Author Archives: timblmk

The Ancients Used Hands-Free Equalization, And So Should You

by Tim Blömeke

Some months ago in the classroom of Tech Asia (Philippines), I came upon a little booklet of unambiguously antiquarian character: “Diving with the Aqua-Lung”, 11th edition, published by U.S. Divers in 1959.

The old-timey design caught my eye, and I succumbed to what my beloved sister has dubbed the “alphabet sickness:” a mental condition which causes those who suffer from it to, upon exposure to the written word, immediately drop whatever they were doing at the time and start reading compulsively.

The half-letter size booklet offers a fascinating glimpse into the early days of civilian scuba diving. It is a collage of Open Water Diver textbook, regulator maintenance manual, and guidance on setting up a filling station. It also has decompression tables, instructions on hookah diving, and even tips on how to start a dive club – all on a mere 40 pages of crisp, well-written prose. As an instructor and student of diving, I wish more training materials were like that… but I digress.

Stylistic merits aside, “Diving with the Aqua-Lung” has some nuggets of information to offer, one of which I’d like to spend a little more time on. In the third paragraph of the introduction, the authors drop this here (from a modern-day perspective) bomb:

Lets have that again: “The ear-drums […] will remain in a neutral state” simply because we breathe air at ambient pressure? That is, no active equalization? Yessir, you heard correctly. It is a description of what we refer to today as hands-free equalization, a technique that is considered quite advanced by modern standards, so advanced in fact that many scuba divers will never hear about it. Yet people took it for granted in the 1950s, ostensibly. Or did they? I’ll get back to that question in a bit.

How does it work?

Most divers learn about equalization only once, during their Open Water Diver training. “Gently exhale against your pinched nostrils. Very gently. Do you feel your ears pop? Yes? You sure? Cool, you’re good to go.”

That’s what my OWD instruction was like, and I’m sure many will find it familiar. It works… kind of. Unless the instructor is quite careful, divers instructed in this way somewhat randomly end up performing one of two equalization techniques. The luckier ones instinctively close their glottis and use a swallowing action to pump air into the Eustachian tubes – the Frenzel maneuver. This is adequate, and the majority of divers, even instructors, never progress beyond this level.

The less lucky ones keep their glottis open and pump from the diaphragm – the Valsava maneuver. The diaphragm is a much stronger muscle and more difficult to control. As a result, Valsalva divers more frequently report ear pain after diving, and the risk of barotrauma is greater. Such divers generally remain unaware of the cause – equalization probably won’t come up in future training, and you need to know what you’re looking for to tell the difference as an outside observer.

With either of the above techniques, the textbook instruction is to equalize frequently during descent, at least every couple of meters. For a dive to 60 meters, that’s a lot of equalizing.

Leveling up

What if, instead of frequent, your equalization could be continuous? What if you could go all the way down to the bottom without touching your mask, and without feeling your ears? Welcome to hands-free equalization – the technique so casually alluded to in the introduction to our little booklet from – *checks calendar* – sixty-six years ago.

The benefits of this technique are twofold: On one hand, you will experience virtually no pressure changes on your ears during descent. Even if you think that’s no big deal and Frenzel is fine, once you experience hands-free, it’s like your neighbor’s kids finally turn off that gaming console they’ve been running all day long, to the point where you thought you’d stopped noticing the noise. You will notice when it stops and “your ear-drums […] remain in a neutral state.” It’s nice.

On the other hand, and this applies more to technical and CCR divers, you’ll have both of your hands free to signal during descent checks, operate your BCD, drysuit inflation valve, primary light, DPV, diluent MAV, or whatever other part of your kit might need your attention. Or you could just relax.

Hands-free is a superior equalization technique, once you’ve mastered it, and herein lies the crux. All the involved musculature is internal. Instructors can’t demonstrate the technique to students, only describe it,* which makes this method much trickier to teach than the nose-pinching styles. I strongly suspect that’s why hands-free equalization isn’t mentioned in modern scuba training materials. Freediving… different story. Those guys take equalization quite seriously.

So what about folks in the 1950s?

The booklet talks a little more about equalization in a section titled “Hints on Diving or Underwater Swimming”, subsection “Pains in the ears” (page 14). The authors explain how sinuses generally equalize by themselves, whereas the ears may take a little longer due to the small diameter of the Eustachian tubes.

They go on to describe two equalization techniques: (a) swallowing and (b) pressing the mask against the face and exhaling into it through the nose.** However, these techniques aren’t presented as essential, but merely as ancillary to a process that is taking place anyway. Nowhere in this booklet does it say, “as you descend, here’s how you equalize,” like modern training materials do.


