Toby [Archive] - ScubaBoard

seahunter

April 23rd, 2003, 08:09 PM

Did I miss something??

How did we jump from the dive boat situation in Toby which is better now than it was 2 years ago before the non-diving boat accident to the discussion about Visual Eddies - another non-issue since they are not required IF (note the capitals) the visual inspector does his job correctly??

We just sold our Visual Eddy machine since it is not an essential service and was adding nothing to the safety of the visual exam. Dive stores who indicate otherwise are simply trying to pay for the machine OR they have no one who can conduct a proper visual. This is my opinion and is based on the course and literature of Bill High of PSI who is the current expert on high pressure tank inspections in North America ( www.psicylinders.com ).

Here's the scoop...
If you can conduct a proper and thorough visual inspection of a tank (which includes the threads of all tanks, not just 6351 Aluminum), the tank is perfectly safe. Sorry groundhog but a proper visual exam will detect those cracks. A Visual Eddy machine can do no better. Keep reading..
If you cannot do a proper inspection or are sloppy at the job, the Visual Eddy machine will help you catch some you missed - but not all! The Visual Eddy machine will do a better job of detecting cracks than a sloppy or incompetent inspector will.

In fact, IMHO the machine tends to make the inspector lazy. That is, using the Visual Eddy machine may increase the likelihood of a missed problem because he depends on the machine to do the job. Vis Eddys are well-known for false positives (shows a crack that doesn't exist) or the opposite.
Having used the machine, I can tell you that it's easy to screw up. In the time it takes to make a thorough and proper Vis Eddy you could complete a proper visual and be certain. Note that a Vis Eddy is for the threads only - you still have to make a tank visual!!
What's the point?

Groundhog246

April 23rd, 2003, 10:08 PM

seahunter once bubbled...
We just sold our Visual Eddy machine since it is not an essential service and was adding nothing to the safety of the visual exam. Dive stores who indicate otherwise are simply trying to pay for the machine OR they have no one who can conduct a proper visual. This is my opinion and is based on the course and literature of Bill High of PSI who is the current expert on high pressure tank inspections in North America ( www.psicylinders.com ).

These threads do jump around. In this case the topic was Toby and the follow up was getting air fills in Toby. Since there was a past tank explosionup there, they may be a little more sensitive.

I'm not going to pretend to be qualified to argue Eddy testing one way or the other. We have 3 shops locally that all do eddy testing. Two do it on all aluminum cylinders, not sure about the third. They also do a close visual inspection of the threads as well as the tank interior.

The PSI link was interesting, I did not see stated anywhere that Eddy Testing was not good (except for not intended for use on stell which I already knew). I did see links to companies selling Eddy test equipment.

Bubble Boy

April 23rd, 2003, 11:48 PM

seahunter once bubbled...
Did I miss something??

We just sold our Visual Eddy machine since it is not an essential service and was adding nothing to the safety of the visual exam.

Thats a wide open question but I will behave. You did miss something. Eddy current testing is not a substitute for a visual inspection, it is a tool to assist in a visual inspection. False positives are a lack of training or failure to use the equipment properly. If you can do a visual in the time it takes to do an eddy current test then you are doing neither correctly.

On recreational "SCUBA" cylinders the testing is not required but strongly recommended for the older alum cylinders. It can detect a crack prior to them being visible as well. The are not for use with steel cylinders.

Don't forget that the units should be recalibrated annually---ooops is there no one servicing the visual plus units in Canada?! I have had my eddy current machine calibrated regularly but I doubt that it is the norm.

Yes they do add safety to the scuba industry.

Groundhog246

April 24th, 2003, 08:54 AM

Bubble Boy once bubbled...
Don't forget that the units should be recalibrated annually---ooops is there no one servicing the visual plus units in Canada?! I have had my eddy current machine calibrated regularly but I doubt that it is the norm.

Yes they do add safety to the scuba industry.

My LDS sent theirs out for calibration this year (I think they do every year). I know because it went 3 days before I dropped my tanks off (one is the old alloy) and it was almost a month before it came back. Wasn't an issue in the middle of winter and I have 2 steels which weren't due yet available for pool play.

I can't see how any extra level of scrutiny can be bad. During my equipment course, the Eddy machine was demonstrated on both good and known bad tanks (bad tank was rendered permanently unfillable and saved for demo). Yes the crack was barely visible, but quite obvious with the Eddy test.

seahunter

April 25th, 2003, 12:53 PM

I don't want this to be a 'He said - I said' debate so let's see if we can agree on some basic technical points and also on some well-understood if not appreciated human characteristics.

1. A proper visual will detect any cracks. A poor visual will miss cracks and, it's safe to assume, other problems.
2. A Vis Ed must be accompanied by a proper visual as well so the time factor is longer than for a proper visual alone. In the time required to set up, calibrate and conduct a Vis Ed AND then a proper visual , you can complete a thorough, proper visual.
3. Vis Eddy machines have a history of false positives and missed cracks. This may well be due to operator error but the operators in the study were trained in the use of the machine so these 'mistakes' will occur in the general, proper use of the machines.
4. Human nature dictates that a safe condition on the Vis Ed display creates a false sense of security. The operator will seldom if ever check the threads manually or question the validity of the reading. That is, in my experience, if the machine shows a crack the operator will re-check to be sure BUT, if the machine shows no cracks he will not.
5. Again, human nature is such that when supplied with assurances from a Vis Eddy salesman that tank problems are 'solved' by it's use, he will be believed. Now the inspector does a Vis Eddy plus a cursory visual and sends the tank on it's way. What the tank gets is a quick Vis Ed with it's inherent errors and a sloppy visual.

My basic point is that a proper visual is the solution and the addition of the Vis Ed may not help. It may in fact hinder the process.
I'm of the opinion that Vis Ed is simply an application of the old magnaflux technology in a new form which has been sold to the dive industry. All these types of non-destructive testing are very operator sensitive. This opinion is based on lengthy discussions with an industrial stress engineer on my staff.

No, Visual Eddy testing is not bad.

Why not do both?
Human nature as described above. It is the same process that has led to the exclusion of 'buddy breathing' from basic scuba classes or to the extinction of the J Valve. I loudly protested those moves but now understand the rationale and absolutely support the dropping of both these seemingly supportive safety measures. Human nature often contradicts logic.

Perhaps these two changes in scuba are another topic for discussion. I think I still have my notes from 1970 (for the J Valve) and 1989 (for the Buddy Breathing). We might as well jump to another unrelated topic. I'm having fun.

I'm know you're well aware that the accident in Toby was not remotely related to recreational scuba tanks or their inspection.
You're right that it may have raised sensitivities but it's illogical to relate the two actions - Human nature again?

Groundhog246

April 25th, 2003, 05:20 PM

seahunter once bubbled...
Perhaps these two changes in scuba are another topic for discussion. I think I still have my notes from 1970 (for the J Valve) and 1989 (for the Buddy Breathing). We might as well jump to another unrelated topic. I'm having fun.

I'm know you're well aware that the accident in Toby was not remotely related to recreational scuba tanks or their inspection.
You're right that it may have raised sensitivities but it's illogical to relate the two actions - Human nature again?

I think we mostly agree on the inspection issue then. perhaps we should insist on 2 different people inspecting. One doing the Eddy test and one the visual, without being able to discuss before both are done. With 2 people, each determined not to miss something that the other might find, you'd have an extra margin of care. :D Of sourse, the cost of inspection might become an issue. :wacko:

My LDS still trains buddy breathing, almost wonder why when you've an octo and it was the advent of the spg that killed the J valve, whose demise I am agreed with.

