 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / November 2005scuba-suicide question
First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified ages ago and dove enthusiastically for awhile... Anyway, I'm working on a novel manuscript. The main character is an extremely experienced cold-water diver (Monterey Bay area), middle-aged female in reasonable physical fitness. I need her to attempt to commit suicide while diving, but with the complexities of dive physiology i am clueless as to how to make it happen. In my head, she's solo diving in some really deep water, and - having been depressed for some while - the narcosis sort of lures her into a how-easy-it-would-be-to- end-it-all reverie, so she begins to go deeper still, knowing she's exceeding her bottom time and/or air supply. Now - the sticky wicket in all of this - another diver (also experienced, young male in top physical condition) sees her and for some reason (this is where you all come in) assumes she's in trouble... attempts a rescue... and in the end she dies and he survives. Does she die from the bends? an embolism on ascent? would either person suffer deep- or shallow-water blackouts? Oxygen toxicity at depth? You can see I'm in over rmy head. so to speak. Thanks in advance for your help. > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified ages > ago and dove enthusiastically for awhile... Anyway, I'm working on a novel [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Thanks in advance for your help. Maybe in her narc-reverie she decides to take off her mask. That might make another diver think she needs help. Or if she were so far gone that she didn't resist when he started dragging her to the surface. Thanks. >Maybe in her narc-reverie she decides to take off her mask. That might >make another diver think she needs help. Or if she were so far gone that >she didn't resist when he started dragging her to the surface. > embolism on ascent? would either person suffer deep- or shallow-water > blackouts? Oxygen toxicity at depth? > > You can see I'm in over rmy head. so to speak. > > Thanks in advance for your help. This is an easy one. Just put her in a bungied wing with a steel tank. She'll run out of air trying to get off the bottom. Make the guy a GOP appointed secret PNAC dive master posing as a FEMA rescuer and she's dead meat. >> embolism on ascent? would either person suffer deep- or shallow-water >> blackouts? Oxygen toxicity at depth? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Make the guy a GOP appointed secret PNAC dive master posing as a FEMA > rescuer and she's dead meat. Gotta give him credit, there's only -one- charliekeys. > >> embolism on ascent? would either person suffer deep- or shallow-water > >> blackouts? Oxygen toxicity at depth? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Gotta give him credit, there's only -one- charliekeys. Indeed. Hope he had a happy Thanksgiving. Dennis > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified ages Thought you said you're a writer? > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified > ages > You can see I'm in over rmy head. so to speak. You'll be fine. Just apply the same creative energy that you did to your other classic works like "Artichokes for Everyone" and "Sunflowers Raise Funds for Make-A-Wish Foundation". But as a practical matter, the notion that another diver saw her and went to help her is the credibility gap. Visibility isn't so hot in Monterey, so if she was solo diving, she was truly alone. And even if another diver saw her, why would he go to help if she wasn't panicking? You should change the scenario to a clearer warmer locale like Roatan and make the rescuer a dive master who might have reason to note how deep other divers are going. You'll be fine. Just apply the same creative energy that you did to your >other classic works like "Artichokes for Everyone" and "Sunflowers Raise >Funds for Make-A-Wish Foundation". Uh-huh. WIll do. (Note to self: use alias on listservs) >But as a practical matter, the notion that another diver saw her and went to >help her is the credibility gap. Visibility isn't so hot in Monterey, so if Thank you - this is helpful. It is one of the things that's been bothering me - originally I had her making teh suicide attempt off a dive boat, henc ethe avialability of would-be-rescuers, but she's not the sort who would want a big spectacle made of it. > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified > ages [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Thanks in advance for your help. While diving in Cozumel I had asked the diver master how deep it was at the drop off since the water was so dark. He casually replied, "Oh only about three miles straight down." He then proceded to tell me that they had had problems with people comitting suicide by swimming out with extra weights on and dumping their gear. No body to recover. Vic A. Bodnar Ack - somehow this is all very gory. I know of a site in the Monterey area where a diver could access deep water, but then there's the rescue complication... - Erica >three miles straight down." He then proceded to tell me that they had had >problems with people comitting suicide by swimming out with extra weights on >and dumping their gear. No body to recover. > >Vic A. Bodnar > > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified