from the April, 2007 issue of Undercurrent
Perhaps a diver's worst nightmare is ascending too quickly after losing one's weights. The dangers of decompression sickness and embolism are ever present. Soda pop in your veins? No thanks.
With all the discussion about proper gear configurations, it's remarkable how divided we can be on the issue of weight systems. On any given dive trip, you might see a diver with quick-release integrated weights sitting next to a diver with a double-buckled weight belt. Underlying the visual difference is a clash of ideology that could become a matter of life and death.
Cold-water divers typically wear full 7-mm wetsuits or bulky dry suits that can require up to 35 pounds of weight to counter their suit buoyancy. For these divers, attention is increasingly focused on weight "security" over "quick release." Even warm-water divers are reconsidering the ageold axiom "when in danger, drop your weight belt." That notion is so ingrained from early open-water training that the consequences of weight dumping are seldom discussed - - and divers typically aren't trained to perform a free ascent without a belt. In fact, this "auto-dump" philosophy can conflict with the concept of "stop, think and then act."
Specifically, the issue involves one's belief about emergency dumping procedures. This determines one's choice of weight systems, which could range from old belts of beat-up plastic, to the various integrated systems, to double steelbuckled belts. It all depends on your primary focus.
Release or lockdown?
You likely subscribe to one of two schools of thoughts:
the "easy releasers" and the "security lockdowners." The "easy releaser" is most concerned about the effortless release of weights in an emergency. The philosophies are quite dissimiliar. The "security lockdowner" is more concerned about an accidental loss of weights. This diver focuses on the unintentional loss of weights that could result in an uncontrolled ascent and death by embolism or DCS.
The easy releasers are divers with weight-release handles sticking out from their BCDs. They might even have weight pockets held together with thin strips of Velcro. On dive trips, they often rent weight belts without first checking the condition of the buckle. The security-first divers often wear two buckles on a heavy-duty weight belt. The belt's tail is secured into the second buckle for double security. They consider a crotch strap over the belt a good thing.
Who's right? The answer depends on many variables. The obvious ones include the diver's level of training and skill, type of diving, and the ability to avoid panic in an emergency. Beyond those, however, is a more complex discussion about how training principles and scuba technology can lose pace with each other.
When diving was in its infancy, divers did not wear buoyancy compensators, they wore just a tank on a harness and a weight belt. If an emergency occurred, an injured diver's only recourse for gaining buoyancy was to drop his weights. Along came the horseshoe collar BC, devised to provide manually inflated buoyancy. This primitive device also became the diver's first alternative to weight dumping. However, it was no easy task for a diver in an emergency to blow, inhale from his tank, and then blow again to inflate his vest.
Eventually, modern BCDs evolved with the obligatory power inflator and multiple dump valves. Interestingly, throughout this evolution, the crisis mantra has remained the same: "When in trouble, drop your weight belt!" If you drop your weights at 100 feet, can you really expect to make a controlled ascent afterward? Have you ever tried it? And if you're in an overhead environment, do you really want to rip your weights off and end up on the ceiling?
Still, existing notions are slow to change. In the November 2006 issue of Scuba Diving, the "Ask the Instructor" section had this to say about weight-integrated BCDs: "Make sure you can find and pull the weight releases without looking, without thinking and without too much effort." Great news for dementia divers, but for the rest of us?
Learn from others' mistakes
One can refer to any number of back issues of Undercurrent in which Divers Alert Network (DAN) cases are reported and analyzed. Drownings outnumber embolisms, but the cause of drownings can vary widely from air depletion to entrapment. The cases often mention situations where a drowned diver might have been saved if the weights were dropped, but questions remain. Did the panicked diver even think of dropping weights, or was a difficult release the problem? And if the diver had released the weights, would he survive a rapid ascent without DCS or embolism?
Embolism reports are somewhat easier to sort out, but the issue of whether the weights were dropped on purpose or by accident is rarely determined. These cases generally involve a panicked diver shooting to the surface, often without thinking. And there is never a mention of whether they lost a belt inadvertently.
