- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 1
- # of dives
- 100 - 199
Just reading the latest issue of the DAN magazine (Alert Diver), and here's an excerpt from their 2010 Fatalities Workshop:
" Forty % of the fatalities took place during a period of buddy separation; 14 % involved declared solo dives."
Both seem awfully, scarily high and will provide ample ammo for solo demonizers as this show gets on the road. Has anyone maybe already taken a closer look at the base data for those percentages?
Since I tend to blame info I don't like on statistics wrongly applied , I got a few questions:
It's not quite clear to me if the '14 % while on declared solo dives' were included in the '40% of deaths while separated'. Or do they go on top of that? Quite the difference if 54 % in total or 40 % in total of fatalities occurred while diving alone!
And I'd like to question the details of '40 % while in buddy separation". What's the story here? what came first? Diver A gets into trouble, buddy (sensibly or by accident) doesn't follow him into trouble, so diver A dies alone. Or is it thought that the buddy separation was somehow causative to diver A getting into trouble?
If anyone has any info to counter those bad-looking figures, I'd be grateful. Of course I would like to make the case that if more divers were prepared to solo (mentally, physically, training and equipment), then buddy separation wouldn't freak them out to the point of making other, deadly, mistakes. But without knowing the actual stories this could be considered cynical.
" Forty % of the fatalities took place during a period of buddy separation; 14 % involved declared solo dives."
Both seem awfully, scarily high and will provide ample ammo for solo demonizers as this show gets on the road. Has anyone maybe already taken a closer look at the base data for those percentages?
Since I tend to blame info I don't like on statistics wrongly applied , I got a few questions:
It's not quite clear to me if the '14 % while on declared solo dives' were included in the '40% of deaths while separated'. Or do they go on top of that? Quite the difference if 54 % in total or 40 % in total of fatalities occurred while diving alone!
And I'd like to question the details of '40 % while in buddy separation". What's the story here? what came first? Diver A gets into trouble, buddy (sensibly or by accident) doesn't follow him into trouble, so diver A dies alone. Or is it thought that the buddy separation was somehow causative to diver A getting into trouble?
If anyone has any info to counter those bad-looking figures, I'd be grateful. Of course I would like to make the case that if more divers were prepared to solo (mentally, physically, training and equipment), then buddy separation wouldn't freak them out to the point of making other, deadly, mistakes. But without knowing the actual stories this could be considered cynical.