ages [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Thanks in advance for your help. The suicide part is easy. It would be a great way to go if one wanted to. Once past 180-200 on air, the world is beautiful and peaceful and the seduction of going deeper is very strong. At 245 on air the sensation is better than sex and almost as good as a perfect lap in a race car. By the time you get to oxtox depth, you've already have swooned of ecstasy. My spot of choice is a wall in Tuna Alley, south of Bimini. But then I've never done California. Assuming the suicide candidate was drifting slowly down (as one should do in such circumstances, soaking in the terminal bliss) and the unhappy rescuer spotted the happy suicide from far above, a banzai dive to depth to cheat the suicide could result in far more risk to the person who has been at greater depth for a longer time. Bends is a poor choice, and oxtox is highly over rated as a way to do oneself in although it is the penultimate cause of death, drowning being the ultimate. Embolism is implausible. The suicide, resisting the rescue, could well spit out the reg and drown on the way up. Or die of a broken heart, having been snatched from so close to Nirvana. Probably easiest to have her hit her head on the ladder just as the rescuer gets her to the boat. Or maybe the divemaster, on his first trip since switching careers from commercial fishing, panics and gaffs the girl. m Thank you, MIke! This is very helpful. >The suicide part is easy. It would be a great way to go if one >wanted to. Once past 180-200 on air, the world is beautiful and >peaceful and the seduction of going deeper is very strong. At >245 on air the sensation is better than sex and almost as good >as a perfect lap in a race car. By the time you get to oxtox Not to ask stupid questions (But then again, that's why I'm here - 'cuz I know how much I don't know), but: Oxtox is a product - if i understand it correctly - of both exposure time and the partial pressure of O2 in the mix which - again if i get this right - would increase with depth. what would a typical profile look like where you might get oxtox symptoms, like convulsions? assuming the diver's on air and not mix? >Bends is a poor choice, and oxtox is highly over rated as a way >to do oneself in although it is the penultimate cause of death, >drowning being the ultimate. Embolism is implausible. The Why is bends a bad choice? Assuming she was brought up rapidly from a sufficient depth to induce narcosis, wouldn't a DCS hit be almost inevitable? Thanks a whole bunch. - Erica > Thank you, MIke! This is very helpful. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>245 on air the sensation is better than sex and almost as good >>as a perfect lap in a race car. By the time you get to oxtox > Not to ask stupid questions (But then again, that's why I'm here - 'cuz I > know how much I don't know), but: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and > not mix? Mike took the time to describe what I thought of. I guess the least I can do is take the time to add to it. Most consider a partial pressure of 1.6 to be the maximum limit for avoiding oxygen toxicity. That's reached at 218 feet of salt water. There's no such thing as a typical profile for oxtox. Some have toxed at less that a PPO2 of 1.6 and some have not toxed at higher levels. It's no more, or less, predictable than most other gas related diving issues. Oxygen toxicity problems are uncommon. Even a recreational diver doesn't get to 218 feet on air without knowing they've exceeded agency recommendations by a significant margin. Those that plan dives to such depths, usually understand the risks well enough to avoid the problem. Probably the most common circumstances resulting in oxtox is deep divers who, for one reason or another, tox during the decompression stage of their dive. >>Bends is a poor choice, and oxtox is highly over rated as a way >>to do oneself in although it is the penultimate cause of death, >>drowning being the ultimate. Embolism is implausible. The > Why is bends a bad choice? It's a bad choice of ways to commit suicide, It hurts . . . a lot. > Assuming she was brought up rapidly from a > sufficient depth to induce narcosis, wouldn't a DCS hit be almost > inevitable? Nothing is inevitable. Studies show that pretty much all divers are somewhat impacted by narcosis at around 90 feet. Lots of divers have made rapid ascents from 90 feet and deeper without noticeable DCS effects. Personally, my choice would be narcosis as Mike suggested, followed by an oxtox just after the would be rescuer reached the victim, somewhere below 218 feet. If you want to add some drama, have the rescuer experience some of the less severe oxtox effects during his rescue attempt. Lee > Mike took the time to describe what I thought of. I guess the least I can > do is take the time to add to it. Most consider a partial pressure of 1.6 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > who, for one reason or another, tox during the decompression stage of their > dive. You can't oxtox at 1.6 in a single exposure. These very conservative levels are for cumulative exposures. Table six is at 2.8 for 2 hours 15 minutes plus 3 five-minute air breaks before the PPO2 starts dropping, and oxtox is very rare then. m >> Mike took the time to describe what I thought of. I