And yes, I am aware that the tank explosion in Toby was an error by the fill operator, not a faulty tank. In fact, if you look at the info from Luxfer, the number of crack related failures, worldwide, is really very low when placed against the number of cylinders they made. I've also wondered, how many of those have been repeated overfilling. While some may complain if they get to a dive site and they've only got 2900PSI, I'm just as happy if that's the case. The very few minutes that 100PSI (or 200) will make to my dive is less important than extending the life of MY cylinders. Most of my buddy's use more air than me anyway, I often end up with 1000PSI left, maybe I should have saved weight and bought 63's. :)

seahunter

April 25th, 2003, 07:55 PM

Divers are pretty funny. They seem to think that they must get 3000 psi or they've been ripped off even though every one will agree they usually come up with between 500 and 1000 psi anyway.
That's been another good side effect from our policy of free air for divers. Certainly no one can claim we ripped them off.
We don't take advantage of it however. Our posted air fill policy states that a 3000 psi fill will require at least 30 minutes. If they can't wait, they will likely lose 200 to 500 psi. Their choice. Many do come in and ask us to overfill (3300?) so the tank will be full at the dive site. It's against policy and we tell them that stores who do that are not doing them, their tank or scuba any favor. Fill it right or go home!

When the octopus first became popular the skill(?) of buddy breathing was still taught because older divers and instructors felt (rightly) that a diver out of air would grab the main reg from his buddy's mouth and the skill of BB might be useful.
Research has since shown that it is the teaching of the skill of buddy breathing that gives the new diver the idea of grabbing his buddy's main reg.
New divers now never even think about doing that. They are taught to instinctively find and use the octopus. Theoretically, if you went diving with a new diver and you did not have an octopus, he would drown looking for it but would not grab your main reg. He's has never even considered that as an option! Theory and practice may differ somewhat but it seems to be working just fine.

For me personally who was trained on two hose and how to buddy breath on two hose (quite a trick I'll tell you!), I would not buddy breath with another diver in an emergency. If he runs out of air, he can damn well go to the surface. I have no intention of increasing the number of 2-diver deaths in the accident reports at my own expense.

Bubble Boy

April 26th, 2003, 12:30 AM

From the UHMS' web pages:

One tank has the explosive potential of a stick of Forcite. This tank was 13 1/2 feet long, 18 inches in diameter and fully charge to 3000 psi. The blast was heard miles away. A map showed the original location of the tanks and where some of the pieces and other tanks ended up. the tanks had been in a pyramid stack with a row of 4 on the bottom, three on top of them and 2 in the upper tier. The lower outside tank that was against a wall blew up. One piece ended up on the road to Big Tub and another was near the lighthouse. Two intact tanks were on the lawn, one on the patio of the resort next door. The one victim was standing beside the wall the tank was against and was literally blown away. Another person standing nearby was not injured. One tank ended up in the lake. All the tanks were ripped from their moorings. People described the tanks having "blue flames" coming out of their broken off stems but it was likely just condensation of the air rushing out. It was very luck that the accident happened in early June because there were no visitors at Tobermory yet. Last know date of inspection of the tanks was in 1989. They were war surplus torpedo charging air tanks. The owners had the air checked regularly but there were no tank inspections done by regulatory authorities and that issue needs to be resolved. The explosive capacity of the tanks was equal to three stick of dynamite. The interior walls of the tank were heavily pitted and the tank probably blew up because of corrosion inside. The wall thickness varied greatly

TAM Dive

April 26th, 2003, 01:45 AM

Toby charters???...........yes the enforcement of the coast gaurd rules and regs has weeded out the charter boats with not quite up to standards worthyness, so ya!! less charter boats available presently...........meaning, you may have to book early to get on one..............weekends in Toby are still a zoo, so if you just show up, you take your chances??

VIS Eddy?? if you check out the Luxfer site, you'll read that the VIS Ed machine was designed for a specific material, Luxfer does not recommend the machine to be used on the 6061 aluminums or steel tanks, and even comments about the high number of tanks sent back to them as failed, which should have never been removed out of service.

Unless you own a compressor, you are at the whim of the diveshop, they are the ones who are filling the tanks, in consideration of the fact that the few tank explosion accidents that have been documented ( I think last count was less then a dozen) have happened in the dive shop while the tank is being filled.

With regards to getting that FULL Fill 3000psi?? everyone one is in a hurry these days, hurry up fill my tank, well I'm sure we can get into a whole physics thing about heat of compression yada yada!!! best way to get that full fill is to plan on leaving the tank at the dive shop, let them fill it slowly (low heat build up) and then a top off after it cools...................but understand.......you take the tank out from the room temp of the shop to say the 5C temp of the water today, that tank is NOT going to read 3000 anymore......hmmmm there's that physics thing again??.......you are pretty much splitting hairs over a couple of hunder pounds??

mho
j

sparky30

April 26th, 2003, 07:16 AM

I keep my tanks in the car if I'm going to dive them in the next few days.. They go out even before I get tehm filled.. When I haul them into the shop to get filled they are nice and cold.. Even with a quick fill, the increae in temperature is minor... I let them sit for a while and top them up.. Then they go back into the car..
By the time they hit the colder water they are already cold, so I usually end up with 3000psi.. Works very nicely :)
They were basically filled at the same temperature (or as close as I could get it) as the water the will be used in..

cat

April 26th, 2003, 03:54 PM

the laws of physics...
Ignoring the Joule-Thompson effect for now (the heat of compression/expansion thing) you can calculate what your tank should read in the water like this:

Pressure in the water = pressure in the dive shop x (water temp in C + 273)/ (temp in diveshop in C + 273)

The 273 is the conversion to the absolute temperature scale (aka Kelvin)

Example: a tank that shows 3000 psi in a 20 C dive shop (assuming it is at equilibrium and not a hot, just-filled tank) should have just under 2850 psi in 5 C water.
The same tank filled to 3000 psi on a hot, 30 degree C day will only read around 2800 in 10 degree water or 2740 in the 4 degree water at the bottom.

seahunter

April 27th, 2003, 09:27 PM

Thanks for the graphic details bubble boy. I'm not entirely sure if much was gained by reading that anymore than we are more careful drivers by hearing how a person's head was torn off in a car accident.

Some technical deatils that are not common knowledge might be more interesting. I am not defending nor attacking anyone by stating these things.

1. Stationary compressed air bottles are not required to be visually inspected. Even the storage ones in every dive store are NOT inspected each year. A visual is unique to portable bottles and particularly to scuba for a variety of reasons which you may be able to guess - marine environment and private (read sloppy) care.
2. Most stationary bottles require a Hydro test every 10 years.

The submarine bottles (that's the common name for the one in Toby that exploded because they were used as storage of air on submarines) were not covered by any government inspection regulation. That is, when TSSA went to inspect the TOBY system, they found no standards for the inspection of those bottles. Whether it was neglect on the part of the owner or the regulating body is for the courts to decide but there were no care and inspection guidelines for the owner to follow.

Bubble Boy

April 28th, 2003, 12:51 AM

seahunter once bubbled...
Thanks for the graphic details bubble boy. I'm not entirely sure if much was gained by reading that anymore than we are more careful drivers by hearing how a person's head was torn off in a car accident.

Some technical deatils that are not common knowledge might be more interesting. I am not defending nor attacking anyone by stating these things.

1. Stationary compressed air bottles are not required to be visually inspected. Even the storage ones in every dive store are NOT inspected each year. A visual is unique to portable bottles and particularly to scuba for a variety of reasons which you may be able to guess - marine environment and private (read sloppy) care.

The information was given to correct a statement made earlier pointing the blame on the employee of the dive shop.

How often do you visually inspect your store cascade bottles?

detroit diver

April 28th, 2003, 07:40 AM

seahunter once bubbled...
......
For me personally who was trained on two hose and how to buddy breath on two hose (quite a trick I'll tell you!), I would not buddy breath with another diver in an emergency. If he runs out of air, he can damn well go to the surface. I have no intention of increasing the number of 2-diver deaths in the accident reports at my own expense.