Neal Pollock of the DAN research staff says that by not capturing incidents involving a positive outcome, the data does not provide a true picture of successful emergency ascents. He notes that there is "far less risk in premature surfacing if students are taught to flare to reduce speed and to avoid breath-holding." However, students might be told about these skills, but they are rarely given to openwater divers underwater.
Undercurrent readers weigh in
I recently took a wreck diving trip on the Lois Ann out of San Diego. I did a survey and found that six of the divers aboard, many of them students, preferred easy-release weights to more security. The captain, the divemaster and two other divers were more concerned about an accidental release of weights that could result in an uncontrolled ascent and embolism.
Via e-mail in March, Undercurrent subscribers were asked to weigh in on the issue. Most respondents showed greater concern for uncontrolled ascents and possible embolism due to unintentional release. Typical comments echoed those of Mike Ferland of Tulatin, Oregon. "I had my weight belt come off once and wound up ascending feet first and kicking like crazy to slow my ascent." Dennis Marquet of Pleasanton, California, added, "I dive a lot in cold California waters and heavy belts are the norm. Losing 26 pounds of weight at depth will really send you flying toward the surface." His point correctly indicates that the issue is more severe for divers in heavy wetsuits or drysuits.
These responders revealed little consensus on the preference of weight belts or integrated weights. Both systems seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. While some like the comfort of integrated weights, others prefer the traditional two-part separation of tank and weights.
Another observation suggests that dropping weights for most divers is like using the exit door in an airplane - - it almost never happens. Bob Santini of Brookfield, Vermont, says, "The only situation that I would see myself dropping my belt in is after I was on the surface and looking at a prolonged wait for assistance or had to swim a great distance to survive." That sentiment seems quite pervasive.
Several wrote about the use of Velcro as a weight retainer. Few consider it suitable for holding weights without a snap-release buckle. Many cases have been reported where heavier weights opened the Velcro and fell out, resulting in a rapid ascent. (See a full report on the problems with Velcro in Undercurrent's October 2005 issue.)
Some divers combine integrated weights and weight belts, believing this allows for better distribution and trim. And most integrated BCDs now have non-ditchable weights that lessen the buoyancy effect of dumping. Some ditchable weights have positive locks, others pull out with just a tug. In any case, a diver should consider the ease of use, ease of weight packing, and the security of the weight pockets.
What, when and where to drop
Divers might also consider under what circumstance they'd drop their weights. Inside an overhead environment? Probably not. Struggling with kelp at the surface? Perhaps. Dropping at depth is a serious judgment call that might involve a malfunctioning BCD, complete loss of air, or another type of buoyancy crisis. Depending on the diver's ability to swim, the option to drop just one integrated weight pocket might be wise. But consider the consequences!
If you can't find a reason to drop your weights, consider the following DAN incident report: A diver was being taunted at the surface by a large shark. He dropped his weights and swam like crazy to the shore. He made it in time but his partner wasn't so lucky.
I once lost my weight belt accidentally at depth while lobster diving. I was lucky to grab a rock ledge and retrieve the belt as I began to "launch." Because I was wearing an extra large 7mm full suit, the sudden 27 pounds of positive buoyancy would have been tough to fight. These days, I use one buckle on a Dive Rite harness, two buckles on my weight belt, and a crotch strap over that. If I'm diving doubles on a decompression dive, dropping weights is not an option. If I'm on the surface breathing air, I can release the belt in two seconds if I want to donate my lead to King Neptune.
The worst enemies in any diving emergency are panic and the inability to think. If you're prone to panic, you may be better off playing tennis. Periodic procedural reviews are also a good idea as diving skills progress. Clearly, training mantras like "the first thing to do in an emergency is drop your weights" need to be reassessed. And if you want to avoid getting a crummy rental weight belt in the tropics, bring one you can trust with zippered pockets. The best advice is to consider all the factors and all the consequences of this weighty issue.
Chuck Ballinger, who has written for Scuba Diver, Skin Diver and other magazines, is author of An American Underwater Odyssey: 50 Dives in 50 States. It is available at www.undercurrent.org, and all profits go to save coral reefs.