In this sense, I believe it’s fair to conclude that hands-free equalization was considered the norm.

Trying to come up with an explanation for why that is and how, I believe things become easier to understand if you consider what kind of person would have gotten into scuba diving in the 1950s. At the time, new scuba divers very likely would’ve been practiced skin divers (to use the period term) already. After all, why would you go and buy a scuba unit if you didn’t like diving? And if you like diving, then you obviously know how to equalize. Case closed. To this day, Open Water Diver courses include a legacy skin diving section to reflect this history.

Equalization is significantly harder on breathhold dives, especially when going deep. A competent skin diver experiencing the Aqua-Lung for the first time would’ve been surprised by the relative ease: All you need to do is to allow the pressure in your lungs to propagate to the eardrums. Piece of cake.***

Taking a page from the Book of the Ancients

Today, beginner scuba courses need to accommodate the needs of people who don’t know how to equalize yet. And with modern masks that allow for nose pinching, the Frenzel maneuver is good enough, a lot easier to teach, and gets people under water quicker – crucial when a course is scheduled to take three days because people have flights to catch on day four.

However, this doesn’t mean you have to remain at that level. Much like trim, buoyancy control, finning, and other personal dive skills, equalization can be improved beyond the minimum requirements for passing an open-water course. Let the Ancients be your guide and learn the hands-free technique. Your ears will thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, you could do me a favor by going back to where you found it (social media) and giving that post a like, comment, and/or share. Cheers and safe diving, always!

Footnotes:

* The key to teaching hands-free equalization is finding a verbal instruction that makes the student do the right thing with the muscles in their throat. I find that “pretend you’re suppressing a yawn” tends to work for a lot of people. Even so, it usually takes some time and experimentation. But believe me, it’s worth your while.

** 1950s dive masks had very thick, stiff skirts and no nose pockets. Pinching the nose from the outside was just not possible; pushing the mask against the face and increasing the pressure inside by exhaling through the nose was the next best thing. Search for “Charlie Sturgill mask” to learn about the gold standard of diving masks at the time.

*** My own first exposure to scuba diving was a bit like that. Our training as junior lifeguards in late 1980s West Germany involved lots of skin diving (albeit only Frenzel equalization, no hands-free). Every now and then, one of the instructors would bring a couple of scuba tanks to the pool to spice things up.

“Do you need a rebreather?”

Of course I do. Shut up already and take my money!

Jokes aside, going closed is a big decision, with ramifications that are not obvious at the time the decision is made. As a result, quite a few folks who take the training and maybe even buy a unit end up reverting to open circuit, thousands of [insert currency unit] in the hole.

To avoid such frustration, it is worth doing some research into the actual prerequisites, beyond mere agency standards, for making the transition to closed circuit a rewarding endeavor.

For this article in Alert Diver, I interviewed six renowned and prolific instructors to learn what it takes to become – and remain – a CCR diver.

Diver Propulsion Vehicles: Tools, Toys Troubles

Those who have dived with me know how highly I value scooters (DPVs) as tools to enhance both the fun the safety of technical diving. The Suex XJ-S I purchased a couple years ago continues to be one of my favorite pieces of kit.

Yet as with any powerful tool, improper use can get you in trouble in new and possibly unanticipated ways. Here’s my take on the matter for Alert DIver.

The Art of Being Found At Sea

Coming back safely from an ocean dive is more than a question of personal dive skills and a prudent approach to decompression. After surfacing, there is one more step: getting picked up by a boat. It sucks when that doesn’t happen.

From basics like DSMBs and good coordination with the crew all the way to personal locator beacons and other electronic communication devices, here is my review of ways and means to make sure you will be back home in time for dinner.

Review: The Halcyon Vector Pro fins are excellent.

by Tim Blömeke

Photo: Halcyon Dive Systems

I had to read this out loud: “A revolutionary advancement in underwater propulsion meticulously engineered for exceptional performance and versatility.” Well, well, well. What might this marketing blurb be about? A fully autonomous, fusion-powered nuclear submarine captained by a sentient AI maybe?

No? Hold on, we’re talking about scuba fins! Really? By Halcyon? Tell me more!.

I will do exactly that, in a minute. But first, a DISCLAIMER: This is not a paid review. I have no business affiliation with Halcyon Dive Systems. All opinions expressed are my own, to the extent I am able to accurately express them.

Context

All right, so Halcyon Dive systems has released a new fin – its first. To me, this is interesting for a number of reasons.

