Diver Dies in Lake Huron on the Dunderberg

[CDNScubaMoose]

First, please understand I do not want to get into an argument here - I truly want to understand why "y'all" think the buddy did the wrong thing.

1. Diver is unconscious underwater . . . Pretty P-poor outlook already.
2. I (assuming the place of the dive buddy) have incurred a [serious?] deco obligation.
3. I know the two divers are already "up".
4. I assume I will execute my part of the CPR taking the victim in.
5. An unconscious diver cannot hold his or her breath. Expanding gas will vent unless the head is locked forward somehow.

So, if I 'escort' this victim to the surface, and decide to take the DCI hit, so then I am possibly paralyzed or in so much pain I am worthless and another victim . . .

How is that the 'right' thing to do? Please help me understand why that would be a better course of action?

I don't think anyone is saying what the buddy did was wrong - but perhaps not what many consider to be the ideal action (if there is such a thing in this type of situation) . If you send someone to the surface and the folks on the boat aren't expecting the victim they might not notice him hit the surface right away, or they might not be able to get to them immediately. Meanwhile the victim is laying face down in the water with or without a reg in and possible drowning. I don't think it is fair yet to say how much deco obligation (if any) was present. From the reports, it sounds like the buddy simply inflated the BC and sent the victim to the surface, even with deco obligations the buddy should have been able to bring them part way up in a controlled manner with a reg held in place (if it was still in the victims mouth).

Getting the victim to the surface quickly is very important but I think what people are saying is that getting them to the surface in an uncontrolled and unexpected manner is not how many of us believe a rescue should be performed.

 

[Jax]

Getting the victim to the surface quickly is very important but I think what people are saying is that getting them to the surface in an uncontrolled and unexpected manner is not how many of us believe a rescue should be performed.

Thank you, I understand it's not the best situation.

Besides, we have all our "facts" from news stories . . . .

 

[Kingpatzer]

Yes, in an absolute "it's my life or theirs" situation you may have to send someone to the surface, but simply dealing with a victim at 140 feet isn't that situation.

I'm not an expert in deco diving by a long shot, but this statement seems ludicrous.

140' is more than deep enough to incur serious deco obligations on open circuit. Without knowing how much (if any) obligation the divers had, it is foolishness to contend there was no significant or life-threatening risk involved in a direct ascent.

That said, with a significant obligation, it would almost certainly be best to take the unconscious diver to the first stop as quickly and safely as possible and release the diver from there. Perhaps attaching him to the up-line if possible.

Further, it might be the case that the rescuing diver did just that. News reports about anything remotely technical (from science reporting to various recreational activities) are almost always sketchy and often factually incorrect in what they state or imply.

 

[limeyx]

I'm not an expert in deco diving by a long shot, but this statement seems ludicrous.

Then why are you responding about something you dont have any knowledge of ?

 

[limeyx]

I'm not an expert in deco diving by a long shot, but this statement seems ludicrous.

140' is more than deep enough to incur serious deco obligations on open circuit. Without knowing how much (if any) obligation the divers had, it is foolishness to contend there was no significant or life-threatening risk involved in a direct ascent.

That said, with a significant obligation, it would almost certainly be best to take the unconscious diver to the first stop as quickly and safely as possible and release the diver from there. Perhaps attaching him to the up-line if possible.

Further, it might be the case that the rescuing diver did just that. News reports about anything remotely technical (from science reporting to various recreational activities) are almost always sketchy and often factually incorrect in what they state or imply.

First of all, if your BUDDY has a problem, the "test" I use for myself is if I can live with myself after I attempt to rescue them. Doesn't mean I have to kill myself doing it.

This means if I have to go face my other buddies, or a victims family, will I be able to tell them I did everything I could to help their family member and be able to look them in the eye.

Inflating someone from that depth has a huge chance of killing the person either by popping their lungs, or having them drown on the surface.

And it depends on what you mean by "Serious deco" I will blow off up to 30 mins deco for a buddy without a question.

How long would you have to be at 140 to get more than that deco ?
The vast majority of my dives in those ranges have a max of 35 mins of deco.

