• Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:

    • Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
    • Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
    • Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
    • Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
    • All this and much more...

    You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!

Could you dive to the titanic?

Thread Status: Hello , There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.

Pliny

New Member
Mar 17, 2006
17
0
0
Re: Could you dive to the titanic? YES! with a Jim Suit

Even if, and that is a big if, you could solve all the problems with gas toxicity and equalization of air spaces, there is another problem I don't think could be solved. I have only been to 250 feet (in a chamber), but I noticed the air became viscous. That is, it seems thick. At Titanic depths it would be impossible to ventilate properly because the gas you would be breathing would be so thick. A one atmosphere diving suit is the answer. Here is a link to information on the "Jim-Suit".
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/ear0int-4
 

jimdoe2you

freediver/spearo/comedian
Sep 26, 2005
1,091
423
173
All of my experience in the "Jim-Suit" tells me that I would still be crushed under all that tremendous pressure. I still have depth limitations even when in such a fancy suit.

Jim

.
 

Attachments

  • Jim-Suit.bmp
    1.7 MB · Views: 80

TNdiver

New Member
Apr 23, 2006
69
1
0
34
I dont know alot about decompression, but isnt the main problem there from nitrogen in the air being breathed disolving into the body? It seems to me that liquid breathing would defeat that, and no deco time would be required.
 

trux

~~~~~
Dec 9, 2005
6,522
764
268
TNdiver said:
I dont know alot about decompression, but isnt the main problem there from nitrogen in the air being breathed disolving into the body? It seems to me that liquid breathing would defeat that, and no deco time would be required.
Yes, this is basically correct. In the document Decompression incidence in air- and liquid-breathing hamsters it is shown on experiments that test animals (hamsters) breathing liquids, unlike animals breathing gas mixtures, survive explosive decompression without complications. However, you should bear on mind that it is a simplified test, and that there are many other effects and factors that may play role at humans under liquid breathing in great depths.

There are different risk factors already listed by others earlier in this thread. One of the most limiting ones is the High Pressure Nervous Syndrome (HPNS). In the old times, the effects occurring at deep trimix dives (sometimes already at depths of 130m), were incorrectly attributed to Helium. However, the paper "EEG and evoked potential changes during gas- and liquid-breathing dives to 1000 msw" documents that HPNS causes problems also at liquid breathing in depths (under higher pressure).

As for bone damage at whales and other diving mammals (including dinosaurs), it is a well known fact, but usually it is blamed to osteonecrosis caused by fast decompression either due to fast surfacing (see for example the document "Cumulative sperm whale bone damage and the bends"), or like in the theory of cpt. David Williams, due to pressure changes during seaquakes.

However, the effect of extremely high pressure of some 350 bars on human bones is currently unknown (as far as I can tell). It is not quite true that liquids are non-compressible. It is only close to true. Seawater is only nearly incompressible. Its coefficient of compressibility being 0.000046 per bar under standard conditions. This value changes slightly with changes in temperature or salinity. (see this document for details) It means that at pressure of 350 bars, the compression ratio is 0.016 which means 1.6%. I am not capable to tell if it poses any risk to human bones (or other structures inside the body), but so far it certainly cannot be excluded without closer investigation and experimenting, regardless to the fact that some whales are capable of diving to comparable depths.
 

Pliny

New Member
Mar 17, 2006
17
0
0
The question is interesting because it seems like we have solved so many problems in diving that we can keep going deeper and deeper. I love to read about it and this has been a great thread. But intuituition doesn't work here. There are so many factors, even factors that we don't know about, that it is not possible to forsee the issues and obsticles to diving at that depth. There are no computers or special programs that can predict the problems that would be incurred. it is a fallacy to make the hasty generalization ("Converse Accident" it is sometimes called) that since everything in science and technology seems to advance with time, that we will one day dive at ambient pressures equal to those at the depth of the Titanic. So...don't hold your breath!
Yet a 3192 meter dive has been documented. See: http://www.4to40.com/recordbook/index.asp?counter=495&category=
 
Last edited:

Pliny

New Member
Mar 17, 2006
17
0
0
Here is another facinating issue. Lets say the physological problems are all solved and you load up 30 or 40 thousand cubic feet of air (gas) and head toward the bottom below at 12,460 feet to take some photos of the Titanic. At a rate of decent of 100 feet a minute you reach 6230 feet (half way) an hour after leaving the surface and notice two things. First, the volume of air remaining probably won't get you to the bottom much less any bottom time and enough gas to get you back up. Then you notice that the pressure at 6230 is 2775 psi and equal to pressure of your tank. You decide to return to the surface and your dive computer shows that you will have to decompress for the rest of your natural life, which at this point you are wondering how long that will be!
 

naiad

Apnea Carp
Supporter
Oct 11, 2003
2,897
449
138
40
Pliny said:
Lets say the physological problems are all solved and you load up 30 or 40 thousand cubic feet of air (gas) and head toward the bottom below at 12,460 feet to take some photos of the Titanic.
But with liquid breathing, all that could be solved. The air would be so dense at that depth anyway, that it would probably be like breathing liquid.
 

DeepQuest

New Member
May 2, 2008
1
0
0
You absolutely CAN NOT dive to Titanic. All other considerations aside, the pressure would crush you LONG before you ever reached the wreck sight, there are only 4 submersibles in the world that can reach that depth, so unless you are Superman, it is not even a consideration.
 

trux