guess the least I >> can do is take the time to add to it. Most consider a partial pressure [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > minutes plus 3 five-minute air breaks before the PPO2 starts dropping, and > oxtox is very rare then. Captain JT, I think that's his on line name, reported a diver going into convulsions during the deco stage of a dive. He was at a PPO2 of 1.6 at the time. While it's certainly unlikely, it appears that it's possible to tox at no more than 1.6. I understand, however, that a slap on the outside of the chamber, or anything similarly unexpected, will put a participant over the top pretty much every time. Lee > Captain JT, I think that's his on line name, reported a diver going into > convulsions during the deco stage of a dive. He was at a PPO2 of 1.6 at the > time. While it's certainly unlikely, it appears that it's possible to tox > at no more than 1.6. That was more than a single exposure at 1.6. That diver probably did about 25 minutes at 1.4 or so, and then definitely switched to 50% at 70' (1.6) and used that gas for stops up to 20 ft, where she switched to O2 (1.6 again). This was at the end of a multi day trip to that wreck, and I don't know what she did on the days before. . >> Captain JT, I think that's his on line name, reported a diver going into >> convulsions during the deco stage of a dive. He was at a PPO2 of 1.6 at [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 70' (1.6) and used that gas for stops up to 20 ft, where she switched to > O2 (1.6 again). That all happened at the end of a single dive. I would call that a single exposure. > This was at the end of a multi day trip to that wreck, and I don't know > what she did on the days before. I don't know either and I can only share the information I have. This issue has been discussed before. Others who seemed to know and certainly had a responsibility for knowing, have suggested that the safe period for high PPO2 decreases at an accelerated, perhaps logarithmic, rate with depth and that somewhere around 1.6, becomes so short that even a slight unpredictability is likely to lead to a hit. That may or may not be valid, but it is consistent with the change, only a few years ago, from a safe PPO2 of 1.6 to a more safe 1.5 and then 1.4. It's hard to equate recommendations that 1.6 is acceptable only for the non working deco portion of a dive with statements that seem to imply little or no risk at PPO2s two or more times that level, even when it's Mike saying it. Lee > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That all happened at the end of a single dive. I would call that a single > exposure. Although convulsions are a symptom of oxtox, convulsions do not equal oxtox. It might have been very low blood glucose or bad gas at depth or any number of other things. >>This was at the end of a multi day trip to that wreck, and I don't know >>what she did on the days before. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > of a dive with statements that seem to imply little or no risk at PPO2s two > or more times that level, even when it's Mike saying it. Military and commercial divers have long used > 2.0 with no ill effects. The 1.6 and 1.4 are both based on more recent concerns about long term cumulative effects, thousands of hours of exposure, and based on young Lambertson's current work may be cut soon to 1.2 or even lower. When the exposure limit for rec divers is restated to 1.2 or 1.0, you'll see a whole bunch of oxtox cases reported at those levels. Rec divers just can't pass up an opportunity to have terrible things happen. m OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you die *only* from the resultant drowning? >> > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >m > OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you die > *only* from the resultant drowning? As far as I know, all oxygen toxicity deaths have been drowings. Lee >> OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you die >> *only* from the resultant drowning? > > As far as I know, all oxygen toxicity deaths have been drowings. These guys didn't drown: Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol., Volume 19, Number 4, October, 1998 573-581 Oxygen Toxicity in Mouse Lung: Pathways to Cell Death Constance Barazzone, Stuart Horowitz, Yves R. Donati, Ivan Rodriguez, and Pierre-François Piguet Departments of Pediatrics and Pathology, University of Geneva, Switzerland; and CardioPulmonary Research Institute, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York Mice exposed to 100% O2 die after 3 or 4 d with diffuse alveolar damage and alveolar edema. Extensive cell death is evident by electron microscopy in the alveolar septa, affecting both endothelial and epithelial cells. The damaged cells show features of both apoptosis (condensation and margination of chromatin) and necrosis (disruption of the plasma membrane). The electrophoretic pattern of lung DNA indicates both internucleosomal fragmentation, characteristic of apoptosis, and overall degradation, characteristic of necrosis. Hyperoxia induces a marked increase in RNA or protein levels of p53, bax, bcl-x, and Fas, which are known to be expressed in certain types of apoptosis. However, we did not detect an increased activity of proteases belonging to the apoptosis "executioner" machinery, such as CPP32 (caspase 