observation, experience, and an open minded thoughtful approach to what is really going on. This is certainbly an artifact of the accellerated learnign process but i amnot sure it is a good thing.
I suspect this forceful defense also is to some degree out of necessity as in some cases their philospohy and configuration is the corner stone of their self confidence and the corner stone of their acceptance into an elite group. But take that away and in many newly minted tech divers, you may not have much left.
Consequently when a novel situation is encountered that differs significantly from the training environment, a lot of congnitive flexibility and the ability to think clearly under pressure is required and those attributes may or may not be there despite the presence of a piece of paper. In those cases, prodigious amounts of tech training of a diver with what amounts to the "wrong stuff" would not result in competence. I am not sure how you could effectively and reliably weed out those divers in the current process.
In many ways a newly minted tech diver can be very similar to a newly minted soldier. They believe what they believe very strongly but it takes a few years and a few stripes for them to really understand "why".
It needs to be recongnized by everyone that any type of tech certification or training is in reality only a license to continue learning and carries with it a great deal of personal responsibility. You need to know and respect your own personal limitations.
-----
And MASS Diver - The ability for a diver to devleop a tolerance to narcosis over time is supported by reseach. Whether you choose to endorse it or not, or whether or not it is "PC" in the current tech diving community, it is a legitamate research based opinion and Shanronn has a legitamate right to exress it as an informed opinion and as an informed choice.
The variability of the effects of narcosis due to the divers indoctrination about whether it is possible to function at depth on air and at what depth it will ultimately incapacitate a diver is also established by research.
So in the case of a diver who has been indoctrinated to believe that narcosis is incapacitating at depths much below 130 ft and who may also have been trained that the use of trimix is prudent for all dives below 100' (or 130, 150, or whatever), they will most likely be incapacitated at 200' on air because they believe they will be. But you need to understand that these same largely psychological limitations would not neccesarily apply to divers who routinely do deep air dives.
It's a free country with free speech but we all have to recongnize that our right to free speech stops at the point it infringes on someone elses right to express themselves. It's ok to disagree and I would encourage anyone to do so in a civil manner. But I prefer it when people do it respectfully, factually, and without the eye rolling - it's demeaning and insulting to others.
MASS-Diver
Contributor
So, narcosis is all people's head huh????? Let see some research that you can adapt? Forward it to the Navy, they don't have it. And I guess the GUE boys don't have a clue either.
I have nothing but respect for "old-timers" but most of the ones I know jumped on the He bandwagon as soon as they dove it and treat it like it's the best thing since slice bread. Sure it's expensive, but, it breaths nice and you aren't drunk diving.
Heck if somone wants to come on SB and start posting about how they go 500' back in caves with a single tank or how they like to pentrate wrecks without guidlines - that's their right to do so and it's their right to post about it, but, they should expect to be called out on it. We can argue all day about narcosis at 130' or 150', but, deep air at 200' plus - it's reckless. And I think if you read up on it, alot of people are starting to realize that 1.6 is high for the working portion of a dive.
I have nothing but respect for "old-timers" but most of the ones I know jumped on the He bandwagon as soon as they dove it and treat it like it's the best thing since slice bread. Sure it's expensive, but, it breaths nice and you aren't drunk diving.
Heck if somone wants to come on SB and start posting about how they go 500' back in caves with a single tank or how they like to pentrate wrecks without guidlines - that's their right to do so and it's their right to post about it, but, they should expect to be called out on it. We can argue all day about narcosis at 130' or 150', but, deep air at 200' plus - it's reckless. And I think if you read up on it, alot of people are starting to realize that 1.6 is high for the working portion of a dive.
OP
Kapiti Diver
Registered
I have a stack of photos that were captured off several well illuminated digital video shoots we did on the Aaron Ward last year. This year we didn't have access to any camera gear that would operate at that depth..I need some help from my daughter to get the shots from last year uploaded to a web site and I will do so and post the link.. I have some really great shots of the decks, armed torpedoes, the high speed props, 5" Guns, inside the bridge, 40mm bofors, Search Light etc etc... I had her post some of them on our (out of date) club website last year... have a look at these photos on the photos link at www.divekapiti.org.nz
If you go to the links page there are also some other related articles about this wreck.
Also I appreciate the debate on the wisdom of this dive on air.... as far as I can tell it has probably had over 250 divers perhaps 1000 dives in total on air so far... I am only aware of one incident that from what I can tell was attributable to a very dehydrated diver who went unconcious at the surface after (I recall) completing her deco obligatiions. I also believe she had a full recovery from the incident after being evacuated to a chamber.
Its also considered she may have had a shallow water blackout, not DCS.
If you go to the links page there are also some other related articles about this wreck.
Also I appreciate the debate on the wisdom of this dive on air.... as far as I can tell it has probably had over 250 divers perhaps 1000 dives in total on air so far... I am only aware of one incident that from what I can tell was attributable to a very dehydrated diver who went unconcious at the surface after (I recall) completing her deco obligatiions. I also believe she had a full recovery from the incident after being evacuated to a chamber.
