Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 100,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard you must register for a free account.
As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 3,000,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from 80,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
I completely agree with you on the hazmat asspects of this, and i must say i love all the feedback i can get from this forum. I have another question though, knowing that there are chemicals, toxins, waste, etc.. in waters especially flood type high water incidents, do you then think that for warm water regions a wetsuit is not suitable protection for swift water rescue incidents? This is currently the most popular suit choice for texas swift water rescue, however i do know that most PSD teams use encapsulating dry suits. Also, thinking about rates of absorbtion of the most common flood chemicals and the duration of the exposure when doing a short (10-20 min) rescue only dive? Meaning how much can you really get exposed to on a very short dive? Thanks
Jonathan
Good question! That is exactly what I was getting at. My opinion is drysuit use for all PSD no matter where you're at. Most of the really nasty toxins will sink to the bottom and end up in the silt - right where our divers are sticking their faces and stirring it all up into the water column again! Once its on the bottom it will stay there and concentrate year after year, decade after decade (even in really strong currents).
Some of the nasties (ie hydrocarbons) will float and stay on the surface and these should be considered if their presence is probable - ie a vehicle in the water. But over time wind, wave and current action will remove these.
Mid-water is where the sport diving takes place and this is likely the cleaner area as most toxins will either be sinking or floating most generally aren't neutral (some are). Most water quality samples are taken from this area (4-6" below the surface) when they're testing. Rarely can you get them to test this bottom water because its more difficult to get a sample and also who the heck is going to be wallowing in the muck anyway? Just the PSD...
As far as surface rescue swimmers it depends on your point of view. We use drysuits for everything because the water is cold most of the time. We may sometimes forgo the dry gloves and dry hood in favor of wet and may or may not add a mask & snorkel. The biggest factor is how long are we going to be in the water? Surface rescues are generally allot shorter than dives (we hopefully won't even need to fully enter the water if done correctly). A rescue dive will hopefully always be short but the rescue may easily turn into a recovery involving multiple dives per diver. I'd put them in the best suit right from the start.
Another consideration that may or may not apply is that we tend to train in the same crap water that we may be called to (doing all this in a clean pool isn't the only way to train well). After 20 or so dives per year...
I don't think using a wet suit is a bad thing for fast surface work - the extra bouyancy of the neoprene is a good thing. What may not be so good is the wet suit really needs to fit well to work properly so you may end up needing more to outfit your team (but they're cheap so what the hell). It also usually takes longer to suit up in a tight fitting wet suit vs a drysuit, probably not too significant though
In case the issue comes up again... I would highly advise to steer away from consideration of such units for the application you are referring to.
One main point... sounds like you have the activity in the area to justify ready recources trained for public safety diving. Research effort and time into "quick rescue" units may be better spent figuring out your local political system and making moves for equipment and proper training.
I can certainly see the basis of your concept..... there they are.. they just went in, it won't take long, only 20' max etc.... why not do the quick packs? There are just too many unkowns, potentials for entanglement, drysuits/temp and too many other factors to allow anything but PSD standards. Our PSD equipment is setup 24/7/365.
On the other hand, these pony bottle setups do have a great application. I worked as rescue diver for formula one poweboat racing, drag boat races and some with unlimited hydroplanes. We had to sit on a PWC for hours at a time and provide quick intervention. An 80 on my back would have caused far more chiroprator visits than I have now. Most rescue were very quick, very short times underwater but even with most rescues like this, some could push the envelope. Entanglement in steering cables and other parts from the crashed boats, swift currents in some rivers moving the rescue scene closer to bridge etc.
So even in those applications... they were near the edge of safety... but appropriate for the overall scenario.
They certainly look like well designed units for the intended purpose, but I feel sure they were not marketed towards your particular scenario. Good luck ....
I have used the Zeagle Rapid diver bc for 1 year and I have to say that I love it. We just recently updated our packs on the fire truck from the 20cf bottles to the 30 steel cf bottles on the zeagle packs and they work great.