3), ICE (caspase 1), or cathepsin D. Furthermore, administration of an ICE-like protease inhibitor did not significantly enhance the resistance to oxygen. Additionally, neither p53-deficient mice nor lpr mice (Fas null) manifested an increased resistance to hyperoxia-induced lung damage. These results show that both necrosis and apoptosis contribute to cell death during hyperoxia. Multiple apoptotic pathways seem to be involved in this, and an antiapoptotic strategy does not attenuate alveolar damage. >>> OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you die >>> *only* from the resultant drowning? >> >> As far as I know, all oxygen toxicity deaths have been drowings. > > These guys didn't drown: They weren't under water either. We're talking diving here. Lee >>>> OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you >>>> die [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > They weren't under water either. We're talking diving here. We're talking fiction. Put little scuba tanks on the rats and they become divers. Perhaps a legion of scuba-diving oxygenated lab rats could make an attempt to save the suicidal diver's life, but they all ox-tox and die just before their little paws can grab ahold of her. The kids will love it. >>>>> OK - can you actually die *directly* from oxygen toxicity, or do you >>>>> die [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > to save the suicidal diver's life, but they all ox-tox and die just before > their little paws can grab ahold of her. The kids will love it. The original premise has the would be rescuer surviving and the would be rescuee dying. Unless you think this is a Stewart Little book, I'm afraid the rats don't fit the story line very well. Lee >Unless you think this is a Stewart Little book, I'm afraid >the rats don't fit the story line very well. > >Lee thanks, Lee. :-) > The original premise has the would be rescuer surviving and the would be > rescuee dying. Unless you think this is a Stewart Little book, I'm afraid > the rats don't fit the story line very well. Well, you know how lawyers like rats, professional courtesy and all... > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Well, you know how lawyers like rats, professional courtesy and all... Could we get a fed grant to put the entire ABA membership on 100% O2 for a month? > Could we get a fed grant to put the entire ABA membership on > 100% O2 for a month? Unfortunately, the ABA is so deeply embedded in our government, pockets and a.ses, the feds would never go for it (half of them are lawyers, and the other half thieves, hence the ability to vote themselves raises, get caught red-handed stealing, commiting crimes against the state and the public trust and get off with a stern warning). If we were able to put it straight to the people, it would be a slam dunk. > Could we get a fed grant to put the entire ABA membership on 100% O2 for a > month? Only after the results of the AARP trials are published. Half of Florida is on oxygen already. Lawyers, on the other hand, already blow a lot of hot air. Replace the hot exhalations with pure (less the metabolized fraction) O2 and you'll see office building meltdowns that will put the WTC attacks to shame. You're not advocating terrorism, are you? > Could we get a fed grant to put the entire ABA membership on > 100% O2 for a month? Inefficient... How about 100% N2 for a day? > > Could we get a fed grant to put the entire ABA membership on > > 100% O2 for a month? > > Inefficient... How about 100% N2 for a day? Nothing to be learned from that, plus we dont get to watch them do the chicken. > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Oxygen Toxicity in Mouse Lung: Pathways to Cell Death 1. They're mice 2. It takes 3-4 days 3. They're not certified for nitrox. > Oxygen Toxicity in Mouse Lung: Pathways to Cell Death So Greg, as a diver, do you resemble a man or a mouse, eh? (Lawyer already equates with rat) ;-) Curtis > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Lee You can kill with O2 but it's a very long process. For that reason, saturation limits have been 0.35 with a max of 0.50 since Christ was a corporal. The mouse study in another post just confirms what sat divers have always known - three days at 1.0 is naughty. Lee's right, the oxtox danger in open circuit diving is convulsions from single exposure overdose and the cause of death is drowning. There are many cases of surface supply oxtox where recovery was rapid once the diver was pulled up and fed surface air. One reason commercial divers use tethers and full-face masks. m > There are many cases of surface supply oxtox where > recovery was rapid once the diver was pulled up and > fed surface air. Which brings up another question... Do the guys who get an O2 hit remember the convulsions and if so, how do they describe them? >>There are many cases of surface supply oxtox where >>recovery was rapid once the diver was pulled up and >>fed surface air. > > Which brings up another question... Do the guys who get an O2 hit remember > the convulsions and if so, how do they describe them? According to R.H. Davis the British Admiralty, in 1942, "undertook what was probably the most exhaustive programme of human experiments ever attempted on one aspect of diving. In all it involved over a thousand actual dives in 'toxic' depths of water, and a large number of 