Its also considered she may have had a shallow water blackout, not DCS.
Thank you MASS diver for the wonderful re-cap of the authoritarian argument (The Navy says...GUE says...etc, etc, ad nausem.)
Your use of the word reckless is interesting too. When I started diving, using Nitrox - let alone trimix - was considered "reckless". I find it ironic that the tech community has become the institutionalized authoritatian critter that it so despised for stifling growth in diving 15-20 years ago. An odd turn of events to say the least, and along with it has developed a distinct lack of tolerance toward other opinions and expressing that intolerance has become an accepted and politically correct thing for properly annointed tech divers to do.
I also do not agree with your gross over simplification that narcosis is all in people's heads. What I am saying is that a diver's expecations of whether they will be incapacitated by narcosis is a significant factor in whether they are in fact incapacitated and at what depth. It's a psychological phenomenon that is supported by experimental research. It's interesting to me because I am a psychologist by trade and have a good appreciation for how many odd things can be floating around in people's heads. Based on my masters degree and my experience, I see no contradiction in the idea that expectation and training play key role in the effects of narcosis at depth.
Sure I agree helium is nice if you have access to it, but then people go a step farther and say if you don't have it you should not be diving deep at all. I do not agree with that. I would also not agree, based on several hundred deep air dives, that diving deep air is "reckless" any more than I would say it was reckless driving to the store this moring on icy winter roads.
Both require some care and consideration and some adjustment of your individual limits and objectives based on conditions but neither endeaveor can be considered "reckless". Although I will concede that winter driving is a rather dangerous undertaking for transplants from warmer climates until they figure out how to deal with the road conditions and develop a better understanding of mass, inertia and energy management.
Your use of the word reckless is interesting too. When I started diving, using Nitrox - let alone trimix - was considered "reckless". I find it ironic that the tech community has become the institutionalized authoritatian critter that it so despised for stifling growth in diving 15-20 years ago. An odd turn of events to say the least, and along with it has developed a distinct lack of tolerance toward other opinions and expressing that intolerance has become an accepted and politically correct thing for properly annointed tech divers to do.
I also do not agree with your gross over simplification that narcosis is all in people's heads. What I am saying is that a diver's expecations of whether they will be incapacitated by narcosis is a significant factor in whether they are in fact incapacitated and at what depth. It's a psychological phenomenon that is supported by experimental research. It's interesting to me because I am a psychologist by trade and have a good appreciation for how many odd things can be floating around in people's heads. Based on my masters degree and my experience, I see no contradiction in the idea that expectation and training play key role in the effects of narcosis at depth.
Sure I agree helium is nice if you have access to it, but then people go a step farther and say if you don't have it you should not be diving deep at all. I do not agree with that. I would also not agree, based on several hundred deep air dives, that diving deep air is "reckless" any more than I would say it was reckless driving to the store this moring on icy winter roads.
Both require some care and consideration and some adjustment of your individual limits and objectives based on conditions but neither endeaveor can be considered "reckless". Although I will concede that winter driving is a rather dangerous undertaking for transplants from warmer climates until they figure out how to deal with the road conditions and develop a better understanding of mass, inertia and energy management.
MASS-Diver
Contributor
Well not too much to argue about here:
You think deep air is safe, I don't.
You think you can learn to adjust to narcosis, I don't.
Your're a psychologist, I'm a biologist, it shows.....I'm still waiting for the rearch articles you promised???
In the mean time have time pushign those PO2 though the roof and try to remember what you saw on the dive.
You think deep air is safe, I don't.
You think you can learn to adjust to narcosis, I don't.
Your're a psychologist, I'm a biologist, it shows.....I'm still waiting for the rearch articles you promised???
In the mean time have time pushign those PO2 though the roof and try to remember what you saw on the dive.
Shanronn
Guest
MASS diver
I don't dispute that in hindsight, knowing what I know now, that some of the things I have done diving could be considered reckless. But I believe my experience diving for 30 years counts for something.
Fothgill and Carlson (https://www.daneurope.org/eng/1562.pdf) found that the effects of narcosis varies greatly among individuals and that the amount of CO2 build-up also has an effect (breathing technique?). physiological tolerance seems debatable but they raise the question of whether divers can be trained to monitor and improve awareness of their sensations to prevent problems. Anyway you look at it, if one is intoxicated then one is impaired, this I do not dispute. I can't wait to use trimix and experience the deep with a clear head.
Also - There are organizations that actually train deep air divers to well over 200 feet (http://www.hydraexplorations.com/IANTD/DeepAirCourse.PDF)
Regarding PO2 - Here's what I believe is the current conventional wisdom:
In no case should your planned or actual dive ever exceed the maximum Oxygen pressure of 1.6 AtA.
For prolonged, or strenuous, or cold water dives, limit the maximum Oxygen pressure to 1.4 AtA.
All of the current thought about technical diving seem valid, I was only trying to point out that experience is as important as training. I know too many divers that rush from OW to Advanced and on to tech training with minimal dives under there belt.