Now here's a guy we all want to dive with. NOT. Great attitude.:rolleyes:

seahunter

April 28th, 2003, 10:31 PM

Read again bubble: stationary compressed air bottles do not require nor need visuals. Visuals, you need to realize are unique to scuba diving tanks. While other users these days may also employ a visual test, they were started by scuba divers for scuba tanks. If you understand the reason for visuals, you'd understand why scuba tanks need them while other tanks do not. Cascade bottles are not scuba bottles and do not require nor need them. In fact, conducting a visual on a stationary bottle may be detrimental to the bottle.
If you are concerned about the lack of visuals on cascade bottles, you'll shiver to know that oxgen, actetylene, helium, hydrogen, propane, etc stationary bottles do not have visuals either. BTW stationary does not mean they are not portable nor even that they do not move but simply that in use, they are not moving.
Each day on the highway, bottles filled with highly flammable gases pass you and your vehicle regularly.

I don't think anyone intended to blame the employee. It sure wasn't his fault! You bring up a good point however. In the very rare cases where a tank has caused a problem, it has almost invariably been the dive store staff that suffered - not the diver.

You wish you could find a diver who has so firm a grip on reality as I do detroit!!
If you think you might need to buddy breath with me (or any other diver) or that I should be prepared to buddy breath with you, read the diver accident reports for the last 10 years.

There is a disproportionate number of accidents in which two divers die. 2 divers don't get into trouble at the same time - one gets into trouble and he kills his buddy!! That's reality - not bad attitude.

In training in the 60's, we buddy breathed with 2 hose regs while blacked out, up-side down, without masks, without fins and during serious harassment from the instructors so it's not a matter of not being able to buddy breath - it's a conscious decision to not do it!
The octopus has made the share air exercise a lot safer and the emergency more manageable but still to be avoided at all costs. In less than 30', in an out-of-air emergency you should go up. I assume you've been trained to make a controlled emergency ascent! You'll be safely at the surface before you'd even find your buddy and secure the octopus in most cases.

Take a Rescue Diver course and learn about staying away from dumb, dangerous divers. Anyone think a diver who runs out of air isn't dumb and dangerous?

Bubble Boy

April 29th, 2003, 01:00 AM

seahunter once bubbled...
Read again bubble: stationary compressed air bottles do not require nor need visuals. Visuals, you need to realize are unique to scuba diving tanks. While other users these days may also employ a visual test, they were started by scuba divers for scuba tanks. If you understand the reason for visuals, you'd understand why scuba tanks need them while other tanks do not. Cascade bottles are not scuba bottles and do not require nor need them. In fact, conducting a visual on a stationary bottle may be detrimental to the bottle.
If you are concerned about the lack of visuals on cascade bottles, you'll shiver to know that oxgen, actetylene, helium, hydrogen, propane, etc stationary bottles do not have visuals either. BTW stationary does not mean they are not portable nor even that they do not move but simply that in use, they are not moving.
Each day on the highway, bottles filled with highly flammable gases pass you and your vehicle regularly.

The last time I checked Toronto was still in Canada. You may wish to start reading Canadian standards. Try CSA B339 and B340.

SubMariner

April 29th, 2003, 09:21 AM

Hey, people. What happened to the actual Toby topic?

Perhaps you should move the "air" thread elsewhere?

~SubMariner~

Boogie711

April 29th, 2003, 10:00 AM

it's not a matter of not being able to buddy breath - it's a conscious decision to not do it!

mental note to self - don't dive with seahunter.

detroit diver

April 29th, 2003, 10:07 AM

seahunter once bubbled...
.......You wish you could find a diver who has so firm a grip on reality as I do detroit!!
If you think you might need to buddy breath with me (or any other diver) or that I should be prepared to buddy breath with you, read the diver accident reports for the last 10 years.

There is a disproportionate number of accidents in which two divers die. 2 divers don't get into trouble at the same time - one gets into trouble and he kills his buddy!! That's reality - not bad attitude.

In training in the 60's, we buddy breathed with 2 hose regs while blacked out, up-side down, without masks, without fins and during serious harassment from the instructors so it's not a matter of not being able to buddy breath - it's a conscious decision to not do it!
The octopus has made the share air exercise a lot safer and the emergency more manageable but still to be avoided at all costs. In less than 30', in an out-of-air emergency you should go up. I assume you've been trained to make a controlled emergency ascent! You'll be safely at the surface before you'd even find your buddy and secure the octopus in most cases.

Take a Rescue Diver course and learn about staying away from dumb, dangerous divers. Anyone think a diver who runs out of air isn't dumb and dangerous?

No, I think your sense of reality is watching someone struggle to the surface without a breath, while you could be assisting them. In fact, I think you're pretty twisted. I wouldn't want to be in the same ocean as you. 30 feet? how about 90 feet? How about an equipment failure, and not "dumb and dangerous"? You're probably the kind that laughs as you drive by an accident on the side of the road and thinks to yourself "I'm not stopping here-I could get hit by a car". Most compassionate people would try to assist in some way. Not you.

I don't know or care what they taught you in the 60's. These days, WE TRY TO ASSIST PEOPLE IN TROUBLE.

detroit diver

April 29th, 2003, 12:54 PM

Hey Seahunter,

From YOUR shop's website:

Personal Motto: "Improve yourself by helping others"

Is this a joke, or do you make it a habit of lying to your customers? Maybe you're just selective. I've got it. It does make sense now. Improve your wallet by helping others buy stuff.

But helping others when they are out of air? No way.

You might want to re-think this one. Customers in the hospital or dead usually don't want to buy anything.

Spectre

April 29th, 2003, 02:48 PM

DD,
I do believe you may be taking this a little out of context. Seahunter was referring to Buddy Breathing, not actually helping an OOA diver.

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt, and the benefit of a response, to make that clear. We're not talking about donating an alternate, we're talking about buddy breathing.

SeaHunter; I'm going to assume you are referring to buddy breathing... but since you always have an alternate, that's not an issue... Correct?

My only question to the buddy breathing comment is: What if there is an equipment problem with your alternate. I would assume you would offer assistance by way of buddy breathing [since it's your gear that is what put your buddy in that situation].

detroit diver

April 29th, 2003, 03:35 PM

Jeff,

We may be talking about buddy breathing, or donating a reg, but in either case he said he would rather watch someone shoot to the surface than help them out. What's the difference if it was buddy breathing?

You're being more generous than I am with this.

Spectre

April 29th, 2003, 04:00 PM

seahunter once bubbled...
The octopus has made the share air exercise a lot safer and the emergency more manageable but still to be avoided at all costs. In less than 30', in an out-of-air emergency you should go up. I assume you've been trained to make a controlled emergency ascent! You'll be safely at the surface before you'd even find your buddy and secure the octopus in most cases.

My apologies DD. I took your comments and read Alec's posts again and found the above gem.

Flame on.

detroit diver

April 29th, 2003, 04:14 PM

No apologies necessary!!:)

jbd

April 29th, 2003, 11:35 PM

has a valid point and his supporting information is a sad commentary on the state of dive training over the past 15 to 20 years.

Seahunter commented about his training with the buddy breathing which is far more than is taught by most agencies. If you will consider that most new divers are not taught buddy breathing then you will realize that the scenario is as seahunter says according to dive accident reports. One diver gets into trouble, the buddy comes to the rescue, and lo and behold neither diver knows what to do and the end result is that both divers die--bottom line IMHO--low quality, poor and insufficient training.

I also agree with seahunter that a CESA may well be the most logical choice especially on low viz shallow dives. Every diver, again IMHO, should have the practiced ability to perform a CESA.