'dry' experiments. Many of the divers were taken to the point of unconsciousness and convulsions, and the young divers of the Unit showed great courage in submitting themselves cheerfully to these experiments." Convulsions can be pretty ugly, sort of like being beaten up by our friend Magilla. But willingness to intentionally go through it indicates it can't be too awfully bad. I don't know that I've ever seen a description of what it's like for the convulsee, though there are many first-person reports of it happening. Divers working the piers of the Golden Gate Bridge seemed to take some pride in oxtoxing, but that was long before OSHA. The quote is from a description of training for midget subs and human torpedoes. The O2 threshhold at the time was considered to be 3.0 but with the pure O2 rebreathers they used riding the midget subs for extended periods, "Oxygen Pete" (or "getting a Pete" as it was known) became a very big problem. The Admiralty went to 2.0 as a result of these experiments, dramatically reducing but not eliminating oxtox. Remember, these guys were on 100% O2 for many hours at a time, working hard and under considerable stress. m > Captain JT, I think that's his on line name, reported a diver going into > convulsions during the deco stage of a dive. He was at a PPO2 of 1.6 at the > time. I remember that, aand may add that a friend survived a similar oxtox incident ehile on a rebreather with a fullface mask. Which prevented him from drowining. > I understand, however, that a slap on the outside of the chamber, or > anything similarly unexpected, will put a participant over the top pretty > much every time. Yep. Do you remember who reported this? Matthias >> Captain JT, I think that's his on line name, reported a diver going into >> convulsions during the deco stage of a dive. He was at a PPO2 of 1.6 at [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Yep. Do you remember who reported this? No. I can't even recall if it was on line or in person. It was in the context of Navy testing and was represented as how divers who had made themselves unpopular were deliberately washed out. Lee >>>I understand, however, that a slap on the outside of the chamber, or >>>anything similarly unexpected, will put a participant over the top pretty [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > context of Navy testing and was represented as how divers who had made > themselves unpopular were deliberately washed out. Yes, now I remember it as well. I think this was mentioned chez nous on a Diving Medicine roundup by a physician working at the Institute of Diving and Hyperbaric Medicine... May be.. Matthias > You can't oxtox at 1.6 in a single exposure. These very conservative > levels are for cumulative exposures. Table six is at 2.8 for 2 hours 15 > minutes plus 3 five-minute air breaks before the PPO2 starts dropping, > and oxtox is very rare then. Pls. distinguish between a wet and a dry environment. Test made at Comex have shown that people tolerating a "dry percentage of 1,6 O2 toxed out immediately after sunmersion ( acc. to J.P. Imbert) Matthias > > Thank you, MIke! This is very helpful. > > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > who, for one reason or another, tox during the decompression stage of their > dive. Put her on EAN 36? <snip> > Personally, my choice would be narcosis as Mike suggested, followed by an > oxtox just after the would be rescuer reached the victim, somewhere below > 218 feet. If you want to add some drama, have the rescuer experience some > of the less severe oxtox effects during his rescue attempt. Dennis > Lee > > Not to ask stupid questions (But then again, that's why I'm here - 'cuz I > know how much I don't know), but: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > might get oxtox symptoms, like convulsions? assuming the diver's on air and > not mix? Single exposure oxtox, which is what yer considering, has very little to do with time, and comes on much deeper than the "safe limits" which are based more on the Lorraine Smith Effect, which is cumulative exposure. Somewhere between 3.0 and 3.5 PPO2 (450 fsw on air) the convulsions hit, shallower if yer working hard and CO2 retention is high. I am assuming that at that depth I really won't notice the convulsions and should be narc'd enough to enjoy them. > Why is bends a bad choice? Assuming she was brought up rapidly from a > sufficient depth to induce narcosis, wouldn't a DCS hit be almost inevitable? A hit might be inevitable, but prolly not enough for her to die in her lover's arms. The twitching and jerking and pain could make some great text, though, and be a great scene for the movie. It's actually damned hard to kill yerself on scuba without really trying. How about an improperly set up compressor, she gets some CO in her tank. That works pretty good. m >> Now - the sticky wicket in all of this - another diver (also experienced, >> young male in top physical condition) sees her and for some reason >> (this is >> where you all come in) assumes she's in trouble... attempts a >> rescue... and >> in the end she dies and he survives. Does she die from the bends? X. an >> embolism on ascent? XX. Or any combination of above. > The suicide part is easy. It would be a great way to go if one wanted > to. Once past 180-200 on air, the world is beautiful and peaceful and > the seduction