Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] PSubs..safety simulation

["Vikking" <vikking@mindspring.com>]

good morning Pat, we have here an opportunity to work on a blue print for
safety, probably we will arrive to a series of share conclusions that  will
help  everybody as a guide, we can even later on develop some gear on this
forum, imagine when we do this tipe of thinking, whith coatings,
hydrodinamics, life support systems ,propulsion etc. one at the time , like
building a psub in modules, mmany of us (i assume) will like a bigger sub,
or a faster one, or a  more surface independent design., even if we all get
a wining lotery ticket, we still  need to do the thinking.

the scenario is forming, you can change any of the variables, you are
interested in, an important thing to consider is that we should do it on a
orderly way, because any change we make will gives differents
posibilities,and diferents final conclusions, Murphy is always tring to
hitch a ride,

thanks for remarking about the cooperation , tryng to see the other guy
point of view,
lets get to work on the specifications, how big the psubs for the safety
simulation?


Gabriel
---- Original Message -----
From: Captain Nemo <vulcania@interpac.net>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] PSUB Fatalities...


> This thread is developing in an educational direction, which is good.
>
> I'm not going to offer a scenario; I think that's being done already.  One
> thing I hope is becoming apparent here is that different conditions call
for
> different emergency procedures, and safety can be best served by planning
> for the environment we'll be operating in.
>
> If I'm operating in conditions where I can't exceed recreational diving
> depths; say,  doing a photo shoot of the sub in a quiet lagoon that's 50
> feet deep at the max; SCUBA will do just fine, and I won't need HELIOX or
> the like.
>
> A SPARE AIR is never a complete life support system unto itself; but it
can
> be a handy thing to have around as a backup under the right conditions.
I'd
> hate to find myself in a situation where a SPARE AIR might be the
difference
> between making it or not, and I don't have one.  Cheap insurance.
Valuable
> within the parameters in which it's designed to operate.  I'll take one
> along, if I have a choice.
>
> If there's any chance that I might end up stuck at a depth where air won't
> work as well as HELIOX, I should logically take the mixed gas along.  Now,
> HELIOX requires special training; but if you're going to be operating at a
> depth where that's what you might need, then I think it behooves you to go
> out and get certified for mixed gas diving.
>
> Safety divers, lift bags, cable attach points on your hull, boats on the
> surface: all these things increase safety.
>
> So does the availability of communications.  If sophisticated com gear is
> not available, a diver can put his ear to the hull and hear what the pilot
> is yelling; and a diver can press his mouth and chin into a dive glove,
> inflate it, press it up against the window (or alongside the ear of
another
> diver), yell into it and be heard and understood.  It's not AT&T, but it's
a
> trick people have used to talk to each other underwater for years.  Then
> again, there's always the old standby: dive slates.
>
> On the surface, communications should also include a means of summoning
any
> help that might be needed: radios are nice; and nowadays we've got cel
> phones.  Those emergency numbers (Coast Guard / Rescue; the local
hyperbaric
> chamber if there is one in your area; the Fire Department; Ambulance;
> Hospital, Pizza Hut, etc) should be written down and handy.
>
> One of the most important things I can think if is HAVE A DIVE PLAN AND
> STICK TO IT.  This means organization: talk it out thoroughly and "dirt
> dive" it with your crew before ever launching the sub or boats.  Everybody
> should know what his job is; what the dive schedule is from launch to
> recovery; and what to do in forseeable emergencies.
>
> Remember, inside that sub, the occupants are in potential danger from
launch
> to recovery.  I have an understanding with my crew: WHEN IN DOUBT, GET ME
> OUT.  If something goes wrong, abort the mission, get me back on the
surface
> and / or on the trailer, and get me out of the sub A.S.A.P.  The occupants
> are not safe until they are breathing community air.
>
> This thread can go on and on.  There's a lot more to this: lockout /
escape
> procedures; emergency rescues of an incapacitated pilot; raising the
> stricken sub; various types of emergencies; variables of visibility
> conditions, depth, changes in weather, etc. etc. etc.  Just when we think
> we've figured it all out, something else will occurs to us.  And that's
> good.  That's how it should be.  What usually "gets ya" is what you didn't
> expect or plan for; continual contemplation and discussion of potential
> problems reduces the odds of being taken by surprise.
>
> I see a lot of bright minds here, all wanting to be heard.  That's good,
but
> let's also try to cooperate with the other guy.  We're all trying to share
> knowledge for the common benefit.  We should try to see what the other guy
> is saying; even if some aspect of it isn't quite right, or maybe wasn't
> expressed too well, because there's still probably an element of truth in
> it, and it's to everyone's advantage to seek out that grain of truth
rather
> than shout the other guy down.  The erroneous concepts will disclose
> themselves, and preferable methods will rise to the forefront, as we go
> along.   And if we sift through the input together, we can develop a
greater
> awareness of what safety in small subs is all about.
>
> This thread has already disclosed things I hadn't been thinking about; if
> any of those concepts saves my life or my sub, I'm really going to be
> grateful, you can bet.
>
> Pat
>