Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have no actual knowledge of the situation beyond what has been posted, but
a couple of things caught my eye: First was they had supposedly successfully gone over the dam before. Secondly, the article said they "were swept beyond the boil line but were pitched out of the kayak in the turbulence". Not to diminish the danger of low head dams in general, but it sounds to me like this particular dam (at least at this water level) may not be of the really lethal variety. It sounds like they got through what should be the really dangerous part of the dam and came out of their boat just after due to "turbulence" (white water?). In a typical low head situation, PFDs won't save you--they'll just make it easier to find your body (assuming it stays on). In this case, it sounds like PFDs would have saved lives. Can anyone who actually has seen this dam clarify the reports? -Paul |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Skoczylas wrote:
In a typical low head situation, PFDs won't save you--they'll just make it easier to find your body (assuming it stays on). In this case, it sounds like PFDs would have saved lives. If a PFD provides enough flotation, wouldn't it be able to keep your head above the water? I was surprised once that with drysuit, thick fleece, and an Extrasport Hi-Float, I was able to breathe while trapped in a hole. I would have stayed in the hole if not for a throwbag, but I could breathe. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bill Tuthill wrote:
Paul Skoczylas wrote: In a typical low head situation, PFDs won't save you--they'll just make it easier to find your body (assuming it stays on). In this case, it sounds like PFDs would have saved lives. If a PFD provides enough flotation, wouldn't it be able to keep your head above the water? I was surprised once that with drysuit, thick fleece, and an Extrasport Hi-Float, I was able to breathe while trapped in a hole. I would have stayed in the hole if not for a throwbag, but I could breathe. I think it depends on a couple of things: My experience with weirs is that if the water is too aireated, you simply float just below the surface, due to lack of buoyancy. Also, if the hydrolic below the weir is too strong, you get pulled below, despite a PFD and wet-/dry-suit. You might come up every once in a while, but since you stay under for quite a bit of time in between and since we lack gills, that eventually means that you run out of air in between the pop-ups. :-( A couple of years ago I had difficulties rescuing a friend of ours who was getting recirculated, I remember that I was amazed at how long she stayed under during each circulation, despite wearing a PFD. -- Wilko van den Bergh wilkoa t)dse(d o tnl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://kayaker.nl/ |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wilko wrote:
A couple of years ago I had difficulties rescuing a friend of ours who was getting recirculated, I remember that I was amazed at how long she stayed under during each circulation, despite wearing a PFD. In desperate circumstances, you're better off taking off the PFD and diving down to follow the bottom current out of the backwash. Few people who get in (low-head-dam) trouble have the knowledge or composure to make that radical move, however. |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob P wrote:
In desperate circumstances, you're better off taking off the PFD and diving down to follow the bottom current out of the backwash. Few people who get in (low-head-dam) trouble have the knowledge or composure to make that radical move, however. I've given that some thought. Over the years, this option seems to have surfaced on RBP a couple of times. My main concern would be what happens after you get out of the hydrolic, and what would happen if taking off your PFD wouldn't get you out. I'm fairly ambiguous about whether or not that would be a smart thing to do. It's the main reason why I have a PFD with a front zipper though... so that I can quickly take it off if needed. -- Wilko van den Bergh wilkoa t)dse(d o tnl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://kayaker.nl/ |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Wilko" wrote in message ... Bob P wrote: In desperate circumstances, you're better off taking off the PFD and diving down to follow the bottom current out of the backwash. Few people who get in (low-head-dam) trouble have the knowledge or composure to make that radical move, however. I've given that some thought. Over the years, this option seems to have surfaced on RBP a couple of times. My main concern would be what happens after you get out of the hydrolic, and what would happen if taking off your PFD wouldn't get you out. I'm fairly ambiguous about whether or not that would be a smart thing to do. It's the main reason why I have a PFD with a front zipper though... so that I can quickly take it off if needed. This boondoggle arises all the time. As far as my experience goes, the old "take off your PFD and flush out the bottom of the hole" strategy is an urban legend. Everyone knows the rule, but afaik, no one knows anyone who has actually had to do it. Its in the same legendary category as putting maggots in an open wound to stymie gangrene from forming, or as using soldier ants as stitches to close a wound, or to use a swiss army knife to cut an oar in half to extricate it from your leg. Sounds good in theory, but in practice you are just never in that exact type of situation, or else there are other complicating factors that prevent it from really being a good strategy. I think if you were actually trapped in a hole with sharp enough edges to keep you in, you would be underwater and tossed around so much that you would have no idea which way 'down' was, let alone how to crawl along the bottom. Also, once you shed your pfd, the force of the water would almost certainly prevent you from using the rocks along the bottom anyway, as you'd be plastered down there at best, or slammed among them at worst. As Wilko points out, even if it DID work, you'd then be downstream without a PFD, pretty beat up and completely out of breath. Also, in the aerated water behind the pourover, you would have less floatation than normal and would have NO chance to catch a breath, so you'd be more likely to drown without a pfd than with it on. I think it'd be very interesting to hear some statistics about people who have gone over low-head dams with and without PFDs, and get some statistics of who actually has washed out vs who has drowned. