I was thinking how best to constructively add to the thread.
Perhaps it is a matter of terminology.
I think perhaps we should say that we can have a dive where we have had an incident. An initial emergency. i.e.
- running out of gas.
- a free flow.
- High PO2 (on CCR).
- Low PO2 (on CCR).
- Silt out and loss of contact with line (cave dive).
This has been managed, so the emergency has stopped, but we are now on a dive where an incident has occurred.
We are taught to deal with these immediate crises (emergencies). By following out training, and having the appropriate skillset, we manage the emergency, and regain control. So the immediate risk to the diver is negated.
However, we still have had an incident. The dive is now compromised. Under optimal circumstance, the diver(s), can now successfully exit the water in good health.
The issue is that once we have one incident on a dive, how much of a risk that subsequent incidents may occur. More importantly, if a subsequent issue arrises, how much are we now compromised.
i.e. If a second emergency occurs are we likely to survive. Has the first incident compromised our safety?
One of the things I was taught during my training, and is still on my mind on any dive, is the incident pit.
This is about incident escalation, where the problems escalate passed the point that you can successfully resolve them.
Think of it as funnel shaped, where the walls get progressively more shear the closer you get to the bottom. At the top, the shallow angle means you can 'climb' out, at the bottom, the shear wall makes it impossible to 'climb' out.
One last thing I would like to leave you with.
Until you get every individual safely out of the water after an incident, it is potentially an on going emergency.
The initial feeling of safety when you reach the surface (or resolve the initial emergency) may well be an illusion.
Gareth
Perhaps it is a matter of terminology.
I think perhaps we should say that we can have a dive where we have had an incident. An initial emergency. i.e.
- running out of gas.
- a free flow.
- High PO2 (on CCR).
- Low PO2 (on CCR).
- Silt out and loss of contact with line (cave dive).
This has been managed, so the emergency has stopped, but we are now on a dive where an incident has occurred.
We are taught to deal with these immediate crises (emergencies). By following out training, and having the appropriate skillset, we manage the emergency, and regain control. So the immediate risk to the diver is negated.
However, we still have had an incident. The dive is now compromised. Under optimal circumstance, the diver(s), can now successfully exit the water in good health.
The issue is that once we have one incident on a dive, how much of a risk that subsequent incidents may occur. More importantly, if a subsequent issue arrises, how much are we now compromised.
i.e. If a second emergency occurs are we likely to survive. Has the first incident compromised our safety?
Obviously, losing gas from one cylinder, and 'bailing out' to the alternate gas source means if we have a second gas issue we are severely at risk.
Loosing the line in a silt out, and finding the line. This is less obvious. But has this effected our mental state, added stress, or used more gas. These are more subtle issues in terms of how much the safety of the dive has been affected.
Loosing the line in a silt out, and finding the line. This is less obvious. But has this effected our mental state, added stress, or used more gas. These are more subtle issues in terms of how much the safety of the dive has been affected.
This is about incident escalation, where the problems escalate passed the point that you can successfully resolve them.
Think of it as funnel shaped, where the walls get progressively more shear the closer you get to the bottom. At the top, the shallow angle means you can 'climb' out, at the bottom, the shear wall makes it impossible to 'climb' out.
One last thing I would like to leave you with.
Until you get every individual safely out of the water after an incident, it is potentially an on going emergency.
The initial feeling of safety when you reach the surface (or resolve the initial emergency) may well be an illusion.
Gareth