A Wreck Dive Costs This Unprepared Instructor His Life

[doctormike]

::shrug:: I guess that makes sense. I mainly do solo cold water shore diving in bad viz. On my occasional trips to tropical places, I am reminded that there are lots of people who dive who aren't serious about diving. Sometimes I forget they are the majority.

Hah, yup exactly! And an even bigger majority if you just consider the SDM readership... Not a lot of backplates or Shearwater and Halcyon gear get reviewed in those pages.

I believe there exists a received wisdom and standard narrative involving the general nature of diving accidents and diving safety. I believe it is the author's agenda to reinforce that, and to encourage readers to dive in ways that the dive industry supports.

The problem I have with that is that it calls out practices that aren't necessarily unsafe (like solo diving), overemphasizes convenient bogeymen (like medicals), and disregards things that the industry would like to wish away (like the role of bad gas planning and poor buoyancy control).

Well, the column probably has hits and misses like any other long running feature, but reading this one over I don't think that it is too far off the mark.

The one glaring issue to most of us (which probably could have been edited out without changing the takehome messages) was the one about spending 74 minutes below 100 feet on a single tank. While they don't specify a mix and a profile, I assumed three things reading this scenario:

1) The student was OW only, so probably on air.

2) They went straight to the entry point at 105 feet, so probably not a lot of that 74 minutes were spent at shallow depth. It would be even MORE insane attempt such a penetration late in the dive with less gas.

3) They probably didn't ascend much after penetration if the hull was at 130 feet and if they were in an engine room. Giving them 100 feet for 74 minutes on air is about three HOURS of deco with 30/70, not 75 minutes. Not to mention the fact that even with a good SAC of 0.5, that's 150 CUF of gas before you even start deco, so not sure how you do that with an AL80.

All of this distracts from the main message to anyone reading the article who is an experienced diver, and brings up questions about dive planning and gas management which aren't really developed in this fictional Charlie Foxtrot (as you correctly pointed out).

Another distracting detail was the instructor's general fitness, which had nothing to do with the narrative as written, unless you count making it harder to squeeze back out through tight restrictions.

The main points that they do hit all are reasonable - warnings about "trust me" dives, overhead environments, and unplanned deco. I don't read it all the time, but I don't remember any column specifically criticizing solo diving as a practice (except to say that you need special training for it).

 

[northernone]

Steven O. Donathan's death on Yukon - Spearboard.com - The World's Largest Spearfishing Diving Boating Social Media Forum

Now that's believable. And saddening. Unlike the absurd fiction of the article.

 

[2airishuman]

It would have taken only a few slight changes to the original story to make it a good lesson. Adding the absurdity of the decompression status was a serious mistake, because it cost the story its credibility.

Do instructors take students into wrecks without laying line, etc? Do they take other risks they shouldn't in those circumstances? The answer to both of these is yes, and such a story would be a good one all by itself.

I don't go into wrecks except for swim-thrus (visible exit straight ahead and nearby).

That said, it was my understanding that there are various approaches to wreck diving and that following a line was but one of them, in light of the fact that lines are more readily damaged by sharp corners etc than would be the case in a cave.

 

[TrimixToo]

I don't go into wrecks except for swim-thrus (visible exit straight ahead and nearby).

That said, it was my understanding that there are various approaches to wreck diving and that following a line was but one of them, in light of the fact that lines are more readily damaged by sharp corners etc than would be the case in a cave.

In any number of wreck dives I have never had a line damaged by a sharp corner. There is no need to yank hard on the line, after all. It's a guideline, not a pull-yourself-out-of-the-wreck line. Also, judicious routing is needed inside anything to prevent a number of things, including undue hazard to the line itself, to other divers, and exit hazards like line traps. I don't see that many sharp edges, come to think of it, though I have seen plenty of sharp pointy things.

 

[doctormike]

I don't go into wrecks except for swim-thrus (visible exit straight ahead and nearby).

That said, it was my understanding that there are various approaches to wreck diving and that following a line was but one of them, in light of the fact that lines are more readily damaged by sharp corners etc than would be the case in a cave.

