Printable View
Why does the Godzilla Circuit have mid way arrows at 700' when the line is only 800' long.
You would have to have prior knowledge of the system (trust-me dive, mentoring) or have marked the jumped on the way in and identified your personal marker as you reached the end of the Godzilla circuit to know that this was a verified exit.
Thoughts....
'cause it's fun to mess with student's heads like that... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by tflaris
Seriously though, I don't know either, if it was a continuous line it would make sense but otherwise....
Safe diving,
Rich
I do not recall there being any back-to-back arrows on that line. I do recall double arrows for jumps....
I dove it this past weekend. I'm fairly certain I saw back-to-back arrows in the center of the Godzilla Room. It's in the center of the room, down on the floor. From that point it would be roughly the same distance in either direction to get back to the point where the "loop is closed" at the bottom of the Monkey room. After that you're back on your original path to the entrance/exit. So, apparently, no matter which way you go it's the same distance to the exit.
Brian
Yes...I do recall those arrows now that Brian has brought it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic
At first thought I can think of no good reason for those to be there. Generally we use arrow configurations of this nature to indicate equidistant exits.
My initial reaction is to pull them out.
Any discussion?
I've been told that is a jump at the bottom of the Godzilla room. The passage is on the map.
These arrows do not mark a jump..the configuration they are in denotes equidistant exits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenwood_60
Yeah, I don't remember them being back to back... but I'm probably wrong. I'm looking for my video of that room... see if I got it. (edit: video indeed shows them back to back.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
Where is that other passage then?
The arrows in the GR are back to back. Yes, there is a jump off the GR as well as four or five others on the Godzilla line, not including the Banana Room which is marked. Having followed a few of them, they are pretty much SM only and I would imagine that is why they are unmarked, or maybe it is because of their, ahem silty nature.... :D
Safe diving,
Rich
I don't know the arrows, but based on Benthic's description the exit line is the same distance either way. So I'm curious why you'd get rid of them? And if they were removed, would you just leave this midpoint section of the loop unmarked?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
It didn't use to be marked that way 12-15 years ago if my memory serves me correctly.
Generally the back-to-backs mark exits to an actual exit point, to atmospheric air. If we removed the back-to-backs I think we would point the exit toward the way folks generally come into the Godzilla Room.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjack
The reason to get rid of them is they do not currently fit the paradigm we usually expect back-to-backs to represent....
No decisions have been made about this...I just want to have the discussion.
I'm with rjack, I think they should stay. From the Godzilla room the distance back to the entrance, no matter which direction you choose to follow the line, is roughly the same. If you go one way there's a jump, and if you go the other way there's not. But the distance is about the same. Yes, if you choose one way there's a jump to be made, but there's also a jump to be made back to the mainline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
Brian
There are definitely other instances in N Fl where there are back to back arrows not indicating the midpoint between and pointing the way to two different exits... Insulation Room Circuit in Ginnie comes to mind, although this one is a closed loop, rather than the open loop like Godzilla.
I can see arguments in both directions. But as a diver, I like consistency and therefore prefer that arrows not get changed around (and back and forth) unless there is a real compelling reason to change it (like the Pothole fill in).
Someone or some group agrees there should be back-to-backs there, and I think they have been there for a LONG time. So far three folks think they should stay.
My thought is that if the crap hit the fan in the Godzilla Room and someone found the back-to-backs and continued onward they would shortly come to EOL. If they followed an arrow pointing out it would be a continuous guideline back to gold line.
I agree with your thinking. It seems safer to remove the arrowsQuote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
I had a student in there not too long ago, who placed the jump, made it past the back to back arrows which we both circled. He hit his thirds and exited the way we came in, again passing the back to back arrows which we circled. When questioned on it, his reasoning was that HE had not confirmed the circuit and wasn't going to rely on some back to back arrows as confirmation of an exit, even though we had discussed the line configuration before the dive. Needless to say, I was very proud of that young man and he did save himself from getting hit with some nasty drills....
Safe diving,
Rich
P.S. My thoughts are with Brian, Mer and Richard, leave it the way it is...
I vote for leaving it the way it is as well. I first dove this circuit in 1995, and so far as I can remember it has always been marked that way.