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the majority of people without PFDs drown, and the majority of people with them flush out. No, unless I hear some pretty definitive stories from folks who have had to actually do this, and who can verify that their PFD remained in the hole indefinately afterwards (in other words, it was a true keeper hole), I choose to believe that this is a poorly thought out legendary old wives tale that impressess newbies. --riverman |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
riverman wrote:
I think if you were actually trapped in a hole with sharp enough edges to keep you in, you would be underwater and tossed around so much that you would have no idea which way 'down' was, let alone how to crawl along the bottom. That's correct. Spatial disorientation would be but one facet of the experience that makes a low-head tailwater hydraulic a "drowning machine". Visibility is bad to non-existent, bubbles go in all directions, and the current is quite deceptive. I know a guy who went diving in a similar current, looking for lost anchors. He did this and several similar crazy things in his younger years, and is quite lucky to have survived many of them. He's the only person I know who was in such a current and lived to talk about it, he had SCUBA gear and advanced training, he was quite impressed with the power of the hydraulic and says he couldn't see how anyone without all the equipment could have gotten out of it. Our Dive/Rescue team had one of these hydraulics in our jurisdiction and we used to really worry about a potential rescue or recovery there until the Army Corps of Engineers solved our problem by rebuilding the structure in question to eliminate the low-head dam. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
riverman wrote:
"Wilko" wrote in message ... Bob P wrote: In desperate circumstances, you're better off taking off the PFD and diving down to follow the bottom current out of the backwash. Few people who get in (low-head-dam) trouble have the knowledge or composure to make that radical move, however. I've given that some thought. Over the years, this option seems to have surfaced on RBP a couple of times. My main concern would be what happens after you get out of the hydrolic, and what would happen if taking off your PFD wouldn't get you out. I'm fairly ambiguous about whether or not that would be a smart thing to do. It's the main reason why I have a PFD with a front zipper though... so that I can quickly take it off if needed. This boondoggle arises all the time. As far as my experience goes, the old "take off your PFD and flush out the bottom of the hole" strategy is an urban legend. Everyone knows the rule, but afaik, no one knows anyone who has actually had to do it. Its in the same legendary category as putting maggots in an open wound to stymie gangrene from forming, ... Actually, maggots are now occasionally used in hospitals to eat dead flesh. I think if you were actually trapped in a hole with sharp enough edges to keep you in, you would be underwater and tossed around so much that you would have no idea which way 'down' was, let alone how to crawl along the bottom. Also, once you shed your pfd, the force of the water would almost certainly prevent you from using the rocks along the bottom anyway, as you'd be plastered down there at best, or slammed among them at worst... --riverman As I said, it's a desperation measure. If you can keep your head above water long enough for someone to rescue you, you're better off not taking the chance. However... If you look at the typical water flow of a low-head, the water first goes down and along the bed, away from the lip of the dam before it doubles back. It's the only path where the water takes you to safety rather than holding you against the top flow. I've never use it, and I certainly don't intend to experiment, but the logic is reasonable. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wilko wrote:
Bob P wrote: In desperate circumstances, you're better off taking off the PFD and diving down to follow the bottom current out of the backwash. Few people who get in (low-head-dam) trouble have the knowledge or composure to make that radical move, however. I've given that some thought. Over the years, this option seems to have surfaced on RBP a couple of times. My main concern would be what happens after you get out of the hydrolic, and what would happen if taking off your PFD wouldn't get you out. I'm fairly ambiguous about whether or not that would be a smart thing to do. It's the main reason why I have a PFD with a front zipper though... so that I can quickly take it off if needed. I suspect it's an urban legend. Perhaps all the swimmers found dead without a PFD attempted to do it. Or their PFDs weren't tight enough. Here's a story of somebody who did it and survived: http://www.ptone.com/Kayak/RF/ |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats.paddle
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Per Wilko:
It's the main reason why I have a PFD with a front zipper though... so that I can quickly take it off if needed. This thread is making me re-think my practice of tying that waist band on my PFD... -- PeteCresswell |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Carolina Blackwater Trip Report (lengthy) | General | |||
Near drowning incident on the Potomac River (USA) - victim revived | General | |||
WTB: Autohelm 4000 control head in Washington state | Marketplace |