[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Was "storm and sub", now JSL accident investigation



That would be the very folks who are searching the archives and not finding "scrubber" because it's under the heading "pee bottle"???? Don't worry about the grumpy old man thing--it comes with the territory--at least it does with mine.
Vance 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: sealordone@aol.com
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Was "storm and sub", now JSL accident investigation

Vance,
 
Please don't apologize.  I was just being a grumpy old man.
 
This is a site that is open to all.  I like that.  It encourages newbies, it welcomes everyone.  It connects a community together.  So it is probably quite unreasonable of me to expect any sort of "site discipline" in terms of careful use of words and conventions designed to ease later archive searches. Issuing and enforcing those sorts of rules would make the site a lot less friendly, and in the end would probably chase away the very folks we mean to attract.
 
Doug
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: vbra676539@aol.com
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Was "storm and sub", now JSL accident investigation

Doug, Sorry about that. Vance 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: sealordone@aol.com
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 12:31 PM
Subject: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Was "storm and sub", now JSL accident investigation

Shipmates,
 
I can't believe this thread is still called "storm and sub".  No wonder the titles of these posts are not particularly useful in researching the archives (grumpy old man).  But that is not why I am posting.
 
The Johnson Sea Link accident is the only submersible accident I am familiar with where there is a full National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident investigation posted on the web.  I recommend it to anyone who is interested in submersible safety.
 
Doug Farrow
SeaLordOne
 
-----Original Message-----
From: vbra676539@aol.com
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Storm and SUB

In other words, plan ahead, without ego or agenda. Good words to remember. Vance 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: bottomgun@mindspring.com
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 10:49 AM
Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Storm and SUB

Having worked at Harbor Branch a short time after the KSL incident, several issues were identified that have proved out in review of almost all submarine rescues:
1.                    Start rescue attempts as soon as possible, DO NOT DELAY!  Any effort is better then waiting for the best option.
2.                   A second submersible vehicle can greatly assist a rescue attempt, whether it is an ROV or another submersible.
3.                   Provide adequate thermal protection in the submersible to mitigate long exposure to even moderate cold.
4.                   Emergency CO2 scrubber and O2 supplies should be sufficient to cover the maximum time expected before recovery can be completed (generally 72 hrs.).
5.                   If free-ascent is a viable option, start it at the earliest possible point as rising CO2 levels, numbing cold, fatigue and other developing catastrophes make it much more difficult later.
6.                   Different rescue scenarios should be sandboxed and looked at from all angles to determine what issues might be resolved to prevent the accident.
7.                   Submarine rescue should be practiced.
 
Respectfully,
Jay K. Jeffries
Andros Is., Bahamas
 
Natura nihil fit in frustra
- Nature does nothing in vain
 
 
 

From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org] On Behalf Of Rick and Marcia
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:17 AM
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Storm and SUB
 
Ah, Johnson-Sea Link.
 
I understand there were circumstances surrounding that particular incident that led to these deaths being unnecessary.  Apparently those present differed with the published version of the event.
 
The deaths were, I understand, preventable.  The way the drama unfolded was what killed them, not the accident itself.  A decision tree that went awry.
 
Rick L
 
 

Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.