The Dryden Gallery in Providence, Rhode Island is hosting its annual underwater photography exhibit entitled 'New Englanders Underwater' from March 31 through May 19. The Gallery states that this is the LARGEST exhibition of underwater photography in New England. There is an opening reception, free of charge, on Saturday evening (6-9 PM) March 31st at the Dryden Gallery.
Several of photographs by Michael Lombardi will be on display at the event, and are priced to sell! 100% of the sale price from any of work will be donated directly to Ocean Opportunity. For a sneak peak at some of photographic works please visit www.oceanopportunity.com
Okay, you have been diving in the Atlantic. How about the Pacific? How about California? As a matter of fact, Catalina Island was voted by Rodales SCUBA Diving Magazine readers as the number 1 dive destination in North America!
Dive In To Earth Day is an international Earth Day celebration that mobilizes environmentally conscious communities, park managers, dive shops and other marine lovers around the world to take a stand in protecting our endangered water world. Dive In has become a huge driving force for environmental awareness and has involved thousands of participants in active marine conservation. In the past seven years, Dive In organizers have held 2,000 marine conservation events in 117 countries worldwide, removing trash, educating children and their communities, supporting marine protected areas, and much more.
For more information on Dive in to Earth Day 2007, visit: Coral Reef Alliance website.
KEY LARGO, Fla. - More details are emerging about the accident that tragically took the lives of three New Jersey divers off Key Largo Friday, according to the Monroe County Sheriff's Office.
The lone survivor of the quartet who went diving together Friday morning, Howard Spialter, was initially thought to have been stationed outside the entrance to the wreck.
Monroe County Detective Mark Coleman said, after speaking with Spialter, he actually entered the wreck with the other divers. Spialter said they weren't sure where they were inside, but he thought he knew the right direction. As he ran low on air in his dive tanks, he tried to tell the others which way to go. They wouldn't listen.
"He went one way and they went the other," said Coleman. "He lived because he went the right way and got out."
Spialter told the detective he grabbed the hand of one of the others, in an attempt to get him to follow. That is the last he saw of his friends.
Two other divers, from another dive boat, found Kevin Coughlin and pulled him out, but it was too late.
"At some point, Coughlin also started in the right direction to get out, but he didn't make it. We don't know what happened with him," said Detective Coleman. "Either he ran out of air before he got out, or he may have embolized in a section of the wreck where there is a long, steep ascent on the way out."
The other two divers who died were Jonathan Walsweer and Scott Stanley. Their bodies were recovered inside the wreck Saturday.
Coleman said he has discovered some reasons why this terrible tragedy may have occurred, besides the fact that the men were diving in an area of the ship not intended for such forays.
According to Coleman:
- The men, all experienced divers, did not have a dive plan. A dive plan, he says, is crucial in order to make sure all participants in the dive know what to expect, and to make sure the divers are properly prepared for the coming dive.
- The men had no dive reels with them to show them the way out of the wreck. Dive reels are spools of line which are attached at the entrance to the dive. The divers let out line as they progress and, thus, are able to find their way out again.
- The men did not take enough dive tanks with them to complete the dive. Normally, according to Detective Coleman, divers planning an extensive penetration dive such as this one take down "stage tanks" which are staged all along the dive route so they have new tanks when they run low on air. These divers had several stage tanks with them, but they were staged much higher in the vessel, and closer to the entrance, than their bodies were found. They only carried single tanks with them. Had they had a safety line, they may have been able to find their way back to the tanks.
- Detective Coleman said when he interviewed Spialter, he admitted they did not take all the safety precautions they should have to complete the dive.
"The divers who went in to recover the bodies said this portion of the ship has large amounts of silt built up inside," said Detective Coleman. "It doesn't take very much movement to kick that silt up and cause problems with your ability to see. Without a line to follow out, and with lots of silt in the water, it would have been virtually impossible for them to find their way out of the wreck," he said.
The Spiegel Grove is a popular dive spot off of Key Largo. The upper portions of the ship have many areas that have been prepared specifically for penetration dives with holes cut for ingress and egress, and markings on the walls showing clearly which ways to go. The portion of the ship these divers were in, were in the bowels of the vessel, not intended for use as an entrance to the wreck.
###