We dont have the Zeagler but the Browne rapid deployment unit : fits into a nilon briefcase and has a small bottle placed in a parachute-type harness in the small of the back. It doesn't have a pressure guage that can be read by the diver (that's one of the biggest problems). We did have a SOP for use and I did like it. However, the powers that be got into the act and started talking about liability etc, and we had to let the idea go. Good Luck
The concerns are still there for either of these units. Its like going into a house fire with only a scba (with a tiny bottle), no helmet, no gloves, no boots and no turnout gear. Most of the time you'll probably be OK but is your family OK with most of the time?
Get adequate protection and procedures to do the job properly or leave it to someone who can.
Here is a scenario; mother and three children roll a minivan into a local swimming hole. Van sinks 20' from shore in 15' of water. Good Samaritans with no gear try to help but it is too dark. FD arrives and removes the bodies after 25 minutes. Three dead on scene one dies a few days later in the hospital. This is a true story, it happened last summer here in CT.
Now you are there with your family enjoying the day at the park. Tell me after witnessing this you wouldn't make an attempt to get them out of the minivan.
Risk vs. benefit, its a known public swimming area, no current, shallow depth, no trees or entanglement hazards, summer time warm water no temp exposure. Sure the vehicle fluids are potential contaminants in the water but the benefit of getting the four victims out sooner than the FD did would seem to out weight the risk of exposure.
As public safety professionals we could be faced with a rescue situation that could ask us to operate outside the normal parameters.
For those of us who have had to downsize our vehicle (Suburban to Escape) and already have fire gear, EMS gear, kid’s stroller on and on...a full SCUBA setup is tough to manage. This is why I and others have been searching for something small yet effective. Sure we could just try it with our mask and snorkel but wouldn't it be better to have something vs. nothing?
When I saw the prices Zeagle and Brownies (upwards of $1,000.00) wanted for their setups I thought about building my own. I carry my own SCBA and have actually read stories about FF using their SCBA for a water rescue for people trapped in a submerged car. Not recommended but it actually works for shallow depths.
After looking at my SCBA I came up with the idea to make a smaller version of my AL80 setup. I thought about using an OXYCHEQ travel plate and simple harness with an al40 strapped to it. (Zeagle uses an al20 and Brownies uses an AL13) For me I could handle carrying around a AL40. A lot cheaper than the almost $1,000.00 wanted for these other systems.
I am not saying this would replace what we do as a team and I am not advocating taking unnecessary risks. The reality is that as public safety professionals we could find ourselves in situations where we may need to take necessary risks and something like this could help make the situation better and safer for us.
It is a slippery slope stepping outside the relative safety of our well defined boundaries created by our laws, rules and guidelines, but I think it is good to think about and prepare for these situations before they happen. Think of it as a sort of mental pre-plan to help us do a better job of critical thinking and decision making. This topic definitely gives us some things to think about.
I have used a zeagle rapid diver for a year now and I have to say for a quick rescue this is the way to go. We have just upgraded to 30cf bottles and an air 2 on it. We get about 35 minutes on the bottles in 20-25 feet of water.
Any questions just ask.
Greetings from the tiny island of Singapore. We are a small water rescue outfit that deal primarily in aircraft ditching incidents within our territorial waters. We are also looking a small rapid diver deployment system to supplement our current inventory and was offered both Zeagle RDS and OMS TACOPS. The conditions here are mainly zero-viz, strong seasonal currents, heavy marine traffic & avg of 30-m deep waters. We are also acquiring Viking HazMat Diving Suits as well.
We would like to seek experts advice/views on both products before we decide which is suitable. And can they be worn with a drysuit?
Blades you a right about the limited air and subsequently down time. However, I will say the Rapid Diver has it place. We have been using them for years, not only for the powerboat races you mention but also for rapid deployment in shallow water and what PSD’s term as clear water as the ocean; ie when you can see the victim but they are just out of your reach.
They are never allowed in a dark murky canal in the middle of the night at an accident scene where you do not know what is under the surface. Considering the units are not equipped with a FFM and sufficient air, I would not ask any of my guys to use them in any canal.
We have been using the rapid diver for 1 year and I have to say that we love it. We use a scuba pro m600 regulator and an Air2 system on it with a steel 30 cf bottle. We only perform rescues not recoveries. We perform most of our rescues in canals where the water is black. But we love the rapid diver since we can be dressed and in the water in 2 minutes.
Linear Mode