I tend to think,what if that section of the cave got blown out,and you had a fairly new cave diver,perhaps the worst case scenario,but maybe not too unrealisitic considering low silty areas and entry level circuit. Would encountering line arrows that would guide you to a dead end, that didn't tie back into the mainline cause confusion or panic? Could this contribute to an incident or accident? Line arrows that conflicted caused a double fatality in this system once before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic
If the jump back onto the mainline had an arrow pointing back into godzilla room (since there is a continuous line that way) then I could see this being a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
If the EOL arrow, and all the others on the jump side of the middle arrows "out" towards the jump onto the mainline then for my MX and BC brain its all consistent. I guess I'm accustomed to finding arrows (mid point and others) pointing at unverified exits which may involve jumps, or sidemount, or not be actual exits at all just breathable atmospheric air.
If its making sense to a naive visitor like Rich's student (and by extension myself) then I think its probably good as is.
Lots of experienced folks think it should be left alone.
Please make sure you have read my last post about finding EOL versus Gold line
Back to back arrows denote equidistance routes of exit. Arrows do not have to point to a continous line to the surface. Wishbone circuit at Peacock has back to back arrows as I recall from many years ago, Ginnie has atleast two back to back arrows (probably many more) that come to mind that are not continuous lines and many other caves have places where the nearest point of exit changes but if you continue straight you might be making a visual jump unless you had placed a spool in the correct spot previously. You have to know the system or not trust the arrows otherwise.
I think in this case the issue may be that the loop is just such a short loop. In all other examples that come to mind, the line continues for a much longer distance in each direction from the back to back arrows. Perhaps someone was just being cute when they were originally placed. But, since it is technically correct I say leave it. Last time I was in there it had been a few years since I had swam that line and I had forgotten it was a circuit (probably because it is such a small one) until I saw the arrows. I guess they helped me.
Greg
Let's also not forget the following:
A. there is an arrow at the "dead end" of the Godzilla line pointing back to the close of the loop (exit).
B. *IF* the circuit has been set up properly, there will be a line run from the "dead end" to the close of the loop.
C. *IF* the diver(s) in question are inexperienced in that area they should be doubling back from the "dead end" anyway, as they don't actually know that they are closing the loop.
Food for thought.
I agreed. Since there is a jump if you continue on the arrows should come out. Back to back arrows should indicate a continuous line either way. This one does not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Wyatt
If the back to backs stay then this arrow is erroneous IMHO. It should point "out" which is the jump line to the mainline.Quote:
Originally Posted by harmstrong
If the EOL arrow remains pointing back along the continuous line exit, then the inward pointing arrow of the back to backs should be removed. Since right now you have 2 arrows pointing at each other but no exit in their midst.
You misunderstood me. The current arrow configuration is exactly as you describe it should be. The EOL arrow points to the shortest distance of exit, which is "closing the loop" on this circuit- imagine that the circuit looks more like a 6 than a 0. Make better sense?Quote:
Originally Posted by rjack
Good point. The Insulation tunnel is a complete loop that is independent to any other line,so back to back line arrows would make sense,versus the Godzilla line. I know an argument that people used to have was where should the line arrow face at the end of the Peanut line. Since this is frequently set up as a circuit,many used to argue the closest exit is toward Olsen,so the line arrow at the EOL should point away from the peanut restriction denoting the gold line 20ft away is the closest exit,and others would argue that it is a continuous line back to the P1 cavern so it should point that direction,which is currently does. I am sure the arguments and rationalizations could be endless,and I think most of us would agree that navigation should be clear to everyone,and inconsistencies have resulted in accidents,which is inexcusable if we haven't learned from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by mer
Sounds to me like another issue similar to " Snap and Gap" at hill 400. Someone thought it was a good idea at the time. Don't know.
Snap and gap was a good idea in theory,but had many failures. Someone would deploy the snap and gap,and then another team would put it back,thus the first team no longer had a continuous line.Also,line the line gap made in the expressway tunnel for lost line search training,the line was held together with two bolt snaps,and would be undone during training. Unfortunately,if you bumped this line,sometimes the bolt snaps would become uncoupled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocky
What about making the jump in to a T? Solves the arrow issue.
There is no continuous line, no matter which way you go. There's still the jump from the main line to the Godzilla circuit in the first place. This lack of continuous line to an exit (from back to back arrows) is true in plenty of other well travelled locations. Peacock comes to mind. The back-to-back arrows indicate *distance* to the exit not continuous line, or lack thereof, to the exit. If we're going to decide as a community that back-to-back arrows should indicate both distance AND continuous line to an exit then suddenly we're going to have a LOT of line changes that need to be made in systems all over the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by reiterman
Brian
I would change it for this reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
I have to agree. We have many places currently set up where the back to back arrows do not point on a continuous line. Unless we change them all I think it will only cause that much more confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic
I was thinking the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenwood_60
Ok thanksQuote:
Originally Posted by harmstrong
I am fine with an arrow pointing to an EOL where a jump is required in order to continue to exit. These are litterally everywhere in MX. I understand that people want to expedite emergency situations based on the "normal" route. As noble as that might be, I don't think it actually works in many cases.
