Bahamas: Missing Female Diver

[Thalassamania]

One DM was leading the dive, another Instructor was supposed to be playing rent-a-buddy. The question was, how did the rent-a-buddy get so far away?

 

[alohagal]

From 140'? she may have lived, i guess. If the Vic was fighting off assistance in the mode i'm given to understand then she'd have fought this action too and in the process the two would have just dropped another X number of feet.

I dare say i'll hear about breathing mixes and will forward accordingly.

Cavediver, that was my first question. I believe the situation came to escalate after instructor 3. allowed sufficient respect to Mrs Wood to perform her own dive then tried to bring her back into line when she was seen to be pushing the limits. If 3. had two charges, as is understood (Mr & Mrs wood), this would explain why she was called up first before 3. descended to "hands on" her up.
Given the huge variation in skill, ability and individual style of diver a pro here is faced with, it's not unusual to access the skills visually and "go with the flow" of the diver. Most (if not all) clients resent a more complete control, these two were after all not on a resort dive.
That, coupled with the fact that in crystal clear water 20' isnt that greater distance unless it's suddenly a head start for a race...............

The procurement for a private DM, is also said to be at the very last minute. To the extent that the boat was unable to leave until Mrs Wood returned from the dive shop having procured 3. as a private DM.
With the benefit of hind sight one would surly have suggested a refresher course that would have been performed at a "bottomed" site rather than placing the responsibility upon a DM, the moral perhaps is that the Customer isn't always right.........

Again i'd reiterate that the "facts" i write related to this specific incident are not and in no way first hand, rather the communal understanding of events by those not even necessarily directly involved. I, like most of us i'm sure, await onlyhalcyon's input as the most belief worthy source of detail.

And for even further clarity...one last post from DANTHEENGINEER who WAS NOT on this dive. But has heard the scuttlebutt around the dock of the DIVE OP.

 

[cappyjon431]

No I mean investigated, that means original data, primary sources, not review of what others have compiled. This includes but is not limited to: reviews of all documents, discussions with witnesses, conversations with coroners, examinations of equipment when possible, etc. All as part of a full time job funded by NOAA, NIOSH, OSHA, USCG and later on, in small part, DEMA.
Whether you've gone out on a limb or not is defined by how far you fall or how far you have to crawl back.

It may or may not be going out on a limb, per se, but it does not add to your credibility when you've not bothered to read my profile where my employment with the National Underwater Accident Data Center is mentioned.

Thanks for providing this source. I have only recently perused it, and it will require some more in depth reading, but it looks like fascinating stuff. Here is the link for anyone who is interested in this type of stuff (number and nature of diving fatalities):

Rubicon Research Repository: National Underwater Accident Data Center

 

[pilot fish]

100 ft of Vis, one diver and one dive master assigned/hired to that diver. How does a diver get 20ft BELOW? To the side, I might understand, but below? The DM was not watching her charge. Do I read that correctly?

 

[Thalassamania]

The reports need to be taken in the context of their time and do suffer (in my view) from some of Schenk's and McAniff's preconceived notions (hell ... maybe some of mine too).

Categorization was the big bugaboo, for example, it took me years to convince McAniff that a guy who killed himself trying to figure out how to use an Electolung that he had stolen was not a scientific diving accident.

 

[Cave Diver]

100 ft of Vis, one diver and one dive master assigned/hired to that diver. How does a diver get 20ft BELOW? To the side, I might understand, but below? The DM was not watching her charge. Do I read that correctly?

I raised a similar thought many posts ago.

 

[Teamcasa]

I raised a similar thought many posts ago.

Heck it has only been discussed three or four times in this thread. But with over 400 posts, all the old issues will no doubt will come back around in a few dozen more posts anyway.

 

[alohagal]

Heck it has only been discussed three or four times in this thread. But with over 400 posts, all the old issues will no doubt will come back around in a few dozen more posts anyway.

Glad to do my part to "restart" all the issues. I still don't think we know where the husband really was. But, I don't see where that matters. I would like to know if the DM (Designated Muddy) was HIRED voluntarily by this couple.

 

[Teamcasa]

Glad to do my part to "restart" all the issues. I still don't think we know where the husband really was. But, I don't see where that matters. I would like to know if the DM (Designated Muddy) was HIRED voluntarily by this couple.

I doubt the DM was involuntarily hired by them.

 

[alohagal]

I doubt the DM was involuntarily hired by them.

It was brought up in prior recantations of this story, that the DM (Designated muddy) could have been there to "oversee" someone who had medical issues or lack of recent dive activity. I mean there were 3 DM's on this dive. So, again my point...was this a DESIGNATED Dive Master (guide/buddy) assigned as an "extra" crew member on board, or someone sought out by this couple to insure extra precaution and safety. I think it makes a difference to the chain of events and expectations perceived by all parties involved.