I would hope that seahunter would share air via octo or buddy breathing with his regular dive buddy. There is no excuse for regular buddy's not to practice this stuff.

GTADiver

April 30th, 2003, 12:59 AM

Now we all know the standards have dropped so much with the agencies over the years that it is now possible to certify divers in a weekend. Something has to be sacrificed (not the buddy but in what is taught).

All kidding aside, a buddy is a redundant air supply and that is why we (with a few exceptions) are tought to dive with a buddy.

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 07:27 AM

The sad commentary is his, and your, attitude that "every man for himself".

Statistics are BS when it comes to trying to help someone out.

Where do you draw the line, JBD? Do you let the OOA diver go at 30 feet? How about 50 feet? What if he/she is not OOA and they have a medical problem? What depth do you watch them suffer at?

You folks are sick.

jbd once bubbled...
has a valid point and his supporting information is a sad commentary on the state of dive training over the past 15 to 20 years.

Seahunter commented about his training with the buddy breathing which is far more than is taught by most agencies. If you will consider that most new divers are not taught buddy breathing then you will realize that the scenario is as seahunter says according to dive accident reports. One diver gets into trouble, the buddy comes to the rescue, and lo and behold neither diver knows what to do and the end result is that both divers die--bottom line IMHO--low quality, poor and insufficient training.

I also agree with seahunter that a CESA may well be the most logical choice especially on low viz shallow dives. Every diver, again IMHO, should have the practiced ability to perform a CESA.

I would hope that seahunter would share air via octo or buddy breathing with his regular dive buddy. There is no excuse for regular buddy's not to practice this stuff.

GTADiver

April 30th, 2003, 09:29 AM

detroit diver once bubbled...
Where do you draw the line, JBD? Do you let the OOA diver go at 30 feet? How about 50 feet? What if he/she is not OOA and they have a medical problem? What depth do you watch them suffer at?

You folks are sick.

Reminds me of the movie Back Draft when they say "You go, I go".

DD I agree with you completely. At the shallower depths the likeliehood of an embolism is not reduced and one should not plan on doing an emergency swimming assent if something goes wrong....they should plan on getting air from that dive buddy that is within touching distance.

Chet

April 30th, 2003, 03:20 PM

I think this whole subject is out there. First, this idea of buddy breathing-alternate-CESA are all options that are encountered when the diver *****-up. That is the fact. An out of air position as a diver should never happen if the diver was taught properly in the first place (meaning their atittude in the water column). A new diver should be taught that an out of air experience is not an option. With proper air management this does not happen. The only reason to teach people alternate air source is for the other people you will be diving with. Meaning the were not taught like you were. As for CESA, it is dangerous. It should be mentioned and thats it. Buddy beathing is a skill that is part of the past and the people that teach it and practice it are in the past too. With pony bottles and and back-ups and spare air(thats another issue) etc....... to buddy breath is not part of the equation.
Chet

Ontario Diver

April 30th, 2003, 03:29 PM

As much as I agree with much of what you say... I believe that Murphy is always the third diving buddy......

In my opinion Sharing air is a critical skill that all divers should be prepared to do at any depth and at any time - regardless of equipment carried.

Groundhog246

April 30th, 2003, 04:22 PM

Chet once bubbled...
First, this idea of buddy breathing-alternate-CESA are all options that are encountered when the diver *****-up. That is the fact. An out of air position as a diver should never happen if the diver was taught properly in the first place (meaning their atittude in the water column). Chet

I take it from this response you've never suffered or had a buddy suffer a free-flow. I've been fortunate so far to have only been involved with one. It was early in the dive (8 minutes/50 feet) so we had time to do a 30fpm ascent with my buddy breathing on his free flowing reg. He surfaced with about 200PSI left and we managed to turn off the air before zero, thus avoiding a tank vis. Because we were only 8 minutes into the dive we did not do a safety stop, which would have required sharing air. If we had been later in the dive, with less than 2500 PSI in his tank, he would not have had enough air to spend 2 minutes on ascent and with 40 or more minute bottom time, I would not have been comfortable blowing the safety stop. Aside from the fact we don't carry pony bottles, I fail to see where he *****d-up.

Generally speaking, I dive with people I like, so if they were to need air, I'd share.

cat

April 30th, 2003, 05:05 PM

heck, in the "pick a buddy" check.

"If I run out are you going to share air? Or are you going to watch me shoot for the surface and lecture me afterwards (assuming there is an afterwards) on why I should have *known* my reg was going to freeze or that o-ring was going to burst or my hose was going to break or... or."

I'm a diving newbie and have a new-to-me gear configuration so I did a lot of shared-air drills in the pool before hitting the lakes again this season. I'm glad I did. Free-flows and freezeups *happen*.

So do screwups. In other fields of human endeavour it is always possible for someone, no matter how experienced and well-trained, to suffer a brain fart (can I say fart or would you prefer flattus?) and screw up royally. Is diving an exception?

Doppler

April 30th, 2003, 05:09 PM

Groundhog246 once bubbled...

I take it from this response you've never suffered or had a buddy suffer a free-flow.
SNIPPED

Generally speaking, I dive with people I like, so if they were to need air, I'd share.

Groundhog... and others... I want to suggest a drill that you and your buddies might wanna practice from time to time. I know the age-old 'single-tank-diver' response to a freeflow is to get to the surface, but try this: shut down the "freeflowing" reg... breathing off your buddy's octo. Wait 30 seconds and turn the valve back on... If you can't reach it yourself, practice until you can. This often will stop the freeflow...

DD

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 05:14 PM

You're absolutely correct. Not only is diving NOTan exception, but the consequences are potentially life threatening. That's why having someone willing to help is critical.

cat once bubbled...
heck, in the "pick a buddy" check.

"If I run out are you going to share air? Or are you going to watch me shoot for the surface and lecture me afterwards (assuming there is an afterwards) on why I should have *known* my reg was going to freeze or that o-ring was going to burst or my hose was going to break or... or."

I'm a diving newbie and have a new-to-me gear configuration so I did a lot of shared-air drills in the pool before hitting the lakes again this season. I'm glad I did. Free-flows and freezeups *happen*.

So do screwups. In other fields of human endeavour it is always possible for someone, no matter how experienced and well-trained, to suffer a brain fart (can I say fart or would you prefer flattus?) and screw up royally. Is diving an exception?

DivingGal

April 30th, 2003, 05:17 PM

Doppler once bubbled...
Groundhog... and others... I want to suggest a drill that you and your buddies might wanna practice from time to time. I know the age-old 'single-tank-diver' response to a freeflow is to get to the surface, but try this: shut down the "freeflowing" reg... breathing off your buddy's octo. Wait 30 seconds and turn the valve back on... If you can't reach it yourself, practice until you can. This often will stop the freeflow...

DD

It's advice like this that I look for on the board.

jbd

April 30th, 2003, 07:23 PM

there is no drawing a line on depth as to what is the absolute perfect solution. In any given situation, we all need as many ways out of the event as is possible. All of the techniques mentioned in this thread are what we have available to us. It should be fully understood that having a competent, well trained buddy that is willing to help is the best situation to be in if things go all to sh*t underwater. It also helps tremendously if the diver who ends up in trouble is competent and well trained also.

The fact is, thats not the way it is. You can find posts all over this board about the "deplorable" level of training that exists. Couple this with the fact that most divers don't dive frequently and certainly don't practice skills in rescue and self rescue it would make sense that an emergency underwater will result in two people being dead as opposed to one. That is the point that seahunter is making,IMHO, when he mentions the statistics.

I've been there done that twice and I can tell you that a drowning person will in fact kill you to save their own life. This why we teach releases and defensive methods when teaching rescue. No human being is morally obligated to sacrifice their life for another person no matter how noble or heroic the situation.

