pilot fish
Guest
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 6
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
Belize: Death of Corey Monk
- Thread starter johnnydiver2003
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Darnold9999
Contributor
Ayisha - while I understand the distiction you are trying to make, I don't think I agree. The arguement has been pretty clearly that he should not have been diving solo. Not that he should have taken extra air or other equipment. There is a bit of an arguement that his computer/depth guage was not working but that is, as I understand it, speculation.
The dive in question was solo at night. Perhaps redundant air should have been taken along, I would, but having it really only allows you to solve a very small number of issues. I personally don't view this as an equipment issue. He choose to go diving solo at night, something went wrong. Buddy might have made a difference, we don't know. Additional air might have made a difference, we don't know. The fact that he was diving solo at night just means he decided to accept the risks - you don't have to - and I won't be critical of him for doing so.
Now IF his depth guage was truely not working AND he was in fact diving over the wall then and only then would I consider the dive reckless but we don't know this. To jump in with a single tank to explore the bottom at 60 feet which is as I recall where the bottom is at that site unless you go over the edge of the wall - even with no computer or depth guage - is not what I would do, but isn't particularly unsafe either. I have forgotten my depth guage on exactly that kind of site and finished the dive knowing that the sand was no deeper than 60 feet. Feel kind of naked without it but not the end of the world.
Peter - actually if I am diving truely solo (as opposed to same ocean buddy) I really don't expect anyone to rescue me - where I dive the chances that someone will notice a problem while I am under the surface is almost nil and for them to be then able to deal with it are exactly nil. Nobody's just going to jump in the water with a spare tank and swim it down. Yes there are consequenses to an accident diving solo, but there are also consequenses for those who only buddy dive - the risk is just a bit higher - buddy diving is not risk free either. Accepting the arguement that I would be putting someone at risk and making EMS people work etc. means you shouldn't be diving at all - as all of that is in play when buddy diving too.
PF actually in the case of the solo cert that I did a large part of the cert was someone who I trust, assessing that in fact I was qualified to dive solo. As I understand it that is true of both agencies that do the cert. Not quite the same as a PADI OW or AOW cert. This is not so much a training cert, but an evaluation cert. Kind of useless except it allows me to do dives on liveaboards and other sites that otherwise require buddy diving.
Sorry to all who want to keep this going - it has been fun I learn things doing this - but I'm going diving! - back in a couple of weeks!
The dive in question was solo at night. Perhaps redundant air should have been taken along, I would, but having it really only allows you to solve a very small number of issues. I personally don't view this as an equipment issue. He choose to go diving solo at night, something went wrong. Buddy might have made a difference, we don't know. Additional air might have made a difference, we don't know. The fact that he was diving solo at night just means he decided to accept the risks - you don't have to - and I won't be critical of him for doing so.
Now IF his depth guage was truely not working AND he was in fact diving over the wall then and only then would I consider the dive reckless but we don't know this. To jump in with a single tank to explore the bottom at 60 feet which is as I recall where the bottom is at that site unless you go over the edge of the wall - even with no computer or depth guage - is not what I would do, but isn't particularly unsafe either. I have forgotten my depth guage on exactly that kind of site and finished the dive knowing that the sand was no deeper than 60 feet. Feel kind of naked without it but not the end of the world.
Peter - actually if I am diving truely solo (as opposed to same ocean buddy) I really don't expect anyone to rescue me - where I dive the chances that someone will notice a problem while I am under the surface is almost nil and for them to be then able to deal with it are exactly nil. Nobody's just going to jump in the water with a spare tank and swim it down. Yes there are consequenses to an accident diving solo, but there are also consequenses for those who only buddy dive - the risk is just a bit higher - buddy diving is not risk free either. Accepting the arguement that I would be putting someone at risk and making EMS people work etc. means you shouldn't be diving at all - as all of that is in play when buddy diving too.
PF actually in the case of the solo cert that I did a large part of the cert was someone who I trust, assessing that in fact I was qualified to dive solo. As I understand it that is true of both agencies that do the cert. Not quite the same as a PADI OW or AOW cert. This is not so much a training cert, but an evaluation cert. Kind of useless except it allows me to do dives on liveaboards and other sites that otherwise require buddy diving.
Sorry to all who want to keep this going - it has been fun I learn things doing this - but I'm going diving! - back in a couple of weeks!
From reading through this, it seems many are blaming solo diving, lack of gauge, single tank, etc., etc., etc., as the CAUSE of Cory's problem (which none of us knows). I can say with almost certainty that solo diving was not the root cause of Cory's disappearance.
Isn't that kinda like blaming the fire on the fact that the fire dept was busy fighting another fire, or that you didn't have as spare tire as the reason for the flat?
Now, I always load my tool box on any trip - just so I won't need it
but I really don't think if I forgot it behind, and had a problem, that having taken it would have keep the problem from occurring.
What I am saying is it looks like much of this "accident analysis" is based on things that might have helped, AFTER the accident occurred. Like having a buddy to supply air...But that didn't CAUSE the OOA problem (as example) but I do agree it MIGHT have helped, after the original problem occurred.
