... that would amaze me too, if it were true. It would indicate that BSAC has some serious deficiencies in their drysuit training.
You know, when I hear claims like that, I like to go to the cited material and check for myself. I haven't read every incident report, but I did read the summary. And for the benefit of readers who may be scared by
Foxfish's version of the numbers, here's a summary of the summary:
p. 1:
2013 has seen 263 UK diving incidents reported
That's the grand total. Two hundred and sixty-three. More than a quarter of a thousand. If we compare seven directly related to faulty or mis-used dry suits to a grand total of more than a quarter of a thousand, the picture doesn't look that bad, does it?.
p. 4:
Fatalities
14 fatal incidents occurred in the UK during the 2013 incident year [...]
- Three cases involved divers who suffered a 'non-diving' related medical incident (for example a heart attack) whilst in the water. [...]
- Four cases involved a separation of some kind. [...]
- Three cases involved divers who were unable to gain or maintain positive buoyancy [...]
(my note: These may be dry suit related. It doesn't say they are, but it doesn't exclude the possibility either)
- Three cases involved divers diving in a group of three [...]
- Two cases involved divers who were diving alone [...]
- One case involved a diver who was using a rebreather [...]
- One case involved a dive to a maximum depth of 54m. [...]
- One case involved a diver who entered the water with his gas supply turned off.
- One case involved a double fatality where the divers were recovered from the seabed nine days later. Very little is currently known about this incident.
This adds up to more that 14, so obviously there are fatalities involving more than one of the listed factors.
Anyhow, three out of 14 fatalities were buoyancy-related, and given the prevalence of dry suits in UK waters, we can assume that a faulty or misused dry suit
may possibly have been involved. But as far as I can see, there's no cite that any of those fatalities were directly related to dry suit misuse or malfunction. Also, if we look at the ratio between dry suit related incidents and "simply poor buoyancy control" related incidents (see my quote from p.5 further down in this post), it's statistically unlikely that any of those fatalities were directly related to mis-used or faulty drysuits.
p. 5:
Decompression incidents
[...]
An analysis of the causal factors associated with the 91 incidents reported in 2013 indicates the following major features:
- 38 involved repeat diving
- 15 involved rapid ascents
- 13 involved diving to deeper than 30m
- 13 involved missed decompression stops
Some cases involved more than one of these factors.
[...]
Boating and Surface incidents
The number of incidents reported in 2013 has dropped back to earlier levels with a total of 55 incidents recorded. The factors associated with these incidents are as follows:
- 28 involved lost diver(s)
- 24 involved engine problems
- 8 involved boat problems
- 2 involved bad seamanship
Some cases involved more than one of these factors
[...]
Ascent related incidents
Ascent related incidents have been falling in recent years and this year sees that trend continuing with 43 cases reported. As in previous years the majority of these were ‘rapid ascents’. An analysis of these ‘rapid ascents’ (where the detail is known) is as follows:
- 42% Simply poor buoyancy control
- 23% Regulator free flows
- 16% Drysuit control malfunction/mis-use
- 13% Delayed SMB problems
- 13% Out of air / gas
- 10% Panic / anxiety / rush for surface
- 10% Weighting or weight related issues
So,
Foxfish is formally correct in that seven incidents (not seven
fatalities. Seven
incidents) in UK in 2013 were dry suit related. Seven out of 43
ascent-related incidents. Seven out of
a grand total of 263 diving related incidents. While 18 out of the 43 ascent-related incidents were "simply poor buoyancy control" not related to dry suit mis-use or malfunction. In my limited experience, it does take a little more care to properly control your buoyancy in a dry suit, especially if you're using the suit for primary buoyancy control underwater. Given the prevalence of dry suits in UK waters, the fact that just seven incidents could be attributed directly to the dry suit while two and a half as many were "simply poor buoyancy control" doesn't look like the picture
Foxfish is trying to paint: That dry suits are dangerous. But hey, it
was apparently a
bona fide attempt to shift the goalposts and change the subject of the thread...
As the saying goes, there are three kinds of lies: there are lies, there are d@mned lies, and then there's statistics.
---------- Post added December 6th, 2013 at 03:33 PM ----------
By the way, I have a significantly lower risk of being "unable to gain or maintain positive buoyancy" - the second most prevalent factor involved in fatalities in the UK in 2013 - if I'm diving dry. If I'm diving wet, I have two tools for gaining or maintaining positive buoyancy: I can inflate my BCD, or I can ditch my weights. With my dry suit, I have redundant buoyancy. Since I'm not overweighted, I can maintain positive buoyancy on the surface with a ripped wing even without ditching my weights. I might look a little weird with my DS inflated so that I look like the Michelin man, but I'm definitely positively buoyant. And since I dive using rock bottom calculations with an extra safety margin to have a little gas left after surfacing, it's pretty unlikely that I won't have any gas left to use to inflate my DS