This thread got me thinking about inconsistencies here and accidents in Mexico in the past. Many times we have had a tendency to look at cave diving accidents in Mexico,shrug our shoulders,and blame it on the line arrow wars of the later 90s,but without really doing a true accident analysis here,and benefitting from it. Probably the one accident that occurred in Mexico that eliminated the "snap and gap" was when a couple teams entered,and common protocol at one jump was to pull the mainline over to the rock that had the jump line. This caused the last team to blow this T,and actually go deeper into the cave (paraphrasing the best I can from memory,so forgive me if the details are specific). I recall one accident that a team was following the line arrows only to reach end of the line,and no further line in front of them. In actuality the cavern was a few hundred feet away,they couldn't see light,and even if they knew for sure there is good chance they didn't have enough length in safety reels to make it. They both perished while trying to reverse their course. There was a documented incident where someone came to an end of the line arrow pointing out,but it 20+ft in front was the line you needed to pick up to exit. Unfortunately a passing team previously blew out this section of tunnel,and they couldn't see any line in front of them,but fortunately this had a happy ending because they had enough gas for an exit. It has been said perhaps we need to eliminate all jumps in favor of T's,and perhaps this would eliminate some inconsistencies that apparently we have in Florida caves. Either way,a line arrow at an end of the line pointing toward another line is probably not the best choice as some accident analysis from Mexico may suggest. Safe diving.
Unless your doing visual jumps when you get to the back to back arrows you do have a line to surface if you go back the way you came. If you contenue on you do not because you have a jump unless you gaped it on the way in. So should be changed or be made a T according to my training.
I think ANY jump that divers routinely do visually should be changed to a "T". That way nobody is tempted to do visual jumps. Sooner or later visual jumps are going to get you into trouble.
Here's an even dumber question:
why is it called Godzilla circuit?
There is a little rubber Godzilla in the "Godzilla Room."
there are several.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slüdge
And they seem to be multiplying. When I first did that dive there was one. The last few times there have been three.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slüdge
I seem to remember hearing or reading that Sheck Exley did the initial exploration of that area, and named the Godzilla Room. I am guessing that the rubber Godzillas came later. When you get to the Godzilla Room it does seem big enough to hold Godzilla!
Because someone put a rubber Godzilla doll on the line....:diverQuote:
Originally Posted by phillip1
The first time I dove it in the 80's, there was no plastic toy. I was told one of the rock formations looked like Godzilla, but I could never pick that feature out. Regardless, the name stuck and the toy came later...
+ 1Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
The way I train my students is when they come across markers that contradict their course of travel to mark it as such. In this particular case a non-directional should be placed on the team's exit side so if something happens that causes confusion or panic there is a marker on the line telling the team of divers which side they entered from, and thus, which side has the continuous guideline to the surface. If you're passing these markers without marking your exit side then you are only increasing the chance for confusion should something happen farther into the passage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
i disagree, in a shtf dive they should be shown the shortest distance without a jump. Showing both to a freaked out diver in zero viz will just confuse them when they get to the jump. In this case you can keep them on a continuous line so...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic
The problem with this is the Calimba dive (which started off with the snap n gap issue) ended up so far away on the Paso de Lagerto line that another entrance was vastly closer (Grande Cenote). These divers swam over a thousand feet on a line during their exit which they had not traversed during their entry and never planned to be on at all. If you reversed all the arrows based in this incident, then divers entering from Grand Cenote and jumping to the Paso de Lagerto line would find all the arrows pointing away from their exit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
The same thing would happen here if you reversed all the arrows here. Divers entering the gozilla circuit one way would find all the arrows pointing towards their exit. Divers entering the other way would find all the arrows pointing away from theirs.
I'm happy with them the way they are or as a T. In either case, I don't think shuffling arrow directions around is a substitute for people having the awareness and personal line markers available to only ensure they only exit on personally verified lines.
We did the same in El Toro in Caroli's room, we hung a Barbie doll on a tie off to symbolize Thomas' love at the time Caroli because her image appeared in his mind when he thought he was going to die in El Toro in that room. It is now called Caroli's Room, Goodzilla room sounds way cooler though.
