18hr Flight Ban Valid After 5' Dive?

[nwhitney2003]

So just call DAN and be done with it. Then tell us what they say. You've spent more time and energy justifying calling DAN that it would take to actually do it.

I don't really see where the OP has gotten different answers to the question he actually posted - is it safe to fly after a short pool dive. Did I miss where someone said it was not? Where the differences come in concern the theoretical issues of full saturation amid a bunch of bickering and insulting.

First, I'm not the OP so why would I call DAN regarding this? I think you've missed my point on this whole thread. I'm not necessarily trying to justify calling DAN but rather there is so much disagreement regarding the original question and that it can be tough for new divers (myself included) to figure what the correct approach would be. So rather than try and sort through all the answers on here, go to the experts via phone, book, classroom, etc.. Second, yes you did miss something in these posts. There has been disagreement over the answer to the original question.

This thread isn't about which fin is better but rather deals with something that may or may not impact the health of a diver. I suppose you could say I'm a supporter of turning to the experts when it comes to questions such as this rather than SB.

 

[mempilot]

...your implication (i.e. "saturation is saturation") that the depth of saturation didn't matter with respect to ascending from one depth to another.

...what is clear is that you have stated several times that ascending from saturation at 5fsw to 8000 ft was very bad.

...you've presented no evidence to support your position that it is not.

I have not implicated what you state, nor, have I ever said that ascending from saturation at 5 fsw to 8000 ft was very bad. Please find it and quote it in context to prove me otherwise.

I don't need to present evidence to support a position that I don't have. I agree with them. Dear God, where do you people come from?

Here, I'll quote myself:

Post 25: Not to belittle the original poster, since they are a new diver. Go fly without worries.

Post 33: Don't complicate a simple question about flying after diving in a pool with all kinds of "The sky is falling!" type non-sense that will send a new diver off with an over active sensitivity to the PADI flying after diving rule.

A simple, "No, flying after a 10 foot pool training dive will not bend you."

Post 34: Saturation is saturation, no matter what depth you stayed at to get saturated.

Post 48: To fully saturate at any depth [requiring decompression] and then ascending to altitude without decompressing would end badly. Your comment above about being fully saturated at 5 fsw (which is possible but not probable unless someone wanted to live at 5 fsw) and then being OK to fly was stupid.

(This is probably the comment that confused people about my positon. The original comment, said as a joke to a new diver is what I find stupid. If a diver applies that comment to other dives, ascends without proper decompression, and then flies... is what meaning I was trying to portray at 10pm)

I have been telling this guy he can fly after a 10 foot pool dive with no problems, yet some of you think I am against it. I even provided him with the NOAA table values to do so.

 

[DandyDon]

Really? Where?

The Associated Press: Qantas probe focuses on oxygen tank
Some reports said that the Oxygen masks did not all drop, but then since an Oxygen tank is suspected as the cause, the system wasn't dependable anyway.

That airline has been in the news a lot this week.

Anyway, the new guy said it quite well, I think - for anyone with a mind open to a simple view...

I think everyone agrees about the OP being able to fly safely. I think the disagreement is about Mempilot's seeming contention that saturation at 5 ft. has similar or the same potential implications as saturation at other depths.

I don't have years of diving or multiple certs to appeal to, but I know some basic physics and biology, and I know that as I sit here in my sea-level apt in Goleta, my blood is saturated with N2 and will not ongas any more at this "depth." If I now travel to the top of a 12,000 foot mtn, the pressure will be about .69 atm. My blood will begin to offgas. I think this gradient is fairly close to the saturated diver at 5 ft flying to 8,000. It's certainly well less than the 5-footer (at, as we've heard, 1.12 atm), flying to 5,000 ft, which is at .83 atm (74% or so of 1.09).

People don't typically worry about getting the bends from traveling between the beach and the snowcaps, even if they don't know lots of decomp theory.

I'm not sure why everyone gets so worked up though.

 

[mempilot]

Ahh. I heard something about an O2 tank letting go in a 747, but I hadn't caught the actual story.

I bet their was a leak since:

The O2 bottles are usually serviced to about 1800psi, less than half of their nominal test pressure. They also have an OPRV that discharges overboard in the event of expansion, which would mainly come from the aircraft being on fire causing severe heat around the bottle, or if someone over-serviced the bottle and expansion took place from being on a hot tarmac.

Inflight at 29,000 feet, it would be highly unprobable that heat expansion caused the tank to explode, since the temperature at FL290 would be around -40 to -50 C and the cargo and electronics bays are warmed via cabin air. A fire in the bay would have brought other issues to note to both the crew and investigators.