As a brand affiliated with Global Underwater Explorers (GUE), Halcyon is laser focused on the technical diving market – a demanding community of divers who, in their majority, have used heavy rubber Scubapro Jet Fins (or their various clones and derivatives) for decades.

For these divers, Jet-type fins deliver everything they need – a stiff, wide blade for frog kicks and precision maneuvering, and negative buoyancy to help with trim in a drysuit.

Arguably, Jet Fins are so prevalent in tech and cave diving that finning technique as taught in courses has been built around them. Jets are simple, relatively cheap, virtually indestructible, and they do the job.

Jet Fins have their disadvantages though: The foot pocket design clearly predates the discovery of ergonomics, and if your feet are too small to wear sizes XL and above – true for most female divers – you’re stuck with a disproportionately small blade that makes pushing multiple cylinders through the water a lot of work.

For use in a wetsuit, many divers find them too negative to easily maintain good trim, thus necessitating a second, lighter pair of fins for warm-water dives. In the technical diving world however, Jet Fins are ubiquitous, and have been for a long time.

Given Halcyon’s focus on this very market, it stands to reason that any fin released by Halcyon has to at least match the performance of Jet Fins in a drysuit. This is the context in which I am reviewing the Vector Pro fins.

First impression

Halcyon took to the challenge with an unusual design: a retro-futuristic looking, thin blade made of stiff monoprene, wide at the root and tapering toward the tip. The foot pocket comes in three sizes, with a steel spring strap that is adjustable in 8 steps. With these sizing options, virtually any diver should be able to find a pair that fits. 

So far, so interesting. The truly novel feature of the Vector Pro fins however is that their buoyancy can be adjusted using removable metal weight plugs, to make the fins more suitable for diving in a wetsuit. According to Halcyon at least, this should make the Vector Pros the one-stop shop for all your propulsion needs, regardless of the diver’s physical size and equipment configuration.

All this however comes with a price tag of about $400 in the US – easily twice the going market rate for a pair of good quality kickers, and not exactly what you’d call an impulse purchase. 

Testing


A few days ago, courtesy of GUE instructor Jimmy Choo from Singapore, I had a chance to take the Vector Pros for a spin on a 75-minute decompression dive. I was in a drysuit with a light undergarment using double Al80s and a single deco stage. I used the exact same weighting as I do with my Jets.

And boy, was I surprised. The Vector Pros are really, really good.

First off, the foot pocket feels great. These fins attach to the whole of your foot, not just the front half, as Jet Fins tend to do.

Even with the ballast in, the Vectors weigh less than my Jets. Combined with the weight distribution being biased toward the diver’s feet – the weight slots are near the foot pocket – this makes the Vectors feel almost like you’re not wearing fins at all. I even found it a bit confusing during the first few minutes of the dive.

My initial confusion quickly gave way to joy when I realized that despite their light weight and agility, the buoyancy of the Vectors is about the same as that of my significantly heavier (but also more voluminous) Jet Fins. Power-wise, they need not shy comparison either. These fins deliver an impressive amount of propulsion with all types of kicks.

In a nutshell:, the Vectors do everything Jet Fins do, but with less effort. In terms of the benchmark I set in the introduction, they pass the test with flying colors.

Unfortunately, I haven’t had a chance to try these fins in a wetsuit. However, I think it’s safe to assume that removing one or both of the weight plugs will have the desired effect on the fins’ buoyancy characteristics.

Conclusion

Scuba fins are relatively simple objects, and as such difficult to improve. As a working diver, I keep seeing the same handful of makes and models being used by divers from all over the world, with little change over the years.

When innovations are made, they tend to be a little gimmicky. Split fins and spring-loaded models, such as Scubapro’s Seawing range, cater to recreational divers who mostly flutter or scissor kick. More radical designs like Force Fins require divers to completely change their technique, which makes them a niche product at best.

Not so the Vector Pros. To my mind at least, Halcyon has accomplished something remarkable with these fins: They took a product that was simple and good to begin with and made it better without sacrificing any of the simplicity.

Whether or not the difference in performance is worth the hefty price tag remains of course up to the individual. I certainly wouldn’t mind having a pair of Vector Pros in my crate – better is the enemy of good, after all.

With this, I would ask you to excuse me – I have to go and find 400 dollars in the crack of someone else’s sofa.

What my students say about me

I’ve had a Testimonials page up for a while now, and people occasionally leave comments. You can find them here: timblmk.com/testimonials

Here’s a couple more from the Google Reviews page for Tech Asia.

I feel deeply grateful for all the kind words. Feedback like this makes me feel like I’m on the right track, and inspires me to work harder to be the best dive professional I can be.

For more testimonials and to leave your own review, please visit timblmk.com/testimonials.

