Accident at Humber Bay, Toronto

[Stoo]

Thank you for the report Alysha... What a sad and unnecessary way to go.

 

[Hatul]

A massive amount of research, interviews and documentation went into preparing the report. There is only so much that can be published. What is it about the recommendations that you find lacking? At this time, based on this accident, the recommendations are:

Thank you for the recommendations. I can read.

The description of the accident is very vague. "From our understanding she was with her husband and I guess ..."

There is no indication what they were doing in the lake. Were they diving? If yes what was the depth, when did she get into trouble, what was her husband doing with an open drysuit?

Then after a very vague snapshot follow some general motherhood statements that don't really follow. Seems amateurish to me. Nothing like the reports I'm used to from DAN or even Scubadiving Magazine.

 

[Ayisha]

It is a preliminary report and it is all that is allowed to be published at this time - one week after the accident and only 5 days after her death. The public may or may not need to know all the details. What the diving public does need to know is how to prevent a similar recurrence including preventing a second victim. Each recommendation is obviously based on THIS accident.

No, they had not yet begun their dive.

 

[shoredivr]

That's even worse somehow. Thanks Ayisha.

 

[Hatul]

It is a preliminary report and it is all that is allowed to be published at this time - one week after the accident and only 5 days after her death. The public may or may not need to know all the details. What the diving public does need to know is how to prevent a similar recurrence including preventing a second victim. Each recommendation is obviously based on THIS accident.

No, they had not yet begun their dive.

Before you can give recommendations you need a diagnosis. And before you make a diagnosis you need a detailed description of the events.

The "Report" has flipped the process around. Give recommendations, then worry about the details.

 

[Ayisha]

Before you can give recommendations you need a diagnosis. And before you make a diagnosis you need a detailed description of the events.

The "Report" has flipped the process around. Give recommendations, then worry about the details.

You mean that YOU don't know the details. The people who need to know, do know. No matter how much you push for the details, that will not change. Sorry.

 

[Hatul]

You mean that YOU don't know the details. The people who need to know, do know. No matter how much you push for the details, that will not change. Sorry.

There is no reason to hide the sequence of events, there's nothing confidential in this. I don't even need to know the names, but to learn anything from an accident there's no getting around having access to the details of what happened.

 

[Stoo]

In my experience, these reports evolve over time. Preliminary reports are just that, and of necessity tend to be a bit vague. I think the trick is to find balance between getting out pertinent "warnings" in a timely fashion, but maintaining some discretion out of respect to those directly involved.

The reality is that there is no "requirement" that any of this information be made public. Let's try to remember that there were real people involved in this accident, and at least one of them is a member of this board and is undoubtedly reading this thread.

 

[RetroBlader]

The reality is that there is no "requirement" that any of this information be made public. Let's try to remember that there were real people involved in this accident, and at least one of them is a member of this board and is undoubtedly reading this thread.

Well said.

The amount of rubber-necking around any roadside incident suggests most of us have a macabre curiosity, but this should not trump the family's right to some privacy.


Having said that, this is the Accidents and Incidents Forum, and as someone who's thinking about taking up cold-water diving (I live only 5 minutes from Lake Ontario, but so far all my diving has been tropical ocean diving), I have a question related to drysuit diving:

Short of surf condition mentioned above, I would imagine most of the time it is better to be positively buoyant on entry, whether shore or boat. Is drysuit diving any different? (Is it harder to walk in an inflated drysuit?)

If the couple were just at the beginning of their dive (husband still donning his drysuit), even if she suffered a heart attack/VFib arrest, why would she be found submerged, rather than floating at the surface?

 

[shoredivr]

Short of surf condition mentioned above, I would imagine most of the time it is better to be positively buoyant on entry, whether shore or boat. Is drysuit diving any different? (Is it harder to walk in an inflated drysuit?)

At the surface, depending on the type of drysuit you have, you want to squeeze as much air out of it and the undergarments as possible before you put your tank(s) on, otherwise you'll have a lot of buoyancy. So no, you are not walking in an inflated drysuit. Under water, there are two ways to go, use the BCD as primary buoyancy device and just take the squeeze off the suit. Or you can use the suit as the primary buoyancy device. Either way in theory you should have some ability to become buoyant. I am not speculating on the second part of your question.