I would venture that the regulator or a line had a leak, spewing pure O2 at something that ignited the area and caused the explosion. It will be interesting to see what they come up with. The fact that the only significant damage to the aircraft was a 9 foot hole blasted out is a testament to the design of the aircraft.

Catastrophic decompression, which this obviously was, happens when the gas escaping the vessel is more than the outflow valves can modulate and of greater volume than the gas being driven into the vessel by the packs. Small holes can cause deteriation in the pressure differential and cause a climbing cabin pressure which is manageable by descending the aircraft to a lower altitude and hence the need for a lower pressure differential. A catastrophic hole such as this creates a situation where the cabin equalizes with outside ambient pressure very quickly.

I would not want to have been on that aircraft after diving, but the effects on every passenger would have been noticeable. ie. ruptured blood vessels in the eyes, ringing in the ears, instant loss of intestinal gas, etc...

 

[mempilot]

From post #48 last edited at 12:30 PM today

I was told I had some typos. I corrected it. Hence the confusion last night.

 

[nwhitney2003]

Ahh. I heard something about an O2 tank letting go in a 747, but I hadn't caught the actual story.

I bet their was a leak since:

The O2 bottles are usually serviced to about 1800psi, less than half of their nominal test pressure. They also have an OPRV that discharges overboard in the event of expansion, which would mainly come from the aircraft being on fire causing severe heat around the bottle, or if someone over-serviced the bottle and expansion took place from being on a hot tarmac.

Inflight at 29,000 feet, it would be highly unprobable that heat expansion caused the tank to explode, since the temperature at FL290 would be around -40 to -50 C and the cargo and electronics bays are warmed via cabin air. A fire in the bay would have brought other issues to note to both the crew and investigators.

I would venture that the regulator or a line had a leak, spewing pure O2 at something that ignited the area and caused the explosion. It will be interesting to see what they come up with. The fact that the only significant damage to the aircraft was a 9 foot hole blasted out is a testament to the design of the aircraft.

Catastrophic decompression, which this obviously was, happens when the gas escaping the vessel is more than the outflow valves can modulate and of greater volume than the gas being driven into the vessel by the packs. Small holes can cause deteriation in the pressure differential and cause a climbing cabin pressure which is manageable by descending the aircraft to a lower altitude and hence the need for a lower pressure differential. A catastrophic hole such as this creates a situation where the cabin equalizes with outside ambient pressure very quickly.

I would not want to have been on that aircraft after diving, but the effects on every passenger would have been noticeable. ie. ruptured blood vessels in the eyes, ringing in the ears, instant loss of intestinal gas, etc...

"instant loss of intestinal gas"
While very serious I'm sure it also sounds very funny, please elaborate!

 

[mempilot]

"instant loss of intestinal gas"
While very serious I'm sure it also sounds very funny, please elaborate!

Well, imagine this. You eat that Charly's Cheesesteak in the airport terminal prior to departure. About 1 hour into the flight, you are 'fluffing' your seat cushion and giving everyone the 'I didn't do it look." Then, like a balloon inflated underpressure, the pressure is suddenly released, and ta da says the intestine! :mooner:

Yes, just trying to put a little humor back into a thread gone terribly wrong.

 

[mempilot]

OK, whatever you guys think I meant is correct.

 

[nwhitney2003]

Because you want to know the correct answer to the original question? And according to you, that's the most logical source of the correct answer?

Um, OK. Care to provide post numbers or quotes where anybody said that flying after a short pool dive was unsafe? All the disagreement has been over the side issues that arose afterward.

I'm not seeking the answer to the original question. Calling DAN is ONE logical source for the correct answer. Look back at a couple of post and you'll see that I also mention other options.

Post 105 is a good place to start as any I suppose. I think this is a good example over the disagreement. Thalassamania's post clearly shows a disagreement with Mempilot in regards to the answer of the original question.

 

[mempilot]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

quote of deleted post removed

---

I did admit I made a typo, left out the word 'not', which should have been evident from other posts I made to the contrary of what you would have people believe I mean. I fixed the typo, and you still want to take it out of context.

I've said I was sorry to a couple of people in this thread. I'm even sorry for upsetting you, as you seem to be very aggressive towards me. I can handle that. No big deal. I played out an equation from memory to show a 40 minute tissue at 10 feet, while you used VPlanner to figure out a no-deco schedule. Good for you. You win.