With proper training and PRACTICE it is possible to reasonably safely rescue someone and hopefully that rescue occurs before the sitaution turns to full blown panic.

Panic is best avoided through knowledge and proper training of all individuals in any given situation.

Take seahunters comments in the context of two divers that dive infrequently, say one trip every couple of years, and without further training beyond the OW certification.

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 07:39 PM

Sorry, I'm not buying that load.

There is no perfect solution. But there is a chance to save someone in trouble. Forcing someone to do a CESA because you're worried about what MAY happen is garbage. Especially in the context of a new diver. Chances are that the new diver will hold their breath and embolize. That's what you're advocating.

Yes, we have all the techniques available. So why don't you use them as they are intended??? What's your other choice, do nothing? That's what you advocate. And read seahunter's webpage. He's a shop owner with supposed credentials up the ying yang, and he wouldn't think twice about letting someone get into trouble. What the hell does he teach at his store? Is that the message he gives to his shop instructors and DM's, and in turn to his students? He won't even donate his octo!!

I guess if you don't feel a moral obligation to help someone who's life depends on it, you have no morals in my book. And this is from two guys that supposedly have the ability to handle a situation like this-you learned it in your rescue class.

Pathetic.

jbd once bubbled...
there is no drawing a line on depth as to what is the absolute perfect solution. In any given situation, we all need as many ways out of the event as is possible. All of the techniques mentioned in this thread are what we have available to us. It should be fully understood that having a competent, well trained buddy that is willing to help is the best situation to be in if things go all to sh*t underwater. It also helps tremendously if the diver who ends up in trouble is competent and well trained also.

The fact is, thats not the way it is. You can find posts all over this board about the "deplorable" level of training that exists. Couple this with the fact that most divers don't dive frequently and certainly don't practice skills in rescue and self rescue it would make sense that an emergency underwater will result in two people being dead as opposed to one. That is the point that seahunter is making,IMHO, when he mentions the statistics.

I've been there done that twice and I can tell you that a drowning person will in fact kill you to save their own life. This why we teach releases and defensive methods when teaching rescue. No human being is morally obligated to sacrifice their life for another person no matter how noble or heroic the situation.

With proper training and PRACTICE it is possible to reasonably safely rescue someone and hopefully that rescue occurs before the sitaution turns to full blown panic.

Panic is best avoided through knowledge and proper training of all individuals in any given situation.

Take seahunters comments in the context of two divers that dive infrequently, say one trip every couple of years, and without further training beyond the OW certification.

wetvet

April 30th, 2003, 08:18 PM

Doppler, interesting idea, but I have a vague memory of being told that breathing two folks off a first stage makes freeflow way more likely.....by letting buddy breathe off your octo, are you not in danger of having a double header freeflow?.....then if his didnt fix..... please correct me if Im wrong
I know you tekkie types have this better looked after with the two first stages, but us single tank guys could get into trouble. BTW, I would refuse to share air with anyone who has better equipment than I do....I always try to buddy with someone about my size ....anyone with a XXL drysuit wanna go ice diving?
:D

Wetvet

DivingGal

April 30th, 2003, 08:23 PM

wetvet once bubbled...
Doppler, interesting idea, but I have a vague memory of being told that breathing two folks off a first stage makes freeflow way more likely.....by letting buddy breathe off your octo, are you not in danger of having a double header freeflow?

I believe what Doppler is saying is the diver with the freeflow is shutting their tank off, and breathing off the octo from their buddy -- who has a stable system.

So I don't see a "double header freeflow" occuring.

jbd

April 30th, 2003, 08:43 PM

I have the training and the experience to affect a rescue and that is what I would do. I'm also smart enough to realize, from experience, that there may come a point in the rescue where it might be best for me to save myself and finish the rescue at the surface. Once again, "A dead medic is of no use to anyone".

I teach air sharing(octo) and buddy breathing. We do this several times until I see that the people I'm working with are comfortable with it. This involves progressiviely longer swims to reach a buddy so that it is understood that just the simple fact of losing your air does not mean you will in fact die; therefore you need not panic.

I also teach CESA and do not see a proper performed CESA as being live threatening event. I will grant that the risk of being injured goes up but it doesn't mean you will die just because you did a CESA. I honestly don't see why people are so completely terrified of this technique. Actually I do have my opinion on why.

Knowledge, training and practice are key to avoiding problems as well as being key to properly handling problems if they do occur.

Now as to seahunter and his credentials---if he has put himself in a postion of incurring a legal obligation to respond then he will have to face the consequences of his actions. Higher training does incur a higher level of responsibility.

Actually one of the things that was covered in the rescue course was that there is no obligation to make a rescue, but once you do start the attempt you must perform up to standards for the level of training that you have and you can not just abandon the attempt.

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 09:16 PM

JBD,

You validated this:

"For me personally who was trained on two hose and how to buddy breath on two hose (quite a trick I'll tell you!), I would not buddy breath with another diver in an emergency. If he runs out of air, he can damn well go to the surface. ...."

"In training in the 60's, we buddy breathed with 2 hose regs while blacked out, up-side down, without masks, without fins and during serious harassment from the instructors so it's not a matter of not being able to buddy breath - it's a conscious decision to not do it!
The octopus has made the share air exercise a lot safer and the emergency more manageable but still to be avoided at all costs. In less than 30', in an out-of-air emergency you should go up. I assume you've been trained to make a controlled emergency ascent! "

"Take a Rescue Diver course and learn about staying away from dumb, dangerous divers. Anyone think a diver who runs out of air isn't dumb and dangerous?"

with this:

"I also agree with seahunter that a CESA may well be the most logical choice especially on low viz shallow dives. Every diver, again IMHO, should have the practiced ability to perform a CESA."

Whose choice is it? The guy with no air struggling to the surface? I ask you again, where do you draw the line? 30 ft, 40 ft, 50 ft?

I won't argue the issue about the point in the rescue where it is best to save yourself. That is wise and prudent. But that's not what we're talking about here. What we're dealing with is the decison to help in the first place.

CESA is the last ditch option when NOTHING else is available to you. Yes, training may make this safer, but it's a lost cause scenario only to be used when the only other option is death. If you're sitting back watching someone OOA and don't make a move to help them because of what MIGHT happen, that is just plain obscene. Your last post seems to mitigate your previous post somewhat in that you say you WOULD affect a rescue. I hope that this is your real feeling and course of action that an OOA person could expect.

seahunter

April 30th, 2003, 09:19 PM

Well detroit, you've had your say!
You're a better diver than we are.
You're more moral than we are.
You know more about diver mentality and training than we do.
You are the hero and will save every diver in trouble for us.
We got your message so now you can relax in the knowledge that it got through. Stop shouting!!
Please email your resume and diving credentials to Ms. Stanborough at dive@scuba2000.com . We've been looking for the 'perfect' scuba facility employee for many years.

Check out how you've interpreted my comments:
At no time did I say I wouldn't help a diver in trouble.
At no time did I say I wouldn't help my buddy if he was in trouble.
At no time did I say I wouldn't share air.
At no time did I say I wouldn't donate my octo.
At no time did I say I'd laugh as my buddy shot to the surface.
At no time did I say I would allow my buddy to "suffer".

I did say "...I would not buddy breath with another diver."
Where did you come up with all this other s...?
It doesn't sound to me as though you so much interested in discussing the topic as you are in twisting my words and shooting off! In the last few posts you've added nothing of any value. Even other readers have tried to straighten you out but you're too bullheaded to listen. Whatever..