of going deeper is very strong. At 245 on air the > sensation is better than sex and almost as good as a perfect lap in a > race car. In the deep ends it depends. I f.i. get extremely cautious when below 60m. Nearly met a Shangri La at 74m, where there began a horizon covering stretch of black corals. But leaving control when you want to is another cup of tea. > Probably easiest to have her hit her head on the ladder just as the > rescuer gets her to the boat. Or maybe the divemaster, on his first trip > since switching careers from commercial fishing, panics and gaffs the girl. Can be easier done when the DM releases her overweighted as usual weightbelt at depth, she goes skyrocketing up, hits the boat with the head, overpressure release pops of, and gravity takes it's toll. Matthias > First, an intro: I'm a writer, not a diver. I was Open-Water certified ages > ago and dove enthusiastically for awhile... Anyway, I'm working on a novel [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Thanks in advance for your help. Well, I dive out of Monterey and while sometimes the vis is low, sometimes it can be pretty good too. There are some walls here that go down thousands of feet. You can also have a good number of divers in an area because two or more dive boats show up at the same area. I think I would put the male diver as a Tech diver fairly deep along the wall. She decides suicide is a good idea and puts her head down going deeper and deeper, she takes her mask off and just heads down. He sees her go by and believes she's narc'ed and goes after her. As she runs out of air at depth, she panics and shoots for the surface. The rescurer attempts to keep her from surfacing too fast and get her his Octo... but she fights him to get to the surface and he just can't hold her without being dragged too fast to the surface himself and has to let her go. Of course she drowns on her way to the surface. However, even if she made it, either she would have an extreme case of the bends or her lungs would explode. This could be from say 200 feet, and an out of air at 200 feet would pretty much seal your fate. > I think I would put the male diver as a Tech diver fairly deep along the > wall. She decides suicide is a good idea and puts her head down going [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > would explode. This could be from say 200 feet, and an out of air at 200 > feet would pretty much seal your fate. Initially this sounds good but there's a problem with plausibility. :^) The Tech diver most likely would have had a buddy and so the two buddies would have been working together to rescue her. >>I think I would put the male diver as a Tech diver fairly deep along the >>wall. She decides suicide is a good idea and puts her head down going [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > The Tech diver most likely would have had a buddy and so the two buddies > would have been working together to rescue her. True, but that would also be true for most divers. There are a lot of dive boat operators that don't allow solo divers. > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The Tech diver most likely would have had a buddy and so the two buddies > would have been working together to rescue her. Cool. An underwater menage a trois. That'll sell. Honestly, when I was in Monterey (and this was 8 years or so ago) there was a lot of solo diving going on. It was usually rather quiet, since many of the more experienced divers who wanted to solo dive also made their living at least partly from the dive industry (e.g., instructing or DM'ing or running a shop) and PADI & NAUI frown on solo diving, but it was out there... Maybe that's changed, but my impression has been that the more advanced you get in the dive world the more divers you run into who are OK with solo diving, at least in certain circumstances. >The Tech diver most likely would have had a buddy and so the two buddies >would have been working together to rescue her. Hi, Dennis, I'd love to pick your brain at some point about specific dive sites in Monterey. I learned to dive in the Bay, and I've been to the typical sites (S & N Monastery, the breakwater (of course), Pinnacles, Otter Cove, PInk House...) but it's been many years, and as I mentioned, I never got past the Open-Water point. FWIW, I have N. Monastery in mind for the deep-dive/suicide scene, since it has access to the Trench, but my character also has a dive boat, so if there are other sites that would be good to consider, feel free to pipe up. I also appreciate your other commentary on my question. Thanks. >Well, I dive out of Monterey and while sometimes the vis is low, poking at big sharks with a lil knife might be fun >Now - the sticky wicket in all of this - >another diver (also experienced, >young male in top physical condition) >sees her and for some reason (this is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >You can see I'm in over rmy head. so to >speak. >Thanks in advance for your help. I like the mental image of him seeing her below, at the outer limit of visibility, slowing drifting downward. He tries, but is unable catch up with her before she gets past a point where he knows he can't survive. This allows for a contrast in thought between her lethargic, narcosis induced state, and his frantic frame of mind. There's also plenty of room for