Diver Dies in Lake Huron on the Dunderberg

[vladimir]

It is a guess of "what was the lesser of the two evils". A decision, that hopefully, I will never have to make. Anyone that has been diving for a while knows that things can go very bad very quickly under water, so I hope this doesn't turn into a "what should have been done" or "he was a bad diver" debate. According to the news articles, he was a very giving person. My thoughts go out to his family. I am sorry they missed their Sunday....

Why else would we bring it up here if not to learn what perhaps should have been done? So that your thoughts can go out to his family? There is a designated place for condolence threads.

 

[limeyx]

Actually, if his buddy had a deco obligation, it was best he completed said obligation and sent his buddy up. Better one than two.

I cannot disagree more. Far better to get DCS and go to the chamber than to have someone drown.

Even if I thought there was no hope for my buddy, I am going to do everything I can to ascend them as fast as I can without serious injury to myself and fix the DCS later.

Especially for a shallowish dive like 140. If you start getting to 200+ then you have to modify your decisions a bit.

I cannot agree with your statement, and I dont know who is teaching tech diving in this manner.

 

[Rick Inman]

I cannot disagree more. Far better to get DCS and go to the chamber than to have someone drown.

Even if I thought there was no hope for my buddy, I am going to do everything I can to ascend them as fast as I can without serious injury to myself and fix the DCS later.

Especially for a shallowish dive like 140. If you start getting to 200+ then you have to modify your decisions a bit.

I cannot agree with your statement, and I dont know who is teaching tech diving in this manner.

Yeah, you're right. I was in a hurry and spoke poorly. I would bring my buddy up and risk DCS. I guess I was just bothered by the instant judgment against someone's personal decision at the time of the incident from someone who wasn't there.

I wasn't there, so I don't know the exact circumstances. Not saying this is what happened, but for example, if he was sure his buddy was absolutely dead, I could see him sending him to the surface and ascending slowly behind him (again, I wouldn't do this. I would try to bring him up with me, but that's me). Or, maybe he was trying to bring the diver up and lost control of him and didn't want to go for the fast ride to the surface. I donno.

Again, the point I was trying to make was, I wasn't there. And it's easy to criticize someone else's decision from the safety of the keyboard.

I'm all for analyzing and saying what I think I would do in given situation. But the blanket statement, "Sounds like his buddy who saw he was having trouble sent him to the surface by himself???? " just got me suggesting that there may be other factors involved. But yes. I stated it poorly.

 

[limeyx]

Again, the point I was trying to make was, I wasn't there. And it's easy to criticize someone else's decision from the safety of the keyboard.

I'm all for analyzing and saying what I think I would do in given situation. But the blanket statement, "Sounds like his buddy who saw he was having trouble sent him to the surface by himself???? " just got me suggesting that there may be other factors involved. But yes. I stated it poorly.

Indeed. I am not trying to make a comment about what actually happened here, those facts are not yet known. It's not that easy at those depths to ascend someone in a controlled way.


Ascending someone is what i HOPE I would have the presence of mind and skill to do, but yes sometimes "you had to be there" I guess (or hopefully not)

Hopefully the facts will come out here.

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

I am hoping to dive this wreck this year so this has definitely cast a shadow on my plans although I still plan to go ahead with the dive, it once again re-enforces (in my mind at least) the need to be constantly training and practicing skills for these types of dives.

I hate to be the one to bring this up but, does anyone know what kind of certs/training/experience these divers had? The reason I ask is that last summer there was a thread on SB that got somewhat heated concerning this very wreck and if it was considered a technical dive or not.

 

[Jax]

Actually, if his buddy had a deco obligation, it was best he completed said obligation and sent his buddy up. Better one than two.

If the victim was unresponsive and the regulator not in his mouth, then sending the victim to the surface by himself makes sense, especially if the buddy knew the other two were up there waiting.

First rule of rescue - don't make two victims out of one.

Book says to get an unconscious victim, without reg, to the surface as fast as it is safely (for the rescuer) possible. We just don't know if the guy had a reg in his mouth, or not.

Anyone see why it would be wrong, if the assumption that the regulator was not in the victim's mouth is correct?

 

[Kingpatzer]

A dive to 140' can have a significant deco obligation. I don't think the response of "oh it's relatively shallow just go up" is necessarily true.

Granted, I doubt they were down there diving with enough gas to spend an hour on the wreck. But if they had carried that much air down, then they'd have almost 2 hours of deco obligation.

I have no idea what my personal cut off point for deciding "well, it's worth the risk, I probably won't die" and I sure hope to never find out. But if I'm ever in that situation, I wonder how many people would find fault if I choose not to risk it? It's easy to be dismissive when it's not your butt on the line.

 

[limeyx]

If the victim was unresponsive and the regulator not in his mouth, then sending the victim to the surface by himself makes sense, especially if the buddy knew the other two were up there waiting.

First rule of rescue - don't make two victims out of one.

Book says to get an unconscious victim, without reg, to the surface as fast as it is safely (for the rescuer) possible. We just don't know if the guy had a reg in his mouth, or not.

Anyone see why it would be wrong, if the assumption that the regulator was not in the victim's mouth is correct?

I dont think any assumptions are going to really be helpful in discussing the current incident, and we should stick to the facts as they are known.

I do not agree that sending someone up to the surface is the right thing to do assuming that you just saw them alive a few mins ago, and I wouldn't dive with someone that had that attitude.

For me, especially from that depth, reg in or out isn't going to make much of a difference.

And which book says that ?

While the first rule of rescue says don't make two victims from one, DCS you can generally recover from. Drowning not so much. You have no way to really know if this person can be saved (unless they have been without a reg/gas for a long time and you know that for sure).

 

[Rainer]

Totally agree with Nick here.

I cannot disagree more. Far better to get DCS and go to the chamber than to have someone drown.

Even if I thought there was no hope for my buddy, I am going to do everything I can to ascend them as fast as I can without serious injury to myself and fix the DCS later.

Especially for a shallowish dive like 140. If you start getting to 200+ then you have to modify your decisions a bit.

I cannot agree with your statement, and I dont know who is teaching tech diving in this manner.

 

[limeyx]

One other thing to mention, again since the facts are not known here, trying not to comment directly on what happened in this incident.

If (for instance) knew I had another team coming down the line behind me, I dont even have to skip any deco, I can simply hand off the injured diver to that team.

Now, again, we dont know what happened in this incident, so this is a "what if" scenario.

For all we know the buddy in this case may have given everything they had trying to rescue the victim but was just unable to complete the rescue.