Thank you and stay safe, Tim

Recreational vs. technical DPV training – which course is for me?

by Tim Blömeke

DPVs or underwater scooters are becoming increasingly popular, for good reason: They offer the opportunity to cover more ground, save gas by reducing exertion, and improve safety by enabling divers to push against currents. Plus, they’re a lot of fun.

However, the use of DPVs also comes with new ways to get yourself in trouble, so some training is absolutely necessary. For diving in open water, this training comes at two levels, recreational and technical. Below are the main features of each course.

Recreational

This course covers the basics of DPV diving, including

  • Dive planning taking battery life into account
  • Equipment pre-dive preparation and post-dive care
  • Water entry and exit
  • DPV use at the surface and underwater
  • Descents and ascents
  • Depth management in consideration of greater speed of movement
  • Gas monitoring and management while scootering

This course includes instruction on the above subjects on land, as well as two training dives on DPVs. It takes one to two days.

For recreational diving with relatively low-powered scooters, this is adequate. In these dives, a scooter is a non-critical piece of equipment, and (as in rec diving in general) major failures can be handled by simply aborting the dive, making a safety stop, and ascending to the surface. The focus is on having fun while maintaining safety.

Technical

In technical diving, a scooter becomes less of a toy and more of a tool. This course goes into quite a bit of extra detail to account for the additional equipment, planning requirements, tasks, and team procedures. We need to allow for the fact that in tech diving, immediate ascent to the surface is not available as an option for dealing with problems. In addition to the curriculum for the recreational course above, the following is included:

  • DPV rigging for one-handed use
  • User-level maintenance
  • Dive planning with gas, distance, and time constraints; coordination with boat crew
  • Buoyancy and trim
  • Team formation and cohesion, navigation, light signals, separation procedures
  • Managing DPV failures underwater
  • Towing a diver with a failed DPV
  • Gas sharing while scootering
  • Propeller entanglement procedures
  • “Parking” the scooter to enable other tasks like gas switches, DSMB deployment, etc.
  • Environmental considerations, low-impact use, DPV etiquette

Because of the greater scope of subjects, this course has a minimum of four hours of classroom and briefing time. Agency standards require two training dives to a maximum depth of 40 meters.

At Tech Asia however, we feel that two dives is a little on the low side to absorb the skills and build familiarity with the equipment, to the point where students are able to use scooters on technical dives safely without professional guidance. These things can be very distracting initially, and distraction is something we can’t afford. That’s why we offer this course with four dives, which are included in the price. Assuming no issues with skill development, the final two dives will be regular technical dives with DPVs at the student’s current level of training. Course duration is about three days.

So which one is for you?

If you just want to try your hand at something new and have fun with it, then the recreational course is fine. I’ve yet to meet a diver who doesn’t enjoy scootering. 

However, if you plan on using scooters for tech dives, or if you’re the kind of recreational diver who enjoys getting into the nuts and bolts of things, then you may want to consider the more comprehensive, technical course. Note that you don’t necessarily have to be a technical diver to enroll. All of the skills taught can be practiced in recreational equipment configuration.

Carbon Dioxide, part three: Countermeasures

The third part of my series on CO2 has been published by Alert Diver (EU)!

In the first part, I shared a personal close-call story and gave a brief overview of the carbon dioxide metabolism in the human body.

In the second part, we examined the mechanics of carbon dioxide generation and elimination, the complications introduced by depth and dive equipment, as well as the deeply unpleasant and potentially devastating effects of hypercapnia.

In the third and final part, I’m talking about ways and means at our disposal to prevent the kind of problems we spent the first two parts seeking to understand, avoid common mistakes, and become better and safer divers overall.

You can read it here: https://alertdiver.eu/en_US/articles/carbon-dioxide-the-dreaded-enemy-part-3/

Carbon Dioxide, part two: Complications

Excess carbon dioxide can be a source of danger at any level of diving, yet it is barely mentioned in course curricula. Here is part two of my three-part mini series for Alert Diver on the subject, in which I get into the nuts and bolts of how carbon dioxide affects us, and the special considerations we need to take into account when diving.

Decompressing with the US Navy

At last year’s RF4, Dr. David Doolette dropped a few remarks about how Bühlmann with gradient factors might not be the be-all and end-all of decompression models when it comes to very deep and long technical and cave dives. He encouraged divers to look into the US Navy’s Thalmann algorithm.

Here’s my piece for GUE’s InDepth magazine explaining what this is all about – an interesting variation on traditional Haldanean models that has been around since the 1980s, more or less ignored by the civilian dive community. Buckle up for some theory!