With respect to your denigrating comments about my scuba facility and staff, I will say that we've been directly responsible for the training of close to 20,000 divers from which hundreds of instructors and store owners in dozens of different countries have developed. The effective total today is almost uncalculable.
Big deal!! You're right. It's not the number of divers I've trained that really matters. But it is the number of divers who I've helped in an emergency during all that training that have given me a firm grip on the reality of diving problems and hence my comments.

My comments don't come from a few years and couple of screw-ups. They come from 45 years of diving and 34 years in the scuba industry. They come from first hand observation of divers who didn't have their head on straight and paid the price. They come from listening to touchy-feely divers who would "always help their buddy regardless of the circumstances" and paid the price. They come from being part of investigations of other's diving tragedies. They come from a strong sense of self preservation because I'm no good to myself, my buddy, my family or anyone if I don't return from a dive. It's that sense that has kept me safe through thousands of dives in every harsh environment with many dive buddies who were not completely comfortable underwater.

Re-read your own posts DD. Then try to make an objective evaluation of who in this thread has an attitude; who in this thread clearly doesn't understand a thing about safe diving; who in this thread hasn't the sense to listen to and consider a different viewpoint.

To those in control, to those who want to improve their diving skills and become better divers, do as I suggested in the beginning before DD lost it and look up the diving accident stats. The stats don't tell you everything but they do make you think about and perhaps re-order your priorities.
Buddy Breathing is history and good riddance.
Controlled Emergency Ascents are quite safe, are taught to new divers, are performed by new divers in their first open water dives and are the logical choice in an out-of-air emergency in shallow water.
Safe Seconds may help in the rest of the circumstances.

I will sleep well tonight knowing that DD will NOT be diving in the same body of water as I. Good luck to the rest of you. And before you lump me in with all the other name-calling a..holes, this is not a baseless personal insult nor a reference to his diving skills about which I have no knowledge. He may be a fine diver. I am very concerned about his inability to accept that someone else has a viewpoint - maybe even a better viewpoint based on experience and knowledge.
Dive buddies who are always right are almost as dangerous as dive buddies who are always wrong. At least you can prepare for the latter.

Diverd

April 30th, 2003, 09:23 PM

I was in Tobermory today and the people I talked to said there would be no changes from last year.
Just as a note the water is cold but clear was getting 40-50 feet on the Niagara II . Dive computer said it was 28 F never did trust the thermometer on that thing anyway

seahunter

April 30th, 2003, 09:30 PM

A 'Controlled Emergency Swimming Ascent' is not dangerous. Do not confuse it with a 'Bouyant Emergency Ascent'. You're quite right those of you who know the difference. If you don't understand the difference, perhaps you ought to get out your basic manual. We also offer free refreshers of all pool skills every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings at out facility. Please call first.

CESA is standard training for all new divers in the class, pool and open water. It is the choice in out-of-air situations in most shallow water divers. Guess what? At the end of a CESA, you are safely on the surface breathing all the air you want. At the end of a Safe Second activity, you are still on the bottom, jammed up against your buddy, scared and in danger of a free flow.
Gee! I wonder what I'd choose.

CESA is not a 'last ditch option'. It is preferable in many cases over Safe Second and preferable in all cases to Buddy Breathing.

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 09:32 PM

Seahunter,

I wouldn't work for your shop for anything. Not with your attitude.

I'll let the folks here decide what you did or didn't say. I've highlited the "best of seahunter". They can draw their own conclusions.

seahunter

April 30th, 2003, 09:34 PM

Doppler has an interesting idea and he's right. If the reg freeflows (supposedly from icing not from lack of service), turning it off for a few moments may well melt the ice and make it OK. It's probably still a good idea to end the dive. It will likely happen again.
May I suggest that if you have the time and presence of mind to be able to octo with your buddy, shut off the air, wait and turn it back on... it's not really an emergency?

seahunter

April 30th, 2003, 09:45 PM

Once again DD you've proven you're unable to accept that some one else may have a valid idea.
You've written off S2K based on a personal disparity of views.
It won't really affect the facility if you never visit but isn't there any curiosity about why we have a disproportionately large share of the rec scuba training market in Ontario? Isn't there any interest in seeing what the largest scuba facility in Ontaro might have to offer? Don't you wonder what a designated scuba Career Development Center looks like?
I won't even know if you visit (or don't).
It seems to me that your closed-mindedness hurts only one person.

Let's assume you're right about me.. I'm arrogant, a dangerous diver, an unsafe instructor and an ass..... to boot.

So what! Call first to be sure I'm not in.

To refuse an opportunity to expand your diving knowledge or to assume you can't pick up even a tidbit of information by a visit to S2K because you don't like the fact I have a different viewpoint from you proves my point.

seahunter

April 30th, 2003, 10:03 PM

WetVet and DivingGal have mentioned a phenomena that I don't believe exists - a double header freeflow.
Don't get me wrong - a double header happens (that's when both second stages freeflow - right WV?) but...

It isn't the second stage that freezes and causes a freeflow. It's the first stage. It's a natural assumption to make since there is no apparent change in the first stage while the second stage(s) go crazy with air flowing out. The reason they do that is that the first stage has 'frozen' open. Even freezing is a misnomer since steel and plastic can't freeze. What's happened is that water in the air or reg has frozen in the first stage and the resulting ice on the HP seat won't let it close completely so the IP pressure builds up and, as it's supposed to, the second stage freeflows so the hose won't burst and the diver can still get air. That's why regs today are called fail safe - if they fail you still get air. It wasn't always that way.

This freezing can occur in 42 degree water (F) because of the inherent drop in temperature when the air pressure drops. The greatest drop in pressure (from 3000 to 150) by far is in the first stage and that's where the problem occurs.

What causes a double header? As the IP (intermediate pressure) rises from the frozen open first stage, the second stage will let it escape - it freeflows. Generally the main second stage is more sensitive (lower poppet spring pressure) than the octopus so it free flows first. Usually the release of pressure from the main second is enough so the octopus doesn't freeflow. There's an assumption that the octopus is OK but the main is not.
Actually, if both second stages were adjusted to the identical poppet spring pressure (hard to do), they'd both start to freeflow at the same time. Also, if the first stage freeze is severe and the air pressure flowing from it to the second stages is great, the feeflowing from the main reg is not sufficient to relieve the pressure so the octopus will also freeflow.

This is pretty standard stuff but only if you've taken an Equipment Specialty or Advanced Equipment Specialty course. It's probably not required knowledge for safe diving but I find it very interesting and it can be useful.

If you've had similar experiences that you've found hard to understand, let me know and I'll try to explain what happened.

BTW, you're also right that buddy breathing or using the octopus greatly increases the likelihood of a freeze-up and freeflow.

detroit diver

April 30th, 2003, 10:21 PM

I'm unable to accept what YOU consider valid. To me it's dangerous.

I've written off S2K because, as in any corporation, the ideals and direction eminate from the top. That's you.

Large share of the market? It's called marketing and sales. It has nothing whatever to do with quality. PADI is a perfect example of this. You're impressed with the size of your store. That means nothing to me. I've been in business long enough to know that bigger does not mean better.

seahunter once bubbled...
Once again DD you've proven you're unable to accept that some one else may have a valid idea.
You've written off S2K based on a personal disparity of views.
It won't really affect the facility if you never visit but isn't there any curiosity about why we have a disproportionately large share of the rec scuba training market in Ontario? Isn't there any interest in seeing what the largest scuba facility in Ontaro might have to offer? Don't you wonder what a designated scuba Career Development Center looks like?
I won't even know if you visit (or don't).
It seems to me that your closed-mindedness hurts only one person.

Let's assume you're right about me.. I'm arrogant, a dangerous diver, an unsafe instructor and an ass..... to boot.

So what! Call first to be sure I'm not in.