The same goes for the discussion on Dive Ops in Cozumel. I doubt that they CAUSED the problem.
I suspect that inexperience is contributory, but probably not the root cause.
What do you say we start considering (not just in Cory's case, but in all accidents) the CAUSE of the accident (which it seems we may never, ever really know) and what might be done (besides "have a buddy to bail you out") to mitigate that problem from coming up and biting us sometime.
Isn't that kinda like blaming the fire on the fact that the fire dept was busy fighting another fire, or that you didn't have as spare tire as the reason for the flat?
Now, I always load my tool box on any trip - just so I won't need it
but I really don't think if I forgot it behind, and had a problem, that having taken it would have keep the problem from occurring.What I am saying is it looks like much of this "accident analysis" is based on things that might have helped, AFTER the accident occurred. Like having a buddy to supply air...But that didn't CAUSE the OOA problem (as example) but I do agree it MIGHT have helped, after the original problem occurred.
The same goes for the discussion on Dive Ops in Cozumel. I doubt that they CAUSED the problem.
I suspect that inexperience is contributory, but probably not the root cause.
What do you say we start considering (not just in Cory's case, but in all accidents) the CAUSE of the accident (which it seems we may never, ever really know) and what might be done (besides "have a buddy to bail you out") to mitigate that problem from coming up and biting us sometime.
The point I was trying to make was that having the right equipment when solo diving was not being mentioned, but just "taken as read" - but in fact the absence of that equipment is itself a major risk factor. I'm primarily looking for a change in semantics as I believe that with sloppy language goes sloppy thinking, and we must always keep in mind what's important.
The thread has generalised from Cory's sad demise, and while I think that's both inevitable and ultimately helpful it can be regarded as insensitive to Cory's memory. I know nothing about Cory other than what has been written in these threads, and I have no desire to attribute actions or thoughts to him. Insofar as I may have offended relatives, friends and colleagues I apologise. I think the general questions of safe solo diving and our unwitting responsibilities to other people merit another thread.
The thread has generalised from Cory's sad demise, and while I think that's both inevitable and ultimately helpful it can be regarded as insensitive to Cory's memory. I know nothing about Cory other than what has been written in these threads, and I have no desire to attribute actions or thoughts to him. Insofar as I may have offended relatives, friends and colleagues I apologise. I think the general questions of safe solo diving and our unwitting responsibilities to other people merit another thread.
Peter,
I was not referring to you, or anyone specifically. I just think that people are discussing mitigating actions should a problem occur, not the actual CAUSE of the problem.
I think we all agree that wearing a seat belt while driving is a good idea, but I'm not aware of any crashes CAUSED by lack of wearing a seat belt. That is, the lack of wearing a seat belt did not CAUSE the brakes to fail, or the drive to run the red light. Granted, wearing the seat belt may mitigate the damages (to the person) should a crash occur.
I totally agree with your point of having the right equipment while diving sole is very important (the seat belt), because we can not anticipate all possible events which might occur when underwater. Having the right equipment, or having a buddy, might mitigate the damage. But only in some cases. Neither will probably help when there are certain catastrophic conditions. I don't believe that diving solo CAUSES anyone's accident.
In my car analogy, it is akin to making sure the tires are in good condition, inflated to the proper pressure, the brakes are serviceable, as are the wipers, lights, steering, etc., along with wearing our seat belts, before we drive our cars. But that will not guarantee someone else won't run the red light or cross over into our lane, causing us to be party to a crash. But they may well reduce the number of opportunities for us to be involved in a crash.
It is the underlying CAUSE of an accident upon which I believe accident analysis should concentrate. Once an analysis, or a hypothesis is made, can we conjuncture about the appropriate solutions to mitigate the problem from reoccurring.
I was not referring to you, or anyone specifically. I just think that people are discussing mitigating actions should a problem occur, not the actual CAUSE of the problem.
I think we all agree that wearing a seat belt while driving is a good idea, but I'm not aware of any crashes CAUSED by lack of wearing a seat belt. That is, the lack of wearing a seat belt did not CAUSE the brakes to fail, or the drive to run the red light. Granted, wearing the seat belt may mitigate the damages (to the person) should a crash occur.
I totally agree with your point of having the right equipment while diving sole is very important (the seat belt), because we can not anticipate all possible events which might occur when underwater. Having the right equipment, or having a buddy, might mitigate the damage. But only in some cases. Neither will probably help when there are certain catastrophic conditions. I don't believe that diving solo CAUSES anyone's accident.
In my car analogy, it is akin to making sure the tires are in good condition, inflated to the proper pressure, the brakes are serviceable, as are the wipers, lights, steering, etc., along with wearing our seat belts, before we drive our cars. But that will not guarantee someone else won't run the red light or cross over into our lane, causing us to be party to a crash. But they may well reduce the number of opportunities for us to be involved in a crash.
It is the underlying CAUSE of an accident upon which I believe accident analysis should concentrate. Once an analysis, or a hypothesis is made, can we conjuncture about the appropriate solutions to mitigate the problem from reoccurring.
