Accident in Brockville

[nadwidny]

Hatul, as Swamp Diver pointed out, the fatality that you are referring to is a different accident that occurred earlier this year. Please scroll down to the accident that occurred on June 30th. The OUC does not have the results of Mr. Brow's autopsy at this time.

How can you make recommendations when you don't know the cause of death?

 

[Ayisha]

The basic recommendations that have been made are supported by what is known of the accident. Until the autopsy results are received in writing, there will likely be no further recommendations.

 

[Hatul]

There is more than one fatality in that publication and it appears you have read an earlier one. See page 9 (pdf) for the fatality on June 30,2013.

Thank you. Yes I had not realized there was more than one accident reported there, so ignore my previous post.

---------- Post added July 8th, 2013 at 04:20 PM ----------

How can you make recommendations when you don't know the cause of death?

My thought exactly. They have a habit of making recommendations based on preliminary information, which is somewhat like a doctor making a quick initial assessment and giving a prescription before having a diagnosis. I'm also uncomfortable with that process and would ignore the recommendations until the final report.

 

[doctormike]

To be fair, the recommendations that they made were:

1. Always follow a thorough assembly and pre-dive checklist

2. Be cautious of using a recreational unit such as the Poseidon MKVI in a high current
area which may put a demand on the scrubber that it may not be designed to manage
or at a greater depth than it is designed for

​

Those are pretty generic and would apply no matter what the ultimate conclusion of the investigation was....

 

[nadwidny]

To be fair, the recommendations that they made were:

1. Always follow a thorough assembly and pre-dive checklist

2. Be cautious of using a recreational unit such as the Poseidon MKVI in a high current
area which may put a demand on the scrubber that it may not be designed to manage
or at a greater depth than it is designed for

​

Those are pretty generic and would apply no matter what the ultimate conclusion of the investigation was....

So why bother? It's clear from the report that the writers don't really know rebreathers (they mention more than once about the "regulator"). Given that and the lack of cause of death, any recommendations at this point are ridiculous.

 

[Ayisha]

The incident report that was submitted TO the OUC used the word "regulator", and during the interviews, the word "regulator" was used, which we copied into the OUC report. During the interviews, we used "the loop".

 

[srhein]

This is clearly labeled as a preliminary report issued less than 2 weeks after the incident, and updates are promised when available. I would much rather have the best advice/conclusions available based on the facts as known to a credible investigative agency, rather than read page after page of speculation while waiting for a "final" report that never comes.
My two cents, probably worth exactly that.

 

[nadwidny]

The preliminary report's recommendation is just speculation.

 

[Ayisha]

The preliminary report's recommendation is just speculation.

Then clearly you are not privy to everything known about the accident. Both recommendations are supported by what is known. What is in the published report is ALWAYS only a small portion of what is known of any accident.

 

[kelemvor]

Anyone have any idea how long it will take to complete the investigation? I'm hoping it's not the sort of thing that takes years to complete. I've been following this accident a little, and am curious.