That would enable people to take short-cuts and think less about what they're doing. I don't agree with this. I've only been in this system once, and this dive was one of the two we did that day, and we completed the gap before we started the loop around. What I take from your statement (yes, an assumption) is that as divers are getting more experienced in the same dive/system that they are becoming more complacent. Wouldn't the diver who has done this particular dive multiple time just start getting his spool ready as he approaches the jump to save time?Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
The first time I dove it in about 1973 there was no plastic toy either....This was my poor attempt a making a joke.Quote:
Originally Posted by gasdiver
if you change something to a "t" wouldn't you have the same issue as with double back to back arrows and an unverified exit? wouldn't it be up to the diver to drop a personal marker on the exit side of the "t", just as a diver should drop a marker denoting the way out when arrows conflict with the teams verified exit?
Great discussion. I remember the first time I did that dive. It was just I and one other diver and neither of us had been there before. He was leading and did not put a jump line in when we entered, I guess feeling comfortable making the visual jump on the way out. On exit, having never been there before I didn't realize we were exiting out the loop side of the room and not just exploring deeper into the room. When we got to the EOL, I couldn't see the gold line around him and there was a moment of cold, hard dread until my mind made the connection to where we were and what was next. Man...I hate moments like that.
I imagine most of us do the occasional visual jump at spots we know well -for instance, the peanut restriction. That little episode reminded me of just how fast you can get confused when the unexpected happens. I can see where in the event of a major silt out, someone who had never been there (or in any other unfamilair spot obviously) before could get into trouble with confusing arrow configurations. Does it need to be changed? I don't know, but I was pleased to be reminded of the need for awareness and self reliance when cave diving. Rob, thanks for the reminder about placing nondirectional markers in spots like this. Clothespins are cheap!
I like T's, until I get to where there are ten in the next 100 ft, even marked T's you should drop a clothespin, or that was my training anyway, and if you make all jumps T's, you'd be diving with a mess of clothespinsQuote:
Originally Posted by the dude
Better than a mess of spools/reels.Quote:
Originally Posted by a64pilot
Now Forrest, I doubt you'll ever have ten teams of divers on jumps at one time?
Why aren't more gaps/jumps set up so the gap between lines is only 1 - 2 ft so you can gap it with a spool/reel if you do as we are all taught, or if you are a visual gap kind of risk taker, you can reach out from the end of one line and "find" the other line if you return in poor viz.? We know people make visual jumps. By making more gaps less than 2 ft it would seem to be the best of both worlds. People who never do visual jumps could place gap spool/reel more quickly using smaller spools/reels. People who occasionally or usually do visual jumps would be at less risk as they could reach the other line just by reaching ( yes I realize that any visual jump is risky) and it would avoid the potential confusion that T's seem to create for some.
One fatality I can think of was caused by a jump being so close...the diver who was in psychological extremis accidentally jumped onto the line that was two feet away & perished because of the accidental jump.Quote:
Originally Posted by oms121
This scenario is dangerous to me. I have seen several in Mexico that are very close like this and every time comment to my buddy how dangerous this could be. In many places, it would be too easy to look at something in another direction and simply miss the jump. I was told by a guide/instructor of one particular one in Mexico..2 fatalities later....Quote:
Originally Posted by oms121
Also, my feeling is, unfortunately, that the lines being so close will encourage more and more unnecessary risk in the form of visual jumps. At this time, I am against this idea.
I would prefer to see the arrows stay as they are. To me, back-to-back arrows mean that there is another exit somewhere ahead. It does not (repeat NOT) mean that I can break thirds to find that alternate exit. The alternate exit might be sidemount or horrendously silty or be in need of a gap line. I can reach the EOL beyond Godzilla on thirds. If I don't find my own reel there, I turn the dive.
I hate T's. They are confusing. Worse, some T's are blind with one line hidden behind a rock. T's don't save time because it takes just as long to put my cookie on the out side of the T as it does for me to run a finger spool across a gap.
Agree 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by whodunit68
Some reasonable distance like 10ft works well since I have yet to even use any of my Neptuno minispools :(
The reason I posted this because I was guiding last week and was puzzled that a mid-point arrows (700') would include a visual jump to a known exit. I could understand if there was a T installed.
As the arrows are placed now the diver in a case of an emergency following the shortest path to the exit opposite the way they swam in would have to assume or have prior knowledge of the system to know that the jump line is actually the same line the diver entered the tunnel by.
The line ends 100' after a set of mid-point double arrows signifying 700' in each direction to a known exit.
The reasoning for the mid-way arrows didn't make any sense unless you were are already aware of the circuit.
