An Open Letter of Personal Perspective to the Diving Industry by NetDoc

[boulderjohn]

I could not find a density measure either but I did see that the lake also serves as a water reservoir for folks living down stream. But the 7mm FJ does make a big difference. Gross over-weighting does not seem to be the case.

I do open water dives in fresh water with students in 7mm suits, but not FJs. We use aluminum tanks. I would start someone that size with about 10 pounds. I used to work for a shop that used 7mm FJs. I don't remember us ever using more than about 24 pounds on a full sized adult with an aluminum tank.

I don't care if the water is gin clear and calm, when one divers in a group decides to bolt, a single instructor will be severely challenge trying to maintain contact and control over all the divers in that group. Even it the instructor is able to grab the offending diver, is it your contention that the instructor has the duty and the right to hold him in position and not allow him to surface?

Once the initial diver bolted to the surface, which would have taken a couple of seconds from 15 feet, that episode was over. The instructor had to go to the surface to make sure he was OK, but it would not matter if he arrived a hair later, the amount of time needed to show the two other divers the thumb and get them to ascend with him.

 

[RJP]

How could he have possibly known this (what you bolded)? Was he there?
Until reading this I had high regard for Dr. Sawatzky. Why would he testify to the unknowable? - He appears to have lowered himself to being a liar for hire. At beast he turned hearsay from others into his sworn testimony. Sad.

Actually, he appears to be basing that opinion on the interviews and testimony of several other people WHO WERE THERE. That's really what an expert witness does... render an opinion based on an evaluation of available information. Otherwise an expert witness would only be able to form an opinion about incidents and events for which they were personally present.

Further, I'm pretty sure that sworn testimony and documented recollection are not considered hearsay, because there is no legal question as to what was actually "said" in those instances. The information the expert is using to make the statement you quoted came from recorded recollections and admissible depositions... both of which are heresay exceptions.

 

[The Chairman]

It doesn't appear that he "bolted", but simply could not maintain depth. That's at least from his own testimony and that of the instructor. I had assumed he had done the same, but it doesn't appear that there was any panic. According to Sawatsky, he took the time to communicate to the kids to stay on the line before he went up. It is my opinion, based on the testimony, that he lost control of the first diver by allowing him to ascend unassisted and then he simply abandoned the two kids to go correct his mistake.

It should be pointed out here, that regardless of his presence, or non presence, it's also my opinion that the kid should not have been down there in the first place. Had he been there, the instructor may still not have been able to assist the deceased. The autopsy never checked for things like AGE or the like, so we'll never know what caused him to go unconscious. Either way, it's impossible to judge the "standards" based on an instructor's mistakes and due to an event that may have been fatal even if those mistakes had not happened. It's even more ludicrous to publicly decry an agency for sticking to it's published standards.

 

[boulderjohn]

I don't have any trouble believing that the students achieved neutral buoyancy. If the wing of your BCD has enough lift, you can put enough air in it to overcome any amount of overweighting. When I go on technical dives, I am frequently extremely overweighted at the beginning of a dive because of the amount of gas I have to carry. Using Archimede's Principle, we can see that the volume of air needed for each extra pound of weight is about 15 fluid ounces. That's why I have a wing with 60 pounds of lift. I also have a lot of training and experience that allows me to deal with that much air in my wing.

Most importantly, though, when I am that overweighted, I am at great depth, not in 15 feet of water. That makes a huge difference, especially at the altitude at Bear Lake. At that altitude, the air pressure on the surface is only 0.81 ATA, which impacts buoyancy. Using Boyle's Law, we can calculate the amount of expansion and contraction that volume of air will undergo with a small change in depth when diving that shallow. The air in a BCD at that depth will increase in volume by about 60% by the time it reaches the surface. The greater the volume of the air in the wing, the greater the impact that has. When diving in shallow water with an overinflated wing because of too much lead, it is extremely difficult to maintain buoyancy.

Add to that the wet suit. If it is a 7mm FJ, that, too has a lot of bubbles in it, and they, too, react to changes in depth according to Boyle's Law. Small changes in depth have a great impact on that kind of a wet suit.

So, yes, an overweighted diver with a thick wet suit can achieve neutral buoyancy. Maintaining it at that shallow depth, however, requires great skill.

EDIT: I just saw that the diver who went to the surface lost control of his buoyancy and did not bolt. What I just wrote explains why that would happen.

 

[scubadada]

Very sad, these "divers" didn't have the slightest idea what they were doing

 

[boulderjohn]

According to Sawatsky, he took the time to communicate to the kids to stay on the line before he went up. It is my opinion, based on the testimony, that he lost control of the first diver by allowing him to ascend unassisted and then he simply abandoned the two kids to go correct his mistake.

The amount of time needed to tell the students to stay on the line was the amount of time it would have taken to tell them to ascend with him.

 

[The Chairman]

The amount of time needed to tell the students to stay on the line was the amount of time it would have taken to tell them to ascend with him.

That's the sad truth, John. Again, we'll never know exactly what happened. We'll never know if the instructor could have saved him if he had simply been there.

 

[Zippsy]

While it remains clear that the instructor would appear to be the focus of the problem, it is also fairly clear that the standards are all but impossible to follow with multiple students without a qualified assistant when there is a serious problem. Mr Hornsby's statement makes that quite clear when he points out two failures to maintain contact and control were committed by the instructor. .

And for the 79th time, the same error needs to be corrected. The standards are not a ratio of "4:1". The standard is (a ratio of no more than 4:1 but the participants number must be reduced to a number commensurate with the conditions and the ability for the instructor to provide immediate assistance to each participant as needed).

Instructors can't pick and choose which standards they want to ignore.

.... awaiting no. 80.

 

[The Chairman]

And for the 79th time, the same error needs to be corrected. The standards are not a ratio of "4:1". The standard is (a ratio of no more than 4:1 but the participants number must be reduced to a number commensurate with the conditions and the ability for the instructor to provide immediate assistance to each participant as needed).

Instructors can't pick and choose which standards they want to ignore.

.... awaiting no. 80.

Indeed, and the ratio without a pool session is 1:1.

 

[Huzzar]

Does anyone have a link to the original police report? Is that a doc that can be posted here too?