That is true, a wreck penetration line is not a hard and fast rule like it is in cave diving. Some wreck divers prefer progressive penetration - getting to know the inside of the wreck very well over a number of dives, and relying on that memory to exit by feel if visibility drops to zero. The average wreck penetration is a very short distance compared to the long horizontal paths through caves, where it would be impossible to memorize an exit path. Also, some types of wrecks don't lend themselves well to line placement. For example, in the straight tube of a submarine with no side exits, the line might be more of a liability than a benefit - slowing an exit or causing an entanglement hazard.

I think that the author was writing for the typical SDM reader, who has no wreck penetration experience at all, since that's really beyond the training of their primary demographic. Maybe he thought that a discussion of the different approaches to this would be confusing, so he just simplified it by mentioning the need for a line, rather than saying that you need a line or another equivalent means of ensuring a safe exit in the event of a siltout.

 

[doctormike]

Now that's believable. And saddening. Unlike the absurd fiction of the article.

I don't understand.

The newspaper article quoted in the linked thread (the only information about the accident I saw there) sounds a lot like the SDM article, except for the fact that the SDM article includes some extra details. Some of the details are teaching points (like the light going out with no backup) and some are confusing and not enough for a real analysis (like the profile, gas and deco stuff).

But the basic story is pretty much the same. Instructor and student go into a previously sealed off space in a wreck with no line, the student gets out, the Instructor doesn't. Right?

 

[northernone]

I don't understand.

The newspaper article quoted in the linked thread (the only information about the accident I saw there) sounds a lot like the SDM article, except for the fact that the SDM article includes some extra details. Some of the details are teaching points (like the light going out with no backup) and some are confusing and not enough for a real analysis (like the profile, gas and deco stuff).

But the basic story is pretty much the same. Instructor and student go into a previously sealed off space in a wreck with no line, the student gets out, the Instructor doesn't. Right?

I agree, it sounds like a very similar basic plot. Perhaps even an embellished version of the true happening.

My revulsion comes from the caricature of the diver. "The overweight, brash, irresponsible, fool ends up dead" it's not a relatable character, it's the 'other guy' not us who might make decisions which lead to our death underwater. When reading the parody article, it is a "well, obviously he ended up dead, the idiot". My comments come from disagreeing with the fiction element's painted onto the story. I agree, the basic plot is the same.

The lessons drawn from a Vietnam veteran's death while diving with a student likely would touch us much closer to our own weaknesses and risk prone tendencies and logical flaws.

Regards,
Cameron

 

[doctormike]

I agree, it sounds like a very similar basic plot. Perhaps even an embellished version of the true happening.

My revulsion comes from the caricature of the diver. "The overweight, brash, irresponsible, fool ends up dead" it's not a relatable character, it's the 'other guy' not us who might make decisions which lead to our death underwater. When reading the parody article, it is a "well, obviously he ended up dead, the idiot". My comments come from disagreeing with the fiction element's painted onto the story. I agree, the basic plot is the same.

The lessons drawn from a Vietnam veteran's death while diving with a student likely would touch us much closer to our own weaknesses and risk prone tendencies and logicsl flaws.

Regards,
Cameron

Yeah, that makes sense. They do kind of make those columns into little morality plays!

But the article on the Yukon death has very few details at all, other than the ones that it shares with the SDM story. Have you seen a better writeup somewhere? I would be interested in reading it...sounds very sad.

 

[northernone]

Yeah, that makes sense. They do kind of make those columns into little morality plays!

But the article on the Yukon death has very few details at all, other than the ones that it shares with the SDM story. Have you seen a better writeup somewhere? I would be interested in reading it...sounds very sad.

Here's a little more:

(6/28/2005) Instructor dies on the Yukon

Court TV on Steve Donathan Tonight --

Steve Donathan's Death

I have no personal connection to the deceased, I feel hesitant bringing up his death in the context of the original article. (Anyone closer connected please pm if I should edit)

Regards,
Cameron

 

[doctormike]

Thanks. I don't think that we should hesitate to discuss these things at all, that's the whole reason for A&I. Especially in a case like this where it seems that someone (?the deceased) opened up the seal on the boiler room. Pretty sure that's a good takehome message for anyone reading about this tragedy.

Reading those articles makes me even more sure that the SDM article is loosely based on this event, although in the Lesson for Life, the victim just took advantage of the naturally broken welds sealing off the space, as opposed to someone actively breaking in. That changes the lesson in that regard.