To refuse an opportunity to expand your diving knowledge or to assume you can't pick up even a tidbit of information by a visit to S2K because you don't like the fact I have a different viewpoint from you proves my point.

Chet

May 1st, 2003, 01:39 AM

It is the choice in out-of-air situations in most shallow water divers. Guess what? At the end of a CESA, you are safely on the surface breathing all the air you want. At the end of a Safe Second activity, you are still on the bottom, jammed up against your buddy, scared and in danger of a free flow.

I assume you mean by safe second you are referring to an alternate air source? If you are saying a CESA is prefered to a safe second in an out of air situation, not low on air, then if I remember PADI has 5 low on air/out of air responses. In this order of priority. 1 Normal ascent 2. Alternate air source ascent(safe second?) 3 Controlled emergency swimming ascent 4 Buddy breathing 5 Bouyant emergency swimming ascent. So as a PADI CDC you are teaching or suggesting CESA should be done before a safe second, when PADI say with their experience that an alternate air source ascent should be used before a CESA. Granted, I could be wrong and PADI has changed the order on me and If they have I will find a CD and get an update. Or maybe they have changed the colour of the print in the instructor mannual(I still have a print version, I like books) and put in that in shallow water, 30ft., the CESA will now be 2 and the alternate air source will be 3 and if you are in 32ft then the safe second is still 2 and the CESA goes back to 3. Oh I forgot they also say the CESA should be used if the surface is closer then you buddy. So the only PADI CDC facility in Eastern Canada says your buddy is 5, 10, 15 feet away , it does not matter, and you run out of air because of lack of proper air management you should ignore his safe second, we are in 29ft of water, and do a fin pivot and then look up and reach up and then take three deep total lung volumes(oh we are out of air)and then swim to the surface making the ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sound, I think that was 30, or slower. Now we are at the surface and our buddy has just wondered what was wrong with his reg and he must figure out if it was 2 or 3 and was he in shallow water or deeper then 30ft.

Question. Is a free-flow an out of air situation or a low on air situation?(A free-flow is an example of when a dive should be aborted rec. or tech - even if it has been controlled)

If you are in a situation where a CESA is your only option you or your buddy have made a boo-boo. You have not been observing your air in that tank on your back or side or where ever (pressure gauge) and you or your buddy have lost track of each other.

BE SAFE
Chet

seahunter

May 1st, 2003, 11:49 AM

You're still doing it DD! Why do you insist interpreting my words in the most negative manner and then using that interpretation in a vain attempt to insult me?
I know what I said; everyone else knows what I said; it was written in plain English.
Why not try just reading a post and accepting the words.

Here we go again:
At no time did I say bigger was better!
At no time did I say that S2K is mirror of me and my ideas!

I simply suggested that for you to write off a company because on some obscure scuba chat line you disagreed with one of the staff of that store is pretty pigheaded and that you might be missing out on something.
In fact, with over 40 professional staff and 5 full time store staff including a general manager with almost 20 years at the store, you can rest assured that almost all decisions at S2K are by concensus. Furthermore, with respect to training, every instructor at S2K is fully responsible for their own actions. I don't sign certs at all anymore - they do! Under no circumstances would the management suggest to a professional any actions or words contrary to standards. There are profiles with emails on the site for many of the leaders. Ask them yourself what goes on at S2K. I'm not hiding anything. In fact, my whole point in the last post was to encourage you to visit and see what we do.

Our figures suggest that 65% of our new business comes by referral. That is, from happy customers who have sent their friends to us.

Size is certainly no measure of quality. I'm not sure what your reference to PADI at this point was for however, size and increased growth over a very long time has to mean something is right!

Why not drop in and see S2K?
I feel I have an unfair advantge in this conversation since you've not seen S2K so don't really have any knowledge about it.
You might find a lot more reasons why you don't like me, S2K and PADI and then you can speak with authority.
If that's not possible, at least get our weekly e-letter for a few issues and you'll get a better idea. www.scuba2000.com/new.htm

seahunter

May 1st, 2003, 12:39 PM

Hi Chet,
Welcome aboard. Finally someone who knows what they're talking about. You have the PADI recommendations exactly right and that's the way new divers are taught (supposedly).

Your reply seems a little personal to me. This is not a class for new divers. It's a public forum where you, me and even DD can say whatever we like even if it's not in line with accepted philosophy. In fact, I often do just that to see who will jump onto the soapbox next and straighten out the rest of the divers in Ontario. I certainly don't expect everyone or anyone for that matter to agree with me or modify their behavior because of my ideas. S2K is a CDC. I'm just a staff member there and I have my own ideas on a wide variety of topics regarding scuba including training. I've shared them with many other leaders including PADI (I was a member of the PADI Advisory committee for two years whereby PADI solicits and listens to all kinds of crackpot suggestions from all over.).
Neither PADI, our CDC, any instructor or even any diver is expectd to do what I say on this forum (or you or DD!). This is a place to share ideas and discuss their merits or lack thereof.

Your scenarios are good. It's impossible to to know what's the best solution to an underwater problem. My suggestion was that a CESA is preferable to Buddy Breathing. I believe we agree on that which is good since CESA is required training while BB is not.
I went further to say that in the right circumstances (shallow water ++), a CESA is preferable even to safe second use.
Both you and DD have made reference to the distance to your buddy as being the deciding factor. Certainly it's ONE of the deciding factors.
In my experience, despite what PADI says or good divers promote, your buddy is seldom within touching distance. Touching distance is 24 inches. No way! Many buddy teams are often within 24" of each other at times during the dive but throughout the dive? Nope!! Needless to say (Murphy again!), when you need your buddy that's when he's not within touching distance.
I'm not being critical of divers here. It's just not practical nor is it any fun. It definately is not human nature. Heck we're down there to explore.
That being the case, the safe second procedure also involves spotting your buddy, a short swim, contact, signals, securing the octo, re & re your mouthpiece and so on. Let's hope there's no confusion and your buddy instantly knows what you're doing and is there for you when you arrive at his side. Don't give me that junk about simply taking the octo and breathing from it. If you were exploring a wreck and felt a tug and several bumps beside or behind you wouldn't you spin around to see what was happeneing? Just what your out-of-air buddy needs. Again I'm not being crirtical. It's just the way we are. Just think about it!! It happens just like that.
My point was that in less time (in the right circumstances!! There, I said it!!), you could be safely on the surface.

Your description of the CESA exercsie and the problems you see in perfomring it suggest you've not been practicing nor have helped hundreds of new divers master a really simple skill. Quite frankly, if you think about it, a CESA is much simpler to perform that a Safe Secondexercise. Look up, swim up, hum!

AGAIN!! This is my opinion based on my experience. Do what you want with it! I'd like to think that you'd at least think it through rather than just reject it because it's different or because it came from me - but that's your choice.
Regardless, let me assure you that John Cronin is not about to re-write the PADI manual because Alec Peirce has a different idea. I do know that he will listen to new ideas carefully before deciding what to do with them!! Don't be critical of PADI, S2K, a CDC or anyone else because of MY opinions.

I don't consider a freeflow an out-of-air situation. A freeflow is a mechanical breakdown that has it's own remedy. New divers are taught how to handle a freeflow.
A true out-of-air is very rare. It's virtually impossible to manufacture a true out-of-air (that is, everything is fine and suddenly you cannot breath in). Getting very low on air can certainly happen but that's a human failure and the solution can only be suggested. Each situation requires quick analysis and action based on training and experience. Again new divers experience an out-of air situation in the water. They are given a series of options to choose from and hopefully they'll choose the right one.
Even when the tank valve is shut off underwater there's a few seconds to think. When your gauge says you're out of air you may have as much as 2 or 3 minutes to solve your problem. Lots of time!