Scuba gear these days is pretty reliable, but not wholly so. If you're at the sort of depths that the girl I cited was and you have a catastrophic failure of your air supply system, such as a hose bursting, a HP seat failure, or simply a freeflow due to icing (all three of which have happened to me over the years) and you have a single tank, you have a major problem. Probably a terminal one.
Perhaps a better analogy than a car is riding a fast motorbike. If the bike is well maintained and tyres are in good condition and well inflated then you have a good chance of completing a ride. But if you haven't bothered to check tyre condition or pressure you're asking for trouble, and a front tyre blowout at 100mph is comparable to a dive hose rupturing at 150' - you're unlikely to survive.
No parallel in motorcycling, but this is why we say that redundancy of certain equipment is vital when diving deep.
The question of whether you owe a duty of care to others when you are "doing your own thing" is an interesting one that should debated. It was long ago decided in the UK that in certain circumstances you cannot escape that duty, which has implications for the costs involved in rescue and subsequent care, and the extent to which potential rescuers should be expected to put their own lives on the line. Or not. If you have UK dive insurance which pays death benefits and you die in circumstances generally regarded as indicating great negligence, the insurance company will almost certainly not pay.
Perhaps a better analogy than a car is riding a fast motorbike. If the bike is well maintained and tyres are in good condition and well inflated then you have a good chance of completing a ride. But if you haven't bothered to check tyre condition or pressure you're asking for trouble, and a front tyre blowout at 100mph is comparable to a dive hose rupturing at 150' - you're unlikely to survive.
No parallel in motorcycling, but this is why we say that redundancy of certain equipment is vital when diving deep.
The question of whether you owe a duty of care to others when you are "doing your own thing" is an interesting one that should debated. It was long ago decided in the UK that in certain circumstances you cannot escape that duty, which has implications for the costs involved in rescue and subsequent care, and the extent to which potential rescuers should be expected to put their own lives on the line. Or not. If you have UK dive insurance which pays death benefits and you die in circumstances generally regarded as indicating great negligence, the insurance company will almost certainly not pay.
- Messages
- 1,038
- Reaction score
- 537
Confrontation on a dive boat with other divers present, serves no purpose.
The dive is over, it's after the fact. Bad judgement on your behalf no matter
how well intentioned. Nothing personal. It's all in the approach. If your not the
Dive Master let it be..... IMHO. Best to you....
The dive is over, it's after the fact. Bad judgement on your behalf no matter
how well intentioned. Nothing personal. It's all in the approach. If your not the
Dive Master let it be..... IMHO. Best to you....
pilot fish
Guest
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 6
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
You can say whatever but that does not alter the fact that if he had had a buddy his chances of survival would have increased enormously.
No one is blaming the fire dept for the fire, but they are taking note of the fact that if the fire dept had been there, close by, as in dive buddy, the outccome of the fire, and it's duration, would have been different. Maybe the person would have lived if the fire dept had been there and able to rescue the person, as in dive buddy close by. See?
No one is blaming the flat on having no spare tire [no dive buddy] but they are taking note of the fact that if the car [diver] had had a spare,[buddy] the outcome would have been different. Dont drive on a lonely, dark road at night without a spare, or dive on a lonely, dark reef without a dive buddy.See?
pilot fish
Guest
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 6
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
Deaths are attributed to NOT having a seat belt and thousands of accident fatalities were prevented by the use of seat belts. What is confusing you is we are not saying the lack of a dive buddy CAUSED the accident, we are saying that if the diver had a dive buddy he probably would have survived the accident. His chances of survival would increase enormously. If you wear a seat belt your chances of surving a crash increase. If you dive with a buddy your chances of surviving an accident increase. get it?
UnderwaterBumbleBee
Contributor
Cory's accident was never an attack on solo diving but it has quickly become one. My feeling about solo diving is: I personally would never do it. I wouldn't even want to do it if I was certified. I like having my husband around to share the experience and have someone around in case something happens. Having a buddy does not guarantee I will survive a dive related injury or body failure. Having a buddy does significantly increase the chances that they will come to my assistence, possibly save my life or at least be able to give an account of what happened to me and WHERE it happened underwater.
If anyone else chooses to dive solo, I hope they are trained for it and have the proper backup equipment. I also hope that if anything happens to that person that their body will be recovered, their accident will be understood or solved and that their family has some type of comfort in knowing what happened to them. SO DIVE SOLO AS MUCH AS YOU WANT. As long as it doesn't affect me or one of my vacations I really don't care. If you aren't trained to do solo dives and you don't have the proper backup equipment...GOOD LUCK IN YOUR ENDEAVORS.
If anyone else chooses to dive solo, I hope they are trained for it and have the proper backup equipment. I also hope that if anything happens to that person that their body will be recovered, their accident will be understood or solved and that their family has some type of comfort in knowing what happened to them. SO DIVE SOLO AS MUCH AS YOU WANT. As long as it doesn't affect me or one of my vacations I really don't care. If you aren't trained to do solo dives and you don't have the proper backup equipment...GOOD LUCK IN YOUR ENDEAVORS.
Similar threads
