Canadian woman presumed dead - Roatan, Honduras

[sethw]

When I read an accident report like this I am interesting mainly in understanding what might have contributed to the incident that I can use to increase the likelihood that I will not make the same mistake(s) – if any can be reasonably identified from the available information. This is especially true with a more experienced diver, as the deceased was. I don’t find speculation without facts about hypothetical medical events, or hypothetical mechanical failures, or hypothetic diver errors to be all that useful for that purpose, although I must admit I find such discussions interesting in other ways.

It seems to me that the most salient fact is how little we know for sure what happened and why – and I believe this fact points to the most useful lesson of this very sad story. The reason we know so little, whether there was a medical issue, or diver error (valve not opened) or some mechanical failure, or overweighting, or other diver error, is that there was no dive buddy there to witness what happened (let alone intervene).

If one is diving with a buddy, that means diving with a buddy from splashing in the water to exiting the ladder at the end of the dive. I was taught to descend in view of my buddy (and vice versa) in a controlled and planned descent. A failure, or medical issue, or any other problem on descent, can be more easily addressed by the buddy team.

I don’t know that a dive buddy could have saved this woman’s life if there was a catastrophic medical event, but we would have more information for sure if a buddy was present and able to respond appropriately, assisting as needed. We would have much more information about the sequence of events, and the distressed diver could have been returned to the boat with some greater possibility of successful intervention.

Maybe I am stating the obvious, and maybe others have already said this, but if there is something to be learned here it seems to me that it is the importance of a clearly designated buddy and appropriate buddy training.

 

[diversteve]

Don't do that. It's a cheap plastic elbow, if it breaks or the hose pops off you'll be going directly to the bottom. I know people who have had that happen. It's no a big deal if you are in a DS, I'm told it's a bit exciting in a WS.

Not exactly - esp. if we're talking about Zeagle. Some parts are plastic, some rubber and there's a wide flange ithat screws onto threads in a pretty solid mount fused to the bladder itself. Also there's an aluminum cable attached to the dump and the inflator so there's no pull or tension on the elbow itself. Scuba Diving Equipment Shop Online | Zeagle Express Be really hard to break one unless you were lifting someone by their inflator hose - it's a pretty substantial piece.

 

[Ayisha]

The normal arms posture for positive descent would be left arm rise up with fingers on the BCD inflator, letting the air out of the BCD to descend, not in folding position.

In the first 10 feet maybe. After that, and certainly at 100 or 200 feet, we wouldn't be releasing air from the BCD to descend, we would be adding air to descend neutrally or in a controlled manner.

 

[Dan]

When I read an accident report like this I am interesting mainly in understanding what might have contributed to the incident that I can use to increase the likelihood that I will not make the same mistake(s) – if any can be reasonably identified from the available information. This is especially true with a more experienced diver, as the deceased was. I don’t find speculation without facts about hypothetical medical events, or hypothetical mechanical failures, or hypothetic diver errors to be all that useful for that purpose, although I must admit I find such discussions interesting in other ways.

It seems to me that the most salient fact is how little we know for sure what happened and why – and I believe this fact points to the most useful lesson of this very sad story. The reason we know so little, whether there was a medical issue, or diver error (valve not opened) or some mechanical failure, or overweighting, or other diver error, is that there was no dive buddy there to witness what happened (let alone intervene).

If one is diving with a buddy, that means diving with a buddy from splashing in the water to exiting the ladder at the end of the dive. I was taught to descend in view of my buddy (and vice versa) in a controlled and planned descent. A failure, or medical issue, or any other problem on descent, can be more easily addressed by the buddy team.

I don’t know that a dive buddy could have saved this woman’s life if there was a catastrophic medical event, but we would have more information for sure if a buddy was present and able to respond appropriately, assisting as needed. We would have much more information about the sequence of events, and the distressed diver could have been returned to the boat with some greater possibility of successful intervention.

Maybe I am stating the obvious, and maybe others have already said this, but if there is something to be learned here it seems to me that it is the importance of a clearly designated buddy and appropriate buddy training.

Also a safety minded dive operation wouldn't do a checkout dive in 450-500' deep dive site. They'll do it in a shallow water.

 

[diversteve]

Also a safety minded dive operation wouldn't do a checkout dive in 450-500' deep dive site. They'll do it in a shallow water.

AKR does - you do it your first day in 30' off the resort on the other side of the island. Although they do have walk-ins - most people are there for a Sat-Sat AI package deal. Sounds like that's what the divers on this trip were.

Not withstanding the conditions that week which caused them to move the boats south - Mary's Place is usually marketed as an advanced dive - maybe even an optional dive not included in the weekly pkg.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Also a safety minded dive operation wouldn't do a checkout dive in 450-500' deep dive site. They'll do it in a shallow water.

Check out dives are on the diver, not the op. If your gonna make comments that imply it was a bad dive operator at least show sense enough to look up info on the site. Most dives there start above the reef which is 20'-30' depth, then go over the ledge. Regardless, divers should know better than to jump in the water without having air in their BC - if they fail that it is their fault, not the ops.

 

[chillyinCanada]

It could have been an aneurysm, they can cause instant death.

Except that our witness says he clearly saw three bubble streams, ergo she was either breathing or had a leak.

 

[archer1960]

Maybe I missed this, but do we know for sure the deceased was 72?

Yes, according to the picture of her ID that someone posted, she was born in 1944.

 

[Dan]

Check out dives are on the diver, not the op. If your gonna make comments that imply it was a bad dive operator at least show sense enough to look up info on the site. Most dives there start above the reef which is 20'-30' depth, then go over the ledge. Regardless, divers should know better than to jump in the water without having air in their BC - if they fail that it is their fault, not the ops.

My bad. Apology to AKR.

So, the dive operator might have given her a fatal exception to let her do the checkout dive there, putting her requested 14-16 lbs of weights in her BCD, lowering the BCD into the water so she could don her BCD on the water & did not have to do the giant stride into the water with full gear & her bad knee.

This is may be the reason why Pro-Dive Mexico insists on not giving any exception to checkout dive in the deep.

No Morning Dive After Flight the Day Before with ProDive Mexico?!?

 

[Jack Hammer]

Check out dives are for new divers or those new to the area. An experienced diver with 700 dives who's been multiple times to the area shouldn't need a check out dive to determine their weighting. And when I was in Roatan (Cocoview), you could stop the mandatory checkout dive if you'd stayed there before.

@Dan_T , if you have an issue with the operator, please be upfront and state whats driving you to continue to imply this incident was partially their fault as you seem unfamiliar with diving there or this incident.