George,

Air as the diluent and 54 meters no less? This is one of single most idiotic
ideas ever conceived by a twitching neuron.


 Perhaps we should explain why this is so completely stupid:

1. The dangerous idiocy of diving air at 175+ fsw (54 meters) in cold dark
water is obvious to everyone with a shred of common sense.

2.  For a ppo2 setpoint of .8 to 1.2 (typical for this type of CCR) the
corresponding nitrogen prercentages range from about 88 percent to 82
percent. If the oxygen addition system is unresponsive or fails then the
percentage of nitrogen will quickly rise above these levels into the 90s in
a few short breaths.  Now you are talking about nitrogen partial pressures
or so called ENDs which may exceed 200 fsw. The track record for CF
management at 200 fsw is not very good.

3.  Seventy nine percent N2 is bad enough when it comes to decompressing the
stuff out of your system. Ninety percent is absolutely awful and your
chances of suffering physiological damage are significantly increased. It is
no coincidence that the first DCS incident at the Wakulla II project
resulted from just this same problem. One of the volunteer Australian divers
"accidently" breathed air diluent while apparently not being "aware" of it
and was exposed to nitrogen partial pressures well in excess of what would
otherwise be encountered on a 240 ft air dive (90 percent or better - go
figure).  Needless to say the chamber treatments for his supposed knee pain
were for much more serious, but not publicly disclosed sysmptoms.

4.  If the oxygen addition system has failed and you continue to breath the
diluent without going to open circuit then on ascent the ppo2 will rapidly
plummet to hypoxic levels.  Hypoxia is insidious. There is little to no
warning and the result can be a sudden  loss of consciousness. So to make
matters worse you drown in an hypoxic state so that the ensuing brain
damage, should you be fortunate enough to be revived, is possibly
irreversible. A real good show.

 You have to ask yourself who in their right mind would teach this complete
and utter idiocy.   And you all know that whoever was teaching this was
doing so from some reverential pulpit of experience and authority.

It is my guess that it will not require Scotland Yard to track this fine
example of reckless negligence to the source.

My feelings regarding the use of closed circuit rebreathers are well
documented. The risks outweigh the rewards PERIOD. Nevertheless, the
rationale (and appeal in the UK) for using rebreathers is essentially an
economic and logistic one. Helium is very costly and the amount used for
extreme exposure dives is a fraction of what would be required for the
equivalent open circuit dive. Ironically, Martin Parker (the head of the
company which manufactures the Inspiration - i.e. the murder weapon) can
argue in the Inspiration's defense that the device was "misused".   This
misuse is based on a very bizarre codicil of training agency policy which
prohibits the use of mixed gas in a rebreather until the required amount of
bottom time on the unit has been achieved. Sound familiar?  Remember when
deep air was a prerequisite to mixed gas until the howling and protests and
deaths forced this policy to change?

The logic and rationale underlying this policy is right up there with sloppy
to non existent bottle marking schemes, bungee wings and steel stage
bottles.

This sad event and the underlying institutional reasons which created an
environment of unacceptable, but unrecognized risk, is yet another reason
why the long term answer to this fundamental problem is a three letter
acronym.  GUE.

Bill Mee


-----Original Message-----
From: kirvine@sa*.ne* <kirvine@sa*.ne*>
To: cavers@cavers.com <cavers@cavers.com>
Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 6:01 AM
Subject: Gurr again?


>I hear Gurr was the "instructor" for the latest Desperation
>expiration. I also hear that the diver has been using mix for six years
>but somehow was "trained" to use air with this unit. Who is the drooling
>idiot that came up with that?
>
>  The more all of you sit out there and patronize institutionalized
>stupidity out of proven morons, like the operators of these training
>agencies, the longer we are all going to see this kind of preventable
>disaster proliferate.
>
>  The fact is that we have some seriously stupid and ignorant clowns
>teaching diving, and it starts at the "top", whence this brilliance
>finds it genesis.
>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: kirvine@sa*.ne* <kirvine@sa*.ne*>
To: Peter Fjelsten <fjelsten@ma*.st*.dk*>
Cc: techdiver <techdiver@aq*.co*>; cavers@cavers.com
<cavers@cavers.com>
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: DESPERATION BODY COUNT


>Peter, I wonder why these guys are diving air with a rebreather - pretty
>stupid, unless this is what the bullshit training agency condones and
>teaches ( my bet ). Which agency over there is that stupid? I thought
>the idea with the Brits was to use the rebreather to end up saving money
>on the expensive helium by using the rb.
>
>
>
>Peter Fjelsten wrote:
>>
>> Den 06:27 27-05-99 -0400 skrev kirvine@sa*.ne*:
>> >Does anyhone have the current score on the "Expiration" rebreather? I
>> >am again hearing of another "accident", but have not heard if it is
>> >"diver error" ( defined as any use of the unit ), or "natural causes".
>>
>> Newly certified diver (certified in Easter) diving to 54 metres with air
>> diluent. That's Darwinism for you.
>>
>> >   This makes it either five or seven deaths, and a much larger accident
>> >toll, and it is just getting into diving season.
>>
>> Yeah, the mortality rate is well over 1%. Not bad!
>>
>>                                 Hilsen (That's "regards" for you English
speaking folks),
>>
>>                                 Peter Fjelsten
>
>

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]