self-flagellation, and since he didn't bring her up (or find the body), she might even be ripe for a sequil ;o). > >Now - the sticky wicket in all of this - >another diver (also experienced, SNIP > I like the mental image of him seeing her below, at the outer limit > of visibility, slowing drifting downward. He tries, but is unable catch > up with her before she gets past a point where he knows he can't > survive. Hmmm.... I think, if I saw this, and the buddy/friend wasn't finning determinedly downwards, I wonder if I would think very logically. I would certainly fin down to 60-70m. (on air) to try and reach them, deeper than that who knows what I'd be thinking.............I would probably try & reach them and worry about the deco. afterwards. Assuming no shortage of air, how deep would you guys go?? (Just for the sake of discussion obviously) Pip pip  SignatureChris Notton Replace "nospam" with my surname to reply by email Sostituisca il "nospam" con il mio cognome per rispondere }<////(*> > Hmmm.... > I think, if I saw this, and the buddy/friend wasn't finning determinedly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and worry about the deco. afterwards. > Assuming no shortage of air, how deep would you guys go?? Silly boy. Knowing when to leave your buddy should have been part of your training. <rofl> Geo a couple more general depth questions - has anyone found that paranoia interferes with the more pleasant aspects of narcosis? also, assuming a clear sunny day and 30-40' viz, how *dark* would it be at, say, 200 feet? I understand color is gone, but I have no feel for the darkness... Would it be dark enough that you'd be using a dive light even during the day? Thanks agian for everyone's commentary on this thread - it's all very helpful. >a couple more general depth questions - has anyone found that paranoia > interferes with the more pleasant aspects of narcosis? Narcosis tends to take one of two forms. The more commonly known form is the euphoria you describe which starts as a general feeling of well being that increases in intensity. The other form, not all that commonly known, is sometimes referred to as dark narcosis. It is characterized by a slight feeling of unease that progresses to strong fealings of fear. When my wife took a dark narcosis hit, among other things, she was positive that her regulator was no longer working. Interestingly, she knew that it must be because she was still breathing, but she was still positive that it wasn't. You may assume that was a very upsetting combination. > also, assuming a clear sunny day and 30-40' viz, how *dark* would it be > at, > say, 200 feet? I understand color is gone, but I have no feel for the > darkness... Would it be dark enough that you'd be using a dive light even > during the day? It's hard to say. My deepest dive was to roughly 175 feet in very clear water. There was no shortage of light. I've been to 140 feet, give or take a bit, in visibility similar to what you mention, without needing lights. On the other hand, at pretty much any depth over 10 to 15 feet, you might use a light to bring out the true color of things. Salt water filters most red light out in about 10 feet. Yellow and blue light are filtered next, in that order. If you're considering whether a diver would have a light, the answer is probably. In addition to carrying lights when diving at night or in enclosed spaces (wrecks, caves and caverns), many divers carry lights to highlight true colors, see life in holes and ledges and in case they need to signal for help after dark. I'm not sure what proportion of divers carry a light on every dive, but it's more than a few, less than all. Lee Would it be dark enough that you'd be using a dive light even > during the day? > > Thanks agian for everyone's commentary on this thread - it's all very helpful. > > -- > Message posted via http://www.scubamonster.com If you are really looking for that chilling 'No pun intended this time' scene that hits you and sticks out.. Such as the unforgettable vision of the room full of hanging victims/donors in COMA for example. You might want to forget Monterrey where she'll just end up another dead, eaten corpse,and move her dive to lake Tahoe. Its deep and cold with a legend of an unreachable thermal strata with many decades worth of unrecovered well preserved remains eerily floating well off the bottom, grouped loosely by the slight currents. Remember the impact of Mitchums victim in the river current in "The Night of the Hunter". Her hair flying while he hummed "Bringing in the sheaves". Imagine your failed rescuer returning with more advanced commercial technology and finally finding her amidst many others from throughout history.. an eerie, moving scene if done right. Heck, He might even find Fredo Corleone. >a couple more general depth questions - has anyone found that paranoia > interferes with the more pleasant aspects of narcosis? > > also, assuming a clear sunny day and 30-40' viz, how *dark* would it be > at, > say, 200 feet? pretty damn dark....but not cave dark...you would see shapes. but not much detail. I understand color is gone, but I have no feel for the > darkness... Would it be dark enough that you'd be using a dive light even > during the day? Yes...dive lights are often used at shallower depths with greater viz.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.