By the way - I don't think DA Aquamaster promised any articles - You demanded them, I don't think that makes it an obligation. There's plenty of literature out there, a lot of it conflicting.
DA Aquamaster - thanks for your comments
Sorry to have taken this thread off topic.
I don't dispute that in hindsight, knowing what I know now, that some of the things I have done diving could be considered reckless. But I believe my experience diving for 30 years counts for something.
Fothgill and Carlson (https://www.daneurope.org/eng/1562.pdf) found that the effects of narcosis varies greatly among individuals and that the amount of CO2 build-up also has an effect (breathing technique?). physiological tolerance seems debatable but they raise the question of whether divers can be trained to monitor and improve awareness of their sensations to prevent problems. Anyway you look at it, if one is intoxicated then one is impaired, this I do not dispute. I can't wait to use trimix and experience the deep with a clear head.
Also - There are organizations that actually train deep air divers to well over 200 feet (http://www.hydraexplorations.com/IANTD/DeepAirCourse.PDF)
Regarding PO2 - Here's what I believe is the current conventional wisdom:
In no case should your planned or actual dive ever exceed the maximum Oxygen pressure of 1.6 AtA.
For prolonged, or strenuous, or cold water dives, limit the maximum Oxygen pressure to 1.4 AtA.
All of the current thought about technical diving seem valid, I was only trying to point out that experience is as important as training. I know too many divers that rush from OW to Advanced and on to tech training with minimal dives under there belt.
By the way - I don't think DA Aquamaster promised any articles - You demanded them, I don't think that makes it an obligation. There's plenty of literature out there, a lot of it conflicting.
DA Aquamaster - thanks for your comments
Sorry to have taken this thread off topic.
OP
Kapiti Diver
Registered
I have found this debate fascinating and really what I expected from my posting.... In all honesty it does somewhat scare me when I look back at what we did, now that I the issue has had some informed debate...
Not sure I really want to dive that deep again on air.
I also have to say that these dives left us quite tired (ie we were all pretty buggered and got to bed early on each night after a deep dive)... and some of us did have a common complaint of shoulder soreness (between elbow and shoulder) that had us a little concerned at the time...
We put it down to either antibiotic reactions from malaria medication or just plain muscle tiredness from the "strain" of the unfamilair chore of holding on to the deco bar... I doubted the latter as everyone was pretty much in a neutral state of bouyancy at each level of the deco bar and it wasn't really necessary to hold tight (if at all)..
It has been suggested that these symptoms might have been mild DCS...
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Hope to post my photos on a website in the next day or two...
I am also somewhat surprised so few people seem to know of this wreck particularly given its uniqueness and historical significance..
Not sure I really want to dive that deep again on air.
I also have to say that these dives left us quite tired (ie we were all pretty buggered and got to bed early on each night after a deep dive)... and some of us did have a common complaint of shoulder soreness (between elbow and shoulder) that had us a little concerned at the time...
We put it down to either antibiotic reactions from malaria medication or just plain muscle tiredness from the "strain" of the unfamilair chore of holding on to the deco bar... I doubted the latter as everyone was pretty much in a neutral state of bouyancy at each level of the deco bar and it wasn't really necessary to hold tight (if at all)..
It has been suggested that these symptoms might have been mild DCS...
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Hope to post my photos on a website in the next day or two...
I am also somewhat surprised so few people seem to know of this wreck particularly given its uniqueness and historical significance..
noz
Guest
I've done about 35 dives on and in the Aaron Ward. It is an outstanding dive. It is remarkably intact, although it has suffered some major vandalism inside in the last 12 months unfortunately. There is clothing neatly folded on shelves in the quarters, tin cans still on racks in the pantry, crockery, etc. Likewise the Kanawha. It is shallower than the Ward, and the more you dive it the more you want to. It's fascinating both inside and outside.
We dive it on air with 50% deco, because it's simply more practical to do so. I'm not a biologist or a psychologist. Just a long term wreckdiver. Diving the Ward in the warm clear water of the Solomons is a lot different to diving the Woniora in the dark cold water of Sydney. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the more regularly you do it, the better you handle it. But that's just my opinion.
We dive it on air with 50% deco, because it's simply more practical to do so. I'm not a biologist or a psychologist. Just a long term wreckdiver. Diving the Ward in the warm clear water of the Solomons is a lot different to diving the Woniora in the dark cold water of Sydney. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the more regularly you do it, the better you handle it. But that's just my opinion.
Rickg
Contributor
There is a Destroyer Escort wreck off Okinawa if anyone is interested. Info on it can be found at
http://www.fathoms.net/emmons/emmons.htm
Fathoms Dive Shop in Okinawa runs occasional boat trips out to her. They can provide more info to anyone interested. I've never been lucky enough to be visiting Okinawa when one of the trips was scheduled.
Rickg
http://www.fathoms.net/emmons/emmons.htm
Fathoms Dive Shop in Okinawa runs occasional boat trips out to her. They can provide more info to anyone interested. I've never been lucky enough to be visiting Okinawa when one of the trips was scheduled.
Rickg
Similar threads