The back-to-back arrows indicate *roughly equal distance* to the exit in either direction. They do not, nor to my knowledge have they ever, indicated a continuous guideline to the exit. In fact, in the location in question there is not a continuous guideline to the exit in *either* direction. If you go one way there is one jump to deal with and if you go the other way, there are two. The continuous guideline, or lack thereof, is irrelevant when considering the placement of the mid-point arrows. From the Godzilla room there are two paths one may take and the distance to the exit is roughly equal along either of those paths. Ergo, the mid-point arrow is in the correct location.
Brian
Pothole was a good illustration of that concept as the two sets of back to back double arrows on the Olson line each had one arrow pointed toward Pothole, where the line was not continuous - there was a good solid 12' to 18" gap from the main Olson line to the Pothole line. As I recall no one ever questioned that, so it appears to be a matter of:
1) perception,
2) degree, or
3) perhaps just knowledge of the system.
-----
As for tees, in pretty much any N Fl touristy cave, I'd prefer to see:
1) the major high traffic jumps off gold line teed,
2) as well as tees on small white lines that are off the beaten path, but
3) fairly long and unmarked jumps between the gold line (as well as higher traffic white lines) and those off the beaten track white lines, to help keep the traffic down and encourage people going there the first time to go there with someone who has been there before.
What makes it worse in MX is the presence of haloclines in some of those short gapped areas. It's one thing to have a snap gap in clear visibility where you can see what you've got, and it's another to have a snap gap in zero viz where you are forced to feel what you have, but in a halocline it's potentially the worst of both because you can be fooled into thinking you're seeing continuous line when it isn't. Add in something cute like a snap gap, a very short jump, or a tee placed on the extended track of your exit line where the continuous line instead takes a hard right or left turn that you don't immediately see, and you've got the near perfect set up for a major navigational error if the diver is not paying very close attention or is lacking in SA.Quote:
Originally Posted by whodunit68
Consequently, I like tees and short jumps a lot, but I think they require a great deal thought and consideration of the big picture when placing them, and that obviously does not always happen.
It's a bit of an aside but it occurred to me at dinner this evening that a dive last year from Calimba to the the loop at Box Chen is where I stopped viewing back to back double arrows as having any definitive meaning. For example when you reach the back to back double arrows on that line, you are at a stalagtite/tie off that is about 20-30' from the (bat infested) Box Chen cenote and breathable air - but a long way from Calimba or Grande Cenote.
We took the right hand side of the loop to the double arrows then continued around and noted the jump to another line. Looking at it and moving it around in my head I was 95% sure we would have been jumping back to the line we came in on, but 95% wasn't good enough, and since we had staged the dive and were not yet at thirds, we went back around, surfaced at Box Chen and let Marci mock my bat phobia, then took the long way around and confirmed the jump from the other side for future reference before exiting. Call me Mr. Safety, but I have no plans to die in a cave of anything other than natural causes (or maybe rabies from a bat bite).
That lesson had unknowingly, until this evening, stuck with me and since that dive last year I've been subconsciously even more skeptical than before of any markers I did not personally place, especially in new to me cave. And in this case, back to back double arrows may mean the mid point on continuous line between exits - or not - or it just may mean it's effectively the mid point on an independent loop that may have neither end anchored to continuous line.
It might be a good idea to just make that point clear and stop attributing a specific meaning to back to back arrows that is not always (seldom?) warranted.
Using the logic that an arrow MUST point to an exit that is accessible to open air without needing to place a temporary line would mean that every arrow in Devil's and Little River should be pulled. If a diver hasn't personally verified an arrow's accuracy in relation to his/her dive, that arrow shouldn't be relied on for a safe exit.
Personally verifying arrows is of course the best answer, but I thought the reason for arrows in the first place was for when you weren't sure, or maybe if the **** hits the fan. Other than those reasons, I don't see the need in arrows, I mean if I am always 100% sure of where I'm at, I don't have any use / need for arrows. It may sound silly, but I go by the "if I didn't put it there, then it's suspect" way of thinking.
There have been several times I was glad the arrows were there. It is pretty easy, especially on a scooter, to loose track of the line, and once you find it again, it is nice to have arrows to confirm you are going in the correct direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by a64pilot
Agreed, that's why I was trying to point out that while all should be personally verified, they are there for when for whatever reason you haven't verified them or may be temporarily dis-orientated, I won't say lost, I've never been lost, I've always known where I wasn't :)Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
^^^^ That's What She Said!Quote:
Originally Posted by sskasser
Listen to the wise woman peoples :)
I need to re-phase my question:Quote:
Originally Posted by a64pilot
Why aren't the mid way arrows 400' versus being at 700'?
Because if you put them there then the distance to the exit wouldn't be the same in both directions. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by tflaris
Brian