Yes, you can have longer decompressions than that if you try.

Finally, to your last point --- that's what I have been saying the whole time, we DONT KNOW what happened here so my comments are regarding a "what if" scenario.

 

[lobstah]

Not all training agencies include bringing up unconscious/toxing victim with all deco stops as a part of their in water training. It might be a reason why to some people such attempt sounds reasonable and to some people it sounds like suicide.

 

[limeyx]

First, please understand I do not want to get into an argument here - I truly want to understand why "y'all" think the buddy did the wrong thing.

1. Diver is unconscious underwater . . . Pretty P-poor outlook already.
2. I (assuming the place of the dive buddy) have incurred a [serious?] deco obligation.
3. I know the two divers are already "up".
4. I assume I will execute my part of the CPR taking the victim in.
5. An unconscious diver cannot hold his or her breath. Expanding gas will vent unless the head is locked forward somehow.

So, if I 'escort' this victim to the surface, and decide to take the DCI hit, so then I am possibly paralyzed or in so much pain I am worthless and another victim . . .

How is that the 'right' thing to do? Please help me understand why that would be a better course of action?

Ok

#1 Your BUDDY (who, at least the way I dive is TRUSTING you on this dive) Your BUDDY who might be your HUSBAND or WIFE, or a friends HUSBAND or WIFE is unconscious/unresponsive

Yes, the outlook is not great (although I have heard stories of people simply having an extreme reaction to narcosis and "waking up" on ascent)

Are you going to go home to their family and tell them the best you could do was to just shoot them to the surface ? How would YOU feel if it was your wife or son or daughter and someone said that to you ?

and if you DONT escort them to the surface, then what ? Your buddies on the boat are going to sit there and do CPR while you do your 30 mins of deco on the line ?

How much time do you really think you need to do at 140 to get paralyzed ?

There may be no global "right" thing but unless you KNOW for a fact that that person is not alive, my feeling (and same for the people I dive with) is that you have to make the best effort you can.

You dont necessarily even have to make a 30fpm to the surface. I think it would be hard to criticize someone that did some form of minimal deco on ascent while bringing buddy to the surface....

 

[cerich]

Getting the victim to the surface quickly is very important but I think what people are saying is that getting them to the surface in an uncontrolled and unexpected manner is not how many of us believe a rescue should be performed.

then don't tech dive. In tech diving if the problem cannot be resolved fully at depth there is very little likelihood it can be resolved period.

The very best hope for a good outcome is to get the dead diver to the surface

 

[fdog]

I hate getting wrapped up in these furballs, so I rarely post, but after reading this:

<snip>

Yes, in an absolute "it's my life or theirs" situation you may have to send someone to the surface, but simply dealing with a victim at 140 feet isn't that situation.

I'll wade in by saying Nick is absolutely right.

If a recovery from 140' isn't something you can do with reasonable confidence, don't go there.

Also, it's all in the point of view - as soon as you get some dives in on 18/45, you realize that 140' dives really aren't a big deal.


All the best, James

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

then don't tech dive. In tech diving if the problem cannot be resolved fully at depth there is very little likelihood it can be resolved period.

The very best hope for a good outcome is to get the dead diver to the surface

My comment was to the point that you can bring an unconscious diver to the surface in control by skipping your stops. That way you can ensure the other divers on the boat are aware of the problem, you can prevent the victim from laying face down in the water, and even possibly prevent the victim from ascending uncontrolled into the bottom of the boat. In all three cases you are preventing a bad problem from becoming worse.

Your next action can be accepting a likely DCS hit and start taking treatment options immediately to attempt to minimize the seriousness of the hit or you can drop back down to begin your stops (which will likely be longer since you skipped them during the ascent). If you elect to drop back down then you are still holding up the boat from attempting to make it to shore just as if you had shot the victim to the surface so you could complete your original deco stops.

So far most participants in this thread are assuming that this was a tech dive. The depth would say yes, but I would like to see confirmation that the participants were indeed technically trained and had planned this as a technical dive.