~~~~~
Dec 9, 2005
6,522
764
268
You absolutely CAN NOT dive to Titanic. All other considerations aside, the pressure would crush you LONG before you ever reached the wreck sight, there are only 4 submersibles in the world that can reach that depth, so unless you are Superman, it is not even a consideration.
Crushed lungs are the last concern when freediving to great depth. Effect called blood-shift takes care of the pressure compensation. You may want to know that Herbert Nitsch dove to 214 m on empty lungs (he blew off most of the air from his lungs at the beginning of the dive) and did not have his lungs crushed. Well, 3500 m is a bit more, but the volume remaining at an empty-lungs dive to 214 m is already so small, that there would not be any big difference. Blood shift would likely allow going to any depth, if there were not all the other physiological problems discussed here above.

And if we are speaking about scuba (regardless if breathing gas or liquids), then crushed lungs are no issue either - in scuba, the pressure inside the lungs is identical to the ambient pressure, so there is no risk of crushing them.
 

apneaboy

Wellard
Jul 1, 2005
1,860
606
218
Scubies will never do it. Herbert will get there on his sled first I bet, go and get a big diamond out of the safe and the do some deco on the way up.
 

superdude171

Active Member
Apr 23, 2009
100
11
33
Very interesting thread this one, i don't think this would ever be possible. just jotting a few calculations down to freedive to that depth would take longer than anyone could hold their breath. and on scuba at 380 bar assuming you are breathing lightly and doing no hard work or arent really freaking out (unlikely) you would be breathing at least 9492 litres of gas a minute, an average scuba cylinder at 12 litres and 232 bar holds 2784 litres of gas, so you would be breathing over three cylinders a minute, you would be down for several hours needing hundreds if not thousands of cylinders of gas. this is before you even consider the effects of this pressure on your body.

Greg.
 

JCooke

New Member
Feb 24, 2008
171
3
0
I would just raise the dam thing to the surface and toodle around in my puddle gear.....lol.
 
DeeperBlue.com - The Worlds Largest Community Dedicated To Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing

ABOUT US

ISSN 1469-865X | Copyright © 1996 - 2021 deeperblue.net limited.

DeeperBlue.com is the World's Largest Community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving, Spearfishing and Diving Travel.

We've been dedicated to bringing you the freshest news, features and discussions from around the underwater world since 1996.

ADVERT