Am I wrong to suggest that the PADI order of OOA remedies may not be right for all situations??
Does that suggestion condemn me and my diving colleagues to ridicule and contempt?

If you (or DD or anyone) thinks that there is only one right answer to a scuba emergency and anyone who disagrees is a dangerous idiot, this sport is in trouble.
Please contemplate that every skill we currently teach and practice was developed from ideas and discusssions between divers. Those discussions were often long and heated - but fruitful. It's not that long ago that professionals right here in Ontario (myself included) argued vehemently against dropping the use of the J Valve, the CO2 cartridge, Buddy Breathing, harassment during training and many more examples.
They weren't wrong to disagree. They were wrong to think that their ideas were the only right ones.

Maybe it's an age thing.

DivingGal

May 1st, 2003, 01:47 PM

seahunter once bubbled...
WetVet and DivingGal have mentioned a phenomena that I don't believe exists - a double header freeflow. ...

It isn't the second stage that freezes and causes a freeflow. It's the first stage. ....
Even freezing is a misnomer since steel and plastic can't freeze. What's happened is that water in the air or reg has frozen in the first stage and the resulting ice on the HP seat won't let it close completely ....

What causes a double header? As the IP (intermediate pressure) rises from the frozen open first stage, the second stage will let it escape - it freeflows.

I agree it's the first stage not the second that "freezes", and I also agree that freezing is a misnomer. I believe what WetVet was meaning a freeflow from his first stage, and thought what Dopper meant was to share the octo from that kit (but Doppler meant, I believe, to use the buddy's octo).

I have, in my short diving career, both the reg and octo freeflow at the same time. It was in cold water (I believe low 40s) with equipment that was actually due for annual servicing in a couple months. So rare, yes, but it does occur.

--- a short and I hope sweet response, no need for a soapbox.

weight_for_me

May 1st, 2003, 02:30 PM

I agree...I had the same thing happen a couple of weeks ago...first dive, cold water...breathing a little hard. Told my LDS about it..he also said the fist stage froze. BUT, as the freeflow increased, (and the thing about gases expanding and getting cold) it also caused the second stage to freeze. As a matter of fact, when I got back to shore, there was a chunck of ice in the mothpiece. Anyway, it happened at about 30'...signaled my buddy..I kept breathing through the freeflow (as I was taught) and had a very successful ending to the experience.
Randy...

cat

May 1st, 2003, 04:22 PM

Water's still pretty cold on the surface right now and the temperature profile the last 2 weekends (of my diving) has been inverted - ie the 4 C water is the warm stuff, so it's the *upper* layer that's cooler. This would make a reg "freeze" (umm, why is this a misnomer if it's ice forming in there?) seem that much more likely on the way up - ie been working hard at depth, then ascended into a colder layer. Only takes half the heat loss (from Joule-Thompson expansion) to freeze at 2C as it does at 4C.

We (MWC and self) think this is what happened to his reg on Sunday (no FF, no OOA, no real distance to surface by the time breathing go difficult so no unpleasant results other than a surface swim). Does this make sense? Do ice divers and others diving in water <4C experience occasional ice-related problems during ascent?

wetvet

May 1st, 2003, 04:33 PM

What I meant by the double header free flow is that if your reg free-flows.....you turn off your tank and breathe off your buddy's octo....then, because 2 people are breathing off of the same 1st stage, it is more likely to free flow. Now you have one tank off...which may or may not fix the problem...and 2 folks breathing off a 1st stage which is free flowing. Even if the octo doesnt freeflow (due to the reduced pressure from the primary freeflowing), you are in worse shape than if you just surfaced breathing on the origional free-flow.

Im not trying to be arguementative....I am really curious as to whether 2 folks breathing off a 1st stage increases your risk of a free-flow. This impacts whether or not I would consider turning off a tank to correct the problem. Thanks.

Wetvet

Doppler

May 1st, 2003, 04:39 PM

wetvet once bubbled...
What I meant by the double header free flow is that if your reg free-flows.....you turn off your tank and breathe off your buddy's octo....then, because 2 people are breathing off of the same 1st stage, it is more likely to free flow. Now you have one tank off...which may or may not fix the problem...and 2 folks breathing off a 1st stage which is free flowing. Even if the octo doesnt freeflow (due to the reduced pressure from the primary freeflowing), you are in worse shape than if you just surfaced breathing on the origional free-flow.

Im not trying to be arguementative....I am really curious as to whether 2 folks breathing off a 1st stage increases your risk of a free-flow. This impacts whether or not I would consider turning off a tank to correct the problem. Thanks.

Wetvet

If breathing off an octo causes a freeflow, then why do we use them? I started a new thread for this but a freeflow is not normal behavior for a reg... tell you what, go read the other thread!

Doppler

DivingGal

May 1st, 2003, 04:40 PM

wetvet once bubbled...
What I meant by the double header free flow is that if your reg free-flows.....you turn off your tank and breathe off your buddy's octo....then, because 2 people are breathing off of the same 1st stage, it is more likely to free flow.
<snip>

That I have never had happened to me, or to anyone I know.

In our waters here, I think it's just one more reason to have the right equipment for diving. Sure I don't really think 60F (or 50F) is "cold water".... but to scuba equipment (and some of those "southern divers", I think it is. (Though if I'm wrong please remind me what is considered cold for the manufacturers). My point is this, use the equipment necessary for the diving you do. If it is cold water, have the reg set-up for it, otherwise you just may be asking for trouble.

seahunter

May 1st, 2003, 08:59 PM

Yes! WetVet is quite right!
The greater the volume of air passing through the first stage the greater the likelihood of a freeflow. It's a simple application of the physical law that governs the adiabatic drop in temperature as a pressure drop in a gas occurs. That's how a refridgerator works and lots of other cooling devices.
A refridgerator compressor raises the pressure of the coolant gas just as an air compressor fills your tanks and heat is given off as it does so. Feel the back of the fridge. It's warm like your freshly filled tank. The greater the pressure of the gas or the greater the volume being compressed, the greater the amount of heat given off.
Then the opposite occurs. The coolant is allowed to drop in pressure as it flows through a reducer (read: regulator). As the pressure drops, heat is absorbed so the surrounding structure (the ice box) gets cold. The greater the pressure drop or the greater the volume of gas passing through the reducer, the greater the amount of the temperature drop.
In the case of your scuba regulator, any moisture in the reg will freeze or the moisture in the air may reach its dew point and condense and freeze. This can occur in water temperatures as high as 40 to 45 degrees F.

Two people breathing off a reg creates a condition more likely to result in a freeze-up and free flow.

Unfortunately there is no regulator system that will not freeze given the right circumstances. Some have special features that may reduce the likelihood but they all can be made to freeze up in normal cold water diving. Two hose regulators from years ago were very good in cold water. Regulators with environmental protection are usually a little better but not for the reason you may think. Store staff will tell you that they keep the water out so they don't freeze but it's not the surrounding water that freezes any way. It's the water or moisture inside the reg that freezes. Environmentally sealed regulators (Sherwood, Genesis and to a lesser extent those with an add-on rubber kit) will still freeze but are slower to reach the temperature that causes it. So slow that they may not freeze during a dive. Every regulator made will freeze. I've been on training Ice Dives on very cold days and even seen several Blizzards freeze up.
With a good sealed regulator, kept warm until the last minute, well-maintained, using very dry air, not breathing from the regulator until well underwater and not engaging in activities that require large volumes of air, you may dive in very cold water and have no problems.
All this is covered in any good equipment course or ice diving course.

One thing that's not been discussed is the increased likelihood of a freeze-up and free flow on deeper dives. The deeper you go the more volume of air passes through the regulator and the greater the adiabatic temperature drop.

Check out Doppler's thread under "Procedure for Dealing with a Free Flow" for more good ideas.